Coach Johnson expressed interest in Tennessee's vacancy in November

4shotB

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
5,134
All the schools you listed are fine schools for a non athletic kid. The difference is the football team is nowhere near the average student who attends the school. My best friend in high school had a 4.0 and wasn't accepted to ugag. Trent Thompson somehow got in though. That is my biggest problem with "factory schools" you're making the wrong kind of statement to young men.

Guess what? I know I young man whose credentials were pretty darn impressive but Tech didn't take him.

I am obviously in the minority but I believe ALL schools admit athletes who wouldn't have made it in otherwise. I'm pretty sure we do as well and will take some athletes this year with less impressive resumes than the young man I mentioned above.. This splitting hairs about the "differing levels of virginity" is insanity imo. IMO, if you let one kid in who doesn't meet standards you are no different than anyone else. I know the counter argument - "but our special admit is so much better than their special admit". I've heard it before and the argument is a trivial issue of splitting hairs as I said. I completely understand that I am in the minority here and am ok with that..
 

Old South Stands

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
244
That Pepper was something else, that's for sure. What other coach would lead his team onto the field doing handstands like he did at Kansas? To his credit, he operated against some daunting headwinds especially the facilities which at the time were widely considered the worst in the country. Recruiting at Tech has always been challenging but it was particularly difficult during Pepper's tenure. On top of that, he faced opposition from many influential alumni including former teammates. So it was a pretty touch deal. My father could not stand him and that was an opinion shared by most of the "Old Guard" in the west stands. Just the way it was. Then, as now, the triple option in the guise of Pepper's "pure vanilla wishbone" as he phrased it was an equalizer to some extent especially when you had guys like Eddie Lee Ivery, David Sims, Adrian Rucker, Danny Myers in the backfield.
Here is a highlight video of the '76 season... (color quality is bad). I attended the Tulane and Virginia games that year. It was my first real season following the Jackets. That year we beat Notre Dame at home. There were a lot of other big names from that era, too: Drew Hill, Lucius Sanford, Don Bessillieu... and eventually, Mike Kelley. By the time he was a junior or senior, Eddie Lee Ivery was the team's biggest star, and probably a bigger star than anyone UGA had on their roster at the time. For those who are a bit younger and never saw him play, he was basically our "Herschel" before Herschel was ever even around.
 

chewybaka

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
910
Following on to this...I think more than likely it was just Johnson's agent saying "hey Paul, since we're after an extension with GT, let's just send UT a feeler. Couldn't hurt...would only help us with the extension".

I don't think PJ initiated the idea.
Fair enough it's a two way street....Tech is a great spring break for young stars...Paul's window for quantum advancement has long past...
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,243
This Georgia Tech "group think" is disturbing and depressing. Georgia Tech is indeed a good school. But I have friends, relatives, business associates and neighbors that graduated from schools like Uga, UF,Ohio State, Auburn, Texas and Bama.
Despite the narrative that you read on the GT boards, they are happy, well adjusted and contributing to society. None are homeless or working in the fast food industry. Most of them follow football to the same degree that I do. Like me, none of them seem overly concerned that their schools let in athletes who might not otherwise get in to their respective institutions, colleges and universities. Like me, they are more concerned with more immediate and pressing matters in their lives. Not a single one of them have suffered financially, physically, or morally by what happens within their respective athletic programs.

They do not understand terms that seem to be specific to GT boards like "cheapening my degree" or other such nonsense.
Most Tech fans I know don’t have a problem with factory grads. For the most part, they are not the ones that poorly represent their schools. It’s the band wagoners. They’re the ones that give those fan bases a black eye.

We don’t have that. Our sidewalk following is tiny. More importantly, they represent us just as well, if not better, than us alums.

Here’s another observation, a lot of Ugag alums I know detest their non-alum coat-tailers. They’re the first to distance themselves from the unwashed masses that live and breath for the cesspool.
 

GT_05

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,370
They do not understand terms that seem to be specific to GT boards like "cheapening my degree" or other such nonsense.

Two schools off the top of my head where I believe degrees have suffered a depreciation because of athletics: Penn State and UNC. Athletics should never do anything to throw shade on the school. The athletics only exist because of the school, regardless of the institution. It would be odd to think that graduates from any institution wouldn’t or shouldn’t care about the reputation of the school and the degrees that are awarded.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

MikeJackets1967

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,844
Location
Lovely Ducktown,Tennessee
Two schools off the top of my head where I believe degrees have suffered a depreciation because of athletics: Penn State and UNC. Athletics should never do anything to throw shade on the school. The athletics only exist because of the school, regardless of the institution. It would be odd to think that graduates from any institution wouldn’t or shouldn’t care about the reputation of the school and the degrees that are awarded.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think Notre Dame could be put in that catagory................................................................................just sayin';)
 

bke1984

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,607
You could also say 14-10 over the past 2 years or 28-22 over the past 4 years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

True, but are either of those really that impressive?

Honestly, what is he really being judged on? I would argue conference record is most important (with beating Georgia as 1b). Here are his regular season conference records and results against Georgia for every year at Tech. The past three years are three of his worst four records in conference as a coach at Tech. Beating Georgia is what made 2016 OK...the rest of the season wasn't all that impressive.

Look, I'm not ready to can the guy but don't pretend like everything is OK just because 2014 was amazing. 1-7, 4-4, 4-4 in conference is a bad trend over a three year period. What's sucks even more is that we went from the #7 team in the nation to a team that misses a bowl two out of three years. We need to be better than this. That 5-3 mark is generally OK if you rise above and dip below every once in a while and still make bowl games...which is what we were doing from 2008-2014. That gets you in the ACCCG every few years. Right now we've regressed to be worse than that.

2017: 4-4 (L)
2016: 4-4 (W)
2015: 1-7 (L)
2014: 6-2 (W)
2013: 5-3 (L)
2012: 5-3 (L)
2011: 5-3 (L)
2010: 4-4 (L)
2009: 7-1 (L)
2008: 5-3 (W)
 

GT_05

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,370
True, but are either of those really that impressive?

Honestly, what is he really being judged on? I would argue conference record is most important (with beating Georgia as 1b). Here are his regular season conference records and results against Georgia for every year at Tech. The past three years are three of his worst four records in conference as a coach at Tech. Beating Georgia is what made 2016 OK...the rest of the season wasn't all that impressive.

Look, I'm not ready to can the guy but don't pretend like everything is OK just because 2014 was amazing. 1-7, 4-4, 4-4 in conference is a bad trend over a three year period. What's sucks even more is that we went from the #7 team in the nation to a team that misses a bowl two out of three years. We need to be better than this. That 5-3 mark is generally OK if you rise above and dip below every once in a while and still make bowl games...which is what we were doing from 2008-2014. That gets you in the ACCCG every few years. Right now we've regressed to be worse than that.

2017: 4-4 (L)
2016: 4-4 (W)
2015: 1-7 (L)
2014: 6-2 (W)
2013: 5-3 (L)
2012: 5-3 (L)
2011: 5-3 (L)
2010: 4-4 (L)
2009: 7-1 (L)
2008: 5-3 (W)

My point was that the poster was cherry picking stats.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

B Lifsey

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,380
Location
Barnesville, Georgia
True, but are either of those really that impressive?

Honestly, what is he really being judged on? I would argue conference record is most important (with beating Georgia as 1b). Here are his regular season conference records and results against Georgia for every year at Tech. The past three years are three of his worst four records in conference as a coach at Tech. Beating Georgia is what made 2016 OK...the rest of the season wasn't all that impressive.

Look, I'm not ready to can the guy but don't pretend like everything is OK just because 2014 was amazing. 1-7, 4-4, 4-4 in conference is a bad trend over a three year period. What's sucks even more is that we went from the #7 team in the nation to a team that misses a bowl two out of three years. We need to be better than this. That 5-3 mark is generally OK if you rise above and dip below every once in a while and still make bowl games...which is what we were doing from 2008-2014. That gets you in the ACCCG every few years. Right now we've regressed to be worse than that.

2017: 4-4 (L)
2016: 4-4 (W)
2015: 1-7 (L)
2014: 6-2 (W)
2013: 5-3 (L)
2012: 5-3 (L)
2011: 5-3 (L)
2010: 4-4 (L)
2009: 7-1 (L)
2008: 5-3 (W)

I've ready very few posts where anyone thinks/pretends that everything is OK. I have read many, many, many posts from fans being realistic that are here during good times and bad times that are tired of hearing from the CPJ haters that only come around in the bad times and spew negative trash.
 

Jerry the Jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,961
Location
Chapin, SC
Well I think 10 years is plenty long enough to establish some level of consistency in performance. While Coach Johnson certainly has had some highlights and seasons of success, I don't think he has been able to demonstrate consistency over time. Some coaches put their program in place and continually grind out a high level of winning. It is very difficult to do. I would not put Coach Johnson in that strata of coaches. I think he is a good coach but certainly not a great coach. Can we do better. I don't know but I am not afraid to find out. I support Coach Johnson and want him to be successful but I am a Georgia Tech fan first, so I hope he gets more out of this team in 2018 than he did in 2017. If not, it may be time to change coaches. For those of you concerned about GT athletic finances, you should not be. Tech has enough money to do whatever they decide to do. Remember, it is not your money.

Go Jackets!
 

GT_05

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,370
Valid point, but I think his general point was we've been bad the last three years...and I don't think he's wrong.

I would agree but the way you presented the argument was much more clear, compelling, and fair than just stating the record over the past three years. In God we trust; everyone else should present good data.

Regardless, I do like CPJ but I think he may be history if we don’t make it to a bowl this year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

JacketFromUGA

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,897
Well I think 10 years is plenty long enough to establish some level of consistency in performance. While Coach Johnson certainly has had some highlights and seasons of success, I don't think he has been able to demonstrate consistency over time. Some coaches put their program in place and continually grind out a high level of winning. It is very difficult to do. I would not put Coach Johnson in that strata of coaches. I think he is a good coach but certainly not a great coach. Can we do better. I don't know but I am not afraid to find out. I support Coach Johnson and want him to be successful but I am a Georgia Tech fan first, so I hope he gets more out of this team in 2018 than he did in 2017. If not, it may be time to change coaches. For those of you concerned about GT athletic finances, you should not be. Tech has enough money to do whatever they decide to do. Remember, it is not your money.

Go Jackets!
I've gone back and forth on this issue of consistency in college sports and I think I've landed somewhere on the "consistency is almost impossible when the longest a kid can be there is 5 years" Look at all the recent "Greats" and you'll see a lack of consistency there. Beamer, JoePa, and Bowden all had downs and ups on a scale that drove parts of their fandom insane. Pretty much the only "consistent" great coach right now is Saban and I think he has ruined the SEC if not all of CFB in school's attempts to recreate it.
 

grandpa jacket

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
639
Well I think 10 years is plenty long enough to establish some level of consistency in performance. While Coach Johnson certainly has had some highlights and seasons of success, I don't think he has been able to demonstrate consistency over time. Some coaches put their program in place and continually grind out a high level of winning. It is very difficult to do. I would not put Coach Johnson in that strata of coaches. I think he is a good coach but certainly not a great coach. Can we do better. I don't know but I am not afraid to find out. I support Coach Johnson and want him to be successful but I am a Georgia Tech fan first, so I hope he gets more out of this team in 2018 than he did in 2017. If not, it may be time to change coaches. For those of you concerned about GT athletic finances, you should not be. Tech has enough money to do whatever they decide to do. Remember, it is not your money.

Go Jackets!
Your evaluation is spot on, he is a good coach, nothing special. As far as making a change, what do we have to lose, we have our heads just above water now. Regarding the money to make the change, we cant afford to not change barring a major turnaround.
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,243
I think we have been evolving constantly since CPJ arrived. A lot of change. The O is basically the same, but that's a good thing, imo. The strategy to bring in talent has changed. The defense has changed. The commitment and strategy of the GTAA has changed. In my best Yoda voice: A tricky mix success is. I think we may be on to something, I'd sure hate to scrap it before we found out.
 

GSOJacket

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
249
Too many here are looking at Coach Johnson's record in a vacuum. When he came to Tech, the ACC was known as a super power in basketball, but in football, meh. That's changed big time. Just look at ACC football coaching talent then vs. now. So the competition is certainly up - more than a notch - and with it the resources other schools are putting into football. WE HAVEN'T KEPT UP. Financially we're near the bottom of the barrel - not the middle, the bottom, and it shows. TStan is a huge ray of hope here, but to expect immediate results is, IMO, unrealistic. Coach Johnson is an excellent coach and an excellent fit for Tech. Changing coaches at this point (with another buyout) would, IMO, be a regressive move.
 
Messages
13,443
Location
Augusta, GA
Your evaluation is spot on, he is a good coach, nothing special. As far as making a change, what do we have to lose, we have our heads just above water now. Regarding the money to make the change, we cant afford to not change barring a major turnaround.
What we have to lose is what we lost every other time we jumped on the coaching carousel.....2 or 3 years of less even than mediocrity. Although I don't consider anything about Johnson to be "evil," I fall back on the adage that the unknown evil is worse than the known evil.
 
Top