Conference reputation?

[MikeJackets]

OMG. He says that Saban couldn't get it done without Kirby. I guess he doesn't realize that that Kirby's D at Bama last year was shredded for 500+ yards, whereas former mutt DC Jeremy Pruitt's D at Bama was only burned for 400 yards. The Bama offense and ST's won the game last year, NOT the Bama defense, which actually seems overall to be better under Pruitt than it was under Kirby. Uncle Lou is a typical mutt FOOL, and, based on his closing remarks about Watson, he's a racist too.

Yeah his comments about Watson were uncalled for and the rest of his remarks were clueless which is par the course for UGAG fans.

 

[JacketFromUGA]

 

[MikeJackets]

The ACC kicked rear end in 2016 and the SEC apologists are in denial.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

I love the comment that the blind squirrel has done a good job of finding that nut over the past 4 years , what with a 24 - 20 record

 

[TheSilasSonRising]

Just got done listening to Paul Finebaum call the ACC the best college football conference. The talking heads are finally coming around. What does that mean for GT? What effect will that have on our recruiting? The SEC drum beat seemed to help the middle of the pack recruit, will it do the same for the ACC?

I have my doubts. The ACC is still seen as a basketball conference among the elite players. It'll take several more years of this type of achievement to show top football recruits our conference is not a step down.

ACC: National Champions
ACC: best bowl record by a landslide
ACC: best record against P5

What will it mean for GT?

It is a great start for the future of the ACC.

But it will not help GT recruiting if we sit back and think it will help GT recruiting.

 

[TheSilasSonRising]

Bobby Dodd said in his book that if GT hadn't left the SEC that the GT football program would have been on the level of Vanderbilt and Tulane.

Do not see how we would have been on Tulane's SEC level since they quit also. How would Vandy have ever been any better in another conference? Have they ever won a MNC? Major bowl game?

Dodd and Harrison continued to make excuse after unsubstantiated excuse to try and explain away their horrific mistake.

 

[MikeJackets]

Do not see how we would have been on Tulane's SEC level since they quit also. How would Vandy have ever been any better in another conference? Have they ever won a MNC? Major bowl game?

Dodd and Harrison continued to make excuse after unsubstantiated excuse to try and explain away their horrific mistake.

Vanderbilt claims two National Championships in football i do believe. The Billingsley Report named them National Champions in 1906 and 1911 when they went 8-1 both seasons. I think Bobby Dodd thought GT would be the Notre Dame of the South if GT left the SEC and it didn't go to plan.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Vanderbilt claims two National Championships in football i do believe. The Billingsley Report named them National Champions in 1906 and 1911 when they went 8-1 both seasons. I think Bobby Dodd thought GT would be the Notre Dame of the South if GT left the SEC and it didn't go to plan.

It didn't "go to plan," because he continued to schedule the same teams he always did. Keeping the traditional SEC rivals, who were still willing to play us, was fine, but you don't become the "ND of the South" by constantly scheduling the likes of Duke, Tulane, and Clemson (GREAT now, but terrible back then).

 

[MikeJackets]

It didn't "go to plan," because he continued to schedule the same teams he always did. Keeping the traditional SEC rivals, who were still willing to play us, was fine, but you don't become the "ND of the South" by constantly scheduling the likes of Duke, Tulane, and Clemson (GREAT now, but terrible back then).

Great points,Super

 

[Oldgoldandwhite]

I think some of y'all have short memories. Back in the 70's and 80's we were pretty bad playing as an independent and then ACC . If we had played a regular SEC schedule, before divisions, we would have been pretty bad and embarrassed when our stadium was filled with the opposing team.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

I think some of y'all have short memories. Back in the 70's and 80's we were pretty bad playing as an independent and then ACC . If we had played a regular SEC schedule, before divisions, we would have been pretty bad and embarrassed when our stadium was filled with the opposing team.

That's true, but we were bad because we had bad coaches. Maybe the powers that be would have recognized that sooner, rather than later, if we had had SEC level competition every week. But that's past history now, and it is what it is.

 

[WreckedbyWhiskey]

I agree and like your post, however, we may disagree on the direction you lean about what is left unsaid and implied about being a national caliber program. I believe that everything realistically necessary to be a consistent national contender (as opposed to lightning in a bottle chances) amounts to unethical exploitation of young men who should be given an education first and foremost at a college/university, or shouldn't be enrolled.

The only thing I directly disagree on in your assessment is the claim that Tech does not have "a clear vision of the kind of program it wants to be." I think the Institute has made abundantly clear for at least the last 50 years of its existence exactly what kind of football program it wants to have. This was evidenced in Bobby Dodd leaving the SEC and is reaffirmed every time a Tech fan complains about the "Hill," which has been ongoing for decades. Tech wants a football program and student athletes it can be proud of and can call "Tech men" without having to change the meaning of that phrase. The Institute wants a program with integrity first, that recognizes the primacy of education, and then seeks excellence in all things, including athletic endeavor, for the good of the souls of the young men put in their care.

I hear you, and maybe I'm just not aligned w/ that vision for the program. Which leads me to believe that other alum and fans aren't clear on that vision either. But true enough, our job as alum and fans is to show up and support, period.

I can't say that it's not realistic to be a consistent national contender without sacrificing education, I'd hate to discredit the majority of players that did use their athleticism as a means to an education. I grew up with several SEC football players that are very successful off the field post-graduation, and these guys have high paying jobs with a lot of responsibility. I think there's so much to learn that can be leveraged after graduation as a player that's part of a program with a culture of winning. Now, there are other ways that players are unethically exploited but that's a different conversation.

All-in-all, I whole-hardheartedly believe that a program with good character and integrity can win consistently, but I don't believe that it's easy.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I agree with you again @WreckedbyWhiskey. I think the competing visions primarily exist among fans since I think the Institute has shown in its deeds a consistent vision for its athletic programs going back decades. I did suggest that I think the most significant ways to become a national contender are unethical actions but didn't say by whom. Certainly coaches (oversigning, running kids off, grayshirting and dishonest medical scholarships, etc.) but also things fans do or boosters.

In my view, the Tech fans who most want to see Tech compete in a manner that is sustainable the way a factory can could just go ahead and emulate what those other teams boosters and fans do. Not all of that actually has to be shady. Simply raising as much money for the athletic program as one can, above board, is useful for helping improve the program. For example, in hiring slews of NCAA legal pseudo-assistants that aid in recruiting.

In conclusion I do agree with you that an ethical program can exist at an honorable institution of higher education that does have consistent and regular success. I think CPJ and Tech has shown this at a number of points in its history. This is not on the level of the Bama's and Clemsons, but it ain't chopped liver either.

 

[Cam]

I heard for years that if you put Vanderbilt or Kentucky in the ACC Coastal they'd make it to the ACCCG every year, winning it a lot of times. Then there's the whole speculation of how the SEC would stack up against the NFL ("The AFC, NFC, and SEC."). Over a decade now of the SEC being constantly heralded as the best conference. It has an impact on recruiting for sure. You hear a lot from recruits about the "opportunity to play in the SEC." Like it's going to be a highlight of their life. It's always a recruiting point, we even say SEC-bound a lot for elite recruits now. Last year 11/14 SEC teams were rated in the top 30 for recruiting rankings. The lowest was Vanderbilt at 53 (GT at 59). Even using those as just vague estimates of talent, you can see how the SEC is usually head and shoulders above all other leagues (4/14 of ACC teams in top 30). We need sustained success against them like we have. We need to make it where the media can't deny that we're the best conference. It'll take a few years, but the coaching hires the ACC has made definitely show we are on the rise. As GT fans, we all know now that no Coastal game is a gimme anymore. That's good for our perception. Just need to keep it up. After the perception shifts, we'll see recruits talking more about "the opportunity to play in the ACC."

 

[WreckedbyWhiskey]

I heard for years that if you put Vanderbilt or Kentucky in the ACC Coastal they'd make it to the ACCCG every year, winning it a lot of times. Then there's the whole speculation of how the SEC would stack up against the NFL ("The AFC, NFC, and SEC."). Over a decade now of the SEC being constantly heralded as the best conference. It has an impact on recruiting for sure. You hear a lot from recruits about the "opportunity to play in the SEC." Like it's going to be a highlight of their life. It's always a recruiting point, we even say SEC-bound a lot for elite recruits now. Last year 11/14 SEC teams were rated in the top 30 for recruiting rankings. The lowest was Vanderbilt at 53 (GT at 59). Even using those as just vague estimates of talent, you can see how the SEC is usually head and shoulders above all other leagues (4/14 of ACC teams in top 30). We need sustained success against them like we have. We need to make it where the media can't deny that we're the best conference. It'll take a few years, but the coaching hires the ACC has made definitely show we are on the rise. As GT fans, we all know now that no Coastal game is a gimme anymore. That's good for our perception. Just need to keep it up. After the perception shifts, we'll see recruits talking more about "the opportunity to play in the ACC."

I agree with you on the point that if the ACC keeps winning then we'll get better at recruiting but kids want to play in the SEC for a totally different reason. I hate to say this but it's not about actually winning, its more about perception. Even during eras when teams like Bama, Auburn and Ugag are terrible, historically they still dominate the recruiting game. Like Apple, it's not the best phone, doesn't have the best functionality but it's PERCEIVED as cool/the best and everyone buys-into this.

Kids want to play for the SEC b/c they get to play in front of crowds of 100K+ where fans are literally willing to commit crimes over the love for their team (I'm exaggerating a bit here). Whereas, if they played in the ACC, they'd play in front of 60-70K on average, the atmosphere isn't as exciting or rowdy. It's the perception of the brand that we should make adjustments for in the ACC.

 

[jacobchbe]

I agree with you on the point that if the ACC keeps winning then we'll get better at recruiting but kids want to play in the SEC for a totally different reason. I hate to say this but it's not about actually winning, its more about perception. Even during eras when teams like Bama, Auburn and Ugag are terrible, historically they still dominate the recruiting game. Like Apple, it's not the best phone, doesn't have the best functionality but it's PERCEIVED as cool/the best and everyone buys-into this.

Kids want to play for the SEC b/c they get to play in front of crowds of 100K+ where fans are literally willing to commit crimes over the love for their team (I'm exaggerating a bit here). Whereas, if they played in the ACC, they'd play in front of 60-70K on average, the atmosphere isn't as exciting or rowdy. It's the perception of the brand that we should make adjustments for in the ACC.

Actually, Apple is the best phone.

 

[Skeptic]

Hopefully it will help GT's recruiting however the very high academic standards will always hinder recruiting to some extent.

I would argue it is much less the academic standards, though a factor, and far more the curriculum offerings. I don't know what it is about technical folks who just won't accept that their chosen vocation is a turnoff to a huge segment of high school students, and probably particularly football players. Lots of smart players could get in -- yes, it's true -- they just don't want to study something that bores them to tears and which even if they passed they would hate. I have known two former lawyers who did daddy's bidding and eventually passed the bar. Neither lasted ore than three years because they hated it, but the education before law school provided them an avenue to something else. I don't want somebody designing passenger airplanes who really wants to study Proust. Engineering and technology aren't for everybody, and a shoehorn won't make them work. Georgia Tech is now what Georgia Tech will be, but even if you cut academic requirements to the bone, you won't get football players who hate it. Would you buy in? Johnson has embraced it, why not the fans?

 

[Sideways]

I wish people would stop posting stuff from this retard. His mere existence just saddens me as a human being

This fellow makes me ashamed to have been born and bred in Georgia. A really good example of the lower end of the bell curve.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

This fellow makes me ashamed to have been born and bred in Georgia. A really good example of the lower end of the bell curve.

Maybe he's just an attention hound playing a part. They don't call it Youtube for nothing.

 

[Sideways]

I agree with you on the point that if the ACC keeps winning then we'll get better at recruiting but kids want to play in the SEC for a totally different reason. I hate to say this but it's not about actually winning, its more about perception. Even during eras when teams like Bama, Auburn and Ugag are terrible, historically they still dominate the recruiting game. Like Apple, it's not the best phone, doesn't have the best functionality but it's PERCEIVED as cool/the best and everyone buys-into this.

Kids want to play for the SEC b/c they get to play in front of crowds of 100K+ where fans are literally willing to commit crimes over the love for their team (I'm exaggerating a bit here). Whereas, if they played in the ACC, they'd play in front of 60-70K on average, the atmosphere isn't as exciting or rowdy. It's the perception of the brand that we should make adjustments for in the ACC.

It is true that the ACC football experience is on the whole different from the usual madness that is the SEC. But the ACC can be a very difficult place to play. When FSU first joined the ACC back in the early 90s I believe it was, a reporter did a story from the player's perception of what it was like to transition to an ACC schedule. The Seminole players were quite candid. They talked about the nuances of different stadiums, other teams traditions, players etc. One thing they said was that when they played at Grant Field (at night mind you) it was way louder than what they thought it would be. As an aside, they also said that contrary to its perceived inferior nice boy reputation, Wake Forest did the most taunting and yapping.