Football Study Hall on "Coaches who aren't good enough"

[Vespidae]

Said it before and I'll say it again. GT is not large enough to fund raise and compete with the big boys. Outside of Clemson (who does a great job), our giving per alumni head is normally BETTER than just about every other school in the south. We are simply smaller than the rest of these schools...both in undergraduate size AND (even more so) in alumni population local to the school. With people like Tennessee and South Carolina having nearly 3 times as many folks to draw funds from, what in blazes makes you think GT alumni can give 2-3 as much per capita to match their total fund raising efforts?
I am not defending the GTAA, as much as I am saying even a robust GTAA effort is likely doomed to keep us in second tier status simply because SIZE MATTERS.

Two reasons. According the NCAA Licensing, Tech has fewer transactions but ranks near the top in purchases per customer. In other words, Tech folks have money and buy stuff.

Second. A good booster network is national. FSU? National. Clemson? National. Alabama? National. And I'm not talking Alumni Association, I'm talking clubs dedicated to sports, raising money for sports, raising money to support recruiting, etc.

In my hometown, I can throw a rock and hit three fundraisers for Alabama ... either carwashes, selling doughnuts, or local TD Club functions. In 35 years ... I've never even seen a Tech Booster club fundraiser.

Just saying ... We have very wealthy alumni. We just don't connect with them, involve them, or ... love them.

 

[RonJohn]

It is the fans who believe we should be Alabama on Saturday on a slightly better than Duke budget in the middle of SEC country.

It is an arms race that we are going to have extreme difficulty competing in.

The estimates that I have seen for Duke show that their athletic budget is about 20% higher that GT's.

 

[GTpdm]

Look at our last AD.

...and the one before that...
...and the one before that...

 

[BuzzbaitGT]

Honestly - 2014 was Shaq Mason, good AB’s, 2 NFL WR’s and dual threat QB who could put considerable zip on the ball.

I think a QB with a better arm and an explosive receiver(Smelter) would put us in easily at 9 wins this year, maybe 10-11.

Not sure if this was unique to Smelter (shouldn't be, but seemingly was), but timing routes seemed to decrease after his departure -- quick outs, button hooks, etc. The bread-and-butter pass play that made Smelter/Thomas deadly, however, was the back-shoulder throw.

Don't recall many successful back-shoulder throws from Marshall to Jeune or Marshall to Stewart.

 

[Philhutch80]

2009 = Nesbitt, Dwyer, Allen, Burnett, Morgan, etc.

2014 = JT working with a largely senior backfield, receivers, and - especially - OL. If TM had had a Days - Laskey combo, a stable of big, experienced ABs, Smelter/Waller to throw to, and the best OL in recent GT history things would have been different.

FIFY. AND no, if TM had the same backfield from '14 we would have probably lost at least two games or more, Georgia Southern and UGA specifically. Both games were won on passes (O &D). The Georgia Southern game TM does not have the arm to make that throw the way JT did. Also the passes to Smelter in the UGA game, TM does not have the arm to make the slant pass for a TD or the long pass that Smelter was injured on. Love his running ability but passing is not something he is even average at.

 

[UgaBlows]

^but Lucas Johnson does...

 

[takethepoints]

FIFY. AND no, if TM had the same backfield from '14 we would have probably lost at least two games or more, Georgia Southern and UGA specifically. Both games were won on passes (O &D). The Georgia Southern game TM does not have the arm to make that throw the way JT did. Also the passes to Smelter in the UGA game, TM does not have the arm to make the slant pass for a TD or the long pass that Smelter was injured on. Love his running ability but passing is not something he is even average at.

I'm not sure where this is coming from since my post was based on a different question then this one thinks it answered. But I'll play.

If TM was on the field with the team we had in 2014, we probably would only have won 10 games or so. He's not the passer that JT was. Yet. But, remember, this is fundamentally his first year at QB; he played before mainly as an AB. That is the root of a lot of our problems this year: inexperience. We lost several good experienced athletes to career choices, injury, and dismissal before the season started.

I don't know if TM can get up to college speed with his passing and reads by next year, but his high school stats don't look at all shabby (1378, 18 TDs passing, 1436, 12 TDs rush). Let's see what he does in the spring. I expect a real donnybrook at QB then.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Wrong. Look at almost every program in the country. The ONLY two I know of where the Athletic Department is part of the School's general fund are Tennessee and Notre Dame. I'm sure there are more. But my point is that the vast majority are run as separate organizations.

And it's a fact ... the GTAA sucks at fund-raising. Look at most of the programs in the SEC and the ACC. A substantial amount of money is driven through the booster network of clubs. Tech? We don't even have one.

There is no piggy bank on the Hill for the AA. The only commitment the Hill makes is the out-of-state tuition waiver.

And why should we continue that failed funding model?

 

[RonJohn]

And why should we continue that failed funding model?

What model would you go to that is allowed by law and by the Regents?

 

[D-man44]

Georgia Tech doesn’t recruit for stars, bad recruitig isn’t of result of not getting 4-5 stars. Look at a guy like Synjyn Days on that 2014 team played 3 positions, how many of those guys do we have? It’s great to get players that look good on 247 Sports but our staff has struggled to land Offensive playmakers recently. Look at a Guy like Clinton Lynch he was a 2 Star, had a rough year but he’s our best playmaker. We need more guys like him. People think this new staff will bring in 4 stars, it won’t. It will help us find more perfect fits for us so we aren’t guessing with players like we have been.

I think the right coach can get us a top 35 and 8-10 wins a year without having such drastic down years

 

[dressedcheeseside]

What model would you go to that is allowed by law and by the Regents?

The rich school kicks in.

 

[1BearJACKET]

Here is another great article about Stanford. Their S&C program decreased their games missed due toinjury by 87%.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/syndic...e-stanford-football-strength-program.amp.html

 

[RonJohn]

The rich school kicks in.

Can't based on Regents regs.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Can't based on Regents regs.

Oh.

 

[B Lifsey]

http://www.usg.edu/policymanual/section4/C331

 

[ibeattetris]

The love affair some of you have with a private school on the west coast that offers a wide variety of majors is pretty weird. We have almost nothing in common with Stanford. Are there things we can learn from looking at other programs that are strong academically? Of course! Should we expect to be able to emulate any of them, or if we could, expect what works for them to work for us? No.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

The love affair some of you have with a private school on the west coast that offers a wide variety of majors is pretty weird. We have almost nothing in common with Stanford. Are there things we can learn from looking at other programs that are strong academically? Of course! Should we expect to be able to emulate any of them, or if we could, expect what works for them to work for us? No.

We should emulate MIT.

 

[ibeattetris]

We should emulate MIT.

 

[Vespidae]

And why should we continue that failed funding model?

The separation between the school and it's sports programs isn't the issue. "How" Tech raises funds is a failed model. That should be changed, and changed fast. I do like what Clemson did with IPTAY ... and Tech should do something as creative.

The "What" they spend their money on should be challenged. The Revenue sports are underfunded, the non-Rev are overfunded. I can't understand why a competent AD doesn't understand that.

 

[LongforDodd]

The separation between the school and it's sports programs isn't the issue. "How" Tech raises funds is a failed model. That should be changed, and changed fast. I do like what Clemson did with IPTAY ... and Tech should do something as creative.

The "What" they spend their money on should be challenged. The Revenue sports are underfunded, the non-Rev are overfunded. I can't understand why a competent AD doesn't understand that.

Can you give us an example of overfunding in the non revenue sports?