Who would do better at GT than Paul Johnson?

yellowbritchies

Flats Noob
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Messages
710
No, it's not. Again, see the part where I said I've been open to this for three damned seasons.

Six years ago, Tech apparently didn't get it right. I'm hoping the school doesn't do that again. Having a list of names would be one good step.
Koholic, you're just baiting posters.Go away!A search firm would be hired and would be infinitly more capable than a bunch of posters to find a new coach.
 

yellowbritchies

Flats Noob
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Messages
710
I am so sick of this thread - it keeps coming up in one form or another. Some of you people need to google Stockholm Syndrome.

See the truth is that there are a lot of college coaches, some are good, some are bad and some are just in the wrong place.

To make a blanket statement like there is no other coach in the entire world that could do better at GT than CPJ is just stupid.

Do I have a list of 30 coaches to hire - nope - not my job. Do I believe there are a dozen smart young coaches out there that given a chance could succeed ? Yep - sure do because it happens all over the country each year. Coaches come and coaches go, some for the better and some for the worse.

Are we "doomed" by the Hill to be a 6-7 win team ? maybe - but if so, why not hire a $500K coach that teaches the OL to block instead of a multi-million $ coach that has them flop on the ground like mackerel.
The truth has been revealed!!
 

ramble_on92

Varsity Lurker
Joined
Sep 29, 2012
Messages
138
I'd love to see someone like Malzahn or Freeze, both young coaches who have an incredible way of inspiring their players.
 

floridajacket

The Real DB Cooper
Joined
Oct 14, 2005
Messages
17,799
So here were the actual three names I can remember in the running after CCG:

- Will Muschamp
- Rick Neuheisel
- Randy Edsall

Coincidentally, all three were hired as HC's somewhere after our search. One is fired. One will be fired. The last one took a team which went 8-5 in the year before he got there and has gone 13-24. Although Edsall has faced a lot of adversity, you get the idea.

BTW, the main name other than CCG after GOL was Tom O'Brien, who has been a somewhat mediocre coach at BC and NC State before being fired. There is no historical evidence here that there will be somebody better than CPJ down the pike. GOL is not coming back. Whisenhunt is not coming back. Malzahn? lol.

Maybe if GT stumbled on some Boone Pickens like benefactor, who could pay 5 MM a year for a top flight name AND would successfully lobby for lower academic restrictions, would I support firing CPJ. But I just don't see anybody better than CPJ for the 1.5 MM or so we could afford after the 7.5 MM buyout.
 

beej67

new around here
Joined
Oct 18, 2002
Messages
56,552
Before we fire CPJ to hire Wisenhunt, I want to know how he expects to beat Georgia with leftovers, as opposed to Chan and CPJ's plan to do it.
 

lonestarjacket

Dodd-Like
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
10,278
So here were the actual three names I can remember in the running after CCG:

- Will Muschamp
- Rick Neuheisel
- Randy Edsall

Coincidentally, all three were hired as HC's somewhere after our search. One is fired. One will be fired. The last one took a team which went 8-5 in the year before he got there and has gone 13-24. Although Edsall has faced a lot of adversity, you get the idea.

BTW, the main name other than CCG after GOL was Tom O'Brien, who has been a somewhat mediocre coach at BC and NC State before being fired. There is no historical evidence here that there will be somebody better than CPJ down the pike. GOL is not coming back. Whisenhunt is not coming back. Malzahn? lol.

Maybe if GT stumbled on some Boone Pickens like benefactor, who could pay 5 MM a year for a top flight name AND would successfully lobby for lower academic restrictions, would I support firing CPJ. But I just don't see anybody better than CPJ for the 1.5 MM or so we could afford after the 7.5 MM buyout.

So what is the lesson here from these examples?

Is it supposed to be that sure-fire hires are not so sure-fire so no one should make a move?

Or rather is it teams should evaluate beyond the obvious prospects that everyone else is chasing because there are no sure fire hires and everyone, including those with a history of winning elsewhere, can fail.

It is worse in the NFL, where a coach can go from hero to goat in less than a season and a genius with one team can look like an imbecile with another. In general I think teams have become too quick on the trigger in what can be brief downturns. But there has to be a limit in making excuses over a period as well. Set an acceptable level of performance over a time period and do not make a decision until that time is complete. But don't rationalize or make excuses if that level is not reached.

Each coaching hire is an experiment and you have to set conditions for passing or failing in advance. But most coaching decisions today are made in the heat of the moment in reaction to fan pressure.

Of course, that is all theoretical. In our specific situation I think we let CPJ finish his contract and play out that particular experiment, but I think it is defeatist and irrational to assume there is no coaching prospect on the planet who could do a better job in the same situation.
 

AmpuTECHture

Drain Lake Powell
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Messages
3,094
I think several coaches can go better than Paul Johnson. We just can't get them. Some of the names being thrown out are very laughable. Even if we did get them, they will leave after some reasonable success.

I would say its important to keep Johnson (unless things actually don't improve), as he won't leave, and he's shown that he can coach and be successful here with talent. If the hill makes changes and CPJ can use that to continue improving the recruiting, then we can be back to 2009 type seasons.

There is a lot to be said about consistency with a football program. Look at Tennessee. Programs with revolving doors of coaches dont do well. They continually fire coaches expecting to get a big name hire, and have to settle for coaches that aren't as good.


To actually answer the question (and assume the hill doesn't change)...

Mike Leach
Im not sure we could get him, but he knows what to do with inferior talent. He has been able to identify great talent that no one else would even offer (Wes Welker, etc.). And what we currently lack in talent, Mike Leach would be able to make up for in the execution of his teams (of which he would do a better job than CPJ). He's done well with inferior talent his entire coaching career (except with possibly Valdosta State)...look at Kentucky, Texas Tech, Washington State.

I also think he would stick around here if he had the job. He would have continued at Texas Tech if the Chancellor and AD weren't huge pricks, and his team in 2010 would have likely been at least a 12 win team.


I also kinda like the idea of Rich Rod. I think that if he hadn't been fired at Michigan, things would have gotten a lot better. Im still skeptical though. I would rather just keep CPJ on than hire rich rod though.
 

floridajacket

The Real DB Cooper
Joined
Oct 14, 2005
Messages
17,799
So what is the lesson here from these examples?

Is it supposed to be that sure-fire hires are not so sure-fire so no one should make a move?

Or rather is it teams should evaluate beyond the obvious prospects that everyone else is chasing because there are no sure fire hires and everyone, including those with a history of winning elsewhere, can fail.

It is worse in the NFL, where a coach can go from hero to goat in less than a season and a genius with one team can look like an imbecile with another. In general I think teams have become too quick on the trigger in what can be brief downturns. But there has to be a limit in making excuses over a period as well. Set an acceptable level of performance over a time period and do not make a decision until that time is complete. But don't rationalize or make excuses if that level is not reached.

Each coaching hire is an experiment and you have to set conditions for passing or failing in advance. But most coaching decisions today are made in the heat of the moment in reaction to fan pressure.

Of course, that is all theoretical. In our specific situation I think we let CPJ finish his contract and play out that particular experiment, but I think it is defeatist and irrational to assume there is no coaching prospect on the planet who could do a better job in the same situation.
The point of my post was to name 4 coaches who were legitimate possibilities for head coaches. If one includes CCG and CPJ in list of failures, that means we have been 0-6 on coaching candidates. If one puts GOL and Bobby Ross in the win column, that means we are 2-7 on candidates since the 90's.

How low of a probability are we willing to accept on finding somebody better than CPJ the next go-around? I'm honestly not sure of the answer, but I do know all the evidence points to the probability being low.
 

gnats67

Dodd-Like
Joined
Dec 3, 2001
Messages
13,633
I'd say somebody like David Dean might be worth a shot. I don't think any sexy peeps are going to be available or worthwhile. Including the, god forbid, NFL assistants. Next time we're going to need to take a chance on some younger guy that's been plying his trade for a while with some success. An unknown. Think of it.
 

TechRush

Dodd-Like
Joined
Oct 22, 2011
Messages
6,938
I think several coaches can go better than Paul Johnson. We just can't get them. Some of the names being thrown out are very laughable. Even if we did get them, they will leave after some reasonable success.
Comments like this are irritating. So I should be satisfied with our 7-6 or 7-7 coach because God forbid Tech hires another coach that gets 9+ wins and builds some excitement for three seasons but then leaves.
 

lonestarjacket

Dodd-Like
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
10,278
The point of my post was to name 4 coaches who were legitimate possibilities for head coaches. If one includes CCG and CPJ in list of failures, that means we have been 0-6 on coaching candidates. If one puts GOL and Bobby Ross in the win column, that means we are 2-7 on candidates since the 90's.



How low of a probability are we willing to accept on finding somebody better than CPJ the next go-around? I'm honestly not sure of the answer, but I do know all the evidence points to the probability being low.

OK, but that logic is flawed.

Coaches frequently succeed one place when they had failed elsewhere, and vice versa. So you cannot assume everyone who had problems elsewhere would have failed here, just as those coaches had success at other programs before those "failed" hires. Every situation is different.

The good news is even if probability of success is low in finding a successful coach, that you only have to succeed once if you can manage to keep that successful coach.

I do think teams pull the trigger too fast and mistake an anomaly down year for a trend sometimes. The converse of that is giving a coach a ridiculous long term contract after a little success, that also could prove to be an anomaly ( see Paul Hewitt. )
 

TechRush

Dodd-Like
Joined
Oct 22, 2011
Messages
6,938
Bill Belichick didn't fair so well at Cleveland (did make playoffs once), but then went to Boston and the rest is history.

Sometimes coaches just fit better at some places.

Pete Carroll was a mediocre pro coach, became very good college coach and then went back to the pros and performed better than before.

I thought hiring CPJ was a great move by Tech because I thought CPJ could do more with less talent. Problem is less talent has turned into least talent.
 

TampaBayJacket

Dodd-Like
Joined
Feb 26, 2009
Messages
4,258
Well stated TechRush. I too hailed the PJ hire because I thought it would allow us to compete against more talented teams. What I didn't anticipate is it would reduce our talent such that almost every team we play has better athletes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

BarrelORum

Mediocre Poster
Joined
Jul 24, 2002
Messages
16,266
Charlie Taafe... Is he on the wagon?


I'll say this. As soon as PJ is gone, we need to make every effort to lure Brent Key back on the flats in some role.
 

wesleyd21

Dodd-Like
Joined
Jul 16, 2007
Messages
16,144
Put my not 100% confident pick in Godsey.

Need somebody young, smart, energetic, who knows Georgia Tech inside and out.

I've really got nothing else and I've thought on it a good bit the last month. I just don't know.

BOR is right, though. It'd take a miracle to win a MNC with the limitations we currently face and I don't see Bud Peterson taking action.

I think Georgia Tech is eternally ööööed as it stands now.
 

71YellowJacket

Damn Good Rat
Joined
Jul 10, 2002
Messages
1,262
Put my not 100% confident pick in Godsey.

Need somebody young, smart, energetic, who knows Georgia Tech inside and out.

I've really got nothing else and I've thought on it a good bit the last month. I just don't know.

BOR is right, though. It'd take a miracle to win a MNC with the limitations we currently face and I don't see Bud Peterson taking action.

I think Georgia Tech is eternally ööööed as it stands now.
Me too!

The last Tech man I knew who bled white and gold and coached at Tech lived across from campus until the day he died. That marked the end of a generation of coaches who loved the kids, the school more than they loved the money.

For all the money in the world you can't buy a coach who can overcome the academic challenges unique to Tech. Even Buddy Ryan, inventor of the "46" defense and the one coach responsible for the Bears Super Bowl win couldn't continue that edge as head coach at Philly because smart offenses eventually figured out how to beat the "46".

So, for a coach to be successful at Tech he must bring in a new scheme that other teams haven't figured out and because money attracts very smart guys (see Clemson) who will figure out how to take better talent and beat your scheme, the Tech coach must constantly re-invent his scheme and teach the players how to execute it before the best ones leave for the NFL.

Wes, you will grow a long white beard before that day ever comes. Meanwhile, enjoy the game and thank the kids who play it for our entertainment.
 

GT65_UGA89

We’re a Coca-Cola school
Joined
Nov 18, 2005
Messages
12,008
Well stated TechRush. I too hailed the PJ hire because I thought it would allow us to compete against more talented teams. What I didn't anticipate is it would reduce our talent such that almost every team we play has better athletes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This. Whatever the reason for putting the focus, from a geographic perspective, in-state as the primary recruiting base, this really limits GT. A good number of quality athletes in state either can't qualify or have no interest in Tech, which is why the recruiting base has to be broad. See Ross and O'Leary.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

71YellowJacket

Damn Good Rat
Joined
Jul 10, 2002
Messages
1,262
Originally Posted by TampaBayJacket
Well stated TechRush. I too hailed the PJ hire because I thought it would allow us to compete against more talented teams. What I didn't anticipate is it would reduce our talent such that almost every team we play has better athletes.

This. Whatever the reason for putting the focus, from a geographic perspective, in-state as the primary recruiting base, this really limits GT. A good number of quality athletes in state either can't qualify or have no interest in Tech, which is why the recruiting base has to be broad. See Ross and O'Leary.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Cause and effect analysis to support this?

First, is it true that the overall caliber of athletes has been diminished?

If so, is this due to Johnson's coaching philosophy or other factors such as much more limited granting of exceptions in admission standards, a changed dynamic in the in-state recruiting environment.

Our poster from Tampa Bay can always be counted on to share his emotions but I have difficulty finding the trail of logic.
 
Top