CPJ interview - Nov 11

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,083
If I were TStan, I’d drop Alcorn State and add Auburn. Drop Gardner Webb and add Vanderbilt. Yes ... we’ll have to win games but we’re likely to attract local kids who are motivated.

just my opinion
No. God in Heaven above, no.

Tech already has two persistent top 10 teams on out schedule. What we have to do is concentrate on beating one of them on a regular basis. Adding another obstacle - Awbun - to an already murderous schedule would, imho, kill momentum, should it ever appear. All Tech really has to do is turn one of those games - probably Clemson - into a competitive series and we'll have all the attention we need.

That won't be easy. But the Football Gods are fickle. Who would have predicted 8 years ago that FSU - the Paul Bunyan of the ACC for decades - would suddenly descend into mediocrity, nay, complete programmatic collapse? (Not me, for instance.) Will the Tiggers continue at the top? Who knows? They've been there before - the Ford years - and regressed.
 

GoldZ

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
912
I’m happy with the ACC, but we’re still feeling the effects of Dodd’s (in my opinion shortsighted) decision to leave the SEC. Being in the SEC would have solved our financial problems.
Flush financially or not, it would have been sooo much fun being Vandyish the past 5 decades, huh?
 

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,305
Location
Auburn, AL
Flush financially or not, it would have been sooo much fun being Vandyish the past 5 decades, huh?

Vandy doesn’t care about sports. The administration views sports as a nice to have, but not a must have. The alumni don’t really care.

Make no mistake. Vandy has as much cash to spend as it wants. It just doesn’t spend it on sports.
 

LongforDodd

LatinxBreakfastTacos
Messages
3,175
Vandy doesn’t care about sports. The administration views sports as a nice to have, but not a must have. The alumni don’t really care.

Make no mistake. Vandy has as much cash to spend as it wants. It just doesn’t spend it on sports.
...as witnessed by the absence of a formal athletic association.
 

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,305
Location
Auburn, AL
...as witnessed by the absence of a formal athletic association.

Not sure what your point is here. Vandy, as a private school, doesn’t need a separate organization to manage sports. Tennessee also has no AA as Athletics is part of the school administration.

I believe GA law requires sports to be separate from the school.

Regardless ... Vandy isn’t going to lose any sleep going 2-10.
 

a5ehren

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
457
Vandy doesn’t care about sports. The administration views sports as a nice to have, but not a must have. The alumni don’t really care.

Make no mistake. Vandy has as much cash to spend as it wants. It just doesn’t spend it on sports.
I guess a fun question for us is this - isn't this the right attitude to have about it when you don't need it?

We don't need a good football team to attract students or money to our academic programs like other places (cough clemson cough), so why put serious effort into it? It's just sports.
 

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,305
Location
Auburn, AL
I guess a fun question for us is this - isn't this the right attitude to have about it when you don't need it?

We don't need a good football team to attract students or money to our academic programs like other places (cough clemson cough), so why put serious effort into it? It's just sports.

I think this view is consistent with the BOR, the Hill and the faculty. This is especially true after 1980 when research became Tech’s economic driver.
 

Heisman's Ghost

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,827
Location
Albany Georgia
No. God in Heaven above, no.

Tech already has two persistent top 10 teams on out schedule. What we have to do is concentrate on beating one of them on a regular basis. Adding another obstacle - Awbun - to an already murderous schedule would, imho, kill momentum, should it ever appear. All Tech really has to do is turn one of those games - probably Clemson - into a competitive series and we'll have all the attention we need.

That won't be easy. But the Football Gods are fickle. Who would have predicted 8 years ago that FSU - the Paul Bunyan of the ACC for decades - would suddenly descend into mediocrity, nay, complete programmatic collapse? (Not me, for instance.) Will the Tiggers continue at the top? Who knows? They've been there before - the Ford years - and regressed.

We already have two elite programs that we are a long way from being competitive and the last thing we need is another guaranteed loss. It is going to be hard enough to get to bowl eligibility as it is.
 

GoldZ

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
912
Vandy doesn’t care about sports. The administration views sports as a nice to have, but not a must have. The alumni don’t really care.

Make no mistake. Vandy has as much cash to spend as it wants. It just doesn’t spend it on sports.
I'm talking about on the field performance, not just finances. We would have gotten pummeled by Bama, LSU, ugag, Auburn, Fla, UT, and the sec newer additions would have just piled on more recently. I don't believe a Vandyish record in the 70's to present would have resulted in the changessss necessary to compete in the great Land Grant factory world. Imo, those believing that everything would be sunshine and unicorns had we stayed in the sec are misinformed.
 

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,305
Location
Auburn, AL
I'm talking about on the field performance, not just finances. We would have gotten pummeled by Bama, LSU, ugag, Auburn, Fla, UT, and the sec newer additions would have just piled on more recently. I don't believe a Vandyish record in the 70's to present would have resulted in the changessss necessary to compete in the great Land Grant factory world. Imo, those believing that everything would be sunshine and unicorns had we stayed in the sec are misinformed.

I think my original point is lost so I'll reframe it.

To improve, Tech has said it needs to improve recruiting. And of the Top Ten recruiting areas in the USA, three (GA, AL, and FL) are within easy distance of Tech. Moreover, there was a time when Tech was considered as a legitimate alternative school/team for many in the area. There were Wreck Tech parades, split families, etc. Tech was familiar to the SEC (key concept).

In marketing, there are two main things to think about. First is how a decision is made. Often, it starts with Awareness (What school? Oh I've heard of them), continues with Familiarity (I know them. They run the TO), leads to Consideration (Mom, I'm thinking about Auburn or maybe Georgia Tech), followed by Purchase (I signed) and finally, Post-Purchase Glow (We're glad you joined Tech. It was a good decision. Let's show you how to succeed in life).

The second major thing is Word of Mouth. By far, the most effective, least costly, method to sell is through WOM. That's why companies spend so much to develop positive WOM and specialized groups to promote positive WOM. Think "friends and family" and you'll see how WOM works. Cellular companies excel at it.

My original point is that Tech HAD this. We were very Aware in the 60's and 70's because we were still relevant and the nature of college football had not yet changed. Now, do we have strong awareness? I would say no. Tech is virtually unheard of in Alabama because the current generation of fans have never heard of Dodd, Kim King, etc. Do we have strong familiarity? Of those that are aware, it's possible that most have a negative view of Tech because of a) academic load and b) TO legacy. Of those that are familiar, what percentage would consider Tech? Historically, not that many as measured by recruiting. Of those that consider, how many would actually sign?

You get the idea. It's a measurable, linear process.

So, if you are going to recruit (i.e., sell) in the areas of Alabama, Georgia, and Florida ... you had better be focused on driving Awareness, Familiarity, Consideration ... and positive WOM. We did that, at virtually no cost, by scheduling schools like Auburn, Vandy (Ok, it's in TN), and Alabama. THEY promoted Tech through interviews, parades, news articles, etc. All free.

I'm NOT talking about joining the SEC. I am talking about kids who want to make a life decision and follow a typical customer journey. Ultimately, to overcome the lack of Awareness ... you have to raise money (which Tech sucks at) and pay for it yourself. It's Paid Media vs. Earned Media.

So, my theory is if you want to improve recruiting and do so at low cost, you have to become relevant in the areas you are targeting. And you do that by scheduling a few opponents and get that exposure for free. So, drop Gardner Webb and add Auburn. And by getting better players, we should play better on the field.

And I am not that worried about scheduling a school like Auburn. They are a good 8-5 team most years. And a good historical rival. They are not Alabama.

Anyway ... my two cents.
 

Augusta_Jacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
8,092
Location
Augusta, Georgia
I think my original point is lost so I'll reframe it.

To improve, Tech has said it needs to improve recruiting. And of the Top Ten recruiting areas in the USA, three (GA, AL, and FL) are within easy distance of Tech. Moreover, there was a time when Tech was considered as a legitimate alternative school/team for many in the area. There were Wreck Tech parades, split families, etc. Tech was familiar to the SEC (key concept).

In marketing, there are two main things to think about. First is how a decision is made. Often, it starts with Awareness (What school? Oh I've heard of them), continues with Familiarity (I know them. They run the TO), leads to Consideration (Mom, I'm thinking about Auburn or maybe Georgia Tech), followed by Purchase (I signed) and finally, Post-Purchase Glow (We're glad you joined Tech. It was a good decision. Let's show you how to succeed in life).

The second major thing is Word of Mouth. By far, the most effective, least costly, method to sell is through WOM. That's why companies spend so much to develop positive WOM and specialized groups to promote positive WOM. Think "friends and family" and you'll see how WOM works. Cellular companies excel at it.

My original point is that Tech HAD this. We were very Aware in the 60's and 70's because we were still relevant and the nature of college football had not yet changed. Now, do we have strong awareness? I would say no. Tech is virtually unheard of in Alabama because the current generation of fans have never heard of Dodd, Kim King, etc. Do we have strong familiarity? Of those that are aware, it's possible that most have a negative view of Tech because of a) academic load and b) TO legacy. Of those that are familiar, what percentage would consider Tech? Historically, not that many as measured by recruiting. Of those that consider, how many would actually sign?

You get the idea. It's a measurable, linear process.

So, if you are going to recruit (i.e., sell) in the areas of Alabama, Georgia, and Florida ... you had better be focused on driving Awareness, Familiarity, Consideration ... and positive WOM. We did that, at virtually no cost, by scheduling schools like Auburn, Vandy (Ok, it's in TN), and Alabama. THEY promoted Tech through interviews, parades, news articles, etc. All free.

I'm NOT talking about joining the SEC. I am talking about kids who want to make a life decision and follow a typical customer journey. Ultimately, to overcome the lack of Awareness ... you have to raise money (which Tech sucks at) and pay for it yourself. It's Paid Media vs. Earned Media.

So, my theory is if you want to improve recruiting and do so at low cost, you have to become relevant in the areas you are targeting. And you do that by scheduling a few opponents and get that exposure for free. So, drop Gardner Webb and add Auburn. And by getting better players, we should play better on the field.

And I am not that worried about scheduling a school like Auburn. They are a good 8-5 team most years. And a good historical rival. They are not Alabama.

Anyway ... my two cents.

FWIW, I agree with the concept you propose. I just don't think it's the ONLY way to accomplish the goal. IMO, we need one non-uga P5 (preferably SEC) OoC opponent every year. For the ND years, they will be that opponent. That leaves two OoC games. I'd schedule one G5 and one FCS for the win. Winning gets you recognition as well (See the way Duke football has started to become relevant) and scheduling easy OoC wins is a great method for that. Duke scheduled easily and yet scheduled Bama to open the season. Best of both worlds. Now that we're not running the TO, we should be more appealing to the factory schools as an opponent. In this case, I believe it's possible to have our cake and eat it too.

Caveat: The fan base hs to understand that scheduling tougher games means scheduling possible losses.
 

smokey_wasp

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,486
FWIW, I agree with the concept you propose. I just don't think it's the ONLY way to accomplish the goal. IMO, we need one non-uga P5 (preferably SEC) OoC opponent every year. For the ND years, they will be that opponent. That leaves two OoC games. I'd schedule one G5 and one FCS for the win. Winning gets you recognition as well (See the way Duke football has started to become relevant) and scheduling easy OoC wins is a great method for that. Duke scheduled easily and yet scheduled Bama to open the season. Best of both worlds. Now that we're not running the TO, we should be more appealing to the factory schools as an opponent. In this case, I believe it's possible to have our cake and eat it too.

Caveat: The fan base hs to understand that scheduling tougher games means scheduling possible losses.

I think we have Ole Miss on the schedule sometime soon-ish.
 
Top