Great Take.

[Randy Carson]

Joey Weaver posted a great analysis at FTRS.

Take a look and let's discuss.

 

[4shotB]

I read it. I did not see anything fresh or new brought to the table. Seems it was written for a casual college football fan who maybe doesn't know or follow GT. I also suspect the writer is rather young as he talks about the problem of instituitonal alignment going back 'at least 15 years". Heck, this was an issue when I was there in the late 70's/early 80's.

 

[kg01]

May be the finest piece of GT-related journalism I've read in 20 years.

I dont agree with it all, but whoever wrote that did his homework in a way not many do anymore in that field.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

Fabulous article. I agree with basic premise that winning for GT in the future is going to a bowl every year and competing occasionally for ACC Championship. This is typical of most teams in the ACC and SEC and every conference.

Far far better than the embarrassment we have seen wrought by Collins. At least we publicly repudiated the embarrassment.

I think we can compete at the national level in baseball, volleyball, golf etc, but that's for another forum

 

[IronJacket7]

I read it. I did not see anything fresh or new brought to the table. Seems it was written for a casual college football fan who maybe doesn't know or follow GT. I also suspect the writer is rather young as he talks about the problem of instituitonal alignment going back 'at least 15 years". Heck, this was an issue when I was there in the late 70's/early 80's.

I rarely get anything out of the "fromtherumbleseat" articles.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Joey and I followed each other when I used to keep up with my LinkedIn account. A decade or more ago he was the only blogger that GT ever allowed to sit in the coaches box during games. He had a high degree of trust from “all sides” as they say. He has always been very careful about what he writes. Having been out in the business world for a few years now, I’m not sure how much he is able to keep his insider’s knowledge but his overall grasp of the dynamics at play at Tech is probably sound.

 

[croberts]

Interesting article. No revelations but more in tune with what we (most) recognize. If the writer thinks he has explained Tech football without mentioning finances, he is off the mark. Collins came to Atlanta because we were shopping at Walmart and not at Lenox Square .

 

[SilverFox81]

He's a graduate of the Institute. I wrote for SB Nation for two years and he is a class guy. Loves the school.

 

[swampsting]

His assessment of why Collins failed, I think, is accurate - he failed to adequately prepare the team to play its opposition, and he wasn't a victim of Tech's stringent academic requirements or limitations. In other words, our most recent ex-coach hoisted himself upon his own petard.
We know it's tough to win at Tech consistently - the program does not have the backing of some of its peers, it's tough to get some of the kids into the school, etc. But someone who can coach a team up can succeed at Tech. And I think that is at the essence of Joey's column.

 

[iceeater1969]

So why can the prez get gt " institutionally aligned ?

Angel said football is rapidly changing.

Time to make changes

 

[takethepoints]

I liked it and I didn't like it.

Likes: Sober analysis of what "winning" means at Tech. I'd be quite content with 7 - 9 wins consistently every year. Problem = so would almost every other football program in the country. We've been spoiled, badly. This is what winning means. So is winning the conference or division regularly. We were doing this as little as 4 years ago. No reason this can't be the new normal again.

Dislikes: We'll never beat Ugag again? Or, at least, not very often? Why not? People look at two excellent years and assume that the Dwags have gotten to Bama levels. Maybe, maybe not. At present the sample size is too small to tell. Paul beat them 3 times and their recruiting then was every bit as good as it is now. We'll never compete for a national championship again? I heard that in 1989. Then look what happened. If the article had said that we'll never compete consistently for a national championship again, I might buy it, mainly because we haven't done that since the 50a. But with a good team and a little luck, you never know. I think if we had made the big 4 in 2014, we would have had an excellent chance to win the whole thing. With a 12 team playoff I like our chances with another 2014 team and the right coach.

Let's get that coach <•cough• Chadwell or Clawson •cough*> and see, shall we?

 

[BleedGoldNWhite21]

I liked it and I didn't like it.

Likes: Sober analysis of what "winning" means at Tech. I'd be quite content with 7 - 9 wins consistently every year. Problem = so would almost every other football program in the country. We've been spoiled, badly. This is what winning means. So is winning the conference or division regularly. We were doing this as little as 4 years ago. No reason this can't be the new normal again.

Dislikes: We'll never beat Ugag again? Or, at least, not very often? Why not? People look at two excellent years and assume that the Dwags have gotten to Bama levels. Maybe, maybe not. At present the sample size is too small to tell. Paul beat them 3 times and their recruiting then was every bit as good as it is now. We'll never compete for a national championship again? I heard that in 1989. Then look what happened. If the article had said that we'll never compete consistently for a national championship again, I might buy it, mainly because we haven't done that since the 50a. But with a good team and a little luck, you never know. I think if we had made the big 4 in 2014, we would have had an excellent chance to win the whole thing. With a 12 team playoff I like our chances with another 2014 team and the right coach.

Let's get that coach <•cough• Chadwell or Clawson •cough*> and see, shall we?

I agree with you that I don’t like the defeatist attitude about UGA or the championship hopes.

 

[Randy Carson]

I'm not up for the challenge or willing to put in the work, but it would be interesting to see a spreadsheet of the final Top 25 standings over the past 25 years.

How many different schools are on that list? How many more than once? (You could probably name 20 or so off the top of your head.)

IMO, this might give some indication as to how many schools are SERIOUSLY pursuing excellence on the field as opposed to simply having an occasional break-out year. IOW, how many alumni bases around the country have set a Top 25 ranking as their minimum threshold? And is that a reasonable goal for Tech?

If the number is more than about 35 or so, then I'd say Tech's chances of being nationally relevant on a consistent basis in the future are pretty low. For all the systemic reasons we all acknowledge.

Maybe being one of the Top 50 with an occasional 10-11 win season is more realistic. What is our ceiling?

 

[JacketFan137]

I liked it and I didn't like it.

Likes: Sober analysis of what "winning" means at Tech. I'd be quite content with 7 - 9 wins consistently every year. Problem = so would almost every other football program in the country. We've been spoiled, badly. This is what winning means. So is winning the conference or division regularly. We were doing this as little as 4 years ago. No reason this can't be the new normal again.

Dislikes: We'll never beat Ugag again? Or, at least, not very often? Why not? People look at two excellent years and assume that the Dwags have gotten to Bama levels. Maybe, maybe not. At present the sample size is too small to tell. Paul beat them 3 times and their recruiting then was every bit as good as it is now. We'll never compete for a national championship again? I heard that in 1989. Then look what happened. If the article had said that we'll never compete consistently for a national championship again, I might buy it, mainly because we haven't done that since the 50a. But with a good team and a little luck, you never know. I think if we had made the big 4 in 2014, we would have had an excellent chance to win the whole thing. With a 12 team playoff I like our chances with another 2014 team and the right coach.

Let's get that coach <•cough• Chadwell or Clawson •cough*> and see, shall we?

uga is not recruiting at the same level they were under richt. they have really leaned into it, spend wayyyy more and are recruiting better year over year while also doing a better job addressing needs like the o line that richt struggled with. hate to rain on your parade but uga may be out of reach for a long time

 

[ramblineck]

uga is not recruiting at the same level they were under richt. they have really leaned into it, spend wayyyy more and are recruiting better year over year while also doing a better job addressing needs like the o line that richt struggled with. hate to rain on your parade but uga may be out of reach for a long time

Exactly! anyone that doesn't see uga as ELITE now is just lying to themselves or sipping too much gold kool-aid (or something stronger)

 

[JacketFan137]

Exactly! anyone that doesn't see uga as ELITE now is just lying to themselves or sipping too much gold kool-aid (or something stronger)

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

 

[ChicagobasedJacket]

I liked it and I didn't like it.

Likes: Sober analysis of what "winning" means at Tech. I'd be quite content with 7 - 9 wins consistently every year. Problem = so would almost every other football program in the country. We've been spoiled, badly. This is what winning means. So is winning the conference or division regularly. We were doing this as little as 4 years ago. No reason this can't be the new normal again.

Dislikes: We'll never beat Ugag again? Or, at least, not very often? Why not? People look at two excellent years and assume that the Dwags have gotten to Bama levels. Maybe, maybe not. At present the sample size is too small to tell. Paul beat them 3 times and their recruiting then was every bit as good as it is now. We'll never compete for a national championship again? I heard that in 1989. Then look what happened. If the article had said that we'll never compete consistently for a national championship again, I might buy it, mainly because we haven't done that since the 50a. But with a good team and a little luck, you never know. I think if we had made the big 4 in 2014, we would have had an excellent chance to win the whole thing. With a 12 team playoff I like our chances with another 2014 team and the right coach.

Let's get that coach <•cough• Chadwell or Clawson •cough*> and see, shall we?

I had the same reaction too. I think Joey was acknowledging that Uga’s recruiting under Richt was not year over year what it is now nor was their spending on football. We are in trouble competing against them so scheme alone will not overcome talent. I agree that 12 team playoff does give us some hope if we can pull a few more 2014 or 2009 seasons soon.

 

[Js-showman]

uga is not recruiting at the same level they were under richt. they have really leaned into it, spend wayyyy more and are recruiting better year over year while also doing a better job addressing needs like the o line that richt struggled with. hate to rain on your parade but uga may be out of reach for a long time

Which goes back to the article. I always heard that Johnson wanted to increase the recruiting budget and add more heads. (Would love for someone to confirm.) Apparently, The AD and the Hill didn’t want to support him. Kirby comes into UGA and adds 8 more recruiters to the existing staff. He added way more than we had to begin with. A great example of institutional support that we don’t have. We could have saved ourselves millions in debt if we would have put just a little support behind a guy who had some degree of success.

 

[MACHETE]

He's entitled to his opinion but this is the typical age-old take that GT is a hard place to win at and should not expect to win another Natty. We need to change this mindset. If this is the case, why bother to compete at all? If you're going to play the game, play it to win.

 

[Js-showman]

He's entitled to his opinion but this is the typical age-old take that GT is a hard place to win at and should not expect to win another Natty. We need to change this mindset. If this is the case, why bother to compete at all? If you're going to play the game, play it to win.

I would argue that you can get to a natty at GT. Cincinnati got into the playoff last year. But we aren’t going to get there by trying to recreate Bama or Clemson or UGA. That isn’t who we are.