Scheduling

LibertyTurns

LibertyTurns

Banned
Messages
6,216
Yes once we beat anyone thought to be good beforehand after the game comes the following:
a. Their star players were out hurt
b. They really suck this year
c. They were obviously overrated
d. We got a lot of lucky breaks otherwise we wouldn’t have won or the reverse for the other team
e. The players quit on the season already or didn’t even really want to play us
 
GTJake

GTJake

Banned
Messages
2,066
Location
Fernandina Beach, Florida
LibertyTurns said:
Yes once we beat anyone thought to be good beforehand after the game comes the following:
a. Their star players were out hurt
b. They really suck this year
c. They were obviously overrated
d. We got a lot of lucky breaks otherwise we wouldn’t have won or the reverse for the other team
e. The players quit on the season already or didn’t even really want to play us
Click to expand...

WOW, defeatist attitude much ??? ... The only reasonable thing I can think of to respond to this nonsense is, "to be the best you have to beat the best", but maybe I'm just too old school ??
 
Southpaw13

Southpaw13

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,122
Location
Marietta, Georgia
When you're not a regular top 25 team, strength of schedule is not a bonus. It's holding us back from climbing the ladder perception wise. With perennial top 5 teams UGA and Clemson on the schedule, regular top 20 teams Miami and VT on the schedule, all of those every single year, and Notre Dame and FSU in the ACC rotation, I think our strength of schedule is just fine.

We need to get back to winning 8 or more games a year, and get back into the top 25 on a more consistent basis. Then we can worry about how difficult our non-conference schedule is. With UGA always filling a spot, and with how good they are right now, the other 3 need to all be winnable games. 2 of them should be a gimme and an almost gimme. The 3rd can be a UCF/USF/Temple type game that's not a gimme but if we're pretty good or better, we should win.

I hate going 2-2 non conference, and even if we go 5-3 in ACC we're still perceived as a mediocre, 7-5 team... while teams like NC State go 4-0 against James Madison, East Carolina, Marshall and Georgia State... and that 4-0 gives a perception (from the average onlooker) that they are a better team than us. I'm not convinced they were this year, it's just the reality.
 
DaltonJacket

DaltonJacket

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
228
Southpaw13 said:
When you're not a regular top 25 team, strength of schedule is not a bonus. It's holding us back from climbing the ladder perception wise. With perennial top 5 teams UGA and Clemson on the schedule, regular top 20 teams Miami and VT on the schedule, all of those every single year, and Notre Dame and FSU in the ACC rotation, I think our strength of schedule is just fine.

We need to get back to winning 8 or more games a year, and get back into the top 25 on a more consistent basis. Then we can worry about how difficult our non-conference schedule is. With UGA always filling a spot, and with how good they are right now, the other 3 need to all be winnable games. 2 of them should be a gimme and an almost gimme. The 3rd can be a UCF/USF/Temple type game that's not a gimme but if we're pretty good or better, we should win.

I hate going 2-2 non conference, and even if we go 5-3 in ACC we're still perceived as a mediocre, 7-5 team... while teams like NC State go 4-0 against James Madison, East Carolina, Marshall and Georgia State... and that 4-0 gives a perception (from the average onlooker) that they are a better team than us. I'm not convinced they were this year, it's just the reality.
Click to expand...
1000x this! Think, if we can go 3-1 or 4-0 out of conference and then just pull down 5-3 or 4-4 ACC play we can consistently solid records and the respect from those who only see the record grows.
 

Oldgoldandwhite

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,768
Animal02 said:
Tech has about 16k undergrad.4k a year..assume 75% graduate and 20% of those become big football fans.....over the course of 40 years....that is 24k.
Ohio State, with 66k undergrad...using the same stats has 99k.
Click to expand...
Plus I know about a 100 UGag fans. And probably less than ten percent went there.
 
iceeater1969

iceeater1969

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,668
Oldgoldandwhite said:
Plus I know about a 100 UGag fans. And probably less than ten percent went there.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the content. 90 non uga fans out of 100.
For your friends that are gt fans are the in same ratio? Go verses voluntary?

More concerning to me is the lack of gt fans in any where but atl.

Cant imagine being such a poorly like school. !

I went for a long drive thru south ga and saw uga banners, hats, shirts everywhere and near 0 gt. We I talked with them they seemed to be disliking Alabama and uga is their only ga option . Same thing with Auburn
 
Vespidae

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,327
Location
Auburn, AL
Scheduling matters from two viewpoints.

Good scheduling allows you to recruit from geographies where you want to raise your profile. Kids naturally want to compete against their friends and so ... if the the plan is to recruit heavily in the Southeast, Tech should probably plan to play (if they can), an Auburn, a Tennessee, a Vanderbilt ... anything that would raise its profile in the Southeast.

If you want to recruit nationally, you need to adopt the attitude of "go anywhere, play anyone". Tech playing USC opens the Southern California market. Tech playing Penn State opens the mid-Atlantic.

Going after just wins against any opponent to get the win ... doesn't help long-term.
 
MacDaddy2

MacDaddy2

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
435
Location
The Island of Relevancy
If you don't think scheduling drives perception please take a look at Mississippi State. They beat 4 creampuffs OOC and Arkansas and Ole Miss who won exactly 1 conference game between the two of them. Yet, they were ranked in the mid-teens. Average teams always get exposed but until that occurs ride the wave of public opinion.
 

Oldgoldandwhite

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,768
iceeater1969 said:
I went for a long drive thru south ga and saw uga banners, hats, shirts everywhere and near 0 gt. We I talked with them they seemed to be disliking Alabama and uga is their only ga option . Same thing with Auburn
Click to expand...
You should move here. That would make 9 in the county!
But I love it here.
 

Animal02

Banned
Messages
6,269
Location
Southeastern Michigan
Vespidae said:
Scheduling matters from two viewpoints.

Good scheduling allows you to recruit from geographies where you want to raise your profile. Kids naturally want to compete against their friends and so ... if the the plan is to recruit heavily in the Southeast, Tech should probably plan to play (if they can), an Auburn, a Tennessee, a Vanderbilt ... anything that would raise its profile in the Southeast.

If you want to recruit nationally, you need to adopt the attitude of "go anywhere, play anyone". Tech playing USC opens the Southern California market. Tech playing Penn State opens the mid-Atlantic.

Going after just wins against any opponent to get the win ... doesn't help long-term.
Click to expand...
We already play Pitt, V and UVA every year, plus ND, Louisville, Syracuse and BC on occasion. (Part of the reason I would like to do away with the permanent cross over would be to play the other teams more) That is quite a bit of Mid Atlantic and Midwest.......that we do not take advantage of as it is.
 
Vespidae

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,327
Location
Auburn, AL
Animal02 said:
We already play Pitt, V and UVA every year, plus ND, Louisville, Syracuse and BC on occasion. (Part of the reason I would like to do away with the permanent cross over would be to play the other teams more) That is quite a bit of Mid Atlantic and Midwest.......that we do not take advantage of as it is.
Click to expand...

I'm not debating that we play Pitt. I think our profile in the area would be higher by playing someone like Penn State, but I don't want to detract from my point ... recruiting philosophy should follow competition philosophy.
 
Top