Paul Johnson time frame.

[Vespidae]

Winning is becoming a 8-10 game winner for 3 years straight. Catch the eye of some recruits. Sell our players as much as we possibly can to scouts for the nfl. Try and have at least 3-4 players go in the first 4 rounds of the draft. Then show players they dont have to come here to get an education they can come here to get to the nfl.

5 and 4 star players aren't worried about classes. They are focused on the nfl, so get their butts to the nfl. Just make sure they show up to class and get at least bare minimum to graduate. It's rare that these guys graduate anyways. We like for them to, but it's not a big deal if we are constantly in the top 20. We need to be a stopping point for athletes to get to the nfl like bama,Clemson, uga, USC, vt, florida state, florida are. We can do it with academics, just put the system to work. Get a coach that can recruit above his level, grab a couple more 4 star players. Get us to about 9 wins for at least 3 years straight and then dump a load of money into scouting and recruiting. It honestly boils down to money. If you show a kid a path to the nfl and we can show we churn them out like clock work, then we will get those who play better. We just have to put the money to work.

You do realize that since 1970, the year modern football started, Tech has never had a decade winning at that rate. I think we can do 7-5, 7-5, 10-2 ... but it all depends on Clemson and UGA having down years.

 

[okiemon]

He’s a great 58 year old OC. Do you want to get him to train someone or just ride off into the sunset?

The sunset ride, if you don’t mind.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[boger2337]

You do realize that since 1970, the year modern football started, Tech has never had a decade winning at that rate. I think we can do 7-5, 7-5, 10-2 ... but it all depends on Clemson and UGA having down years.

Yes, we have settled on being average for too long. We have an opportunity to make a push. Be a power house. If we settle for anything less than 3 acc championships over the next 10 years the we might as well give up. Why continue to push to hope to catch lightning in a bottle. We can adjust things and try and become a powerhouse.

All you said to me is for the past 40-50 years we have been doing it wrong. We haven't been a SPORTS school. We need to become a FOOTBALL school. Let that be our driving force to getting students here. Why do kids go to Clemson, uga, bama, Michigan Ohio state? Sure some are decent to good schools academically. But, its because they grew up watching their football teams plastered on espn, and being advertised all over the place. Walk into kroger is uga stuff. Walk into target uga stuff, hell there is more kennesaw state stuff than gt stuff in Woodstock! That should scare the hell out of GT. We need to be a brand. Even if it means taking a loss on pushing stores to sit our product on the floor. Go in and demand space in stores. Pay them off for what doesnt sell. Gt needs to flood the state. Show it's a superior school, program, campus, education. We have done things *** back words for half a century. We need to run this like a business and put GT football before everything. It will help the school overall 3 fold.

 

[Vespidae]

Yes, we have settled on being average for too long. We have an opportunity to make a push. Be a power house. If we settle for anything less than 3 acc championships over the next 10 years the we might as well give up. Why continue to push to hope to catch lightning in a bottle. We can adjust things and try and become a powerhouse.

All you said to me is for the past 40-50 years we have been doing it wrong. We haven't been a SPORTS school. We need to become a FOOTBALL school. Let that be our driving force to getting students here. Why do kids go to Clemson, uga, bama, Michigan Ohio state? Sure some are decent to good schools academically. But, its because they grew up watching their football teams plastered on espn, and being advertised all over the place. Walk into kroger is uga stuff. Walk into target uga stuff, hell there is more kennesaw state stuff than gt stuff in Woodstock! That should scare the hell out of GT. We need to be a brand. Even if it means taking a loss on pushing stores to sit our product on the floor. Go in and demand space in stores. Pay them off for what doesnt sell. Gt needs to flood the state. Show it's a superior school, program, campus, education. We have done things *** back words for half a century. We need to run this like a business and put GT football before everything. It will help the school overall 3 fold.

Ah, youth.

Tech, the Hill, doesn’t care. GT is a Top 50 school in the world. They are drowning in applications. SAT scores an all time high. From the Hill’s perspective, they don’t need to do a thing. Except keep the alumni happy.

 

[Milwaukee]

You do realize that since 1970, the year modern football started, Tech has never had a decade winning at that rate. I think we can do 7-5, 7-5, 10-2 ... but it all depends on Clemson and UGA having down years.

This isn't directed only to you but I'm so sick of our fans having this loser/content thinking and passing it off as "we're just being rational, it is what it is". It's a good thing the men with balls in this world don't think like this is all I'm sayin.

I'm a PJ supporter fwiw.

 

[GT_05]

Yes, we have settled on being average for too long. We have an opportunity to make a push. Be a power house. If we settle for anything less than 3 acc championships over the next 10 years the we might as well give up. Why continue to push to hope to catch lightning in a bottle. We can adjust things and try and become a powerhouse.

All you said to me is for the past 40-50 years we have been doing it wrong. We haven't been a SPORTS school. We need to become a FOOTBALL school. Let that be our driving force to getting students here. Why do kids go to Clemson, uga, bama, Michigan Ohio state? Sure some are decent to good schools academically. But, its because they grew up watching their football teams plastered on espn, and being advertised all over the place. Walk into kroger is uga stuff. Walk into target uga stuff, hell there is more kennesaw state stuff than gt stuff in Woodstock! That should scare the hell out of GT. We need to be a brand. Even if it means taking a loss on pushing stores to sit our product on the floor. Go in and demand space in stores. Pay them off for what doesnt sell. Gt needs to flood the state. Show it's a superior school, program, campus, education. We have done things *** back words for half a century. We need to run this like a business and put GT football before everything. It will help the school overall 3 fold.

GT is a great school, even if we never win another football game or even have a football program. College sports exist because of the college, not vice versa. People do not go to GT because of tee shirts and coffee mugs. Nobody would put themselves through that hell because they were inspired by a tee shirt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Vespidae]

This isn't directed only to you but I'm so sick of our fans having this loser/content thinking and passing it off as "we're just being rational, it is what it is". It's a good thing the men with balls in this world don't think like this is all I'm sayin.

I'm a PJ supporter fwiw.

For the record, I grew up in Alabama. Most of my family are Alabama boosters. I also lived in Knoxville and have many Vol Letterman as friends.

I want to win every Natty I can. But having watche’d Tech for 40 yrs, we aren’t Alabama. We are never going to be Alabama.

We think going 0.600 sucks. It actually puts us in the elite programs. That’s right. Winning 7-8 games a year puts Tech in the Top Programs of the NCAA D1... while being a Top 50 STEM school ....in the world.

I think that is pretty friggin cool.

 

[iceeater1969]

Horn dogs do not change, he is a whore and will always be a whore

Doesn't sound like u are into this gender fluidity

 

[sgreer]

Where are all these 4 and 5 stars that want to get a world class education in Georgia Tech’s limited majors? Could you point them out so we can recruit them once the option offense is gone? Thanks in advance.

I never said 5 stars but they can do better than what we are watching now:

Nesbit, D Thomas, Michael Johnson, Vance Walker, Morgan Burnett, Jonathon Dwyer- a few of the guys that were coming before Tech went to the current regime. I also watched the O Leary years before that and there was plenty of talent then. GT is one of the top schools in the world and I would think there are opportunities to get kids from all over the US- but there needs to be some hope and hype around the football program alao.

 

[RamblinWreck92]

Are you at practice? CPJ has stated TM passes pretty during practice.
Confident that they throw plenty during practice.

Are you at practice? How can you be confident that we throw plenty during practice?

Fact is, we're both speculating.

 

[GTJoeBrew]

TStan needs to be very careful with what he does over the next couple of year. I know that is a rudimentary statement, but with the way we are set up and our tough schedule every year we could find ourselves in dark days as a team if he doesn't make the perfect hire. Are fans willing to put up with losing seasons multiple years in a row? I don't think so. Take note of our "home" stadium this weekend. It will be mostly orange. Any change that we make will take time to transition....

How does everyone feel about an Air Raid offense? We could go to the opposite spectrum, hell Oklahoma is doing it now and we don't hear about them being hamstrung by their offense.

 

[TheTechGuy]

I never said 5 stars but they can do better than what we are watching now:

Nesbit, D Thomas, Michael Johnson, Vance Walker, Morgan Burnett, Jonathon Dwyer- a few of the guys that were coming before Tech went to the current regime. I also watched the O Leary years before that and there was plenty of talent then. GT is one of the top schools in the world and I would think there are opportunities to get kids from all over the US- but there needs to be some hope and hype around the football program alao.

Half of the players you listed were in Gailey's anomalous 2007 class. Of the others, Michael Johnson was a 215# 3-star TE, Vance Walker was a 255# 2-star DT, and Thomas was a 3-star wide receiver. While Gailey should be given credit for identifying those diamonds in the rough, and CPJ should be given credit for helping to develop them (especially Thomas, less so with Walker), Tech was not competing with Southern Cal, Texas, and Ohio State for those players.

Unfortunately for Tech, the college football landscape has changed dramatically in the last ten years. The facts that Tech has limited majors, has outdated facilities, and does not invest in football compared to more competitive schools has been repeated on this site and others ad nauseam. Changing the offense is not the magic pill that will suddenly vault Tech into the perennial top-20 of college football. Though, it may cause the offense to regress to where the defense is ranked.

 

[Vespidae]

How does everyone feel about an Air Raid offense? We could go to the opposite spectrum, hell Oklahoma is doing it now and we don't hear about them being hamstrung by their offense.

I would think an Air Raid offense would be more appealing to recruits who wanted to play in the NFL. So, it would probably help get us a quality QB and WRs.

 

[bke1984]

You do realize that since 1970, the year modern football started, Tech has never had a decade winning at that rate. I think we can do 7-5, 7-5, 10-2 ... but it all depends on Clemson and UGA having down years.

CPJ says this all the time and I hate this argument so much. It's only valid if you're saying, "well we're not as good as we used to be." But what if instead you're saying, "we're not performing to the level we want to."

My counter argument to this is, "you're right...so what do we need you for? seems like we can get just about any coach to come in and win 6 games a year since we've been doing it forever."

We hear all of this crap about how Tech is a 6-6 team on average and has been for a long time, so that's just what we are. I hate that crap. We need to strive to be better and build a better program...and I think we are capable of winning 7 games a year at a minimum. That basically entails beating your FCS and non-Power-5 team, plus 5 of your remaining 10 games. That's what I want us to be at a minimum...and I don't think that's unreasonable.

 

[Vespidae]

CPJ says this all the time and I hate this argument so much. It's only valid if you're saying, "well we're not as good as we used to be." But what if instead you're saying, "we're not performing to the level we want to."

No, it doesn't say that at all. Michigan for example, has a WPCT of 0.728. So, on average ... we should expect MI to win 8-9 games a year. ON AVERAGE. There are some years they win 11. Others, they win 6. But they tend to have more years winning 9 or more than 8 or less. That's math.

In our case, we tend to group around 7-5. So, we can expect to have more years winning 6 games and a few years winning more than 9.

Why is MI different than Tech? First, the schools with win rates over 0.700 (which equates to roughly 8-9 wins per year) ... a) have budgets well over $100MM a year; often $130MM (like Alabama); b) have huge fan bases, which turn, drives stadium capacity, demand; c) have huge merchandising programs to feed the larger fan bases; and d) have large booster organizations that generate funds.

Can Tech "consistently" win 8-9 games a year. Only if they are prepared to generate about $100MM or more per year in revenue. Right now, it's about $70MM. That's reality. That's why TStan is raising money.

But before you swim in the deep end of the pool, think about this ... Tennessee generates well in excess of $130MM in program revenue and STILL can't get there often ... because they have to run the UGA, Alabama, and UF gauntlet. They can only win when the others have down years. (They know this.)

So, we have to do a better job of forecasting cycles and making big bets. Which is exactly what TN did in 1998.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

I wish CPJ had been supported properly from day one. I wish his DC picks, despite above point, had panned out better. I wish his scheme wasn’t so widely mischaracterized as a high school offense when it has obviously excelled at the P5 level. I wish the Sasquatch hadn’t hung him out to dry during a season that might have garnered a far better recruiting class if his contract status hadn’t been held up until the team surpassed expectations. I wish Tstan had come on board in 2008 as our AD.

More than anything, I wish our fanbase didn’t act like such big spoiled and whiny crybabies after every loss. Some of y’all are just weak.

 

[BCJacket]

Ah, youth.

Tech, the Hill, doesn’t care. GT is a Top 50 school in the world. They are drowning in applications. SAT scores an all time high. From the Hill’s perspective, they don’t need to do a thing. Except keep the alumni happy.

One thing I'd add to this. And it relates to your later post also. The SEC schools rely on football revenue to fund other things. UGA makes a tidy profit back to the general budget from Athletics, after using football to underwrite the non-revenue sports. UGA exists to provide general education. Football is what drives the public awareness of UGA for the most important stakeholders- future tuition payers (and their parents). [Also, the UGA alumni/fans in state government and the BOR who care about UGA Football]

From "The Hill's" perspective, GT athletics are a minor distraction. Athletics breaks even and some alumni like it. Meanwhile, the GT Research Corporation brings in ~$660 million in funding for core activities. The most important stakeholders for GT are big businesses (tech companies, defense contractors, manufacturers), governments, and non-profits. They couldn't care less about our football team. They care about how our research staff and lab facilities for their funded projects compare to MIT and CalTech. The students Tech needs care more about how many people Tech has put into Google, not how many we've put into the NFL.

So, I think it's incumbent on the Alumni who do care. Those of us who believe that Athletics adds value to the Institute. To be loud, vocal and supportive (financially). I do think that athletics have a visibility and marketing value that research projects never will. I have no idea what MIT's and CalTech's logos look like. But I recognize, for example, Utah's logo... only because of athletics. Top of mind awareness is important. When an 800 math SAT student is deciding between Tech and MIT. When Lockheed is deciding where to fund their next materials science project. Having seen interlocking gold GT's on shirts, cars and TV raises our perceived value. But I don't know that 'the Hill' believes that or thinks that athletics can help the 'more important' mission.

 

[bke1984]

For the record, I grew up in Alabama. Most of my family are Alabama boosters. I also lived in Knoxville and have many Vol Letterman as friends.
Winning 7-8 games a year puts Tech in the Top Programs of the NCAA D1... while being a Top 50 STEM school ....in the world.

This argument works if we actually win 7-8 games. We're headed down a bad path this year. If we don't right the ship and end up with less than 6 wins than I'm not sure that's what we are anymore. You can average across ten years all you want, but over a four year span we could realistically be looking at win totals of 3, 9, 5, and 4. That's 5.25 wins per year over one recruiting class's entire career. We can't have four year spans like that.

FWIW I understand the arguments that explain why we are where we are...but I can't wrap my head around those saying where we are is OK...we are approaching what we were in the 80's. Not so much 81 and 82, but if you look at that 7 year span after that it looks very similar. We should expect to not have losing seasons......at the very least not more than once a decade.

 

[Vespidae]

FWIW I understand the arguments that explain why we are where we are...but I can't wrap my head around those saying where we are is OK...we are approaching what we were in the 80's. Not so much 81 and 82, but if you look at that 7 year span after that it looks very similar. We should expect to not have losing seasons......at the very least not more than once a decade.

I don’t disagree. We should be a “consistent” 7-5 team, and we aren’t.

 

[BuzzStone]

Clemson fan here to offer my two cents.
First, to use the excuse that you’re an academic school who has to settle for mediocrity is BS in my opinion. Every time I talk to a Tech fan they bring this up. Go look at the top 25 national public universities. Now look at the college football top 25. Count how many are in both, there are quite a few.

I think you have to have commitment from the administration for Tech to ever be a great football program. I think Paul Johnson needs to be fired. His offense is outdated and very gimmicky. The top athletes don’t want to play in that type of system. With everything Tech has to offer (amazing academics, cool stadium, a major city), there’s no reason you should settle for being where you are.

And as some poster mentioned in here before. Having a good football program actually contributes to attracting smart students. Bama is attracting some really smart people to their university because they’re a brand. Clemson is as well.

So we should add Parks and Recreation like clempson has?