Coach Johnson expressed interest in Tennessee's vacancy in November

[GTJake]

Simply put, if I'm happy with my job I'm not spending one second looking at other job openings, if I'm unhappy (for any reason) I'm paying attention to other job openings ...
IMO there is something to this more than just an agent trying to get leverage.
I'm not a "negative nellie" and I'v been a GT guy for a long time, I won't shed a tear if CPJ leaves ... a new direction just might be what the doctor order for the program as a whole.

 

[jgtengineer]

It doesn't take calvin Johnson's, just kids that can catch, run routes, a QB that can really complete passes at 50+%. . You need kids that can be taught not to dive block. You need a offense that doesn't require OL to have to have PHD's to function in this offense. You need a couple of play makers that we've always gotten. Oh yeah a better defense. I seem to remember we've had those before Johnson got here.

Ball was a sub 50 passer. Nix's offense were basically zone run. A better defense is arguable because offense changed around us as well as the arms race changed in our peers.

In hamiltons entire career he only completed 61 percent overall. that really isn't that much better than thomas if you take out the outlier 2015 year where he ran for his life the entire year ( thomas was above 50 percent in every other year.)

Shawn Jones only completed 53 percent in his entire career.

So please tell me where our magic super accurate passers are.

It also isn't a dive block, a proper cutblock targets the hip its really no different than a no wrap tackle.

 

[Coloradojacket]

Actually, you can go back to 1990. I didn't think much about it then, but looking back at the 1990 season under the Fridge, Tech actually ran a lot of option plays. Because of the pieces they had in place, it was more of a hybrid type of offense where they used a little pro-style, a little option, a little traditional SEC-style straight-ahead running attack. The difference between those days and today was twofold: slightly lower academic requirements and a larger recruiting area. The academic requirements weren't as stringent in those days (calculus not required for some degrees) and I believe you could get a waiver if a particular athlete was being courted to come to Tech. Another thing, the Tech brand was beginning to have broader exposure up the Eastern seaboard because of Bobby Cremins. When Bobby Ross/Ralph Friedgen and George O'Leary came aboard, they already had a good knowledge of the recruiting grounds in the mid-Atlantic and northern states and it was easier to make inroads in those areas. One other overlooked factor is the relationship Homer Rice had with Patrick Crecine. The AD and president had as much to do with the success Tech had in those days as the coaches. In fact, it was a perfect combination of factors that made it all work. It would be nearly impossible to run a pro-style offense or a Friedgen-style offense with the restrictions Tech has in place now. Barring unbelievable recruiting, Tech would sink to being like a Vanderbilt or a Kentucky-type football program.

or looking at this in an argument people used about CPJ.......Ross won big in 1990.....with Bill Curry's recruits.

 

[Old South Stands]

It doesn't take calvin Johnson's, just kids that can catch, run routes, a QB that can really complete passes at 50+%. . You need kids that can be taught not to dive block. You need a offense that doesn't require OL to have to have PHD's to function in this offense. You need a couple of play makers that we've always gotten. Oh yeah a better defense. I seem to remember we've had those before Johnson got here.

Occasionally. But not consistently since Bobby Dodd retired. Bud Carson didn't have much success at Tech, nor did Bill Fulcher. Pepper Rodgers had a magnetic personality and recruited some great athletes. His defenses were very good, and he had some good QBs and offensive backs. But the on-field playcalling was erratic, and he never was able to put together a consistent winning program. Coach Curry left with the program on an upward trajectory, but he struggled at first with 1- and 2-win seasons. And apparently he was able to coach his players above their abilities, because when Coach Ross came in, the complaint was that Tech didn't have the "athletes". Coach Ross and his staff suffered similar difficulties as Curry before they finally turned it around... only to have Bill Lewis come in. Coach O'Leary's teams were strong, but not so much after Coach Friedgen left. Then we had Coach Gailey, who wasn't a terrible coach, but his inconsistency was similar to Pepper Rodgers. So, although we've had good teams at the Flats over the years, we've never had consistently good teams, at least not in my lifetime.

 

[Coloradojacket]

Blah blah blah blah. If we had a kicker, we would have been 8-3 last year and everybody would have been cheering about how optimistic they were going into 2018. And our offense and defense would have been the exact same as they were when we in fact went 5-6. Fans are shallow fickle people sometimes. "We are so far behind the big 3 in our conference" isn't changing anytime soon and also has nothing to do with our record or offense or stats.

Big 3? who are the Big 3 ahead of us. Clemson I get but who are the other 2?

 

[Old South Stands]

or looking at this in an argument people used about CPJ.......Ross won big in 1990.....with Bill Curry's recruits.

Ross didn't win with Curry's recruits. 1990 was a breakout year because the freshmen they recruited in 1987 were finally maturing and coming into their own in '89 and '90. Ross and his staff arrived in 1987. Most of the impact players were recruited by Ross's staff.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Actually, you can go back to 1990. I didn't think much about it then, but looking back at the 1990 season under the Fridge, Tech actually ran a lot of option plays. Because of the pieces they had in place, it was more of a hybrid type of offense where they used a little pro-style, a little option, a little traditional SEC-style straight-ahead running attack. The difference between those days and today was twofold: slightly lower academic requirements and a larger recruiting area. The academic requirements weren't as stringent in those days (calculus not required for some degrees) and I believe you could get a waiver if a particular athlete was being courted to come to Tech. Another thing, the Tech brand was beginning to have broader exposure up the Eastern seaboard because of Bobby Cremins. When Bobby Ross/Ralph Friedgen and George O'Leary came aboard, they already had a good knowledge of the recruiting grounds in the mid-Atlantic and northern states and it was easier to make inroads in those areas. One other overlooked factor is the relationship Homer Rice had with Patrick Crecine. The AD and president had as much to do with the success Tech had in those days as the coaches. In fact, it was a perfect combination of factors that made it all work. It would be nearly impossible to run a pro-style offense or a Friedgen-style offense with the restrictions Tech has in place now. Barring unbelievable recruiting, Tech would sink to being like a Vanderbilt or a Kentucky-type football program.

The only thing I would take issue with in what you posted is that I am pretty sure calculus was then, as it has always been, required for ALL degrees. If you have documentation to prove what you said, then please post it.

 

[JacketFromUGA]

Simply put, if I'm happy with my job I'm not spending one second looking at other job openings, if I'm unhappy (for any reason) I'm paying attention to other job openings ...
IMO there is something to this more than just an agent trying to get leverage.
I'm not a "negative nellie" and I'v been a GT guy for a long time, I won't shed a tear if CPJ leaves ... a new direction just might be what the doctor order for the program as a whole.

I mean that's you though. I'm constantly looking at job openings whether I'm happy or not.

 

[Old South Stands]

The only thing I would take issue with in what you posted is that I am pretty sure calculus was then, as it has always been, required for ALL degrees. If you have documentation to prove what you said, then please post it.

I don't have the documentation. My father attended Tech from the mid '50s through the early '60s and has said that calculus was required for all degrees then. When I was at Tech in the '80s/'90s, we in the College of Architecture only had to take two quarters of calculus, plus a quarter of mathematics for architects. But (correct me if I'm wrong) I believe the industrial management students didn't have to take calculus at all in those days.

 

[GTJake]

I mean that's you though. I'm constantly looking at job openings whether I'm happy or not.

Just think about the timing though ... spring practice is about to start, he's breaking in a new DC, he's trying to figure out "whatever" to have a bounce-back year from last years disaster ... and he has the time to consider new job openings ???

 

[Wrecked]

I don't have the documentation. My father attended Tech from the mid '50s through the early '60s and has said that calculus was required for all degrees then. When I was at Tech in the '80s/'90s, we in the College of Architecture only had to take two quarters of calculus, plus a quarter of mathematics for architects. But (correct me if I'm wrong) I believe the industrial management students didn't have to take calculus at all in those days.

They took a different math but it was still calculus based.

 

[JacketFromUGA]

Just think about the timing though ... spring practice is about to start, he's breaking in a new DC, he's trying to figure out "whatever" to have a bounce-back year from last years disaster ... and he has the time to consider new job openings ???

This was like 5 months ago though? Before Woody was even hired.

 

[Old South Stands]

They took a different math but it was still calculus based.

Interesting. The scuttlebutt around campus then was that they took an advanced type of algebra/trigonometry. I didn't rub shoulders much with mgmt. students, so only know what I'd always heard.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

I don't have the documentation. My father attended Tech from the mid '50s through the early '60s and has said that calculus was required for all degrees then. When I was at Tech in the '80s/'90s, we in the College of Architecture only had to take two quarters of calculus, plus a quarter of mathematics for architects. But (correct me if I'm wrong) I believe the industrial management students didn't have to take calculus at all in those days.

I am pretty sure that the IM majors have always had to take at least one calculus course

 

[Blumpkin Souffle]

Just think about the timing though ... spring practice is about to start, he's breaking in a new DC, he's trying to figure out "whatever" to have a bounce-back year from last years disaster ... and he has the time to consider new job openings ???

This is from back in November, when CPJ was negotiating an extension. Not recently.

 

[GT_05]

Just think about the timing though ... spring practice is about to start, he's breaking in a new DC, he's trying to figure out "whatever" to have a bounce-back year from last years disaster ... and he has the time to consider new job openings ???

I think this happened in November.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Wrecked]

Im not sure why anyone would be surprised that CPJ would be looking for another job. He consistently has complained his whole time at Tech about lack of resources, support, etc. and pointed out how he has turned down offers to go elsewhere. He has always struck me as a "you are lucky I am coaching here at all" type. I never for a second believe he really has bought into the "I love to coach the Tech kids" thing. Now that being said, if he can get the athletes he can win consistently (see his first two years). His problem is he can't get the athletes and that's apparently always someone else's fault. He also knows his clock is ticking with Stansbury so looking for a way out is just a good business decision I have no problem with.

 

[Skeptic]

BTW. what the hell is the purpose of that article? It's entirely pointless except to stir the pot...

where there are pots, there are stirrers.

 

[Gold1]

Look, I think everyone can agree that if we miss another bowl game or have 6 wins with a loss to uga CPJ is most likely gone. In a make or break year for CPJ this just isnt a good look

 

[MikeJackets1967]

where there are pots, there are stirrers.

Stirring pots is what happens in the offseason there's nothing much else to do