What planet are you people on?

[Mr. Keen]

If you don't know that Tech Basketball is "irrelevant" which is worse than bad - then, you simply aren't in the real world.

• There is zero chance the team will EVER compete in the ACC in basketball - now especially so that Louisville & Syracuse have been added. This is an irrefutable FACT!
• The Tech Athletic Dept. realizes this - and knows that Tech hoops is a dead product. They don't care. they just don't want a basketball program that is an embarrassment.
• There are like 2,000 fans at a out-of-conference basketball game.
• The Atlanta Dream are more popular than Tech Basketball.
• The Marquette thread tonight has like 8 posts "during the game". Stingtalk not much better.
• The coach is no good. Nice guy. Can't recruit.
• The players are no good. Especially the guards. The guards are abysmal.
• Tadric Jackson and Q Stephens are keepers - the rest of the team is disposable.

Every minute you spend watching or listening or reading Tech Hoops - is a minute of your life wasted.

Don't be a loser like me - I follow it strictly for the morbid fascination of it all. There is no other possible reason to follow Tech hoops.

The only good thing - Tech has beaten UGA 4-in-a-row!!!! Whoopeeeeeeeeeeee!

There is no possible refutation of the above........

You are thinking - well Tech will eventually get a good coach and compete. DREAM ON!

I will admit - it is conceivable that Tech could have a .500 type ACC team if everything comes together. Why bother following a team that the ceiling is .500 play in conference.

I am a Tech Grad. I am a Tech Fan. I am a big basketball fan. Nothing would please me more than Tech having a competitive basketball team. But, I implore you to heed my advice and do something else with your spare time.

If you don't believe me - then why does like 99% of the Tech Alumni not attend games / post here or at some other Tech message board?

END OF STORY.

Now watch - this post will get deleted - even though it is the 100% gospel truth!

And, believe me - I am holding back 90% of my venom - minimum.

 

[chrsw003]

I'm pretty upset to. Tadric is our best player by far and its not just bc this game. He's the only one out there that's not scared to shoot the ball. Him and Stephens. It is so frustrating watching. MGH really? Really? Smart play

 

[collegeballfan]

Mr. Keen, why is it any of your business what I do for entertainment?

 

[dtm1997]

MODS - please don't delete this post. Let @Mr. Keen have his say, as he's not bashing any players, coaches, or forum members.

I would note that the game thread didn't have posts in-game because we were in the online chat forum.

 

[GaTech4ever]

I agree that Stephens and Jackson are our only offensive threats. Jorgenson does not have a pretty shot and with him being short plus the slow release, I am not as excited about him as I was. I realize he may not be 100% and he seems to be a good distributer but I was hoping for a lights-out shooting PG, and I'm not sure he fits the mold. That doesn't mean I don't think he's going to be successful, but I just can't see him lighting it up from outside unless he's open- how can he get his shot off with a guy guarding him?

MGH has one good move, that euro-step, and it's because he doesn't have to be quick to pull it off. He has a hard time creating, and he isn't consistent enough with his shot to be a threat. At this point in his career I think we know what we got with him. He's not gonna avg. 15 points a game for us. I don't see him leading us in scoring this year. Maybe not even top 2-3. I was hoping that buzzer beater last year would catapult him in his career but I just don't see it. Hope I'm wrong.

 

[Mr. Keen]

MODS - please don't delete this post. Let @Mr. Keen have his say, as he's not bashing any players, coaches, or forum members.

I would note that the game thread didn't have posts in-game because we were in the online chat forum.

Thank you. Mr. dtm1997.
You must understand - look at the Tech situation from afar........ while you would think that Tech "should be good" - Tech is in the ACC / Atlanta should be a drawing card / Georgia is loaded with talent. Tech has many players in the NBA. Yet, in reality this hasn't panned out. One Myth: Georgia is loaded with talent. You can "look this up" - There has only been two players for Tech from Georgia - Harpring (who was a last minute recruit) & Favors (one and done) - that have gone onto any type of successful NBA Careers. All the rest of the Tech players in the NBA are from out of state. And, by the way - you need NBA level talent to win in the ACC. So, bottom line, TECH needs to recruit the globe - let alone this country - to find talent. Meanwhile - under Gregory virtually all the players are from Georgia. While this is nice - and they way it "should be" (especially for a state school - this is a losing formula. As plainly evidenced over Gregory's tenure. I like Gregory - i like him a lot - he really knows his hoops (not just saying that) - he doesn't have the players - you need super-great offensively skilled guards to win. What won for Marquette tonight - some big guy? - hell no! - it was some guard going apesh*t from troika-land.

 

[dtm1997]

@Mr. Keen I probably disagree with you on a few levels, but at this point of night, I'm gonna ramble incoherently.

1) Georgia is loaded with talent currently and good programs are coming in to the state to get the talent. That's a fact. Is it all NBA talent? No. Are we always getting the best talents in state? No again. That said, there are good college players available in state that can help us win.

2) With regard to expanding our recruiting footprint, it's worked in the past and I'd say the staff would agree with you. Travis, Heath, Lammers, AD, Cox are all out of state products. Recent signee, Sylvester Ogbonda, is OOS. Herrion is known to have NE prep school connections, Mamadou is working Florida, Dollar needs to close on the BEST in-state prospects or your point is proven in totality. Vick, Tacko, Koumadje were all out of state. Multiple 2015 & 2016 recruits being considered are from out of state. That said, we can't be having Charlton Young coming in and eating our lunch on kids like Gilbert from Miller Grove or Chris Lewis from Milton. These are high level kids that will win college games.

3) I don't think anyone dislikes Gregory personally, but there always seems to be that one item that's missing from a given game. Whether it's motivation, tactics, game plan, adjustments, etc., more often than not, it doesn't come together as a whole from game to game. We clearly had the players & tactics to win this game tonight, but a continuing lack of perimeter D, which was previously identified, burned us tonight from the jump. That said, whether people like it or not, you can hem & haw all you want, but it's highly unlikely BG is going anywhere until this season is over.

I'll say this, I don't agree with your stance that GT hoops will remain irrelevant in perpetuity. I'm not saying BG will lead us back to relevancy, but the games are his to coach and provide the data that he should either still be here or he should be removed. The lack of progress is really disappointing, putting himself in position for the latter, but until this season is over, the data is still incomplete. That said, we've got a great school, great facilities, great city... more than enough of a foundation for the right coach with the right resources to come in and lead back to relevancy, competing in the ACC and nationally.

 

[gtpi]

If you don't know that Tech Basketball is "irrelevant" which is worse than bad - then, you simply aren't in the real world.

blah blah blah blah blah blah blah....

And, believe me - I am holding back 90% of my venom - minimum.

***************************************


sorry but i really dont see all that many 'facts' in your rant. a whole lot of opinions based on your butt hurt but not a lot of facts.

ill shoot you down with one word...

PHEWITT.

but for the huge fn contract we were stuck with... do you honestly think that we would still have chosen gregory as our coach? that is on drad and all you fans who were enamored with a coach who was closer to being bill lewis than we would care to admit. phewitt was a one trick pony. many of you stuck with phewitt until the very end. hell he couldnt even graduate the players he recruited let alone coach them.

all you folks who jumped on the phewitt bandwagon after he found an acorn have no one to blame but yourself. drad just like you folks thought we had a winner when the evidence was clearly not all in. even coach k didnt have the contract drad GAVE phewitt. WTF?????

phewitt was not only a poor coach imo but he really didnt care about gt. he alienated ALL the former players. he alienated the students. he alienated the fans. he destroyed what bc built.

what i see is a coach that is trying his damnest to do all the right things. reconnect the former players. reconnect the fans (gregory is a fine man in his own right). he is trying to make sure we have sa's first not nba lottery picks. he has instilled discipline. he brought bobby cremmins back into the fold.

was i happy with the game? hell no. i honestly thought we were done for at the 6 minute mark. that he was able to coach enough to make a lost cause close gave me hope. maybe we need to learn to play with more fire in our hair?????

he had the right guys on the court at the end to win this game. it is not his fault that one of his players did a reggie ball on 4th down. that is on the player. had that player kicked the ball out like HE WAS SUPPOSED TO maybe we win this game?????

fyi.... i was at gt when the golf coach (morris) was coaching the bb team. i met bc the first week he was there and a number of times there after. i was there during our bc glory years. all of them. when i lived in florida i used to drive us1 ( 1 hour each way) so that i could pick up ALL of our games on the am radio while sitting on the side of the road. even during the week.

my point.... i feel every bit of your pain and some but your no more invested in gt bb then i am. i was not happy with the way things WERE going under phewitt. we have made much improvement under gregory as compared to phewitt.

before i would list all the 'facts' you listed.... i want to see how gregory MOLDS THIS GROUP OF FIRST YEAR PLAYERS INTO A TEAM. give the guy a chance sheesh.

this is year 4. duke was ready to run coach k off after the fifth year. you know.... hall of fame coach k.

at the least 4 straight years of wiping the smile off all the dwags faces was worth this loss eh. TO HELL WITH UGAG.

me... i am willing to let this season play out and see what happens! mbob has btdt wrt building a quality basketball program. i trust his judgment in doing the right thing 'when the time is right'.

go jackets.

 

[dtm1997]

I admit to being a Paul Hewitt apologist, mainly because of his recruiting ability. He should have been fired after the Derrick Favors year, because of mismanagement of talent.

Dave Braine gave Hewitt that contract, not DRad.

I personally believe DRad would have made a subpar hire regardless Hewitt's contract. I think he was more interested in the new arena he built than the product he was putting in to it. Clemson can have fun with the long term extension Brownell just signed, as they embark on an $80MM new hoops arena.

Regardless of this game, I really like the pieces of this team. I think I have a realistic view of this team's ceiling and recognize we're gonna have some bad losses along the way. I like BG as a person and would like to see him succeed. That said, it's time for all of the pieces to come together, because the lack of progress cannot continue. He's got about 25-27 more games this season to put them together. I hope he does it, but I won't make the mistake of being an apologist again.

 

[RamblinCharger]

I liked Hewitt because I grew up through middle school watching good Georgia tech basketball with fantastic talent. I didn't understand at the time all of the intricacies of a "program", but I don't think Brian Gregory was the right answer. I honestly don't think he would be quite as bad if he would change his offensive scheme. He also needs to learn how to recruit. It has taken paul Johnson a little while to figure that out so maybe Brian will figure it out too, before it's too late. You don't have to be stacked with 5 star talent to win basketball games in college, but you do need good talent and a lot of guys that work really hard, but the offense has to change if he has a chance of turning it around. We really need a guy that can take the ball and consistently create his own shot. Jackson looks like he could be that player, but he's young and needs some help to develop his talent.

 

[Mr. Keen]

Here are the facts - based on ACC regular season play. I know that a team's regular season record isn't the entire story of a season - but, it is a good gauge since it doesn't include the bogus out-of-conference cream puffs, nor does it include the post season which can often be just one and done.

Tech has been in the ACC 35 years - that is correct 35 years. Here is the regular season breakdown:

• Great Regular Seasons: 2 total - 1985-86 11-3 (Price-Sally senior year) 1995-96 13-3 (Marbury's year)
• Good Regular Seasons: 1 total - 1984-85 9-5 (Price-Salley junior year)
• 2 Games over .500: 4 total seasons (1987-88 , 1988-89 1989-90 - Final 4 team, & 2003-4 - final 4 team). To me 2 games over .500 is not a "good" season. It is an average season.
• .500 Seasons: 7 total season
• Below .500: 21 seasons (including the first 2 under Dwayne Morrison)

Doing the math:

• Anyway you slice it - Tech has had 3 "good or better" regular seasons out of 35. (Mercy!!!) 3 for 35 - not a good batting average.
• Tech (including this upcoming ACC Regular Season - for sure) has had 8 consecutive losing ACC regular season.
• Going back to the last 4 years under Cremins - Tech has had 15 losing seasons out of the last 19 seasons. 3 .500 seasons. And 1 season over .500 (9-7 2003-04 Final 4 team).
• Since 1989-90 season - Tech has been 3 games over .500 at any one time in the regular season ACC (outside of the 1995-96 Marbury season) - only once!!!! 1994-95 (Best-Forrest team was 6-3 - then finished 8-8).
• In the last 19 seasons - Hold onto your hats!!! Tech has been 2 games over .500 at any one time in the regular season ACC - only twice. End of 2003-04 9-7 and one year (I think 2005-06) Tech started 2-0 (finished 4-12).

Any way you slice it - Tech has been - is - and seemingly always will be no good (Note: I wrote no good - I could have written something more apt) in the ACC regular season.

Don't even think of replying by stating - the regular season doesn't matter / only the NCAA Tournament matters - that is such a bogus excuse. Plus Tech has been pretty sub-par there - outside of 2003-04.

Keep in mind: Duke, UNC, Louisville & Syracuse will always be better than Tech. Keep in mind that Pittsburgh, Virginia, Miami & Notre Dame have much stronger programs. Clemson & FSU & NC State are simply better. We are "on par" with Wake, BC & V-Tech. V-Tech just hired Buzz Williams - so they will be improving. Wake & BC - have new coaches - but, I don't know if they will equate to success.

Need more evidence? FSU & Clemson have beaten Tech a combined 19 times in a row!!! That would be an embarrassment in Football where those two programs are clearly at the top of the ACC in terms of talent. To lose 19 in a row to FSU & Clemson in basketball almost defies description.

It is a wonder anyone is still a fan!

 

[RamblinCharger]

Here are the facts - based on ACC regular season play. I know that a team's regular season record isn't the entire story of a season - but, it is a good gauge since it doesn't include the bogus out-of-conference cream puffs, nor does it include the post season which can often be just one and done.

Tech has been in the ACC 35 years - that is correct 35 years. Here is the regular season breakdown:

• Great Regular Seasons: 2 total - 1985-86 11-3 (Price-Sally senior year) 1995-96 13-3 (Marbury's year)
• Good Regular Seasons: 1 total - 1984-85 9-5 (Price-Salley junior year)
• 2 Games over .500: 4 total seasons (1987-88 , 1988-89 1989-90 - Final 4 team, & 2003-4 - final 4 team). To me 2 games over .500 is not a "good" season. It is an average season.
• .500 Seasons: 7 total season
• Below .500: 21 seasons (including the first 2 under Dwayne Morrison)

Doing the math:

• Anyway you slice it - Tech has had 3 "good or better" regular seasons out of 35. (Mercy!!!) 3 for 35 - not a good batting average.
• Tech (including this upcoming ACC Regular Season - for sure) has had 8 consecutive losing ACC regular season.
• Going back to the last 4 years under Cremins - Tech has had 15 losing seasons out of the last 19 seasons. 3 .500 seasons. And 1 season over .500 (9-7 2003-04 Final 4 team).
• Since 1989-90 season - Tech has been 3 games over .500 at any one time in the regular season ACC (outside of the 1995-96 Marbury season) - only once!!!! 1994-95 (Best-Forrest team was 6-3 - then finished 8-8).
• In the last 19 seasons - Hold onto your hats!!! Tech has been 2 games over .500 at any one time in the regular season ACC - only twice. End of 2003-04 9-7 and one year (I think 2005-06) Tech started 2-0 (finished 4-12).

Any way you slice it - Tech has been - is - and seemingly always will be no good (Note: I wrote no good - I could have written something more apt) in the ACC regular season.

Don't even think of replying by stating - the regular season doesn't matter / only the NCAA Tournament matters - that is such a bogus excuse. Plus Tech has been pretty sub-par there - outside of 2003-04.

Keep in mind: Duke, UNC, Louisville & Syracuse will always be better than Tech. Keep in mind that Pittsburgh, Virginia, Miami & Notre Dame have much stronger programs. Clemson & FSU & NC State are simply better. We are "on par" with Wake, BC & V-Tech. V-Tech just hired Buzz Williams - so they will be improving. Wake & BC - have new coaches - but, I don't know if they will equate to success.

Need more evidence? FSU & Clemson have beaten Tech a combined 19 times in a row!!! That would be an embarrassment in Football where those two programs are clearly at the top of the ACC in terms of talent. To lose 19 in a row to FSU & Clemson in basketball almost defies description.

It is a wonder anyone is still a fan!

I get your point but I don't care if we go 7-9 every single year in the hardest conference in basketball. If we get to the tournament and make it past the first round and we have at least a decent shot at making a run in the tourney, I'm happy. March madness is what I live for in college basketball. Losing to UNC and Duke is going to happen, and I really could care less because they won't be seeing us in the tournament most likely.

 

[RamblinCharger]

Also if anyone wants to be Duke or UNC they can give up on that, but it's a blast winning 20-24 games in a season and making the tournament on a regular basis. I think tech has the ability to be that type of team with the right coach and system in place.

 

[Peacone36]

Ah, the ole "Duke didnt fire coach K" argument. That one never gets old.

 

[dtm1997]

@Mr. Keen I get you're trying to roll out facts, many of which are quite valid (FSU, Clemson, 21 losing ACC seasons), but don't follow them up with a subjective add-on that serves your purpose (what constitutes a good season to you, limiting your data strictly to ACC play).

21 losing ACC seasons out of 35 is a very telling fact though. Given all GT has to offer, it should be better than that. It's a fair point.

Another fact - GT has 25-27 more games to play this season. They've gotta be played and then a decision on BG needs to be made. Watching the games or not is your prerogative.

Unlike other msg boards, as long as you're not openly bashing players, coaches, or other forum members, we welcome critical & factual statements of pissing in the kool aid, so to speak.

 

[Papa Doc]

Here are the facts - based on ACC regular season play. I know that a team's regular season record isn't the entire story of a season - but, it is a good gauge since it doesn't include the bogus out-of-conference cream puffs, nor does it include the post season which can often be just one and done.

Tech has been in the ACC 35 years - that is correct 35 years. Here is the regular season breakdown:

• Great Regular Seasons: 2 total - 1985-86 11-3 (Price-Sally senior year) 1995-96 13-3 (Marbury's year)
• Good Regular Seasons: 1 total - 1984-85 9-5 (Price-Salley junior year)
• 2 Games over .500: 4 total seasons (1987-88 , 1988-89 1989-90 - Final 4 team, & 2003-4 - final 4 team). To me 2 games over .500 is not a "good" season. It is an average season.
• .500 Seasons: 7 total season
• Below .500: 21 seasons (including the first 2 under Dwayne Morrison)

Doing the math:

• Anyway you slice it - Tech has had 3 "good or better" regular seasons out of 35. (Mercy!!!) 3 for 35 - not a good batting average.
• Tech (including this upcoming ACC Regular Season - for sure) has had 8 consecutive losing ACC regular season.
• Going back to the last 4 years under Cremins - Tech has had 15 losing seasons out of the last 19 seasons. 3 .500 seasons. And 1 season over .500 (9-7 2003-04 Final 4 team).
• Since 1989-90 season - Tech has been 3 games over .500 at any one time in the regular season ACC (outside of the 1995-96 Marbury season) - only once!!!! 1994-95 (Best-Forrest team was 6-3 - then finished 8-8).
• In the last 19 seasons - Hold onto your hats!!! Tech has been 2 games over .500 at any one time in the regular season ACC - only twice. End of 2003-04 9-7 and one year (I think 2005-06) Tech started 2-0 (finished 4-12).

Any way you slice it - Tech has been - is - and seemingly always will be no good (Note: I wrote no good - I could have written something more apt) in the ACC regular season.

Don't even think of replying by stating - the regular season doesn't matter / only the NCAA Tournament matters - that is such a bogus excuse. Plus Tech has been pretty sub-par there - outside of 2003-04.

Keep in mind: Duke, UNC, Louisville & Syracuse will always be better than Tech. Keep in mind that Pittsburgh, Virginia, Miami & Notre Dame have much stronger programs. Clemson & FSU & NC State are simply better. We are "on par" with Wake, BC & V-Tech. V-Tech just hired Buzz Williams - so they will be improving. Wake & BC - have new coaches - but, I don't know if they will equate to success.

Need more evidence? FSU & Clemson have beaten Tech a combined 19 times in a row!!! That would be an embarrassment in Football where those two programs are clearly at the top of the ACC in terms of talent. To lose 19 in a row to FSU & Clemson in basketball almost defies description.

It is a wonder anyone is still a fan!

Mr. Keen,

You're right. We are not good in basketball and will never morph into an ACC powerhouse. Given you know that and we know that, why are you in such a rage? Just because you want it to be different doesn't change a thing. Watch or don't watch; attend or don't attend. You're working too hard to say something everyone knows. Relax and let it go.

 

[RamblinRed]

I think DTM has the right mindset here.
Last night was a very disappointing loss. Some of the negative issues that have been talked about over the first 3 games bit them last night - primarily not defending the perimeter well. GT also had too many TO's, though there were the first team to get Marquette really upside down in A/TO ratio this year. This team can still go 2-1 in this Tourney though it will feel like a hollow 2-1.
Gregory still has 25+ games to show what he can do. We'll see where this program is at the end of the year.
I don't agree that the admin doesn't care about basketball or doesn't want a winning program. Heck, I expect MBob expects to have a good program since he's always had one as an AD. I'd also agree that GT has been an underperforming program for the majority of its ACC existence (i've said so in the past). That hardly means it has to be nor is ACC wins and losses the only measure.

There does need to be an uptick in recruiting success as well. it should always start in GA and then expand outwards.
If you choose not to follow or support the program I get that, I stopped attending games the last couple of Hewitt's years. But i'm not there with this program yet. There have been positive as well as negative signs this season. I'm going to let it play out.

If you want to talk about coaching changes (which frankly is way too early), the way football has gone this year imo has put Gregory on thinner ice. It would be unlikely GT would take the financial hit of making 2 major coaching changes in one season. Since I expect Johnson to get an extension MBob will not have to worry about that for football for at least a couple of seasons, which means he will have a freer hand to make a change in basketball if that is what he feels needs to be done after the season. Also somewhat ironically this would be a more attractive job after this year than after the last couple of Hewitt seasons. A Good coach would actually have a team that could win right away with a likely lineup they would include
Heath/Jorgenson, Jackson, Hunt, Stephens, Jacobs, Mitchell with Lammers and Bolden as well. That is enough talent to be an NCAA team if they come together. He would also have alot of schollys to use in his first recruiting class allowing him to recruit his own players quickly.

Finally, I'm concerned about Jorgenson right now. I watched a fair bit of HS tape on him and right now he is not close to the same player. He was a really clutch shooter in HS. Good form, little low, but able to get his own shot and almost always made big shots late. Quicker than you would expect. It mentioned in the write up for last nights game that he was feeling soreness in the knee in the days leading up to the game. I'm starting to wonder if at some point they may have to simply shut him down and really let he leg get back to 100%. But that is something for the doctors, coaches and Travis to figure out. I think for right now they need to let Heath start and just see how Jorgenson is going game to game.

 

[Peacone36]

Oh btw, to answer the OPs question since everyone hijacked the thread,

Earth, I'm on Earth

 

[Mr. Keen]

I am not a troll! At least I am posting. That means I care.
Keep in mind that Marquette got toasted at home by the University of Nebraska - OMAHA and was behind for a majority of the game (also at home) against NJIT (the G-Tech of New Jersey who are horrible).
Marquette started 3 point guards last night and still won - had the game in hand - until a last minute GT rally.
Guard play / Guard play / Guard play - that is ALL that matters.
Think about it!!!!!!!!
Even in 2004 - it was Carrot Top (Schensher) with 4 guards out there - take your pick (Jack, Lewis, McHenry, Elder, Ish, Moore).
The game of college basketball is 99% offensive guard play. Everything else (big men, defense, coaching, fans) is virtually meaningless - OK, 1%. Take this mindset and you will have a decent team. Of course, you have to recruit great guards every year since they will defect or whatever - making the task near impossible.
Tech, this year, actually has a good big man rotation (Mitchell, Cox, Sampson, Lammers) - only one of them should be on the court at any one time.... that is if you want to win. If you want to not win - then have two of these guys on the court at the same time.
P.S. Michigan State will beat Marquette by 25 today.

 

[Peacone36]

I can't believe I'm the one to say this but, guy, calm down.

Many of us knew what we had coming into the season. There was some conservative optimism after the UGA win but this loss isn't as shocking as some make it out to be. We should have won yes. But, after the last 5 years is it really shocking. No way.

Chill and brace yourself