If TStan is fired/resigns… what AD do we hire?

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,326
Location
Auburn, AL
He’s not perfect by any means - so I agree with you there are issues - which is why I said there is not A LOT for me to gripe about.

2) do you think Notre Dame anticipated Brian Kelly was leaving? Coaches leave out of the blue sometimes, but TStan was able to secure enough $ for a coaching staff that was well above what CPJ had to work with. It does seem like there was a preset list. But are we sure that was by our choice or because nobody was beating down the door for the job? Didn’t 1 of the few decline the job? This comes back to my thought of what we do know for a fact comment. If it played out the way you understood it to have - fully agree with you.

3) knowing what is going on behind closed doors vs what we know publicly it’s hard for me to agree or disagree. He’s not perfect. All I do know to be a fact is I would never want to be AD at Tech.
Re Kelly, no. I don't think it even crossed their mind that someone would leave ND. It's a premier job but, without conference affiliation it will be increasingly difficult to win championships. Kelly admitted as much.

As to AD at Tech, it should be a WONDERFUL job. There is almost no pressure ... because the expectations are so low. Homer Rice did a FABULOUS job as AD and that's what we need right now. Sadly, we have had a run of crappy AD's since (DRad was good). The problem is, it is and hasn't been, a destination job for some time.
 

jacketup

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,551
Newsflash: Homer Rice isn't walking through that door. Then let's look at what we've had since:

Braine: spent the money Homer left behind and didn't raise more.
DRad: spent money we didn't have, ran up debt we are still paying for, then left for Clemson
Bigfoot: did nothing until a B1G offer came along

Stansbury inherited this mess, then got a Covid year with reduced income. An AD does a lot more than hire a football coach. People better be careful what they wish for. The last 3 ADs show that we can do worse, and that qualified people won't be beating down the door to take over this ship.

Having said that, the 7 year contract was dumb. Now we are in a situation where we can't afford to fire Collins and can't afford to keep him. We haven't given out a coaching contract in the 2 major sports since Hewitt that wasn't dumb--maybe getting Memphis to pay for part of Pastner's salary was a good move, but it also says a lot when we have to depend on Memphis to be able to hire a coach they don't want.
 

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,490
Here is what I can bash TStan for ...
  • In 2013, the GTAA wanted to get rid of CPJ. Powerful figures were tired of the TO then, CPJ was not particularly well-liked within the AA (true) and they were all set to get rid of him until ... 2014 happened. So it wasn't news that a change wasn't foreseen.
  • When CPJ did retire, TStan was surprised and unprepared for a replacement. Add to that the fast search and interview of a preselected set of 2-3 candidates suggests he didn't give WHAT he was doing as much importance as the WHO.
  • So what led us to this point is an AD who has not thought strategically about what he is building/managing but much more tactical, checklist style management. "A coaching opening? Call Sexton. Check." ... is not much of a deep thinker.
I give him kudos for some things. But his management of the number one revenue sport has been not very good. It's especially egregious because he IS a Tech Guy and should know better.
Being “laser focused” on Football instead of systemically fixing what’s wrong with the AA seems like misguided focus for TStan. Yes, it’s your biggest moneymaker, but you have a lot of problems at the AA. If football needs fixing, should the AD be fixing it directly, or should someone else (or multiple someone else’s)?

I hear you. but I also have heard (repeatedly) that an unproven HC at this level could have been had on a 5 or 6 year deal. A contract with performance levels at stages would have been a smart idea....you know, demonstrated progress in order to continue the contract terms...but that didn't happen. A proven HC would never agree to that, but someone like Collins should have been 'gettable' under such terms if they really wanted the 7 year deal.

As AD, it's YOUR job to make thes decisions, and not necessarily to buy what everyone else is saying hook, line and sinker. I speak as a former CEO....

I'd like to come back to this, and shift the focus to GT President Angel Cabrera
  1. You've got bigger and more important things on your plate than the Athletic Association (AA)
  2. The AA was a PR fiasco last year, especially in the last game where Cabrera is wining and dining donors in a skybox over a home stadium filled with opposing fans as part of a blowout loss
  3. He has financial oversight as chair of the Board of Trustees of the AA
  4. Over the past 25 to 30 years, the AA has apparently needed much more effective oversight--we've had two contracts that have gravely injured our two "money" sports, and have gone deeply into debt. Our academic oversight also resulted in "flunkgate" under Gailey. Oversight isn't making things better--or, if it is, not "better enough".
  5. The fiscal trend is bad, and if it gets worse then there will be more PR repercussions
  6. If the AA keeps Collins, finances get worse. If the AA fires Collins, finances get worse.
  7. We have changed out head coaches and athletic directors multiple times over the past 25 years, and the situation is not improving.
So, if you're Cabrera, what do you do?
  1. Fire Stansbury and hire a new AD. Would this work? What replacement AD wants this headache? Plus, you've had a lot of ADs, some of whom have gone on to bigger things, none of whom solved the AA problems. Why does repeating the same thing solve this problem?
  2. You could directly involve yourself in fixing this situation. That's a bad idea for multiple reasons; first, you have bigger items on your plate you can't neglect. Second, you're not a sports management/finance expert--there are better people than you to solve this problem. Third, even if you make things better here, it's got the stink of failure all over it, and you don't want to wear it.
  3. GT is a University. Universities make committees. Do you appoint a task force? I would not do this. Committees are for dealing with support for a project--not for getting things done. This postpones getting a solution.
  4. Appoint someone who knows how to fix this to find solutions. They can either be external (expensive) or internal. My first option would be a senior professor, staff member, or alumnus in a related field that knows how to fix organizations in trouble. The contracts department needs to be fixed. Ticket sales need some fixing. Identify what's broken and come up with a plan.
There might be another option, but if I'm Cabrera then I'm looking at option 4 as my best option.

@MWBATL what would you do?
 

EE95_curse EMAG!

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
112
Move Collins up to AD. Clearly he’s a big picture sort of guy…..

He'd hire a senior cheerleader as HC of football. Collins top two priorities are cheerleading and cheerleading. Football and X's and O's don't really concern him apparently, nor does hiring a competent coaching staff. His skill at hiring OC/DC fails him. Colling could succeed as HC if he makes the right hires and sticks to his only skill...rah-rah'ing. He must be hiring coaches with positive attitudes, but nothing else of value or bestus buddies, because they sure can't game plan or coach.
 

EE95_curse EMAG!

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
112
The unfortunate reality in college athletics (especially when huge $$$ is at play like football) is that having your coach's contract life < 4 year is even more decimating to your program than who the coach is. You can't recruit if the coach is possibly leaving in 2 years and it's a bad show of support from the AD. We would have had to fire/extend after Year 3 on a 6 year contract. We will have to fire/extend Collins after this season (although I think most of us have figured out what dichotomous decision is going to win out there).

This is not true given the new realities of the transfer portal and NIL. Good players that stay four years will be rare for all but the best programs now.

Pay more per year, but keep contract shorter. If you feel you have to do 5 or more years, give the school a nice out after year 3 (paying maybe half of the final two or three years).

The Hewitt contract (too long, perpetual 7 year deal) and this CGC contract clearly show this is bad business, to do 6 or 7 year deals.

If we're worried we might loose a "lightning in a bottle" coach to the SEC, well, we would anyways, even with a 7 year deal. The SEC school rolling in money (i.e. nearly all of them) would bump the offer to cover any buyout from a GT contract.

Stick with 3 or 4 year contracts and if you go 5+ stand firm on a somewhat friendly buyout after season 4 and NO LATER.
 

Buzz Kill

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
3
I feel bad for Jeff but thankfully he's only a Sophomore because of the COVID year. I think he would be an above average P5 QB with a competent offensive line. He should transfer (preferably/selfishly non-ACC) when CGC gets fired and get 2 years of starts to really show off his stuff. I know his introvertedness doesn't lend itself to the QB position, but maybe his leadership abilities would shine more with the confidence from a good offensive system. He's athletic enough and has a good enough arm to lead a ranked team into bowl season.
He'll be gone via portal at the end of the season.
 

GTrob21

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,473
I think you will see a huge exodus of players leaving the program unless we really make an effort to show that the ship is righting.
 
Top