Time to Bury the Asterisk?

Is it time to bury the asterisk when looking at GT football?

  • Yes

    Votes: 164 67.8%

  • No, give CGC another asterisk year

    Votes: 48 19.8%

  • No, give CGC another 2 asterisk years

    Votes: 15 6.2%

  • No, give CGC another 3+ asterisk years

    Votes: 15 6.2%
  • Total voters
    242
Coloradojacket

Coloradojacket

Banned
Messages
2,034
Vespidae said:
Tech won’t drop football now. They ACC money makes it too enticing to stay in.

No, just do average. Seven wins in football. Do ok in the other sports, but nothing great. Just meh. And the Hill and the GTAA are happy.
Click to expand...
Just do 7 wins...be careful the Disney Jackets on this board think we should be doing at least 11 every year. You mean Tech averages 7 wins a year....like they have the last 30....
 
forensicbuzz

forensicbuzz

21st Century Throwback Dad
Messages
8,804
Location
North Shore, Chicago
cthenrys said:
If he wins 6 he’s fine. 4-5 it’s warm. Another 3 win season and he’s a bad loss away from being fired and Stansbury with him. Such is the state of the game / business
Click to expand...
This is laughable. We could go undefeated and the only one gone might be a coordinator. Stansbury isn’t going anywhere until he’s ready to leave. What a joke!
 

first&ten

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
880
Vespidae said:
Tech won’t drop football now. They ACC money makes it too enticing to stay in.

No, just do average. Seven wins in football. Do ok in the other sports, but nothing great. Just meh. And the Hill and the GTAA are happy.
Click to expand...
Sad commentary vespidae, but just about on target .
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
Vespidae said:
Tech won’t drop football now. They ACC money makes it too enticing to stay in.

No, just do average. Seven wins in football. Do ok in the other sports, but nothing great. Just meh. And the Hill and the GTAA are happy.
Click to expand...

Well the hill must be quite angry right now with our ranked volleyball, track, cross country, tennis, and baseball teams.
 
forensicbuzz

forensicbuzz

21st Century Throwback Dad
Messages
8,804
Location
North Shore, Chicago
cthenrys said:
If they have to fire another coach with ~3 years on a contract when the AD gave an unproven HC a 7 year deal ???? Yeah there are consequences if those moves turn out badly.
Click to expand...
You need to wake up from whatever dream world you're living in if you think Stansbury is going anywhere. He's going to retire at Tech, and that's probably about 10 =15 years from now. Collins isn't going anywhere for at least 3 more years even if he has 3 more losing seasons. To think otherwise is to have an unrealistic understanding of Georgia Tech.

It's obvious from your choice of language that you're rooting against our football being successful, so why don't you just change sides. We have enough indifference regarding our athletics from Tech alumni, we don't need fans actively rooting against us.
 

JacketOff

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,951
cthenrys said:
If they have to fire another coach with ~3 years on a contract when the AD gave an unproven HC a 7 year deal ???? Yeah there are consequences if those moves turn out badly.
Click to expand...
Just curious. How many “proven HC’s” are you aware of that were actively vying for the GT job when Collins was hired? Because I’m pretty sure none of the “proven” guys you’re talking about wanted anything to do with the job.
 

cthenrys

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
942
Location
Highland Village, TX
JacketOff said:
Just curious. How many “proven HC’s” are you aware of that were actively vying for the GT job when Collins was hired? Because I’m pretty sure none of the “proven” guys you’re talking about wanted anything to do with the job.
Click to expand...
Oh I think you’re right. They weren’t beating down the door to take the job. That’s why giving CGC a 7 year deal could be impactful for the AD if it doesn’t work out. He didn’t need to do that to convince CGC to take the job.
 

JacketOff

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,951
cthenrys said:
Oh I think you’re right. They weren’t beating down the door to take the job. That’s why giving CGC a 7 year deal could be impactful for the AD if it doesn’t work out. He didn’t need to do that to convince CGC to take the job.
Click to expand...
No matter what you think of CGC as a coach, he’s not a dumb guy. Or he’s at least smart enough to hire a good agent. No head coach was going to take the GT job without longevity attached to it.
 
Lotta Booze

Lotta Booze

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
779
cthenrys said:
7 years though ? That was on TS. Didn’t need to do that.
Click to expand...
Six year contracts seem to be the standard. Satterfield at Louisville, Brown at WVU, and Tucker at Colorado all got 6 year deals in the same cycle of hires. Do you really think 1 more year is that big of a deal?
 
Last edited:

JacketOff

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,951
Lotta Juice said:
Six year contracts seem to be the standard. Satterfield at Louisville, Brown at WVU, and Tucker at Colorado all got 6 year deals in the same cycle of hires. Do you really think 1 more year is that big of a deal?
Click to expand...
And none of those other guys were having to transition the entire fundamental base of their teams’ offenses. Regardless of whether or not you think it’s the “greatest transition in college football history,” it’s still a big deal. Especially for the coaches that were vying for the job. With none of them being “proven”.
 
Augusta_Jacket

Augusta_Jacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
8,093
Location
Augusta, Georgia
Vespidae said:
Not really. Two sports generate money - football and basketball. Most everything else cost money. The less the better ...
Click to expand...

Correct. Hence the reason the Hill doesn't care. Cost isn't a factor since most of the sports are required for Title IX reasons, but if they generated money then there would be expectations that winning programs would generate more.
 
Top