Great Take.

[JacketFan137]

A couple of thoughts.

First, GT did not go cheap on the Collins hire.
He was the highest paid FB coach GT has ever had and when he was hired his salary was in the top half of the ACC. We've gone cheap on basketball hires but not FB.
He was also given more resources and support than any previous GT FB coach.

Second, Thomas came to GT because he was going to get to play at QB where the factory schools wanted to move him away from QB.

GT is unlikely to ever consistently recruit at a Top 25 level. It has not shown that ability over the last 40 years. I think GT can recruit in the 30-40 range and then with good player development and coaching can be better than that on the field - sort of a low end Top 25 type team.

https://247sports.com/college/virgi...alaries-2019-USA-Today-137375898/#137375898_2 this has him at 9th in the acc.

https://247sports.com/LongFormArtic...rby-Smart-Jimbo-Fisher-137356067/#137356067_1 this would put him at last in the sec when hiring him.

years and buyout structure may have been bad for us i’ll listen to that, but he was in fact a cheap hire by any real measure. even relative to other teams the resources were likely pretty cheap.

 

[billga99]

pretending that this is the same uga from 2014 and the majority of paul’s tenure is bending reality. they are entering their schools peak right now and the next 5 years are about to be their best stretch in school history if it hasn’t been already since kirby was hired.

it’s gonna take a lot more than some x’s and o’s to play with them unfortunately. they aren’t just beating teams anymore they’re just crushing everyone

I agree with this. The other problem is Clemson has also become a monster in the past 5-7 years as well. That puts 2 consistent Top 5 schools on our schedule every year. So for all of the SEC and Big Ten schools complaining about strength of schedule, very few have to play 2 Top 5 teams annually.

 

[HouseDivided]

We need to stop comparing ourselves to Ugag. They have the admin support/buy-in, resources and fan buy-in that we cannot match.

It's just not an apples to apples comparison. Unless things change from the Hill, that gap will stay wide between us and them which sucks.

Richt recruited good to very good at times. Kirby recruits at an elite level yearly. Richt was always 4th or 5th in the SEC alone in the recruiting rankings, sometimes worse. Kirby is 1st or 2nd & top 3 nationally. Richt neglected the OL and DL. Kirby hasn't. That's where they are different.

We could get to their level but it would take a massive shift from the power brokers.

 

[Oldgoldandwhite]

I'd argue this is true with almost any offensive scheme you run. Our last couple of years under CPJ were evidence of that.

But it’s more important in a passing scheme. You can win a lot of games with your legs in other schemes.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

But it’s more important in a passing scheme. You can win a lot of games with your legs in other schemes.

I think the right word is it's CRITICAL in a passing heavy scheme. Absolutely agree.

 

[JacketFan137]

But it’s more important in a passing scheme. You can win a lot of games with your legs in other schemes.

i’m not sure it is. there’s a reason the good tech teams, army, navy, etc all came in years where they had great qbs. doesn’t matter what the scheme is

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

i’m not sure it is. there’s a reason the good tech teams, army, navy, etc all came in years where they had great qbs. doesn’t matter what the scheme is

I think what he's saying is a good athlete with average to above average passing skills can win a lot of games in a run happy scheme, similar to JeT in 2014 or 2016, but in a pass happy scheme, you really have to have an outstanding QB to make it work.

 

[Steverc]

I remember when I lived in the Chicago area in the early 80s, the president of Northwestern University used to brag that having a bad football team was good for its academic reputation. I tend to agree.

 

[stinger 1957]

I'm old and go way back, but it is my opinion that Bobby Dodd was the last to have institutional support at GT. Frankly I got a little emotional the other day when listening to our Pres talk about commitment to institutional support to see that we have a program that is winning at the highest levels or however he said it. At my age I may not live long enough to see how that all plays out, but for the first time I feel like a cloud could be lifted and this program have the first chance to be very successful. We will see how it all plays out. I know I'm not by myself, but one thing that is obvious is the debt needs to be taken care of somehow, that would give room to breathe. There may be other things needed, I'm just sure that has to be done somehow. Someone on here said that donors don't want to give for debt reduction, they want to see something for their $ and I totally agree with that thinking. Just my 2 cents worth.