Is Georgia Tech football in better spot today (2018) than when you started 2008?

[BleedGoldNWhite21]

2009 and 2014 were two magical seasons. Two major bowl games. One of them we got outclassed. The other, we outclassed the other team. Nothing more really needs to be said about them.

At Georgia Tech, anytime you beat UGA and win a bowl game, you’ve had a good year. 2008 and 2016 were very good years.

Now the bad....three losing seasons. Two seasons without a bowl.

Two great years
Two good years
Three mediocre years
Three bad years

This season looks to be going towards a bad year, but 2012 turned a 2-5 team into a 7-7 team, so I guess we could end up with a medicore year.

Paul Johnon’s Georgia Tech tenure has had a lot of high highs and low lows. It’s almost a wash. Overall, we’re probably around the same. I think the problem is most of our competition has gotten a lot better since 2008. We have to adapt or die, and it seems, we’re dying.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

I actually voted No on this...but not because I think we are worse off, but because I think we are basically in the same spot. If you really step back and look at it we've had 2 great seasons (2009/2014), 1 good season (2008), 2-3 bad seasons (2010/2015/2017...anything with a losing record is bad) and bunch of mediocre seasons. Yes, I call 2016 mediocre because 4-4 in conference cannot be considered good under any circumstances...and as much as I love beating Georgia, that in itself does not constitute a "good season." This year could still land in any of those three categories...

BTW, it's not all the fault of the coach, the hill, or the AD(s) individually...all three share some of the blame for our struggles. Some prior AD's handcuffed us from a cash standpoint, the hill IWII, and our head coach can turn into the most stubborn person on earth at critical times in games, causing him to make head scratching decisions.

I hope Paul turns this around and exits Tech gracefully in a few years, because the alternative is bad for us. Firing a coach that is owed a bunch of money does nothing but hurt the program (see Paul Hewitt). And honestly...as odd as it sounds, if we were to win the next 5 games we would most likely win the division and get a rematch with Clemson (sheesh)...and I really do think it's possible. The next two are the big ones...get by Duke and Miami and we've got a real chance.

I voted no for the same reason that we are about the same - but the same on a relative basis.

I would have voted yes if I were looking at it on an absolute basis.

Yes our players are bigger stronger and faster than the average player 10 years ago. Our facilities are better.

But on a relative basis, we have about the same on field performance averaged over years that we did. I'd put in the coaches performance chart again showing CPJ's program is just a bit below that of Gailey's and O'Leary's on average.

And like Gailey, after so many years the likelihood of substantial sustained improvement is not expected.

There really should be three camps concerning whether CPJ should leave: Yes, No and Doesn't Matter. I'm in the last camp.

 

[bigsands]

Better spot “today”?

Absolutely not.

2007 team had a winning record, beat Clemson, and beat ND and Miami (in down years) on the road. Derrick Morgan, Morgan Burnett, and Jonathan Dwyer were true freshmen.

2008 was a ‘take this team and get over the hump’ situation, which was done, all credit given.

The program is in worse shape right now. I still support them. I hope we rally and beat VT, Miami, etc., but in legit competitiveness on the field - program was stronger back then.

 

[Techster]

I voted no for the same reason that we are about the same - but the same on a relative basis.

I would have voted yes if I were looking at it on an absolute basis.

Yes our players are bigger stronger and faster than the average player 10 years ago. Our facilities are better.

But on a relative basis, we have about the same on field performance averaged over years that we did. I'd put in the coaches performance chart again showing CPJ's program is just a bit below that of Gailey's and O'Leary's on average.

And like Gailey, after so many years the likelihood of substantial sustained improvement is not expected.

There really should be three camps concerning whether CPJ should leave: Yes, No and Doesn't Matter. I'm in the last camp.

You bring up a good point.

CPJ has been here for 10+ years now. Chances are higher that GT will no longer have sustained success under CPJ. If you look at the history of coaches who have stayed at a school for a good duration, once the coach's team starts having more bad seasons than good seasons, it's too late to turn the ship around under that coach. Especially if a coach is closer to the end of his coaching career...which CPJ is.

IMO, success for GT is a bowl game every year, and maybe an ACC Championship appearance every 3-4 years when personnel has the right mix of upper classmen and special players (see 2008, 2009, 2014). Let's not forget, at one time we were tied for second in the nation for the longest bowl streak...almost 2 decades straight. It's MUCH easier to make a bowl game now than when the bowl streak started.

I made a statement a few years ago that GT should be more attractive to kids because there were some things you could expect if you signed here and played for CPJ: An elite education, a trip to a bowl game every year, and the chance to play for the ACC Championship. If you look at CPJ from 2008-2014, that was spot on. GT will always give an SA the opportunity of an elite education no matter who the coach is, but now I'm not certain you can tell kids they will play in a bowl game every year, and even harder to say they will have the opportunity to play for an ACC Championship. If we don't go to a bowl game this season, then there will be some players who will have experienced a bowl game only ONE time in their four years. Think about that. They will have missed out on more bowl games than going to a bowl game.

IMO, and I wrote this in another thread, keeping CPJ here is delaying the inevitable. More money will not help GT if CPJ is still the coach. GT may get fancier buildings, more staff, and more money to spend sending coaches all over the place (which GT already recruits nationally as you can see from our roster and the kids we target). If the capital drive had been 10 years ago and CPJ didn't have the history he did at GT, I think all the money we're raising could have made a substantial difference. Now? I think it's just putting a new coat of paint on the same old car. The engine, transmission, and everything else that makes the car go will be the same.

There are loyal fans that will support GT no matter who the coach is, but those are not the fans GT has to worry about. It's the other fans GT has to worry about. This was in the AJC this morning:

https://www.ajc.com/sports/college/notes-from-georgia-tech-loss-duke/dC6L2pea99ptqXb4LEDisN/

With two home dates remaining (Virginia and North Carolina), Tech’s average attendance is 43,191. Since Bobby Dodd Stadium expanded capacity to 55,000 for the 2003 season, the lowest average for a season was in 2012, 43,955.

It's not the losing that does a coach in. It's the fan and donor support. I am not that well connected to where CPJ stands with donors, but we can see fan support is beginning to erode. That is not a good sign for a coach.

 

[RamblinRed]

I said no because the world doesn't stand still.

CPJ's winning percentage against power conference opponents is lower than both O'Leary and Gailey. Recruiting is roughly similar to gailey overall, but has fallen further behind our competitors as the ACC is stronger now (though down this year).

Some of Johnson's comments in the recent big article on SI.com about the TO concern me. He is happy no one else is running it - he sees it as making us unique and different. Well, that doesn't necessarily mean better. We are the only option program that hasn't at least incorporated some shotgun packages. He also commented that he understands it is probably in its twilight. Is that good for GT, imo no.

He also said it is hard to recruit because everyone wants to be a receiver. Well if you don't learn how to adapt to that you will die.

I'm thrilled that we have won 2 of our last 4 against UGA, but one game cannot define a program. We are 16-21 in our last 37 ACC games and that includes the great 2014 season (which is feeling more and more in the past). We are 10-18 in the ACC in our last 3 1/2 years. That is simply not getting it done. It feels like most other ACC programs have been steadily working to improve their programs and we really have not until the last year or 2.

When we do decide to make a change it will have to be to a non-TO type offense or I don't think GT will ever recover.

 

[Techster]

Some of Johnson's comments in the recent big article on SI.com about the TO concern me. He is happy no one else is running it - he sees it as making us unique and different. Well, that doesn't necessarily mean better. We are the only option program that hasn't at least incorporated some shotgun packages. He also commented that he understands it is probably in its twilight. Is that good for GT, imo no.

This part.

I don't think CPJ is the type to consciously bring down a program, but we all know he is a proud guy with a chip on his shoulder. Will his pride in trying to make "his system" work on this level bring GT down with him...to the point that it may take YEARS to recover? We don't have to look any further than our basketball program to see how devastating it can be to hold on to a coach for too long.

 

[4shotB]

. He also commented that he understands it is probably in its twilight. Is that good for GT, imo no.

He also said it is hard to recruit because everyone wants to be a receiver. Well if you don't learn how to adapt to that you will die.

This is the very definition of a conundrum...does the system work at this level? yes, if you can recruit...but the system admittedly makes it hard to recruit (at a place where there already inherent disadvantages). I think CPJ' s under the center type offense will die outside of the service academies upon Paul's departure.

 

[Techster]

This is the very definition of a conundrum...does the system work at this level? yes, if you can recruit...but the system admittedly makes it hard to recruit (at a place where there already inherent disadvantages). I think CPJ' s under the center type offense will die outside of the service academies upon Paul's departure.

What frustrates me about CPJ's offense is there is an aspect of it that DOES appeal to recruits: the Run and Shoot. I wrote about it in another thread:

https://gtswarm.com/threads/traditional-passing-vs-option-pitches-tosses.15965/#post-471733

Why not emphasize the RnS more, and scale back on the all option variants to complement the RnS? Instead of running the same option play 10 different ways, why not just use 3 variants of each running staple (3O, rocket toss, speed option, counter), perfect those variants, and spend more time with the RnS phase of the offense? Make GT a RnS school that has option components....as opposed to what we are now. CPJ has history of using more RnS with Garrett Gabriel in Hawaii, and CPJ will proudly mention that name when telling you he can adjust his offense to any player.

Honestly, after Vad, it may be too late to sell that kind of vision anyhow.

 

[CrackerJacket]

Just changed my vote to ‘no’. Simply put, we now lose to teams we used to beat more often than not - Clemson, Duke, UNCheat to name a few. Our program has upgraded its facilities and beaten the Dwags three times in the last 10 years, but the talent level between us and our conference foes has widened in the wrong direction. It’s going to get worse before it gets better.

 

[THWG16]

Better spot “today”?

Absolutely not.

2007 team had a winning record, beat Clemson, and beat ND and Miami (in down years) on the road. Derrick Morgan, Morgan Burnett, and Jonathan Dwyer were true freshmen.

2008 was a ‘take this team and get over the hump’ situation, which was done, all credit given.

The program is in worse shape right now. I still support them. I hope we rally and beat VT, Miami, etc., but in legit competitiveness on the field - program was stronger back then.

Agreed

 

[iceeater1969]

By having a scheme no one regularly played, we have had early success in acc.

When we went to first orange bowl , the coach did not demand more resources.

All I heard was the scheme.

Ditto the next orange bowl after the 14 run, it was all about giving $$ to keep Coach and his coaches that run the scheme.
All I heard was scheme.

Now that Duke can beat us 4 of 5 , I have concluded is they know how to beat the scheme.

 

[Animal02]

By having a scheme no one regularly played, we have had early success in acc.

When we went to first orange bowl , the coach did not demand more resources.

All I heard was the scheme.

Ditto the next orange bowl after the 14 run, it was all about giving $$ to keep Coach and his coaches that run the scheme.
All I heard was scheme.

Now that Duke can beat us 4 of 5 , I have concluded is they know how to beat the scheme.

When we went to the first OB, we were on the plus side of the curve regarding spending per player. It has been sliding the wrong way since then.....and has firmly bitten Tech in the ***.

 

[RamblinRed]

To follow up on my comments from yesterday, I sort of look at it this way.
When Johnson took over GT had won no fewer than 7 games for 11 straight years and hadn't finished below .500 in the ACC in 14 years.
Gailey's last 4 seasons he was 20-12 against the ACC and was coming off his best recruiting class (which Johnson being a very good coach took advantage of like he should have). He also lost 5 games each season and had never beaten UGA. I was ready for a change.

If Johnson has a losing record this season that would mean fewer than 6 wins in 3 of the last 4 yrs and losing ACC seasons in 2 of the last 4 with no ACC seasons better than .500 in the last 4.
Recruiting doesn't really seem to be getting better either. As I mentioned above Johnson is 10-18 his last 3 1/2 years against the ACC.

I think when he was hired Johnson's system gave us advantages. I think that over a decade and with changes to the NCAA rulebook that is no longer the case and that the combination of the NCAA rule changes and negative recruiting about the TO, that it is now a net negative for the program.

it's hard to look at those numbers objectively and say the program is in a better spot. IMO whoever replaces Johnson has a more difficult task than what Johnson inherited. He came into a program that was at least solid and was tasked with making it better. A new coach would be tasked with rebuilding a program to solid and then making it better.

 

[Boaty1]

Quite simple. There was no need to graduate, no need to advance toward graduation like there is today. All they had to do is stay eligible. That was the only concern.

Sorry my friend but you keep missing the point.

Paul Johnson is not having an issue with the APR requirements with the kids that he is getting into Tech. From this fact we can say that the 67 4 star or higher players he has offered for this year would do just fine at GT as well. The problem is he is striking out across the board on the recruits that he has deemed can be successful here and have options from good programs.

Also, flunkgate was a result of mismanagement from within the program. I would be willing to bet a large sum of money that majority of those players that flunked would be fine with today's structure for athletes at the Institute.

 

[Coloradojacket]

Folks, we come on here and lament about our football team but lets face another reality, our men's baseball and basketball teams are not very good and look to be getting worse. Back in the late 70's we were sort of in this same situation. We were near the end of Pepper and basketball was no good as was baseball. In fact Bobby Dodd was thinking we should drop down to Division 2. He thought what Cremins did was amazing.

He knew the landscape was changing and with Tech academics it was going to get harder.

The question I would ask is are we seeing this again? Did something change at Tech in the last 10 years, lack of funding, stiffer requirements. Look, I don't think Cremins 1990 squad could have made it through Tech today and fact is 2 of them left early. I think What CPJ has done is pretty amazing, and yes, it is his offense that has kept us in the hunt.

I would like to know what some of you older guys think. Are we just MIT with a football team? Have we decided that Sports is not important? Fact is I kind of think the entire country is trending this way.

 

[Jacketman1]

Folks, we come on here and lament about our football team but lets face another reality, our men's baseball and basketball teams are not very good and look to be getting worse. Back in the late 70's we were sort of in this same situation. We were near the end of Pepper and basketball was no good as was baseball. In fact Bobby Dodd was thinking we should drop down to Division 2. He thought what Cremins did was amazing.

He knew the landscape was changing and with Tech academics it was going to get harder.

The question I would ask is are we seeing this again? Did something change at Tech in the last 10 years, lack of funding, stiffer requirements. Look, I don't think Cremins 1990 squad could have made it through Tech today and fact is 2 of them left early. I think What CPJ has done is pretty amazing, and yes, it is his offense that has kept us in the hunt.

I would like to know what some of you older guys think. Are we just MIT with a football team? Have we decided that Sports is not important? Fact is I kind of think the entire country is trending this way.

Well, I don't think people are serious about dropping down to D2. Coach Hall needs to be out ASAP. CPJ may need to be out of here too, depending on how the season finishes. If I were Stansbury, I would sit down with CJP, CPJ(or new coach), and CDH(or new coach), and just figure out what we want to be as a program, because where we are right now is not working. The right coaching hire is everything. Look at the before/after of GT Basketball with Cremins, or GT Football with O 'Leary. Bottom line, the Institute has to set its priorities. I think it was O 'Leary that said something like "They(GT) want to be MIT during the week and Florida State on Saturdays."

 

[wvGT11]

One thing that sticks out to me at least with Football..
The schools like Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State etc have reached a point where they pretty much sit at the top with little competition. I've looked at the the CFP the past few years and actually have been pretty bored with it . These schools put so much into football that it's almost unachievable for the Average school now. What's the point when it's the same 4-5 schools year after year at the top .

Now you look at us, and the rest of the ACC we haven't really changed since 2008 but the schools around us have upped their game . We need to at least remain competitive. We used to have one of the longest bowl streaks, we used to be ranked in the top 25 a lot more often etc. All those things now seem a much harder task.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk