What is Winning?

[Coloradojacket]

I hear you and @WreckinGT are stating but he appears to have moved our recruiting up 10-15 spots & seems to have the capability to ratchet it up another 5 putting us in the 20-25 range. Outside of 1 disaster coach here & I’m not sure what talent he had, GT coaches have excelled with comparable talent to what middling teams like Miss St, Tenn, etc get. CGC will have proved himself to be a very poor coach indeed if he underwhelms. I’m ready to put ‘19 & ‘20 behind me. I’m hoping he’s getting help with his coaching/ decisionmaking, he must have realized da U model does not work at GT & it’s not hard to believe the green Asst coaches have gotten better. If not, I’m betting CGC is smart enough to shed the dead wood & move along. We’ll have a talented roster, perhaps a fanbase behind the team & the conditions will be ripe for recruiting a capable Asst coach to come here.

Would you rather hope he fails, limps along miserably until we fire him? No me.

Amen... Toe meets Leather.

 

[Vespidae]

Many of the posts here are unrealistic. Winning 0.686 is the same as 8+ games a year would place Tech at the tenth best program lifetime in the NCAA. Do I want to win? Yes. It is realistic to win at that rate today? No.

Tech was a 7-5 team hoping, by ditching the TO, to move to a 8-4 team. If we catch lightning every few years, maybe a great year. We are never going to be competing in the Top 10 every year ... we simply don't have the resources, the fanbase, the money, the academics or the infrastructure. I hate it. But it is what it is.

In 2021, we are much closer to Vanderbilt than to Alabama. I would be happy as hell to win 8 games a year with a shot at Coastal.

 

[forensicbuzz]

I expect us as fans to not pick the teams that are going to beat us in pre-season threads about expectations. I expect our team to show up and smash the other team in the mouth every Saturday (Friday, Thursday, Monday, Wednesday, and the occasional Tuesday). I expect to win coming into every single game we play. I expect to win until the whistle blows the final play dead and the other team has more points than us. I never concede a game to ANYONE before we've played them.

That being said, winning means you have more wins than losses. Anything else is opinion and negotiation.

 

[LibertyTurns]

We ask (and expect) our students day in and day out to change the world. Why can't we translate that same mentality to the football field or basketball court? If we don't expect to compete and win then why even show up to play or us as fans to cheer?

You can't ask "what is winning" to a fan base with a majority losing mentality and get a respectable answer.

I expect to win 10+ plus games a year. I expect to beat our rivals more often than not. Am I disappointed when we don't? Of course, but that shouldn't make me doubt my team the next year. If yall think 8 wins is good enough, go cheer for south carolina. Yall really do tick me off sometimes and make it hard to be a Tech Fan (short for fanatic) in a land full of leg humpers. If we don't expect our team to win every game, then why are you on a fan site? Yea uga fans are annoying with "this is our year" crap every year, but if you haven't noticed, since their fan base expects them to win, the team does an awful lot of it. If we expect more, we will get more. Back our team 100% or stop posting on a fan site.

And I really couldn't care less how much money you've given, or how many consecutive home games you've been at or how many jerseys you have (love ya @Coloradojacket) if you're not behind our team 100%, none of it matters. And unless you are going to donate the money to buy out CGC and ADTS contracts, then get behind them too. I can't wait to see BDS@HGF lit up on Sept 4th with 55,000 fans cheering their heads off for the White & Gold!

You sir are the one deserving of a beer! My dance card is generally pretty full on football weekends, but I ever get the chance I’ll make my way by Sec 121 and no doubt look for “the really little guy standing on his seat!!!!”

Time for the negativity, backhanded slights, hollow praises to take a breather. Maybe everybody can just support the team, you know, like fans normally do for at least a couple games before the bitching commences?

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

Over on the recruiting general discussion, there is a sub-topic on winning. Thought it might be good to start it's own thread.

So, what is "winning" to you in terms of GT football and its coaching staff? Is it consistency, recruiting rankings, graduation rates, beating UGA, Coastal/ACC champs, national champs, top-20 finishes?

I think if we can put a quality team out each year and average 8-9 wins (that's a number of 7-8 win seasons and throw in a 10-11 win season every couple of years), take as many as we give against UGA, make it every other year to the ACC championship, and a New Year's Bowl every 2-3 years, I'd be very happy.

We had this under O'Leary (while the Fridge was our OC) and sometimes under Johnson especially in the first half of his tenure. Ross made the big splash but wasn't here long enough.
What say you?

Please no Charlie Sheen themed posts.

Well, scoring more points than the other team for starters, but I believe what you are driving at, is how do different fan bases define "winning" and "success" given their different expectations? Winning at Tech is very different from "winning" at the elite factories where double digit win seasons are a given and the college playoffs can be considered a must. Winning at, say Vanderbilt, would simply be beating Middle Tennessee and Murray State while being reasonably competitive with UGA, Alabama, and Tennessee for two quarters or so. Right now, I consider "winning" at Tech, for me personally, a winning record no more historic beatdowns by rivals, and a bowl of some kind. That is just me. Others have their sights higher and some may be praying to beat Pitt, Virginia, or Duke. IIWII

 

[RichardFrazier]

The thing that has us wondering is Collins and this staff. They don't have much of a history and what there is of a history, at least for Collins is not exactly stellar. He ran a defense at UF, where you can get great players. He ran a defense at MSU, that we shredded. He was a head coach at Temple, taking over a good team. Two years at Tech and the coaching has not been good. Is he recruiting, yep, but you don't just win with recruits. That is why this year is so important. If he can get to six wins then he is showing something. But that being said the following year would need to be 8. Let's just see what this year brings. Can he get the team disciplined.

I agree with six wins. However I find it very interesting that GT Legend Pat Swilling is in teh AJC calling/predicting 7 wins and a bowl game.


“I’m excited about this year,” Pat Swilling told the AJC. “I think we’re going to turn the corner. I really do.” His goal is seven wins and a bowl game. Swilling called the defense, which includes Tre, a three-year starter, “loaded.” That includes 11 players who started four or more games and transfers such as linebacker Ayinde Eley, defensive end Keion White and cornerback Kenyatta Watson. “I know, knowing coach (Geoff) Collins, this is probably the most physical and athletic group he’s had,” Swilling said. “If you look at what he’s recruiting, it’s only getting better. But this is a good group of kids he’s got. They look like a football team.”


Link

Pat Swilling holds high hopes for Georgia Tech, sons

Georgia Tech legend Pat Swilling’s time as a Yellow Jackets football dad will likely come to a close this year. But he’s hopeful for what looks like the final seasons for his sons, cornerback Tre Swilling and running back Bruce Jordan-Swilling.

www.ajc.com

 

[GTNavyNuke]

How about winning is like pornography, we'll know it when we see it?

To me, it is being relevant and in / near the Top 25.

 

[GT33]

I agree with a great deal of this, im just trying to be somewhat realistic. There are 4 teams (UGA, UNC, Miami, Clemson) on our yearly schedule that recruit better than us even after the improved recruiting. There are two others (ND, FSU) that we play semi regularly that also recruit better than us. Easy schedules are a thing of the past. Next year we drop ND but add UCF, FSU and Ole Miss. If we win 9 against that gauntlet, we don't have a winning team, we have a great team.

My comment was mostly overall though. We are ranked somewhere in the 40's in revenue, and our head coaches salary is in the 40's as well. Our assistant coaches are paid peanuts compared to most major programs. With NIL, conference realignment, etc. This is quickly turning into a serious arms race and I question if we will have the ammo to be an 8+ win team with any consistency going forward.

It's tough for Engineers to not be rational, but it's also what limits most Engineers in life. Buy into the vision- CGC upgrades recruiting, with that comes more wins, with that comes better recruiting, with that comes more wins. Along the way we become a desirable option, one where we no longer have to "beg" players and coaches to come here. There's a line outside the door, real interest. Fans start to show up in numbers higher than we previous had. Our revenue increases & we can afford better things. It's ok, we don't have to be the prudent Engineers sitting on our fortunes, we can be bold and stick our necks out, take that risk to achieve greatness. We get sidewalk fans, maybe we just stop chasing them away instead because they're not "GT men" and don't fit the old mold. Gasp, some of them may even wear wife beaters and shop at Walmart. We get our city back, take it away from those that don't belong. Dare to dream. We don't need to be stuck in mediocrity for the rest of eternity. We can be academically & athletically excellent.

Go Jackets!

 

[Squints]

Winning is what I want it to be to make the coach I like look good. It has a different potentially unrelated meaning to make the coach I don't like look bad.

 

[wesgt123]

Many of the posts here are unrealistic. Winning 0.686 is the same as 8+ games a year would place Tech at the tenth best program lifetime in the NCAA. Do I want to win? Yes. It is realistic to win at that rate today? No.

Tech was a 7-5 team hoping, by ditching the TO, to move to a 8-4 team. If we catch lightning every few years, maybe a great year. We are never going to be competing in the Top 10 every year ... we simply don't have the resources, the fanbase, the money, the academics or the infrastructure. I hate it. But it is what it is.

In 2021, we are much closer to Vanderbilt than to Alabama. I would be happy as hell to win 8 games a year with a shot at Coastal.

Why is it so unrealistic to be a winning program in your opinion?

 

[85Escape]

"Winning. Winning is wot bwings us together today. Winning, that bwessed occuwance, that dweam wifin a dweam. And buzz, tru buzz, will fowow you foweva."

0% < 6 Wins
10% = 6 Wins
20% = 7 Wins
30% = 8 Wins
20% = 9 Wins
20% > 9 Wins

 

[ChristoGT]

"Winning. Winning is wot bwings us together today. Winning, that bwessed occuwance, that dweam wifin a dweam. And buzz, tru buzz, will fowow you foweva."

0% < 6 Wins
10% = 6 Wins
20% = 7 Wins
30% = 8 Wins
20% = 9 Wins
20% > 9 Wins

Spoken like a truly Impressive Clergyman.

 

[Root4GT]

Why is it we have so many fans that refuse to have an sort of optimistic outlook on our football program? Do you all think so little of the staff & all the highly rated recruits we have been getting? We hated Chan, then we hated Johnson, now Collins?

C'mon, we've got the transfer portal plus a bevy of highly rated players on the team. Gibbs is probably a 1st round draft choice. Sims will be draftable by the time he gets done on The Flats. I have not looked at GT's ratings but I have to think we've got one of the highest rated rosters since 2007 & we saw what those guys did. We're going to win 5 games this year against a fairly brutal schedule with a number of players with youth, not experience. This year people are going to be put on notice. Next year we're going to kick some ***. The GT pipeline is filling up with 4 star athletes (many said it couldn't be done). Our roster rating next year is going to be higher than any class ever because the ratings don't go back that far, but it's probably going to be nearing 1990 in overall talent. 2 years from now, maybe 3 we're going to have sustainable strength on our roster more than 2 deep. What's GT going to look like when the talent gap is not as wide as the Grand Canyon? Well it sure as hell is not going to be 6 win seasons. We're going to chew up and spit out everyone except for the imbeciles up the road & their step brothers in orange across the state line, oh yeah and the occasional Notre Dame. That's 9-3 territory every year, not 6-6. It's going to be mostly 9 or 10 win seasons with an occasional 11, once in a blue moon 12.

Drink the gold koolaid (clear whiskey)! Dress your daughter in white & gold. Teach your son the good word at a young age. Sound the whistle! Get them Rats on the Field!

50 years of GT Football history says we have won 9 or more games 9 times. History in college football rarely gets better for schools with small football budgets and fan bases.

 

[85Escape]

50 years of GT Football history says we have won 9 or more games 9 times. History in college football rarely gets better for schools with small football budgets and fan bases.

So my 40% of seasons with 9 or more wins is pretty ambitious at about twice the historical rate. (9/50 ~ 20%).

It just doesn't feel like 10 win seasons once every 5 years is so out of reach as to be unrealistic.

Do the numbers you quote account for the fact that many of those 50 years of history we played only 10 or 11 games instead of 12 or 13? These days if we make a bowl game then we play 13 games...14 if we make the ACCCG. With two 'gimmie' games in the schedule these days, that means we need to win 7 of 10 competitive games to get to a 9 win season. Since we need to beat the pups every year, that means we only need to win six more

A 9-4 or better record for two out of every five years doesn't seem so out-there as to be unrealistic. That is what I'd like to see, we are in the top 15 two out of five years, the top 10 one out of five and always make a bowl game. And almost always in the top 25.

Even if we are talking only regular season games, 9-3 is saying we could lose 30% of the non-gimmie games and still hit the mark.

Winning less than six games a year should never happen. That does NOT feel like winning.

 

[awbuzz]

@85Escape
THANK YOU for pointing out what should be obvious, but many forget... " played only 10 or 11 games instead of 12 or 13.. ". Getting nine wins in a 12-game season is a whole lot easier now than it was back in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.

 

[WreckinGT]

So my 40% of seasons with 9 or more wins is pretty ambitious at about twice the historical rate. (9/50 ~ 20%).

It just doesn't feel like 10 win seasons once every 5 years is so out of reach as to be unrealistic.

Do the numbers you quote account for the fact that many of those 50 years of history we played only 10 or 11 games instead of 12 or 13? These days if we make a bowl game then we play 13 games...14 if we make the ACCCG. With two 'gimmie' games in the schedule these days, that means we need to win 7 of 10 competitive games to get to a 9 win season. Since we need to beat the pups every year, that means we only need to win six more

A 9-4 or better record for two out of every five years doesn't seem so out-there as to be unrealistic. That is what I'd like to see, we are in the top 15 two out of five years, the top 10 one out of five and always make a bowl game. And almost always in the top 25.

Even if we are talking only regular season games, 9-3 is saying we could lose 30% of the non-gimmie games and still hit the mark.

Winning less than six games a year should never happen. That does NOT feel like winning.

Clemson and UGA are really messing these numbers up right now. Those aren't really competitive games either leaving us needing to win 7 out of 8 (or 9 with a bowl) competitive games. That's not exactly easy with the caliber of teams we have on our yearly schedule.

 

[Coloradojacket]

Clemson and UGA are really messing these numbers up right now. Those aren't really competitive games either leaving us needing to win 7 out of 8 (or 9 with a bowl) competitive games. That's not exactly easy with the caliber of teams we have on our yearly schedule.

Give things time, UGA may not be as good as they were. But the point is made
1985 9 wins UGA win Clemson win
1990 11 wins UGA win Clemson win
1998 10 wins UGA win Clemson win
2000 9 wins UGA win Clemson win
2006 9 wins UGA loss Clemson loss.....strange year
2008 9 wins UGA win Clemson win
2009 11 wins UGA loss Clemson win X2
2014 11 wins UGA win Clemson win
2016 9 wins UGA win Clemson loss

 

[GT33]

50 years of GT Football history says we have won 9 or more games 9 times. History in college football rarely gets better for schools with small football budgets and fan bases.

6 of the last 16 years not coached by a guy named Gailey we had a high enough win percentage to win 9 games, 37%.

3 other times we were within 1 win of winning a high enough percentage, that would have boosted that 9 win attainment to 56%.

You don't think that maybe, just maybe CGC has just enough in him to outperform other guys that were given nothing in the way of support? We have no chance of getting that 56% to maybe 75 or 80%? It's that big of stretch for you to believe that?

 

[Vespidae]

Why is it so unrealistic to be a winning program in your opinion?

I didn’t say that. Please refer to what I did say. Many on this board think Tech should average 8-9 wins per year. That‘s a rate that would place us in the Top Ten Lifetime. Now, look at the Top Ten and ask yourself if we have the resources to be in that club? We don’t. That’s not being negative, that’s being realistic.

“Oh we should. I believe!” ok, fair enough. So why doesn’t Iceland win the Summer Olympics every 4 years? I’ve enjoyed Tech football for 45 years ... and the gap between haves and have nots has never been wider.

I think we could be somewhat competitive in football, but very competitive in other sports. I have NO illusions that we are going to dethrone Clemson football in today’s environment.

 

[cthenrys]

I didn’t say that. Please refer to what I did say. Many on this board think Tech should average 8-9 wins per year. That‘s a rate that would place us in the Top Ten Lifetime. Now, look at the Top Ten and ask yourself if we have the resources to be in that club? We don’t. That’s not being negative, that’s being realistic.

“Oh we should. I believe!” ok, fair enough. So why doesn’t Iceland win the Summer Olympics every 4 years? I’ve enjoyed Tech football for 45 years ... and the gap between haves and have nots has never been wider.

I think we could be somewhat competitive in football, but very competitive in other sports. I have NO illusions that we are going to dethrone Clemson football in today’s environment.

Now now now, don’t bring facts and history into the equation…..

We are, on average, a 7 win team. Some years more, some years less. The delta is either coaching / scheme or a run of great talent. The latter is not sustainable (and I would argue that the former isn’t either). In the end GT Football is / should be a fun diversion for a few months. The last two years have been frustrating and not too much fun, but I watched every game i could. Hoping this year is more fun than the last two.

Those that believe 9 wins each year is a real goal - I admire your optimism