Program has bigger problems

[daBuzz]

Thank you! Stanford is a flash in the pan compared over time with Tech from a football standpoint. I get so tired of reading how "successful" Stanford is. Yes for the last 5-6 years they're having a good run but remember, USC has not been USC and UCLA has been way down. Neither of those situations are going to last forever. So let's see just how successful is when USC and UCLA get back to their normal standards.

OldJacketFan and LibertyTurns,
I don't think people are really saying they want to be Stanford. Rather, they're doing what engineers are trained to do. They see an issue...they try & identify the problems and then correct those problems.

So when people say that we are hamstrung because of our academic requirements, they're looking at other "high academic" schools like Stanford to see what they're doing.

I don't think anyone would argue that Tech has a more storied past than Stanford. And that's something that we as Tech fans should rightly be proud of. However, starting with Harbaugh and continuing with their current coach, Stanford has enjoyed recruiting and on-the-field success. So these engineers are wondering if adapting part of that model might not work for us. Simple as that, in my opinion.

Oh yeah. AND HAPPY NEW YEAR!

 

[OldJacketFan]

OldJacketFan and LibertyTurns,
I don't think people are really saying they want to be Stanford. Rather, they're doing what engineers are trained to do. They see an issue...they try & identify the problems and then correct those problems.

So when people say that we are hamstrung because of our academic requirements, they're looking at other "high academic" schools like Stanford to see what they're doing.

I don't think anyone would argue that Tech has a more storied past than Stanford. And that's something that we as Tech fans should rightly be proud of. However, starting with Harbaugh and continuing with their current coach, Stanford has enjoyed recruiting and on-the-field success. So these engineers are wondering if adapting part of that model might not work for us. Simple as that, in my opinion.

Oh yeah. AND HAPPY NEW YEAR!

daBuzz, the only problem adapting to the model is that it just simply isn't feasible in terms of academics. As I posted earlier Tech offers 36 undergraduate programs versus 118 offered by Stanford. As to most other factors i.e. facilities, recruiting budget, conference affiliation and the like Tech doesn't have to back up at all when compared with Stanford.

And a very Happy New Year's to you and yours as well!

 

[Mack]

Mack, I see what you're saying and it seems as if you're addressing the players on the team presently. We've seen what a top quality B back and WR can do in this offense and, with Godhigh's performance this year, the potential for what a top quality A back would be able to do. Even, at times, what a quality QB can do. I just don't feel it's too much of a stretch to think that 4* and, perhaps, 5* skill position players would not be interested in playing in this offense. Getting 4* and 5* players to commit goes beyond the offensive scheme, it's a combination of many factors and, sometimes, it's just a simple as a mother's wishes

I would like to agree with you since I have seen the option close up with good players but lets face it do you think JD or JN were signed to run thecoption.Again to run the offense you need special guys and in six yrs we have not gotten them here and I think faced with a USC or a Georgie offense vs ours the name players pass on us.Hope I have to recall my words ...,and soon.Happy NEW YEAR!

 

[ATL1]

daBuzz, thmajoring ly problem adapting to the model is that it just simply isn't feasible in terms of academics. As I posted earlier Tech offers 36 undergraduate programs versus 118 offered by Stanford. As to most other factors i.e. facilities, recruiting budget, conference affiliation and the like Tech doesn't have to back up at all when compared with Stanford.

And a very Happy New Year's to you and yours as well!

Have you checked their roster to see what those kids are majoring in? The vast majority major in something that they could major in at Tech.

As far as facilities and the like, I've never been to Stanford so I've only read that the place is Beautiful and that the facilities get the Phil Knight treatment. Every player get there own personal iPad to watch plays and has an endowment.

 

[MWBATL]

I have read this entire thread and completely agree with the opinions expressed in it. The malaise in GT football is much deeper than just one coach or one game or one season, it is that college football continues to evolve, and GT football does not. It seems to this outsider that we have decided to play the game "our way" and if that means 6-5 seasons, well then that's what it means. It is noteworthy that 15 of CPJ's 16 seniors got their degrees (and the 15th has stated will continue until he gets his), my impression from the outside is THAT is what The Hill wants. It is noteworthy that we do not recruit the way other schools do...we will NOT anticipate attrition even, much less force the attrition that some schools do. Schools like Stanford have so many advantages over us that it is a silly comparison (just look up The List if you want to see why some kids decide to go to Stanford over us).

Now, my real question, as a season ticket holder for some 25+ years, what can I...what can *any of us* do about this?

 

[Mack]

I have read this entire thread and completely agree with the opinions expressed in it. The malaise in GT football is much deeper than just one coach or one game or one season, it is that college football continues to evolve, and GT football does not. It seems to this outsider that we have decided to play the game "our way" and if that means 6-5 seasons, well then that's what it means. It is noteworthy that 15 of CPJ's 16 seniors got their degrees (and the 15th has stated will continue until he gets his), my impression from the outside is THAT is what The Hill wants. It is noteworthy that we do not recruit the way other schools do...we will NOT anticipate attrition even, much less force the attrition that some schools do. Schools like Stanford have so many advantages over us that it is a silly comparison (just look up The List if you want to see why some kids decide to go to Stanford over us).

Now, my real question, as a season ticket holder for some 25+ years, what can I...what can *any of us* do about this?

Just my take on it but the Hill only changes with pressure from within the big tech boosters.Money still talks big in college sports and when the money dries up things change.Tech cannot expect six and six or seven and five and grow unless we get help to make the athletes consider us.Now is it the Coach or the offense or the Hill ,I dont know I guess all three but we are so far behind other liberal art schools its pitiful.I am sure a georgie doctor or lawyer could care less if a offensive tackle gets a degree in Parks and Recreation or Hotel Management or Basket Weaving..They like the wins and do not feel it cheapens their degree. Will say next year we will be talking about same thing yet think we will win eight due to our schedule but not so sure how we do vs big uns.

 

[iopjacket]

I will drink to that good sir

Eric and Powder Springs Jacket or anyone else in the know,

Could you elaborate about Buzz Peterson being a problem.

Thanks

 

[Rodney Kent]

Mack. I agree, the only thing that will persuade the Hill is money or lack thereof. There are only two ways to do this; the money boosters must put pressure on the Hill, and the fans will quit attending the games if these poor showings continue. Both of these actions places the burden squarely on the Hill. Do they want to drop football or try to advance football at Tech. We know for a fact that the money decides most of the decisions. Many of our better wealthy boosters are gone; I don't know how many are left. We know many like Kim King, have contributed to the building funds for Tech's academics as well as sports. Kim and others like him have passed on. Without their donations and the donations of Coca Cola in Atlanta, Tech would not have been able to foot many of their bills.

The first part, wealthy boosters must get together and exert pressure. The second part will come naturally, the drop in attendance. I have vowed to never attend another Tech game until the Hill changes our coach. My son and I had season tickets this year. Of course, had it not been for him wanting to have some quality weekends with his dad, I would not have attended as my wife hates sports. I have a son-in-law who is a devout Auburn fan. I can no longer attend a Tech game and enjoy the pitiful coaching; I come away mad and frustrated. Since my son is not a true football fan as I, he is willing for me, him, and my son-in-law to attend some of the Auburn games this coming year. I can attend these games without getting mad and frustrated and wasting money to make me mad.

I will enjoy the football season much better next year because I am basically detaching myself from Tech football until we get a new coach who is willing to play a fun type of football where it is not known every play that the offense is going to make. I saw a question from a Tech fan, "Who could we get to do better than PJ"? Well I have a four year old nephew who could probably do better. Yes, I know some of the mesmerized fans on the board will tell me they are better off without me, but there are many like me who will stop attending the Tech games until things change.

I will state this last caveat; I have been a fan of GT football for approximate 68 years. I doubt you will find many fans who have been this loyal over those years as a fan of GT, and I did not even go to school at GT. Since I do not have the money to contribute to advancing football at Tech, my only action to help change the situation is making my position known on boards such as these. Also, I do like to talk sports in general as that has been part of my life since I was a kid.

 

[LibertyTurns]

MWBATL hit the nail on the head. College football is evolving and GT's treading water.

Buck stops at the top. GT doesn't give a crap about athletics and it permeates every decision and bad move.

 

[OldJacketFan]

Have you checked their roster to see what those kids are majoring in? The vast majority major in something that they could major in at Tech.

As far as facilities and the like, I've never been to Stanford so I've only read that the place is Beautiful and that the facilities get the Phil Knight treatment. Every player get there own personal iPad to watch plays and has an endowment.

Actually I did take a look at the majors currently declared by the Stanford players, 23 have declared majors that are not offered at Tech. One very interesting item is that 46 players have no declared majors, from what I can find there is no requirement for a player to declare a major until his junior year as the 46 players noted are all freshmen and sophomore. This would indicate there is basically a "general studies" program for the first two years. At no time did I say or suggest the Stanford players could not find a major at Tech. My point was that simply Stanford offers 3 times the number of majors that Tech offers.

I have been to Palo Alto and the Stanford campus, it is a beautiful area. Phil Knight is the benefactor at Oregon not Stanford. Stanford does have a very generous endowment to its football program, how much of this trickled down to the SAs I have no idea. I do know the players are not allowed benefits not available to the general student population per NCAA regs.

 

[ATL1]

Actually I did take a look at the majors currently declared by the Stanford players, 23 have declared majors that are not offered at Tech. One very interesting item is that 46 players have no declared majors, from what I can find there is no requirement for a player to declare a major until his junior year as the 46 players noted are all freshmen and sophomore. This would indicate there is basically a "general studies" program for the first two years. At no time did I say or suggest the Stanford players could not find a major at Tech. My point was that simply Stanford offers 3 times the number of majors that Tech offers.

I have been to Palo Alto and the Stanford campus, it is a beautiful area. Phil Knight is the benefactor at Oregon not Stanford. Stanford does have a very generous endowment to its football program, how much of this trickled down to the SAs I have no idea. I do know the players are not allowed benefits not available to the general student population per NCAA regs.

http://www.gsb.stanford.edu/giving/gsb_priorities/new_campus.html

Phil Knight donates considerably to the athletic department as well.

 

[OldJacketFan]

http://www.gsb.stanford.edu/giving/gsb_priorities/new_campus.html

Phil Knight donates considerably to the athletic department as well.

Uh that's a campus building not a football facilities building, unless I miss something in the article. And, truly, Knight's involvement is irrelevant to the issue at hand, is it not?

 

[ATL1]

Uh that's a campus building not a football facilities building, unless I miss something in the article. And, truly, Knight's involvement is irrelevant to the issue at hand, is it not?

Not really we were discussing how the involvement of alum effects a program.

 

[OldJacketFan]

Not really we were discussing how the involvement of alum effects a program.

Funny I thought this thread was about issues with the Hill and other academics issues affecting the football program. I don't recall seeing anything relative to alum involvement. Oh yes and then someone brought up Stanford.

 

[LongforDodd]

Between Rodney and OJF, I think after roster inspections, Rodney wins. Alot of us hope PJ's system should be attractive but at the end of the day, it's only attractive to a smaller pool of 18 year olds.

 

[CrackerJacket]

You don't see the word 'malaise' in too many sports forums, but it's bang on for GT football. Between the Hill's attitude, our limited major offerings, and the triple option, we have made Ga Tech football a warm sour English brew in a market that wants ice cold Coors or Mich Lite: a very hard sell for players and fans alike.

Looks like the only way out is for donors and ticket buyers alike to vote with their feet, but I wonder if even that will change the Hill's outlook. GT has changed since I was a student. Yesterday, I noticed a guy in GT gear at Best Buy. This is not the usual garb in Corpus Christi, TX, so I introduced myself as an alum. The kid said he was a sophomore in Business Admin. When I asked him what he thought about the Ole Miss game, he didn't know or give a damn about it. OK - small sample, I know, but it still has me shakin' my head in amazement.

 

[Rodney Kent]

CrackerJacket: Yes, that is part of the problem of attendance at Tech. Many students at Tech come from afar and then go back to their homes away from the State of Georgia. It is imperative that Tech attract the so-called sidewalk fans like myself. We are some of the strong groups that were attracted to Tech by the winning tradition established by Dodd. Yes, I keep bringing up his name, and know we cannot bring him back, but it is a winning tradition that attracts fans at Tech not the students per se. A winning team will pack out Bobby Dodd Stadium, but it cannot be a year here and a year there, it must be a strong winning tradition to keep the sidewalk fans.

 

[ATL1]

Funny I thought this thread was about issues with the Hill and other academics issues affecting the football program. I don't recall seeing anything relative to alum involvement. Oh yes and then someone brought up Stanford.

Re-read the original post.

 

[OldJacketFan]

Re-read the original post.

However, this isn't just a coach problem. The academic restrictions, alumni support, lack of money, lack of marketing, support staff, and many other issues are going to be a problem for any new coach that we hire. CPJ is figuring this stuff out a little more every year. He has done a good job fixing the recruiting staff, building relationships with HS programs, upgrading facilities, getting more money, and getting some academic flexibility with admissions. But he is still fighting an uphill battle..

Oh my apologies, one issue among many. I guess I was focused the entire post instead of one peripheral issue.

 

[LibertyTurns]

It's a different world than we grew up in. The whiskey's gone and has been replaced by who knows what.

The students/alumni by and large just don't care. Why would the Hill do anything different if nobody gives a crap? You can name the schools on less than one hand that would find reasons not to admit star athletes, puts up with horrible marketing and has poor fan gear, etc.

We can make all the excuses we want but unless someone with the $$ steps up and demands a change we're not going to see anything different.