GT Peer Group & Path to Success

[takethepoints]

Apropos of nothing, but somewhat a tangent to your point, is that sometimes we also build the wrong solutions from available data. In WWII they tracked where all the bullet/flak holes were in the returning B-17s in order to understand why they were losing so many of them. Their initial thought was to reinforce those areas in order for the planes to be more resistant during their missions. The engineers pressed to reinforce the seemingly most vulnerable areas, but a scientist and mathematician convinced them that the real problem was where the bullets weren't. They needed to armor the engines, cockpit, and rear fuselage because that's where the critical hits were coming in. I think we suffer sometimes from the same problem. We have a ton of data and we are convincing ourselves it points to a solution that we are biased towards, and yet we may not even be asking the right questions.

Culture is different at every school, and no single culture is inherently better than the other. If the culture does not produce the desired results, then the culture needs to change. That is the current issue. We are talking about culture, but maybe we need to have a hard discussion about what we truly desire for our football program before we settle on what kind of culture best gets us there.

View attachment 13036

All true and all on point.

But that's the silhouette of a B-26.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

All true and all on point.

But that's the silhouette of a B-26.

Yes it is. It was the image that popped up when I googled and I didn't bother to count engines lol.

 

[takethepoints]

I agree that we don't think we can do better. I think we can. I think the next hire, presuming we don't have a major turnaround this year is either Long or a proven G5 coach. Like I said, we've got more talent here than we did a couple of years ago, so the next guy will be in better shape. If the O looks good, maybe Long gets a look. If not, maybe some rising G5 coach can come in and turn us into an Iowa State, Minnesota, Kentucky type team.

Just my $0.02 + inflation.

Our problem is that we have a fan base that won't learn from history. Every really successful coach we have had at Tech has had something special that "establishes a brand" and that other teams have a hard time coping with. It can be on O - Dodd's razzle-dazzle wing T, Paul's spread option, Fridge's multiple T - or on D - Tenuta's come-at-'em style - but there is always something. And that something special sells players who might want to come to Tech to come here. It also means we are usually looking for players who other schools aren't but who fit what we are after.

This can be done again. And we can hire the coach to do it. If Collins can't deliver this season, I think a call to Wake might be in order.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

If Collins can't deliver this season, I think a call to Wake might be in order.

Clawson just inked a contract extension with WF last year. As a private school, they are not required to release details, but there is rumored to be a substantial buyout involved if he leaves. GT would have to buy out both CGC and Clawson if we went that route, and that's IF he even takes the phone call to begin with. He's most likely to stay right where he is unless/until a factory with a clear path to success comes calling. I doubt he leaves WF for a rebuild of any sort.

 

[forensicbuzz]

Cabrera. So what? The GTAA runs athletics. That Cabrera is on the board doesn't change that.

So what? Cabrera isn't on the Board, he's the Chair. Who do you think the Hill is? Cabrera runs the HIll. Cabrera runs the GTAA. GTAA reports to the Hill. That's what.

 

[Vespidae]

So what? Cabrera isn't on the Board, he's the Chair. Who do you think the Hill is? Cabrera runs the HIll. Cabrera runs the GTAA. GTAA reports to the Hill. That's what.

You do know how boards work don't you? I was the Chairman of several subsidiaries... doesn't mean I called the day to day shots.

If your view is correct, then the board isn't independent and that's a violation of state law.

 

[RonJohn]

So what? Cabrera isn't on the Board, he's the Chair. Who do you think the Hill is? Cabrera runs the HIll. Cabrera runs the GTAA. GTAA reports to the Hill. That's what.

I think your view complicates things too much. The way I view it: The HC is 100% responsible for football. The AD is 100% responsible for the athletic association. The trustees are 100% responsible for the direction of the athletic association.

Sure the AD is responsible for holding the HC accountable, and the trustees are responsible for holding the AD accountable. However, if you want the AD to take over football or if you want the trustees to take over the athletic association or football you end up with a basket case. Auburn has had such issues with boosters who dictate what the program can do. Not too long ago, boosters at GT dictated who the HC could hire as defensive coordinator. That level of micro-managing causes many more issues than if resolves. I have the impression that some of the assistant coaches under Collins have been heavily influenced by boosters. The HC should dictate what the football team does and request funding and resources that he needs to implement his plan. The AD should work to raise money and to most effectively use the associations money for the association as a whole. The trustees should provide a clear and measurable direction for the association.

As to accountability, the AD should provide requirements, limitations, and goals to the HC. If the HC cannot operate within the limits and requirements, or cannot achieve the goals, then he should be fired. The trustees should provide requirements, limitations, and goals to the AD. (Not just about football, but the association as a whole.) If the AD cannot operate within the limits and requirements, or cannot achieve the goals, then he should be fired.

 

[forensicbuzz]

I think your view complicates things too much. The way I view it: The HC is 100% responsible for football. The AD is 100% responsible for the athletic association. The trustees are 100% responsible for the direction of the athletic association.

Sure the AD is responsible for holding the HC accountable, and the trustees are responsible for holding the AD accountable. However, if you want the AD to take over football or if you want the trustees to take over the athletic association or football you end up with a basket case. Auburn has had such issues with boosters who dictate what the program can do. Not too long ago, boosters at GT dictated who the HC could hire as defensive coordinator. That level of micro-managing causes many more issues than if resolves. I have the impression that some of the assistant coaches under Collins have been heavily influenced by boosters. The HC should dictate what the football team does and request funding and resources that he needs to implement his plan. The AD should work to raise money and to most effectively use the associations money for the association as a whole. The trustees should provide a clear and measurable direction for the association.

As to accountability, the AD should provide requirements, limitations, and goals to the HC. If the HC cannot operate within the limits and requirements, or cannot achieve the goals, then he should be fired. The trustees should provide requirements, limitations, and goals to the AD. (Not just about football, but the association as a whole.) If the AD cannot operate within the limits and requirements, or cannot achieve the goals, then he should be fired.

I thought I made it pretty simple before, but maybe I made it too simple that my point was overlooked. Yes, I know how Boards are run. Yes, I know how the Hill is run. I know as the Chair/President Cabrera has significant influence on the direction of each and how they're run.

My comment had nothing to do with any of what you've said. My point was merely that the "GTAA" reports to the "Hill" because the man that directs both the GTAA and the Hill are one and the same. It's about policy, not operations.

 

[4shotB]

I am going to approach this conundrum from another angle. I think we can all agree that GT is not a very desirable job in the world of P5 football. Of course, with the $$$ offered, there would be men and women lined up around the block (myself included) to get an interview.

Q1: So, assuming you were a promising up and comer in the coaching ranks, what would you ask for and negotiate if GT approached you (knowing that it IS a job with challenges).

Q2: And, question #2, if were the AD and knowing that the salary you offer WILL draw people out of the woodwork to apply whether qualified or not...how would you vett the candidates? As Paul used to say about the recruits, they all come highly recommended.

I would love to hear your thoughts on these. TIA.

 

[RonJohn]

I thought I made it pretty simple before, but maybe I made it too simple that my point was overlooked. Yes, I know how Boards are run. Yes, I know how the Hill is run. I know as the Chair/President Cabrera has significant influence on the direction of each and how they're run.

My comment had nothing to do with any of what you've said. My point was merely that the "GTAA" reports to the "Hill" because the man that directs both the GTAA and the Hill are one and the same. It's about policy, not operations.

I still don't understand.

Cabrera is at the top of the org chart for the school. TStan is at the top of the org chart for the athletic association.

Cabrera is the Chairman of the Board of Trustees, but he cannot unilaterally set policy. The board is heavily skewed towards the academic side. There are 11 faculty members, 3 student members, and only 4 alumni members. However, Cabrera has to get a consensus among trustees. He can't make decisions by himself like he can for the university.

 

[GoldZ]

Cabrera. So what? The GTAA runs athletics. That Cabrera is on the board doesn't change that.

Who fires TStan? Simple question and simple answer. If you think the Prez of ND isn't intimately involved in the football program, you are mistaken.

 

[RonJohn]

I am going to approach this conundrum from another angle. I think we can all agree that GT is not a very desirable job in the world of P5 football. Of course, with the $$$ offered, there would be men and women lined up around the block (myself included) to get an interview.

Q1: So, assuming you were a promising up and comer in the coaching ranks, what would you ask for and negotiate if GT approached you (knowing that it IS a job with challenges).

Q2: And, question #2, if were the AD and knowing that the salary you offer WILL draw people out of the woodwork to apply whether qualified or not...how would you vett the candidates? As Paul used to say about the recruits, they all come highly recommended.

I would love to hear your thoughts on these. TIA.

Q1: For a guy in his late thirties or early forties, a contract that guarantees $20 million can set him up for life even if he fails as a HC. I wouldn't be as concerned about the salary amount as I would in other things: Dollar pool for assistant coaches. Support for recruiting. Facilities, equipment, etc. I would probably take a slightly lower salary if I was guaranteed to have support that I believed would help me be successful. My goal would be to remain a HC for 30 years and get to Saban type success. But even if I couldn't buy private jets and vacations homes on the beach in San Diego, $20 million would be plenty enough to retire comfortably. It would be all about how much support I would get instead of how much I am making at the moment.

Q2: They should be working on a list now. They should have been working on a wish list of coaches since last year. They should be having informal off-the-record discussions NOW. Another thing is that IF a coaching change is made at the end of the year, use a recruiting service and do not accept applications directly. Let the recruiting service pre-qualify all of the people who submit resumes.

 

[RonJohn]

Who fires TStan? Simple question and simple answer. If you think the Prez of ND isn't intimately involved in the football program, you are mistaken.

Simple answer is the Board of Trustees:

SECTION 3: DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS The Director of Athletics shall be hired by and with the approval of the Board. The Board shall approve the hiring of and contracts of the head coaches in men's and women's basketball, and football. The Director of Athletics shall be responsible to the Board for the proper conduct of intercollegiate athletics, for the maintenance and efficient use of the physical plant of the Association, and for the general administration of the affairs of the Association according to the directions and regulations of the Board.

https://ramblinwreck.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/GTAA-Board-of-Trustees-Bylaws_June-3-2022-amendment-1.pdf

All decisions have to be made by a majority in a meeting where there is a quorum in attendance.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

Simple answer is the Board of Trustees:

https://ramblinwreck.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/GTAA-Board-of-Trustees-Bylaws_June-3-2022-amendment-1.pdf

All decisions have to be made a majority in a meeting where there is a quorum in attendance.

Wow, baseball coach isn't one of the positions the Board has to approve. Maybe that's good?

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Wow, baseball coach isn't one of the positions the Board has to approve. Maybe that's good?

Texiera has to approve that.

 

[Vespidae]

Who fires TStan? Simple question and simple answer. If you think the Prez of ND isn't intimately involved in the football program, you are mistaken.

ND is not a good example. It is one of the few schools where the Athletic Dept is a full operating department of the university just like Operations, Facilities and the Provost. That is NOT the case at Tech.

As to who fires the AD, typically the BoT would do that but depending on its by-laws, may empower one member to do so on its behalf. Cabrera then, would probably be it but and I want to stress this ... the Chair can't just do what he wants. There are rules and by-laws that he MUST follow as a legal matter.

 

[iceeater1969]

Apropos of nothing, but somewhat a tangent to your point, is that sometimes we also build the wrong solutions from available data. In WWII they tracked where all the bullet/flak holes were in the returning B-17s in order to understand why they were losing so many of them. Their initial thought was to reinforce those areas in order for the planes to be more resistant during their missions. The engineers pressed to reinforce the seemingly most vulnerable areas, but a scientist and mathematician convinced them that the real problem was where the bullets weren't. They needed to armor the engines, cockpit, and rear fuselage because that's where the critical hits were coming in. I think we suffer sometimes from the same problem. We have a ton of data and we are convincing ourselves it points to a solution that we are biased towards, and yet we may not even be asking the right questions.

Culture is different at every school, and no single culture is inherently better than the other. If the culture does not produce the desired results, then the culture needs to change. That is the current issue. We are talking about culture, but maybe we need to have a hard discussion about what we truly desire for our football program before we settle on what kind of culture best gets us there.

View attachment 13036

Our problem is that we have a fan base that won't learn from history. Every really successful coach we have had at Tech has had something special that "establishes a brand" and that other teams have a hard time coping with. It can be on O - Dodd's razzle-dazzle wing T, Paul's spread option, Fridge's multiple T - or on D - Tenuta's come-at-'em style - but there is always something. And that something special sells players who might want to come to Tech to come here. It also means we are usually looking for players who other schools aren't but who fit what we are after.

This can be done again. And we can hire the coach to do it. If Collins can't deliver this season, I think a call to Wake might be in order.

I suggested the air raid because son 6a high school used very successfully ( 14-1)

I thought it would be a good transition for our smaller ol because of the wide gaps.

The thread was hijacked because I made a huge mistake. I mentioned that his team stole the offense fron another high school in Texas. That coach went to baylor to play above weight. Baylor had not won a b12 game in about 4 years.

Maybe i was wrong and the team will finally mesh.

If not we should be willing to be different.

 

[takethepoints]

Clawson just inked a contract extension with WF last year. As a private school, they are not required to release details, but there is rumored to be a substantial buyout involved if he leaves. GT would have to buy out both CGC and Clawson if we went that route, and that's IF he even takes the phone call to begin with. He's most likely to stay right where he is unless/until a factory with a clear path to success comes calling. I doubt he leaves WF for a rebuild of any sort.

We'll never know until we pick up the phone. And, given what he has done at Wake, I'd pay them both off and smile about it.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

We'll never know until we pick up the phone. And, given what he has done at Wake, I'd pay them both off and smile about it.

With what money? That seems to be the sticking point. We will be paying a hefty amount to CGC just to have him not coach.

 

[GT33]

With what money? That seems to be the sticking point. We will be paying a hefty amount to CGC just to have him not coach.

It will take some big checks to fix the problem, but Collins is not the problem. Collins is a symptom of the problem. The problem is we have a fan base that is convinced we are a single step down from the football factories in desirability to athletes and future coaches when in reality we are a few rungs down that ladder. We want proven P5 head coaches, but we aren't able to hire them because they aren't coming here.

First, I'd like to say despite my edgy posts today/yesterday there were a number of reasonable responses, of which I don't agree with a lot of them but they're thoses guy's opinions. Here's one commonly held opinion I disagree with & I hope given the evidence provided below people will agree it's all just more bluster to avoid culpability/responsibility for our mess & assign blame once again at the feet of our very loyal fanbase. Our fanbase culture is resilient, tolerant of coaches learning on the job to a far greater extent than many other P5 programs & generous.

In 2019 we were asked to open our wallets to fund the regime change. Millions of dollars were raised to help close the gap, Stansbury's Current Operational fund. The target was $12M if I recall correctly and we delivered $37M. AI2020 was launched & we responded not with the $125M that was requested but $175M. We're giving at levels never seen before in GT's history & we'll contiune to give when presented with good plans for our money.

Fans regularly complain we don't have money, not true. They complain we must rely on large donors with oversized influence & are beholden to them, to some extent that's true but the rank & file fans donate prodigiously. We're not completely reliant on big donors like Oregon. We say we can't afford better coaches, again not true. Those large donors that are disparaged offered the money; us littler guys are standing by ready to answer the call to fund the operational contingency fund to pay the buyouts and get good coaches. The money's there. It's not a fanbase issue, it's a leadership issue. We've come thru with the money when asked & when the need was communicated.

Stansbury felt no need for change. He's obviously satisfied with what he has given the fact he had full ability (positional authority and a source of funding) to make whatever changes he desired. Those facts are not in dispute or maybe they are, but they shouldn't be. If asked again, we'll answer the call.