Stansbury Seat Temperature

[BCJacket]

This has been mentioned on some other threads. Also, I read an article on another site that basically took it for granted that CGC and TStan are likely gone after this year.

Unless I misunderstand, the hire/fire decision of an AD is up to the university Institute president. Personally, my impression was that Stansbury was in good standing with the administration. My read on the priorities of 'the hill' when it comes to Tech athletics is basically: don't embarrass the Institute with scandals, graduate your athletes, and be financially responsible. As far as I can tell, Stansbury has done a decent job on all those fronts. Better than his recent predecessors. I don't have the impression that football wins and losses is a firing consideration for Tech's AD, as it would be at UGA, Bama, and the like. Actually, I'm not aware of Tech ever firing an AD.

I'm not arguing whether he should or shouldn't be fired. Just wondering if anyone has a different impression of the situation or a real reason to think he might be fired?

 

[New Old Guy]

This has been mentioned on some other threads. Also, I read an article on another site that basically took it for granted that CGC and TStan are likely gone after this year.

Unless I misunderstand, the hire/fire decision of an AD is up to the university Institute president. Personally, my impression was that Stansbury was in good standing with the administration. My read on the priorities of 'the hill' when it comes to Tech athletics is basically: don't embarrass the Institute with scandals, graduate your athletes, and be financially responsible. As far as I can tell, Stansbury has done a decent job on all those fronts. Better than his recent predecessors. I don't have the impression that football wins and losses is a firing consideration for Tech's AD, as it would be at UGA, Bama, and the like. Actually, I'm not aware of Tech ever firing an AD.

I'm not arguing whether he should or shouldn't be fired. Just wondering if anyone has a different impression of the situation or a real reason to think he might be fired?

I think your reading of the situation is correct.

 

[Vespidae]

This has been mentioned on some other threads. Also, I read an article on another site that basically took it for granted that CGC and TStan are likely gone after this year.

Unless I misunderstand, the hire/fire decision of an AD is up to the university Institute president. Personally, my impression was that Stansbury was in good standing with the administration. My read on the priorities of 'the hill' when it comes to Tech athletics is basically: don't embarrass the Institute with scandals, graduate your athletes, and be financially responsible. As far as I can tell, Stansbury has done a decent job on all those fronts. Better than his recent predecessors. I don't have the impression that football wins and losses is a firing consideration for Tech's AD, as it would be at UGA, Bama, and the like. Actually, I'm not aware of Tech ever firing an AD.

I'm not arguing whether he should or shouldn't be fired. Just wondering if anyone has a different impression of the situation or a real reason to think he might be fired?

There are few, random thoughts.

1. No one wants the job. AD at Tech is challenging. Personally, I'd rather have a proctologist (preferably, female) probe my nether regions, than be AD. I give TStan kudos for wanting the job and EXCEPT for football, he has done a pretty good job.
2. The Hill doesn't care about athletics. The only task of the Institute is to hire the AD. The performance is really not a factor in anyone's annual review.
3. Tech is not a player (anymore) at big time college sports. OK, golf. We are a factor in golf. But otherwise, not so much.

Tech, in my 40+ association with the Institute, has never had a professional orientation to running its' athletic programs. It is what it is and it probably will never change. We will enjoy glimpses of happiness, but sustained success? No longer.

Me? I'm 62. I will always enjoy driving all day to Birmingham to beat Alabama 21-20 at Legion Field. To tie Notre Dame 3-3 in probably the greatest football game I've ever seen. Still. To play at Tennessee at Neyland. To drive down 85 and play Auburn. (I still remember beating Auburn and Tech students twirling Aubie's tail in front of the dorms. Dean of Students, Jim Dull, returned it, properly attired, with a yellow jacket sewn into the tail.)

TStan will probably survive CGC if he can line up the successor. And I do think he is doing that. We just don't hear about it.

 

[WreckinGT]

This has been mentioned on some other threads. Also, I read an article on another site that basically took it for granted that CGC and TStan are likely gone after this year.

Unless I misunderstand, the hire/fire decision of an AD is up to the university Institute president. Personally, my impression was that Stansbury was in good standing with the administration. My read on the priorities of 'the hill' when it comes to Tech athletics is basically: don't embarrass the Institute with scandals, graduate your athletes, and be financially responsible. As far as I can tell, Stansbury has done a decent job on all those fronts. Better than his recent predecessors. I don't have the impression that football wins and losses is a firing consideration for Tech's AD, as it would be at UGA, Bama, and the like. Actually, I'm not aware of Tech ever firing an AD.

I'm not arguing whether he should or shouldn't be fired. Just wondering if anyone has a different impression of the situation or a real reason to think he might be fired?

I think its more complex than it just being up to the President. Sure it is up to him, but there are alot of factors in play. A pretty important one is donor support. When a prominent donor makes a public statement like this:

“I think the fact that Todd has linked his career at Georgia Tech to Geoff’s success – and I think that’s really important to know that he did that – is a positive because certainly it indicates that the administration is all in with this working and willing to accept the consequences if it doesn’t,” Garrett said.

It certainly makes you wonder about Todd's future if this doesn't turn around pretty quick.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

There are few, random thoughts.

1. No one wants the job. AD at Tech is challenging. Personally, I'd rather have a proctologist (preferably, female) probe my nether regions, than be AD. I give TStan kudos for wanting the job and EXCEPT for football, he has done a pretty good job.
2. The Hill doesn't care about athletics. The only task of the Institute is to hire the AD. The performance is really not a factor in anyone's annual review.
3. Tech is not a player (anymore) at big time college sports. OK, golf. We are a factor in golf. But otherwise, not so much.

Tech, in my 40+ association with the Institute, has never had a professional orientation to running its' athletic programs. It is what it is and it probably will never change. We will enjoy glimpses of happiness, but sustained success? No longer.

Me? I'm 62. I will always enjoy driving all day to Birmingham to beat Alabama 21-20 at Legion Field. To tie Notre Dame 3-3 in probably the greatest football game I've ever seen. Still. To play at Tennessee at Neyland. To drive down 85 and play Auburn. (I still remember beating Auburn and Tech students twirling Aubie's tail in front of the dorms. Dean of Students, Jim Dull, returned it, properly attired, with a yellow jacket sewn into the tail.)

TStan will probably survive CGC if he can line up the successor. And I do think he is doing that. We just don't hear about it.

We are a player in baseball.

Otherwise, depressingly true imho.

 

[forensicbuzz]

Stansbury won't be here to hire anyone. If Collins is to be fired Stansbury will be gone the same day if not before.

This is an ill-informed opinion.

 

[gtie73]

We are a player in baseball.

Otherwise, depressingly true imho.

We are a player in baseball.

Otherwise, depressinglya@ true imho

We are also in volleyball and womens BB

 

[cthenrys]

We are also in volleyball and womens BB

Thank you very much, that's much better....

In all seriousness, either Todd is already engaged in a preliminary contingency search, or he's not. If he's not, then he's out if a change needs to be made. We won't know until we know.

As for the comment about the Institute not caring about athletics, I would actually say that a decision to replace both the AD and HC would be a sign that they do care, because we are seeing clearly how athletic branding can impact or even drive success of the institution (I'm not saying I like it btw, but that's the landscape today). With a poor start / poor result this year (and the projections of between 2 and 4 wins are piling up) there would be a recognition that the brand has been damaged - doing nothing would indicate apathy. Taking action would be a good thing.

 

[cthenrys]

This is an ill-informed opinion.

Why ? Do you have different / more information that makes your opinion better informed ?

 

[Ramble1885]

We are a player in baseball.

Otherwise, depressingly true imho.

Dude we’re much more than just golf. WBB, Volleyball, Softball, Tennis, and up until three years ago…. *sigh* Football.

 

[Ramble1885]

We are also in volleyball and womens BB

And we were decent in MBB

 

[jacketup]

Stansbury isn't going anywhere anytime soon. If he does, it will be because he resigns due to Collins being terminated after this season, just like Radkovich did after being disgusted with the admistration's inteference when Johnson was hired. Still, the odds of Stansbury or Collins leaving in the next 12 months are low. After 2023, who knows? That's an eternity in college sports.

 

[Techster]

TStan's "hot seat" is tepid at best...and that's because he's been sitting under the sun for a few hours in the hot GA weather.

Not sure why some posters want to pin CGC's failures on TStan given the circumstances around CGC's hire. Seems like there's a lot of posters projecting their anger on TStan, and they're welcome to feel that way, but it's not reality. If anything, CGC's failures will give TStan more independence for the next coaching search if CGC is fired at the end of this season.

 

[RamblinRed]

TStan's "hot seat" is tepid at best...and that's because he's been sitting under the sun for a few hours in the hot GA weather.

Not sure why some posters want to pin CGC's failures on TStan given the circumstances around CGC's hire. Seems like there's a lot of posters projecting their anger on TStan, and they're welcome to feel that way, but it's not reality. If anything, CGC's failures will give TStan more independence for the next coaching search if CGC is fired at the end of this season.

Bingo. The donors drove alot of the last coaching search, TStan hired Collins because that is who the boosters who were willing to open their pocket wanted.

I don't think TStan is in any serious jeopardy. He has improved the financial situation, made good coaching hires outside of FB (which was not 100% under his control) and is running a pretty clean department.

If the big donors really wanted to get rid of Collins they could have paid to make him go away since they paid to hire and support him. The fact he is still here should tell you that a majority of the important donors are not yet at a point to make a FB change and likely even at less of a place to make an AD change.

 

[WreckinGT]

Bingo. The donors drove alot of the last coaching search, TStan hired Collins because that is who the boosters who were willing to open their pocket wanted.

I don't think TStan is in any serious jeopardy. He has improved the financial situation, made good coaching hires outside of FB (which was not 100% under his control) and is running a pretty clean department.

If the big donors really wanted to get rid of Collins they could have paid to make him go away since they paid to hire and support him. The fact he is still here should tell you that a majority of the important donors are not yet at a point to make a FB change and likely even at less of a place to make an AD change.

At some point doesn’t he have to improve the two biggest sports? He has been at Tech for 6 years and has yet to watch a football game or mens basketball game where Tech was ranked in the top 25.

 

[iceeater1969]

At some point doesn’t he have to improve the two biggest sports? He has been at Tech for 6 years and has yet to watch a football game or mens basketball game where Tech was ranked in the top 25.

Hope we r on TV in 6 years. The super conference folks talking to the tv folks expect serious fan support. No TV demand for small schools


Wonder if the number of Hiesman Level DONORS is increasing. I ll ask at the ole miss pre- game ( beg for more $) meeting .

 

[JacketFan137]

Dude we’re much more than just golf. WBB, Volleyball, Softball, Tennis, and up until three years ago…. *sigh* Football.

honestly football hasn’t really ever been much better than any of our sports over the last 20 years. paul johnson and chan averaged seven wins a season. we finished ranked a handful of times but the only back to back ranked finishes the last 20 years i believe was 2008 & 2009. that’s not too different than our other sports. occasional tastes of national relevance but never national championship caliber, maybe knocking off some big teams in the acc tournament, but at tech it’s just hard to win period regardless of sport

 

[forensicbuzz]

Why ? Do you have different / more information that makes your opinion better informed ?

Yes.

 

[boger2337]

This is an ill-informed opinion.

It's been reported by several "insiders" that Stansbury is completely tied to Collins. If Collins is to be let go Stansbury will be too. They are tied to the hip moving forward.

 

[boger2337]

If I can't trust the man to pick out sunglasses... I cannot trust a man to pick a football coach. I'm over him. Been over him. Tech guys might like him, but we need someone who is willing to push the limits a little.