CPJ Comments on Contract Extension

[forensicbuzz]

But not taking the coach's word for something -- I wouldn't -- and going elsewhere is, it seems to me, basic, standard, journalism 101 reporting.

Not when it comes to injury information on his players.

And I like Ken. I think he's a decent reporter and one of the best the AUC has put on Tech. And I like Johnson.

 

[forensicbuzz]

What's laughable is that you drop big words without a clue as to how they are spelled. The word is CURMUDGEON, no CREMUDGEION. And the second time was after I had already corrected you on the first time.

don't be THAT guy.

 

[Techster]

Yes, and with their talent, they should never be outside the top 10 in efficiency. They did score via the pass.

They weren't bad rushing the ball. #35

Their offense was kinda OK for them. Not great, but not bad.

You're right though. They should have done better. GT definitely did more with less.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

don't be THAT guy.

I might not ordinarily, but it was too much to pass up with him. LOL

 

[Josh H]

I had never heard of a CSV file, so I GOOGLE'd it. You might do well to do so also, but in what I think is an answer to your question, I found this: "A CSV file can be opened in any program, however, for most users, a CSV file is best viewed through a spreadsheet program such as Microsoft Excel, Open Office Calc or Google Doc."

I'm not sure if that was meant to be sarcastic, but I wasn't asking what a CSV file was. I was asking how to upload one to the forum (or if it was even possible). I calculated the statistics for Red Zone offensive efficiency minus field goals and wanted to "show my work".

(For those wondering, CSV is a comma separated value file and it's a good way to save spreadsheets in a file format that isn't Excel proprietary. Also nice for working with in scripting languages like Python).

Now back to our regularly scheduled thread.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

I'm not sure if that was meant to be sarcastic, but I wasn't asking what a CSV file was. I was asking how to upload one to the forum (or if it was even possible). I calculated the statistics for Red Zone offensive efficiency minus field goals and wanted to "show my work".

(For those wondering, CSV is a comma separated value file and it's a good way to save spreadsheets in a file format that isn't Excel proprietary. Also nice for working with in scripting languages like Python).

Now back to our regularly scheduled thread.

Gotcha. No, it was not meant to be sarcastic. After I made that post, I realized that you had asked about UPloading it, not DOWNloading it. That being said, however, I wasn't sure where you were going with it, and since I did not even know what a CSV file was, I made the post I did.

 

[TechPreacher]

Would you not agree 4 seasons is a good sample size? We are 28-22 in the last 4 seasons with 3 losses to Duke.

Yes I do agree that four seasons is a good sample size. We were 33-19 the first 4 seasons with 0 losses to Duke.

Am I playing the game right?

See how silly that is? CPJ has been here 10 years. His body of work is 10 years. Not 4 years. Not 8 years. 10 years. In those 10 years, he has had more success than most GT coaches historically and most of his peers presently. His record needs no apologies.

 

[swampsting]

You do realize, don't you, that getting information is the reporter's job, and he doesn't answer to Johnson? "Behind his back" may assign some sinister act, but getting information from somebody else is hardly devious. The Atlanta reporter is not, however devoutly he may wish it, on Johnson's team.

I understand what Ken's job and how he should go about it. Ken does an admirable job covering Tech. It would be nice if he had some backup, like in the days not too long ago when Carroll Rogers also would be covering Tech.
I'm not absolving Ken for circumventing PJ's rules and I'm not absolving PJ for taking umbrage at Ken trying to do his job.
If PJ truly despised Ken, he wouldn't even entertain any of his questions. But PJ knows Ken has a job to do, in spite of any enmity he may have toward him.
As for the post practice stuff mentioned in another reply, perhaps better questions would lead to better answers, if there are any. But really, what can you ask of a practice you don't get to see....
Two vignettes from those who know PJ well. After a win when he was coaching Georgia Southern, PJ was asked in the post game presser about a blocked punt the Eagles had allowed. His answer: "We just (bleepin') turned a guy loose." The story in the paper the next day - "we just turned a guy loose."
at a function with other coaches and media, and as the the vast majority of the media congregated around Richt (then coaching Georgia) and with one scribe next to him who had known him for years, PJ looked over at the media horde and offered this:
"You don't think there's a bias in this state?"
The response may have been along the lines of "no (bleepin') (bleep), man."

 

[Gold1]

Yes I do agree that four seasons is a good sample size. We were 33-19 the first 4 seasons with 0 losses to Duke.

Am I playing the game right?

See how silly that is? CPJ has been here 10 years. His body of work is 10 years. Not 4 years. Not 8 years. 10 years. In those 10 years, he has had more success than most GT coaches historically and most of his peers presently. His record needs no apologies.

The 4 most recent years are more important when determining a coaches contract and extensions

 

[TechPreacher]

The 4 most recent years are more important when determining a coaches contract and extensions

Why only 4? Why not use the 10 most recent years?

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

The 4 most recent years are more important when determining a coaches contract and extensions

Do you have any idea what Dodd's record was for the four years after the amazing streak of the early 50s? From 1957 to 1960, Tech went 4-4-2, 5-4-1, 6-5, and 5-5, with only one bowl (1959), which we lost. Would you have dumped Dodd after 1960? According to your convoluted logic, I think it's likely that you would have. And if that had happened, then Tech would probably never have seen the likes of Billy Lotheridge, Billy Martin, and a slew of other outstanding athletes, an earthshaking defeat of defending NC and undefeated Bama (1962), and an Orange Bowl in 1966. Granted Johnson's record prior to the last four years were nothing like Dodd's before those four years, but it's the most impressive overall record Tech has seen since then. Dodd wasn't done after the 1960 season, and there is no reason for Johnson to be done now.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

The 4 most recent years are more important when determining a coaches contract and extensions

I'd argue you should, at the very least, use a 5 year sample, as that's how long a recruiting class usually takes to play through with redshirting. Over the last 5 years GT is 35-28 (.556) with 2 bowl wins including the NY6 OB win. We've beaten uga twice in that stretch, and we graduate our players on time. Accounting for the injury plagued anomaly that was 2015, all the evidence supports extending CPJ.

But check your bias. If GT went 7-6 and 11-3 over the next two years, you'd suddenly want to include 2015 in your sample because it underscores your agenda.

 

[bke1984]

First of all, I agree with the extension. We're giving the recruiting staff and D coordinator he wants, so let's see what he can do with it.

That said, even the biggest CPJ supporters (I'm probably lumped in this group) have to admit that the three years following an 11-3 Orange Bowl winning season have been pretty sad. It's silly to argue you should improve on those seasons since there is only limited room for improvement, but seasons like that are supposed to help you with branding, recruiting, etc...which should ultimately improve the program, right? Well, we're 9-15 in conference since winning the Orange Bowl. That's the worst three year stretch since 94-96 (or pick any three year period that includes 1994).

So where do I stand?...I feel like we need to have a winning conference record over the next three years with no losing seasons. If we don't do that then I'll be ready for a change...but I also think that if we don't do that CPJ will be ready for a change, as well (i.e. no football, lots of golf)

 

[Milwaukee]

Stop being reasonable @bke1984.

 

[jacketup]

Yes I do agree that four seasons is a good sample size. We were 33-19 the first 4 seasons with 0 losses to Duke.

Am I playing the game right?

See how silly that is? CPJ has been here 10 years. His body of work is 10 years. Not 4 years. Not 8 years. 10 years. In those 10 years, he has had more success than most GT coaches historically and most of his peers presently. His record needs no apologies.

His whole body of work is not 10 years.

The first reason is that recruiting is the most important task in being a head coach. His success or failure the first 2 years (at least) is due in large part to his predecessor's recruiting efforts--or lack thereof.

The second reason is that in comparing coaches, you have to consider what they inherited. O'Leary inherited the Lewis mess. Curry inherited a program that was an even bigger mess. Johnson inherited arguably the most talent ever assembled at GT.

Going back to Curry, and comparing Johnson's FBS record with other coaches after the first two years, he comes up way short as compared to Ross and O'Leary, and about the same as Curry.

I'll ask you this simple question: His FBS record his first two years was far, far better than his FBS record over the last 8 years. Why? Don't start with the "ACC is better" stuff. It did not become miraculously better between 2009 and 2010. The reason is apparent, but the Johnson apologists won't admit the reason.

Back to the OP, I don't know if the extension was a good thing or not. The actual terms of the extension have been mysteriously absent from public view. I don't believe that Johnson should have been terminated after last year, and an extension was therefore in order. If it does not increase the buyout, then I am OK with it. However, I'll bet that it does.

 

[Techster]

Why? Don't start with the "ACC is better" stuff. It did not become miraculously better between 2009 and 2010.

Arguably, only 2-3 teams have gotten remarkably better in the ACC: FSU, Louisville, Clemson. The thing is, those teams became national programs...moreso FSU and Clemson since they became regular playoff teams.

We play Clemson every year, but Clemson has always out recruited us. They just decided to spend more money on better assistant coaches who can actually coach, turning the talent to national championship level teams. Clemson has never been a team GT fans looked at as an easy "W".

Louisville and FSU we play on a rotational basis. In fact, I don't think we've played Louisville in football since they entered the league.

FSU was not that good when CPJ entered the league, and returned to "FSU" when Jimbo Fisher was finally promoted to HC. I think we may have split the regular season matchups, but we're 0-2 in the ACCCG against them.

I would look more to the Coastal than the ACC overall since those are the teams we have to play on a regular basis.

Duke has certainly improved, and the fact that they are even competitive with us now...yeah, that's not good.

VaTech is as good as they were since CPJ came to GT. They tailed off a bit towards the end of Beamer's tenure, but right now they're probably almost as good of a program. CPJ has had some very good games with them.

UNC has a few years where they were good, but for the most part have been mediocre to bad.

Pitt, since they've entered the ACC, has been fairly decent. Not great, but not altogether bad. GT has had some wild games against them.

Miami has gotten better under Richt, but they were always overrated with a lot of talent. We definitely should have had more W's against them than we did. Especially during the Randy Shannon years.

UVA...they have had ok teams, but for the most part have not been a good program.

IMO, the ACC Atlantic division has seen more of an improvement over the ACC Coastal. Coastal has improved a bit, but the Atlantic division houses 2 national level programs.

 

[Techster]

Mark Bradley chimes in:

https://www.myajc.com/blog/mark-bra...ract-extension-really/1tBZXqvv6akZXmoEwlVuIO/

Maybe you think that rewarding a guy who has gone 17-19 since the Orange Bowl is subsidizing mediocrity. I’d suggest you check the body of work. Johnson isn’t the greatest coach in Tech annals, but he’s the best of the past half-century. He’s worth keeping.

 

[Gold1]

Why only 4? Why not use the 10 most recent years?

Because that's not how it works in the real world. It's what have you done for me lately.

 

[Gold1]

Mark Bradley chimes in:

https://www.myajc.com/blog/mark-bra...ract-extension-really/1tBZXqvv6akZXmoEwlVuIO/

Maybe you think that rewarding a guy who has gone 17-19 since the Orange Bowl is subsidizing mediocrity. I’d suggest you check the body of work. Johnson isn’t the greatest coach in Tech annals, but he’s the best of the past half-century. He’s worth keeping.

Hahahahaha most of you agree with Mark Bradley! Not a good sign

 

[Gold1]

Do you have any idea what Dodd's record was for the four years after the amazing streak of the early 50s? From 1957 to 1960, Tech went 4-4-2, 5-4-1, 6-5, and 5-5, with only one bowl (1959), which we lost. Would you have dumped Dodd after 1960? According to your convoluted logic, I think it's likely that you would have. And if that had happened, then Tech would probably never have seen the likes of Billy Lotheridge, Billy Martin, and a slew of other outstanding athletes, an earthshaking defeat of defending NC and undefeated Bama (1962), and an Orange Bowl in 1966. Granted Johnson's record prior to the last four years were nothing like Dodd's before those four years, but it's the most impressive overall record Tech has seen since then. Dodd wasn't done after the 1960 season, and there is no reason for Johnson to be done now.

I'm not talking about Dodd. I'm talking about our current head coach