This has been the issue at Tech for quite awhile. I read an article maybe 10 years ago that said Alabama had over 30 people just to break down and analyze film. I’m sure some of these were students but they had staff people in charge of the film processing.
It may play out at the end of next yr that BOTH Collins and Pastner will be on the VERY hot seat.I wonder what "the money" does then?
I personally believe the money is there if the WILL is there to take care of both but at the least, the FB program needs to be uprighted before the BB program.
I know this is true, but I question the premise. It's like hiring a new doctor, something I've had to do recently.
This analogy doesn’t really work because in your scenario, there’s only one position to be filled. Bama and UGA don’t have to choose either/or because they can just take both. Those “analysts” are still heavily involved with practice and film study, they just can’t be on field coaches during the games.
Interesting comparison with a doctor- so far Collins has not been able to repair the damage. I would like to see him have equal to more resources than everyone else in the ACC and then make the final call about his coaching/recruiting.
I bet those empty seats at the football/basketball games are currently costing Tech a lot. I would rather see the current coaches get more support to help get an advantage over competition than just firing them and crossing fingers on the next hire.
I would like to have seen the current one get a new DC for Christmas, whether he wants one or not.
How about someone like Attaochu wreaking havoc? That would be a great gift.
I hope you are 100% correct about this in bold.
Are they? More effective, that is? Personally, I doubt it and I can fall back on their records for support. Now, if you can - and, as you point out, Bama can - hire both former coaches and "analytical nerds" then you might as well. Problem = I've never seen an analysis of what mix of assistants/analysts works best and delivers the best results. The idea that experience and game day knowledge accumulated by a coach with a losing record is what you want doesn't impress me. Yet another way that football shows how far behind baseball ion analytics it is.
I pray this is true and have thought about this. Either Tech gives a **** about sports and is willing to do what it takes to be competitive or they are not and we will fade off into the abyss. When UGA won the title i told my buddies that hopefully that lit a fire under some ppls assess at Tech. If it didn’t then we have a problem
Just because somebody has a losing record as a head coach doesn’t mean they’re a bad coach, just a bad head coach. A head coach has a ton more responsibilities than even coordinators, and sometimes even great coaches and coordinators aren’t prepared or able to do all the things asked of them as head coaches. They also weren’t just handed a head coaching job without working their way up the ladder either. Most of the time for a decade+. It’s not like all of them have to be former head coaches either. There are plenty of former coordinators and position coaches that go into analyst positions for big schools. Are coaches more effective at conveying a message to players than someone who’s only job is to study analytics and film? Well almost assuredly everytime. There’s a reason why the analysts for baseball teams aren’t in the dugout or on the field during spring training with players. It’s because they understand the information, but likely have no idea how to convey their message. That’s why coaches are necessary. And the more coaches you can get on your analytical team, the better off you’ll be as long as you have enough actual data miners and data analysts.
Or the beginning?
Yes, I've read that here but I'm curious if anyone knows for sure who we could have had, who we reached out to, who reached out to us and therefore who we passed on.
