I want a run first pro style offense

TampaGT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,128
Didn't the hill just come out and say that CPJ can take as many exceptions as he wants??

The only think I can possibly see as an excuse for Tech fans now is our narrow curriculum...

The only thing holding back Tech is a coach who can sell the program to these kids. Stanford was horrible for 50 years till Harbaugh..
Only 6% of grades given to all students at Stanford are C and below. I know everybody compare GT and Stanford, but I don't think their SA are taking as difficult of classes as GT
 

GTRX7

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,489
Location
Atlanta
Only 6% of grades given to all students at Stanford are C and below. I know everybody compare GT and Stanford, but I don't think their SA are taking as difficult of classes as GT

That wouldn't shock me, but I haven't heard that. Got a source? I know Duke and a lot of the Ivy's are like that--hard to get into, easy to get out of. Definitely not Tech's MO.
 

Bert kitchen

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
3
Looking at units in a vacuum not good.

Defense wore out due to the poor offense vs Clemson and BYU; in fact vs clemson we didn't get a first down for nearly 2 quarters and by then the game was basically over. Maimi was a catastrophy on D, turnovers and sp teams didn't help. Go back and watch the BYU game and seriously tell me u put that on the D

In fact, if not for the D last year we don't win UVA, Pitt or UNC. I could argue last year, the D helped with more wins than the O. If the offense shows a pulse vs BYU and Clemson, we may be in those games in the 3 Q without a worn out d. Hell we aren't in the Ole Miss game without the D. The offense bad again.

Again, last year the D played well. Equal at least to the O

It was 27-17 with 12 minutes to go in the 3rd quarter in the Clemson game. Then Clemson scored on their next 4 drives. D sucked that game I was one of the 200 tech fans that was there to see it in person.
 

TampaGT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,128

ATL1

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,377
I really don't have much to add here. This subject has been brought up and rehashed time and time again. It really doesn't matter CPJ WILL be the coach for this year and the year after that. 7-5 repeat .. love it.

I don't care if it's pro style, spread, pistol or whatever. I would even like the flexbone more if CPJ could develop any kind of passing offense and have more balance. Being one dimensional on offense hurts the team overall not just the offense, but whatever.

BTW I love Stanford's football under Shaw, I liked what Franklin did at Vandy, I like Malzalhn, Chip Kelly, Chad Morris, Phillip Montgomery, and a host of other programs. But good try tho.
 

GTNavyNuke

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
9,105
Location
Poquoson Virginia
Don't let ATL1 see that. Stanford is the perfect program, and we're all unwashed heathens for thinking otherwise...

Being in a bar in Venice Beach last night, I almost wished I'd gone to Stanford .....

But seriously, Stanford sucked until USC got sanctioned. It will probably go back to that obscurity once we get rid of the NCAA and go more to semi-pro ball.
 

ATL1

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,377
Being in a bar in Venice Beach last night, I almost wished I'd gone to Stanford .....

But seriously, Stanford sucked until USC got sanctioned. It will probably go back to that obscurity once we get rid of the NCAA and go more to semi-pro ball.
Pop Warner
Tyrone Willingham
Bill Walsh
Just off the top of my head. They have had success before.
 

GTNavyNuke

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
9,105
Location
Poquoson Virginia
Yeah, we had Heisman, Alexander and Heisman. Look at the last 70 years (no Heisman or Alexander) and I bet GT has a much better Power Ranking than Stanford.
 

ATL1

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,377
Tyrone willingham? I don't care about this thread but let's not get carried away, he's a terrible coach haha.

Following the 1994 season, despite lacking experience as a head coach or coordinator, Willingham was appointed head coach of the football program at Stanford, succeeding Bill Walsh. In his seven seasons (1995–2001) as coach, he led the Cardinal to a 44–36–1 record and four bowl game appearances. In 2000, he was presented with the Eddie Robinson Coach of Distinction Award that is given annually to honor "an outstanding college football coach and role model for career achievement".[1]

His best team was the 1999 team, which won the school's first outright Pacific-10 Conference title in 29 years and appeared in the 2000 Rose Bowl. Willingham's 44 wins were the most by a Stanford coach since John Ralston, who left the school for the Denver Broncos of theNFL after the 1971 season.
 

ATL1

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,377
Yeah, we had Heisman, Alexander and Heisman. Look at the last 70 years (no Heisman or Alexander) and I bet GT has a much better Power Ranking than Stanford.

That wasn't what I questioned. You stated this;
"But seriously, Stanford sucked until USC got sanctioned. It will probably go back to that obscurity once we get rid of the NCAA and go more to semi-pro ball."

I replied to that statement.
 
Messages
13,443
Location
Augusta, GA
Stanford's all time record is 605–440–49 (.575). Tech's all time record is 700–471–43 (.594). Stanford has 2 NC's and 14 conference titles. Tech has 4 NC's and 16 conference titles. I think that's enough said
 

ATL1

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,377
Yeah, we had Heisman, Alexander and Heisman. Look at the last 70 years (no Heisman or Alexander) and I bet GT has a much better Power Ranking than Stanford.

If you go back 70 years GT absolutely has a better record. GT has a tradition that takes a back seat to no one.
If you go back 5 years though.
 

forensicbuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,644
Location
North Shore, Chicago
Yes, but if you go back 10 years, GT 78-53 (0.595), Stanford 73-51 (0.589)

The difference is GT's been consistently in the middle and Stanford's record has fluctuated more than a thermostat in a menopausal house.

It's all in how you want to look at it. When USC got slapped, Harbaugh capitalized and Shaw has continued the success.
 

forensicbuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,644
Location
North Shore, Chicago
BTW, not impressed with Whittingham's success at Stanford. He had two pretty good seasons (9-3 and 8-4), the rest were mediocre to bad. Walsh had a couple of good seasons in the 70's and one in the '92, but '93 and '94 sucked. I respect the hell out of Walsh as a coach, but we haven't seen a 4-7 or 3-7-1 at GT since '94 (1-10) and since '88 before that (3-8).
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,515
Don't let ATL1 see that. Stanford is the perfect program, and we're all unwashed heathens for thinking otherwise...
Uh, dude, Bill Walsh says hello.

Stanford has been much the same as us; up and down. What they haven't been is as consistent at winning as Tech.

I swear, if the present generation of Tech fans had had to sit through the 70's and early 80's we wouldn't be having these conversations. We've been consistent winners for so long that people have forgotten what really bad football looks like. Believe me, I can tell you.
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
16,032
Yes, but if you go back 10 years, GT 78-53 (0.595), Stanford 73-51 (0.589)

The difference is GT's been consistently in the middle and Stanford's record has fluctuated more than a thermostat in a menopausal house.

It's all in how you want to look at it. When USC got slapped, Harbaugh capitalized and Shaw has continued the success.

Might have to double check me, but Harbaugh and Pete Carrol overlapped 3 years and Stanford finally beat USC during Carrol's last years...right before USC got slapped with sanctions. Harbaugh had Stanford playing USC (as well as the rest of the PAC 10) pretty tough before the sanctions. Remember the "What's your problem?" handshake game that started the Harbaugh/Carrol rift?

Stanford has also been one of the few teams that have been able to derail the Oregon offense as well...so it's not like Stanford all of a sudden became a good team because of the demise of the USC and the rest of the PAC 10. If anything, the PAC 10 has become a better league now that Jim Mora (UCLA), Mike Leach (WSU), Rich Rodruquez (Arizona), and Todd Graham (ASU) have joined the coaching ranks in that league.

We can debate the reasons for Stanford's rise, but let's not try to diminish their accomplishments. Regardless of what some on here like to think, it's not easy getting SAs into that school. Is it easier to keep them eligible? Possibly, but you still gotta get the SAs past admissions...part of which is requiring their SAs to take a certain amount of math and science as well as a certain amount of AP courses. GT was the beneficiary of Louis Young not making it past admissions at Stanford.
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
16,032
Uh, dude, Bill Walsh says hello.

Stanford has been much the same as us; up and down. What they haven't been is as consistent at winning as Tech.

I swear, if the present generation of Tech fans had had to sit through the 70's and early 80's we wouldn't be having these conversations. We've been consistent winners for so long that people have forgotten what really bad football looks like. Believe me, I can tell you.

I compare GT today to the Braves. People always want more. Braves have been doing so well for so long that Atlanta can't even sell out playoff games!

Same with GT. GT is by no means a bad program...not even close. We've been one of the most consistent winning teams in all of college football since the mid 1990's. It's just that our fans want more.

A good majority of baseball franchises would LOVE to be in the Braves position. The same goes for GT. There are so many programs that would kill to even qualify for a bowl game...and we complain about going to the Sun Bowl for two straight years. We've been doing it for 15+ years now. Very few teams are in the position we're in.
 

forensicbuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,644
Location
North Shore, Chicago
Might have to double check me, but Harbaugh and Pete Carrol overlapped 3 years and Stanford finally beat USC during Carrol's last years...right before USC got slapped with sanctions. Harbaugh had Stanford playing USC (as well as the rest of the PAC 10) pretty tough before the sanctions. Remember the "What's your problem?" handshake game that started the Harbaugh/Carrol rift?

Stanford has also been one of the few teams that have been able to derail the Oregon offense as well...so it's not like Stanford all of a sudden became a good team because of the demise of the USC and the rest of the PAC 10. If anything, the PAC 10 has become a better league now that Jim Mora (UCLA), Mike Leach (WSU), Rich Rodruquez (Arizona), and Todd Graham (ASU) have joined the coaching ranks in that league.

We can debate the reasons for Stanford's rise, but let's not try to diminish their accomplishments. Regardless of what some on here like to think, it's not easy getting SAs into that school. Is it easier to keep them eligible? Possibly, but you still gotta get the SAs past admissions...part of which is requiring their SAs to take a certain amount of math and science as well as a certain amount of AP courses. GT was the beneficiary of Louis Young not making it past admissions at Stanford.

Regardless of how they performed head-to-head (Harbaugh 2, Caroll 1), USC won the PAC10 every year they faced each other, and Stanford never won the PAC10 while Carroll was at USC.

I'm not knocking Stanford. They've done a good job the past 5 or so years. Harbaugh is a good coach and turned that program around. I wasn't insinuating that the only reason he was successful was because USC tanked, but he did take advantage of the opportunity their probation gave him recruiting in Southern California. Shaw has continued that success.

I like Stanford. If I could have afforded it, I would have gone to Stanford (yes, I was accepted). I couldn't, so I went to GT. I'm happy with my choices and have no regrets. That being said, in the past 20 years Stanford has had 11 losing seasons, GT has had 2. They've also had 4 11+win seasons in the past 5 years, while GT has had 1.
 
Last edited:
Top