Is GT Basketball a Good Job?

[Techster]

Kinda curious what the fan base thinks about this. The temperature from the media indicates that GT isn't the job it once was.

Personally, I think GT is one of the better jobs in the country. It's not a Kentucky, UNC, UCLA, Indiana type job (i.e. a basketball blueblood type job), but I think the right guy can win big here. We don't need a big name here...let's not forget Cremins came from Applachian State, and for all of Hewitt's faults towards the end, he was at one time considered one of the hottest coaching names in all of basketball (remember, he was attached to the NY Knicks at one point) and he came from small time Siena.

GT is smack dab in one of the most fertile states for basketball talent. There's enough talent within a 1-2 hour drive from campus for us to be a consistent Sweet 16 team. We have a history of pulling top 10 type talent (Kenny Anderson, Stephon Marbury, Chris Bosh, Derrick Favors, etc.), so to say our academics may be an issue ignores the kind of talent GT has a history of pulling in. There's enough talent on the roster to win next year (remember, we have been extremely competitive against every team not named UNC...a better basketball mind could close the gap in those tight losses), our facilities are first rate, and the city of Atlanta sells itself.

Can we pay as much as other schools? Probably not at first, but I think if a coach can show he can win consistently, the money will be there for him. GT will pony up once someone proves they are a winner.

IMHO, for a young coach who wants to test his mettle against some basketball legends in the premier bball conference in college, GT sets up really nicely for their career.

 

[deeznats]

It's definitely a good job. As you say, we're in a nice city with lots of talent, in a good league... we have all the ingredients to be successful. It was definitely a better job when Cremins was here though when it was much more difficult to get on TV and to get exposure. Being in a great league meant a lot more back then. Any coach that comes in now has to contend with the Carolina schools, Syracuse, Louisville, ND, etc. It basically means you are starting off with your ceiling being middle of the pack until you can prove yourself and start consistently landing top talent. That's no easy task. And even when you do accomplish that, it still would take a miracle season to win the league.

It's a valid argument that a promising coach might find it easier to go to a mid major to make his name and bide his time until the right program calls. Not only is it easier to win, but those schools now frequently pay as much as we would pay and the pressure is so much less.

 

[eetech]

Wasn't Hewitt not amongst our top 5 choices? Anyone know the story behind that, and why we couldn't get a top choice coach then?

I am ignoring the coaching hire where we got CBG (who clearly also wasn't a top choice) because we were heavily constrained by Hewitt's contract.

 

[TheSilasSonRising]

With the contracts we give people , it seems to be a great job.

 

[33jacket]

its an ok job IMO. Not great. Not Bad. Maybe Good maybe not, but definitely ok. Middle 1/3rd of ACC type job...with its challenges, and would be a stepping stone job for a good young coach, unless we offered another parachute contract...which we won't....

I for one don't think Gregory is as bad a x's and o's coach as people are making him out. I really don't. I really think what has made his tenure here poor is his assistant coach choices and underwhelming recruiting. So he is a bad coach in those areas. That needs to improve. Good assistants help recruiting. Thats on him. Totally on him.

Coaches are not just playbook guys. They are CEOs. They are accountable for all.....

But I like Gregory the man, person. He is the type of guy you wish would be successful because he is easy to pull for and like. We will see what happens. He returns alot of players and maybe 1 bigtime recruit away from a solid season.

 

[4shotB]

There are people who turn bad jobs into good jobs. Cremins (for those of you who remember GT BB pre-BC), Homer Rice ( anyone remember the state of affairs before him?) and Bobby Ross (nobody can win a NC at GT, right?) come to mind. You have seen it professionally (maybe once or twice in your career). For whatever reason, people always have the "yeah, but..." mindset where they tell you all the reasons things are different now and therefore what people like Rice, Ross and Cremins achieved cannot be done again. That's rubbish.

Because of the work of Rice and Cremins, the GT job is a good job. Of course, it has slipped a bit (or a lot) in the past decade. But nobody coming in will have to do the work that Rice and Bobby did. The difficulty lies in picking the right man. If I (or any of you) knew who that was, I wouldn't be sitting here in my Spiderman pajamas and a cup of coffee typing on a message board.

The GT job IS a good job..facilities, some history and tradition, location and conference. It just needs the right man leading it.

 

[a5ehren]

GT should be a good job, based on location and conference. Add in the fact that we're a football-first school and you can keep your job pretty much forever by winning 18+ games a year and finishing mid-pack in the ACC, and it starts to look even better for someone thinking long-term.

 

[Peacone36]

Geographically it's great. Best conference in basketball.

But you have to have the balls to want to compete with the big boys while not making a ton of money by comparison.

 

[a5ehren]

True, though I think we've shown with Hewitt and CPJ that you'll be paid well once you perform. Someday one of these cheap guys has to pay off, right?

 

[Techster]

If a young coach comes to GT, gives us 5 good years where he makes THE tourney 4 out of 5 years and moves on to "bigger" things, I'm OK with that. That would mean he's elevated the job from where it is now, and we'll be able to spend more on the next guy. We'll be out of the CPH buyout, and there's more money to spend to find a higher tier coach. A coach has to have success to treat GT as a stepping stone...it's a win-win, IMO.

You never know, maybe the next guy comes to GT, has a lot of success, and realizes the tradeoffs between GT and a job like Kentucky or Indiana. Look at what happened to Tubby Smith and what's going on with Tom Crean. People are not happy simply making the tournament at those jobs. If you're not winning a national championship within 3 years, the burners on the hot plate you're coaching on are fired up. At GT, if you can win, the administration will pay enough for you to be in the top 5 coaches of salaries in the conference (if not more...just look at CPJ's contract for reference). Making the tourney would make you a hero, and getting to the second weekend every other tourney appearance would more than satisfy the fanbase. Any job is what you make of it. Duke wasn't Duke until Coach K got there, Florida wasn't much to talk about until Billy Donovan.

My point is, GT has all the ingredients for the next coach to be successful. It's not like taking the Vandy job in football or the Duke job football...where mountain is so high it's almost a career killer. History has shown the right guy can win BIG here and compete with any team in the country on the court.

 

[MidtownJacket]

@Techster I think you may be underestimating the Techfan's ability to never be pleased. If we start going to 2nd weekend every other year you can bet the rounds of "why can't he get it done" and "time to move along" come back with a vengeance.

Just look at CPJ's tenure. The more commonplace winning becomes the "easier/guaranteed" lable starts popping up.

 

[Buzz776g]

Geographically it's great. Best conference in basketball.

But you have to have the balls to want to compete with the big boys while not making a ton of money by comparison.

This exactly. We need someone with a fire in their belly, who wants to take on a tough challenge and prove to himself, along with everyone else, that he can do the job and then some.

Most folks understandably make lots of calculations in deciding on a career move. That's fine; we all do. At the end of the day, though, we need someone deeply driven to take the good raw material the OP mentioned and rise to a tough challenge for their own competitive nature's sake.

 

[Techster]

@Techster I think you may be underestimating the Techfan's ability to never be pleased. If we start going to 2nd weekend every other year you can bet the rounds of "why can't he get it done" and "time to move along" come back with a vengeance.

Just look at CPJ's tenure. The more commonplace winning becomes the "easier/guaranteed" lable starts popping up.

Lol...true.

 

[up state jacket]

There aren't any legit reason's why Tech can't compete for national titles along with the Blue Bloods of basketball. Atlanta is one of the best cities in America to recruit elite talent. The way college basketball is now players only have to be eligible for a short period of time before they move on to greener pastures. The transfer situation has changed the landscape of college basketball to where a program ala SMU, can be turned around seemingly overnight. So, I say yes Tech is good to very good job. If freaking Iowa St can be a top 15 program, why can't Tech? Iowa vs Atlanta, I'd say the Atl has a distinct advantage on just about every important category that concerns basketball recruiting and basketball in general.

 

[Fatmike91]

Geographically it's great. Best conference in basketball.

But you have to have the balls to want to compete with the big boys while not making a ton of money by comparison.

Something to keep in mind, some of those "big boys" are likely to retire over the next half a decade. There could be some turnover at UNC, Duke, Syracuse, etc. If a coach comes in and does well for a few years, we might get some sustained momentum while those programs reset.

/

 

[mqpayne]

Something to keep in mind, some of those "big boys" are likely to retire over the next half a decade. There could be some turnover at UNC, Duke, Syracuse, etc. If a coach comes in and does well for a few years, we might get some sustained momentum while those programs reset.

/

You are exactly right. I know of limited success following a coaching legend. Thus Virginia might be the only sustained success in 5 years. Atlanta, ACC, Ga Tech AD and President support and improving finances make GT a great opportunity.

 

[Techster]

There aren't any legit reason's why Tech can't compete for national titles along with the Blue Bloods of basketball. Atlanta is one of the best cities in America to recruit elite talent. The way college basketball is now players only have to be eligible for a short period of time before they move on to greener pastures. The transfer situation has changed the landscape of college basketball to where a program ala SMU, can be turned around seemingly overnight. So, I say yes Tech is good to very good job. If freaking Iowa St can be a top 15 program, why can't Tech? Iowa vs Atlanta, I'd say the Atl has a distinct advantage on just about every important category that concerns basketball recruiting and basketball in general.

This.

 

[dtm1997]

You are exactly right. I know of limited success following a coaching legend. Thus Virginia might be the only sustained success in 5 years. Atlanta, ACC, Ga Tech AD and President support and improving finances make GT a great opportunity.

Except speculation is that MBob (A) reset the buyout and (B) he's being forced to raise the money necessary for the buyout as opposed using operating or endowment funds.

So that leaves me questioning MBob's competence and how much the powers that be, whoever they are, really support the hoops program.

 

[Whatllyahave]

Should be...could be.

 

[awbuzz]

Will be again!