State of the Tech State

ATL1

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,377
He's fielded a team that's out-performed its talent and experience on offense almost every year he's been here. He's a proven, championship-winning, head coach at the FCS level and has proven his offense can thrive at FBS level. He's also demonstrated that he's willing to what it takes to get our D where it needs to be.

From 08-12, no ACC team has had a winning record in every year. Only 3 teams have had a winning conference record in 4 of the five years: FSU, GT, and VPI. Again, we're not where we want to be, but we've not been mediocre. I think Roof can get our D where we need it to be. When that happens, I think that we'll be reliably competitive. Go Jackets.

So has Mike London. I'm not convinced about CPJ offense thriving either.
Please don't throw those empty stats when Clemson, Miami, & VT continuously dominate us.
and yes we are mediocre and his winning percentage is only slightly ahead of Chan's and Chan may have had a tougher schedule.
Again I don't understand this loyalty.
 

ATL1

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,377
An honest answer I can respect. Maybe I can gain some of the patience that you apparently have, because I'm tired of waiting for next year.


Well, you ask a big question, and I am going to try and give you the big answer. I'll start by saying this: I am not of the mindset to "settle" for anything, but by the same token, I don't feel we are in need of a "turn around" either. We are close as a program and we need to improve what we are doing in a few areas. We are not in disarray the way I see it. I can easily visualize the positive changes I desire happening with this coach and in the current system. I am going to try and make a prioritized list of what I feel needed / needs to happen to take us to the next level.

1. Hire a good COLLEGE DC who runs a good system and can communicate a plan. (Done. Roof is a good hire, we are making progress)
2. Improve the roster, especially at the DL and WR positions and to a lesser degree BB. (We are trying to make some changes with recruiting in terms of national scale, manpower additions, and targeting philosophy. The results will not be known for a while now, but I think we are just as likely to make headway in this area under CPJ and CTR as anybody)
3. Bring in, and develop, the right players at QB. ( I think we are on the right track here. VL, JT, TB, and our current recruit all seem to have better upward potential than their predecessors. The development side is coming a little slow for these guys, but their track is more of the norm than you might think. Guys like Winston at FSU only come along so often)
4. Improve on special teams. (We are much better this year but still need to grow)

IMHO those 4 things will have us at the top of the conference most every year under THIS coach. They are all doable. Now you may ask (or in fact DID ask) what has earned my allegiance to CPJ? Well, my allegiance is to TECH and not any one man. I like CPJ as a coach. I like his system. I think he needs to grow. I think he will grow and that GT represents the appropriate level of challenge for him at this stage in his career.

This is what I like about him:
1. He is doing things the right way. He sticks to his word. He emphasizes the importance of behavior, integrity, the meaning of commitment, grades, self sacrifice, following through, and being accountable. I truly believe he has the kids best interests in mind ALL OF THE TIME. The academic performance and lack of off the field trouble of the current players speaks for itself.
2. His offense is hard to stop.
3. I have watched enough film to know he is an excellent play caller and schemer on offense.
4. He is blatantly honest and straight forward.
5. He is willing to make changes and is constantly trying to build. (Third DC, new formations and plays, developing recruiting strategy)

This is what I don't like:
1. He can be *****ly and impatient with members of the press. Being an ambassador for the program requires more than he is currently giving.

This is what I am yet to be sold on either way:
1. Can he, as a persuasive personality, recruit at the level we need?
2. Is his system hurting our recruiting efforts?
 

Boomergump

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
3,260
I just sent out my latest Boomergram at Delta, and everyone is breathing a sigh of relief (y).
Thanks Lex. I'll soon post a film breakdown of the Clemson game and we can get back on point with the people at the Tech Ops center.
 

AE 87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
12,980
So has Mike London. I'm not convinced about CPJ offense thriving either.
Please don't throw those empty stats when Clemson, Miami, & VT continuously dominate us.
and yes we are mediocre and his winning percentage is only slightly ahead of Chan's and Chan may have had a tougher schedule.
Again I don't understand this loyalty.

I appreciate that you don't understand, but it may help if you take a whole post into account. I say this because your response, "so has Mike London" is true only of winning an FCS championship, From 2010-2013, London's offenses have been 71, 51, 90, 94 and his defenses were 88, 45, 47, 59 in FEI.

His teams have never out performed his talent.

I appreciate that you are passionate about your opinions, but you don't get your own facts. I think most people know our defense has been the bigger problem in those losses, and CPJ hasn't been satisfied with it. As I said, I think Roof is the answer.
 

Boomergump

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
3,260
So has Mike London. I'm not convinced about CPJ offense thriving either.
Please don't throw those empty stats when Clemson, Miami, & VT continuously dominate us.
and yes we are mediocre and his winning percentage is only slightly ahead of Chan's and Chan may have had a tougher schedule.
Again I don't understand this loyalty.

I am curious why you choose the word "dominate". True our record against those foes has been less than good recently, but I hardly feel dominated by teams like VT especially. I mean, this year we had equal yards and first downs etc and lost by a single score basically because we crapped in our own bed. Last year we had the lead with 40 seconds to go. The year before that we had a late lead and had stopped them on 3rd and long deep in their own end before the punch heard round the world was thrown. VT has far from dominated us. Still, I would rather be on their end of the won loss record. Last year at Clemson, we had a lead in Q4 and fumbled a 4th and 1 snap on their 10 yard line to bail them out before mishandling the KO on our ensuing possession causing a safety. I'll bet they felt lucky to escape with a win. We won against them the year before that. So, I am struggling with the "dominated" description. Certainly the 2013 loss to the Tiggers falls into that category. I have no argument there. It was a beat down.

If truth be told, your anger should be directed towards our proclivity to throw away games. I get that. But to describe us as being dominated doesn't really resonate with me. Sorry. Language like that can be dramatic and inflammatory, but I don't think it is historically accurate. This is why I feel we are close as a program. We have rarely been dominated and are usually quite competitive. We have just had a knack for not finishing games. It has been maddening for sure.
 

awbuzz

Helluva Manager
Messages
9,081
Location
Marietta, GA
Hey! I followed cheese and Boomergump over here. I have many Tech people at Delta Tech Ops that consider him a life line of sanity and common sense. From reading around the forum it looks like the board of wisdom. Do you guys mind if I stay?:)
Welcome over Lex. You'll enjoy the site.
 

daBuzz

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
965
I see this as a linchpin in your argument and it's simply not true. Most of the difference makers on Ross' 1990 team would not get in today.

2 reasons:

1) The NCAA instituted APR since then. All athletes are required to stay on track to graduate. That hurts us more than most people realize because our academic degree requirements are so difficult compared to the factories. In Ross' day, guys could take remedial courses until their elligibility ran out. All they had to do was maintain a minimum GPA (in remedial course work). Not anymore.

2. The hill was embarrassed big time by Flunkgate and the NCAA probation(s). Our academic image is paramount and that includes athletes. The hill is more exclusive now than anytime in our history wrt admitting borderline students. CPJ's success in this arena gives him huge clout with the hill.

You are making my argument for me. Really and truly THINK about what you just said. "Most of the players who played for Bobby Ross AND STAYED ELIGIBLE WHILE DOING THE WORK AT GT couldn't get in today." Yeah, that makes a LOT of sense. </sarcasm>

And your comment about them taking remedial classes the entire time to stay eligible simply isn't true. I know a good many of those players. You can make assumptions and claims, but please present us with the actual cases of where this happened.

Again, why in the hell does the APR matter to the Hill? It doesn't affect their jobs one way or the other, but it does affect the head coach's job.

And, let's get the facts straight about Flunkgate & the NCAA probations because they were 2 separate incidences:

Flunkgate - was a failure, pure & simple, on the part of Chan Gailey and his staff for not putting more measures in place to make sure players were going to class and attending study halls. But, even though we had those players fail out...that somehow reflects NEGATIVELY on the academic side of GT? Are you serious? The very same institution which told us in my freshman orientation class: "Look to your left. Now look to your right. One of those people will not be here this time next year." So this is somehow a negative when some football players fail out? Mr. Pot, meet Mr. Kettle.

NCAA Probations -- caused by a crotchedy old fart (Frank Roper) in the GTAA who was in charge of our compliance and who, by his own admission, didn't regularly attend the NCAA MANDATED compliance meetings for 5 - 10 years because he was getting ready to retire and just didn't give a crap. And the NCAA probations happened because the rules had changed and there was now a bylaw stating that if your school had academic standards higher than those of the NCAA, you had to be current by your school's standards to still be eligible. Prior to that, as long as you were eligible by NCAA standards, you were ok. Well, we had some students who were eligible by NCAA standards but not those of GT...they played in games...and Tech was later held responsible for them.

For corroboration, see this link:
http://blogs.ajc.com/georgia-tech-s...nt-replay-techs-take-on-their-2005-probation/

So now both of these are the foundation on which you lay your "we need to make things more difficult to maintain our academic integrity" argument? That's a crock.

And one final thought: I had an interesting conversation over dinner with Darryl Smith (yeah, that DS...the linebacker in the pros) one night. He told me that he was admitted to GT and that he wasn't prepared for the work there. He didn't think that the education he received in Albany, GA adequately prepared him for the work. But he said WTTE of , "I decided that I was going to do as well in the classroom as I did on the field. And the academic support staff we had there at the time was great. They basically taught me remedial work and then my coursework for me to be able to catch up. I take great pride in the work I did in the classroom at Tech. It's a damn shame that neither me nor a lot of my teammates who ended up doing well in classes wouldn't even be able to get into Tech by today's standards. They'll kill the football program because they think they know who can cut it at Tech and who cannot. But you can't tell that because you don't know who's really willing to do the work and who's not."
 

awbuzz

Helluva Manager
Messages
9,081
Location
Marietta, GA
... But you can't tell that because you don't know who's really willing to do the work and who's not."

I know that is true. Some high school kids jsut skate by, but once they get to college sometimes (not always) mature up enough to actually do the work.
 

daBuzz

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
965
I know that is true. Some high school kids jsut skate by, but once they get to college sometimes (not always) mature up enough to actually do the work.

I agree. But I also agree that it is much more difficult (and more rare) for a kid who has skated by in high school to catch up.

The problem is that we are currently stopping all of those players from getting into Tech. We like to take the academic snobbery approach of saying "Well I don't want my degree tarnished." While the truth is that most of these guys on the football team who are the "players in question" aren't people who would have passed the cut to get into GT if there weren't exceptions made for them being football players. So what we're really arguing about is the degree of exceptions we're willing to make.

I don't want, in any way, shape, form, or fashion, for Georgia Tech to just open the floodgates and start accepting anybody and everybody who can tote the rock. But I do think it's incredibly stupid for us to just take the blanket policy that we're taking right now and just indiscriminately stop all of those guys from getting a chance to do what Darryl Smith did and learn what it's like to be able to succeed at GT.
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,675
You are making my argument for me. Really and truly THINK about what you just said. "Most of the players who played for Bobby Ross AND STAYED ELIGIBLE WHILE DOING THE WORK AT GT couldn't get in today." Yeah, that makes a LOT of sense. </sarcasm>

And your comment about them taking remedial classes the entire time to stay eligible simply isn't true. I know a good many of those players. You can make assumptions and claims, but please present us with the actual cases of where this happened.

Again, why in the hell does the APR matter to the Hill? It doesn't affect their jobs one way or the other, but it does affect the head coach's job.

And, let's get the facts straight about Flunkgate & the NCAA probations because they were 2 separate incidences:

Flunkgate - was a failure, pure & simple, on the part of Chan Gailey and his staff for not putting more measures in place to make sure players were going to class and attending study halls. But, even though we had those players fail out...that somehow reflects NEGATIVELY on the academic side of GT? Are you serious? The very same institution which told us in my freshman orientation class: "Look to your left. Now look to your right. One of those people will not be here this time next year." So this is somehow a negative when some football players fail out? Mr. Pot, meet Mr. Kettle.

NCAA Probations -- caused by a crotchedy old fart (Frank Roper) in the GTAA who was in charge of our compliance and who, by his own admission, didn't regularly attend the NCAA MANDATED compliance meetings for 5 - 10 years because he was getting ready to retire and just didn't give a crap. And the NCAA probations happened because the rules had changed and there was now a bylaw stating that if your school had academic standards higher than those of the NCAA, you had to be current by your school's standards to still be eligible. Prior to that, as long as you were eligible by NCAA standards, you were ok. Well, we had some students who were eligible by NCAA standards but not those of GT...they played in games...and Tech was later held responsible for them.

For corroboration, see this link:
http://blogs.ajc.com/georgia-tech-s...nt-replay-techs-take-on-their-2005-probation/

So now both of these are the foundation on which you lay your "we need to make things more difficult to maintain our academic integrity" argument? That's a crock.

And one final thought: I had an interesting conversation over dinner with Darryl Smith (yeah, that DS...the linebacker in the pros) one night. He told me that he was admitted to GT and that he wasn't prepared for the work there. He didn't think that the education he received in Albany, GA adequately prepared him for the work. But he said WTTE of , "I decided that I was going to do as well in the classroom as I did on the field. And the academic support staff we had there at the time was great. They basically taught me remedial work and then my coursework for me to be able to catch up. I take great pride in the work I did in the classroom at Tech. It's a damn shame that neither me nor a lot of my teammates who ended up doing well in classes wouldn't even be able to get into Tech by today's standards. They'll kill the football program because they think they know who can cut it at Tech and who cannot. But you can't tell that because you don't know who's really willing to do the work and who's not."
There was no pressure to graduate players in those days, not even at GT. Period. Now, there is. APR has forced the issue in all of college football. Flunkgate and NCAA probation has forced the issue even harder at GT. (and yes, I know they are two separate things and it doesn't matter one bit what or who caused them, they royally embarrassed the school.) I've heard a former player say certain teammates had no business at GT, never came close to graduating and would never have gotten in today. You can believe what you want, I choose to form my opinion based on what I know.
 

Boomergump

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
3,260
If I hadn't gotten a scholarship to play sports at GT, it probably would have been 50/50 chance that I would have been admitted based on my own academic merits out of HS. In that sense I feel very fortunate. The academic support staff at the AA was phenomenal and helped a lot of kids get through, including myself at times. I can't tell you how thankful I am for that. I have my ME degree and I played sports. It was a great experience. Having said that, one of the worst things that can happen to a kid and a program is to lose players as academic casualties. It causes a huge disruption to both. I am not saying that athletes should be admitted by the same exact standards as the general student population, but we need to look through a realistic lens and determine if it is reasonable that the recruit can handle the work. I am not sure exactly how to do that. IMHO, we should NEVER bring in a kid that we are not CONFIDENT about succeeding academically just because he can play. There needs to be some judgment made about his character and ability to do school work. If it is tougher today, so be it. I will never stand and argue in favor of lowering standards. There is progress in the world and we all need to keep up. Compromises of the sort have been weakening this nation for a while now in many ways across the entire spectrum of our population and culture. If we are having a hard time recruiting, we need to do better at it. If it means we need to spend more, then spend more. If it means we need to triple the staff to cover the nation and the entire football playing community around the globe in order to find good players who can crack the books, then do it. I am perfectly happy to have the Special Education Conference keep ownership of the academic sham they have created. That is theirs. It is part of their identity. They can keep it. If they want to continue pumping ignoramuses in to the world for the sake of college sports, let them. At the GTAA we have always been about integrity and developing the total person. The way I see it, we have a moral responsibility to keep it that way. One of the things I absolutely love about CPJ is he gets that.
 

Tempest_12

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
162
If I hadn't gotten a scholarship to play sports at GT, it probably would have been 50/50 chance that I would have been admitted based on my own academic merits out of HS. In that sense I feel very fortunate. The academic support staff at the AA was phenomenal and helped a lot of kids get through, including myself at times. I can't tell you how thankful I am for that. I have my ME degree and I played sports. It was a great experience. Having said that, one of the worst things that can happen to a kid and a program is to lose players as academic casualties. It causes a huge disruption to both. I am not saying that athletes should be admitted by the same exact standards as the general student population, but we need to look through a realistic lens and determine if it is reasonable that the recruit can handle the work. I am not sure exactly how to do that. IMHO, we should NEVER bring in a kid that we are not CONFIDENT about succeeding academically just because he can play. There needs to be some judgment made about his character and ability to do school work. If it is tougher today, so be it. I will never stand and argue in favor of lowering standards. There is progress in the world and we all need to keep up. Compromises of the sort have been weakening this nation for a while now in many ways across the entire spectrum of our population and culture. If we are having a hard time recruiting, we need to do better at it. If it means we need to spend more, then spend more. If it means we need to triple the staff to cover the nation and the entire football playing community around the globe in order to find good players who can crack the books, then do it. I am perfectly happy to have the Special Education Conference keep ownership of the academic sham they have created. That is theirs. It is part of their identity. They can keep it. If they want to continue pumping ignoramuses in to the world for the sake of college sports, let them. At the GTAA we have always been about integrity and developing the total person. The way I see it, we have a moral responsibility to keep it that way. One of the things I absolutely love about CPJ is he gets that.

Dude you're on fire today.
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,675
If I hadn't gotten a scholarship to play sports at GT, it probably would have been 50/50 chance that I would have been admitted based on my own academic merits out of HS. In that sense I feel very fortunate. The academic support staff at the AA was phenomenal and helped a lot of kids get through, including myself at times. I can't tell you how thankful I am for that. I have my ME degree and I played sports. It was a great experience. Having said that, one of the worst things that can happen to a kid and a program is to lose players as academic casualties. It causes a huge disruption to both. I am not saying that athletes should be admitted by the same exact standards as the general student population, but we need to look through a realistic lens and determine if it is reasonable that the recruit can handle the work. I am not sure exactly how to do that. IMHO, we should NEVER bring in a kid that we are not CONFIDENT about succeeding academically just because he can play. There needs to be some judgment made about his character and ability to do school work. If it is tougher today, so be it. I will never stand and argue in favor of lowering standards. There is progress in the world and we all need to keep up. Compromises of the sort have been weakening this nation for a while now in many ways across the entire spectrum of our population and culture. If we are having a hard time recruiting, we need to do better at it. If it means we need to spend more, then spend more. If it means we need to triple the staff to cover the nation and the entire football playing community around the globe in order to find good players who can crack the books, then do it. I am perfectly happy to have the Special Education Conference keep ownership of the academic sham they have created. That is theirs. It is part of their identity. They can keep it. If they want to continue pumping ignoramuses in to the world for the sake of college sports, let them. At the GTAA we have always been about integrity and developing the total person. The way I see it, we have a moral responsibility to keep it that way. One of the things I absolutely love about CPJ is he gets that.
We have our own version of Special Ed Conference teams, too. One of them is in contention for the Natty.

We love the game. We love the players, too, even when they scare us.

Like the blue-chip defensive secondary leader who wrote his personal essay for an openly gay professor on the time in high school he gleefully commanded a posse to bash a girly *** near to death, caved the queer's face, and ruined his smile.

Or the hulking offensive star who brought a friend to help him corner a short, pretty instructor alone in her closet office and scare her within an inch of her life for telling the athletic department he was clowning in class.

Or the top offensive player who sought tutoring from me on a plagiarized paper while tweaking on uppers. Or the standout lineman who never showed for my lectures or turned much in except for a term paper written in someone else's voice, then magically disappeared from the class roll when I resisted the team handlers who pressed me not to fail him.

These guys are all starters at Florida State University.

http://deadspin.com/jameis-winston-isnt-the-only-problem-here-an-fsu-teac-1467707410
 
Top