6th stage of grief. Optimism.

GTCrew

Well, I'll be...
Joined
Jul 25, 2002
Messages
37,420
Um, a head coach’s job description includes “coaching the team”. He’s the CEO. As such “not enough time” should not be in his vocabulary when it comes to questions of job performance on all facets of his primary job duties.

Much in the way CPJ was criticized for his lack of performance re: recruiting (and rightly so), CGC should be held accountable for poor performance in regard to his coaching of the offense.
"Coaching the team" = "score an offensive TD vs Temple"?

I dont think so. Coaching a college team is much much more than scoring an offensive TD vs Temple.

Again, you dodge the question and double down on the asinine argumemt that he has unlimited time and resources.

If he is not spending enough time on scoring an offensive TD vs Temple, then he is spending too much time somewhere else. Where is that? What is he spending too much time on in your opinion, that would be better spent on getting immediate results on the scoreboard?

Unless you have a million $ or more to give him to get more resources, stop pretending that GT has unlimited resources. Answer the question.
 

JacketFan77

Bokonon High Priest
Joined
Aug 19, 2010
Messages
20,650
"Coaching the team" = "score an offensive TD vs Temple"?

I dont think so. Coaching a college team is much much more than scoring an offensive TD vs Temple.

Again, you dodge the question and double down on the asinine argumemt that he has unlimited time and resources.

If he is not spending enough time on scoring an offensive TD vs Temple, then he is spending too much time somewhere else. Where is that? What is he spending too much time on in your opinion, that would be better spent on getting immediate results on the scoreboard?

Unless you have a million $ or more to give him to get more resources, stop pretending that GT has unlimited resources. Answer the question.
I don’t know that he’s spending too much time on one thing or another. You brought that variable into the convo. Whatever time he is spending on coaching, from my perspective, isn’t yielding results in either of the categories of “scoring points against a G5 opponent” or “developing strategy” or “developing players”. Now, as to whether or not that is a time issue or a competence issue, I can’t say.
 

Ceiling Cat

Helluva Engineer
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Messages
2,417
I reserve the right to put my optimism on hold until I see how the recruitment hype train negotiates the optics of a really inept offensive coaching strategy.

I’ve said this before and I will state it again, I can handle losing any game this season as long as I see that the coaches are employing a strategy that, at the least, demonstrates a clear plan for the future of this offense. Thus far, I’ve seen what amounts to a continuation of spring scrimmages. No continuity. No improvement. Just rotating players with nothing resembling offensive strategy or the creation of any kind of cohesive playbook. Again, I’ll use the work “optics” - the optics suggest a complete clusterfuck on the offensive side of the ball.

I’m pleased with the defense. On that side of things, the weaknesses appear to be rooted in too much time on the field and a lack of depth on the line, but I’m at least seeing cohesion and strategy.

Hopefully, our recruitment doesn’t tank due to what looks like ineptitude from our HC and OC.

Everything I am hearing is that kids are sold on what we are doing here and that on field results are not factoring in a major way at the moment.

We did move the ball against temple. We had 3 bad turnovers while we were about to score. If the players executed at those moments, at the worst, we are talking about a decently close loss where we showed more on offense than the previous game, despite our issues on the OL. Some of the coaching has me concerned as well, but I think we will start to see something much better in the coming weeks.


One positive about recruiting. I was just scrolling through our top 25 all time recruits. We got 3 in there with our current class. 2007 class had 4 (although the average is higher). We have a good chance to pick up some more big guys, so currently with recruiting, I'm fairly optimistic.
 

GTCrew

Well, I'll be...
Joined
Jul 25, 2002
Messages
37,420
I don’t know that he’s spending too much time on one thing or another. You brought that variable into the convo. Whatever time he is spending on coaching, from my perspective, isn’t yielding results in either of the categories of “scoring points against a G5 opponent”
Nobody would disagree.
or “developing strategy”
What does that mean? You think we need to be developing a strategy for this team? Why, when it isnt relevant after this year? The strategy is to get the players that can actually perform the strategy they prefer, not make a new one year strategy for winning in transition with 3O players.
or “developing players”.
Why do you say that? Other than Wells I dont see anyone regressing.
 

aeromech

Dodd-Like
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
11,295
Yes. We could be more emotionally intelligent criticizing the coaches. We should criticize the current players like we would our own kids. Criticizing the retired coach is largely disgraceful, like criticizing a dead grandfather. Let it ööööing go for petes sake.
You don't criticize your kids by telling them they are huge mistake that it will take you years after they leave to recover from I hope.
 

JacketFan77

Bokonon High Priest
Joined
Aug 19, 2010
Messages
20,650
Nobody would disagree. What does that mean? You think we need to be developing a strategy for this team? Why, when it isnt relevant after this year? The strategy is to get the players that can actually perform the strategy they prefer, not make a new one year strategy for winning in transition with 3O players.
Why do you say that? Other than Wells I dont see anyone regressing.
Yeah, I think there needs to be a strategy for the future, otherwise, how do you create recruitment goals? Unless you’re saying our recruitment goal is “stars” and the strategy is “build around the stars”?

I didn’t say there was regression. I’m just not seeing development/improvement. As it stands now, the kids who played competently/above average last year are doing so this year. No one is really rising to the top beyond those we already 1) knew were pretty good (TO, Mason, Thomas, Harvin) or 2) expected to be good based on recruitment (Swilling, Camp, Curry, Jordan-Swilling).
 

aeromech

Dodd-Like
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
11,295
Everything I am hearing is that kids are sold on what we are doing here and that on field results are not factoring in a major way at the moment.

....
The kids are still playing hard which is a great sign. As much as people criticize our players I don't remember them quitting on the field except for some of CGO players in the early Gailey years. I hope these guys continue to play hard to the end of the season; just as I hope the offense will gel around a scheme that builds for the future.
 

txsting

Elite level sh*tposting
Joined
Dec 5, 2007
Messages
1,146
So Joe posts this in the game thoughts thread and I wanted to comment.
I know we all love GT football and I can empathize with investing a lot into it. But how is anyone not at the accepting stage right now? How could you not have come into the season knowing the likely downside is what you are seeing? Did the doctor only give you one year to live? What excuse do you have for so much negativity? This is a major rebuild. We feared it while harboring cautious optimism but our optimism was misplaced.

So we have some idiots saying öööö like "Why did we throw the ball so much? We coulda had a chance if we yada yada."

This reminds me a lot of the idiots who last year (and earlier this season) thought the Braves should have traded the farm to satisfy their bizzare desire to win now. Thats not how you rebuild long term.

W and L dont matter. At all. Not an iota this year. They matter as much as they did in 88. We literally have to be focused on recruits first and player development a close second and wins about 6th.

The worst though, is the ööööwads who use GT to try to assuage their own ööööty existence by projectile vomiting out complaints about the players having fun or keeping morale up or having an upbeat attitude. Get a life. To win in 2021 and beyond we HAVE to have recruits and player development. No recruit wants to come somewhere full of depressed ööööwads constantly backbiting. They want to go somewhere fun and upbeat and family.

For better or worse, these coaches are sure as öööö GT family through the end of this year and probably well beyond. Stop looking at the irrelevant öööö that means we squeak out 4-8 vs 1-11. You really ööööing care about Temple? UNC this week? Ridiculous.

The only thing that you should be looking at right now unless you are a player development expert is recruiting rankings. If you cant be happy with those I beg you for the good of the program get off the bandwagon and we will be the first ones to pick you up when these bigtime recruits start racking up the wins.

For real. Come to the home games and focus on your friends and the tailgate and chill on the score for once. Consider taking the family camping or whatever next away game (i did that this weekend and they were hunting bears up there). Or just take a break and we will absolutely welcome you back on the bandwagon when these recruits get it rolling.
I'll be there next Saturday, hoss. Good good post.
 

GTCrew

Well, I'll be...
Joined
Jul 25, 2002
Messages
37,420
Yeah, I think there needs to be a strategy for the future, otherwise, how do you create recruitment goals? Unless you’re saying our recruitment goal is “stars” and the strategy is “build around the stars”?
They have told you the strategy, and it is also obvious if you look at our lower ranked recruits in this class. The strategy is to get "prototypical" players and run a standard offense. We are using the recruit charts Alabama uses. A panicked approach would be to take a dozen offensive linemen and we are not doing that. We are not overreacting and reaching for serviceable linemen. We are following the strategy they told us they were gonna do.

I didn’t say there was regression. I’m just not seeing development/improvement.
Good. What are your qualifications for knowing that? Are players not improving their footwork? Are they not getting the fundamentals down? Considering it is still year 1, i would think we would be working on basics.

As it stands now, the kids who played competently/above average last year are doing so this year. No one is really rising to the top beyond those we already 1) knew were pretty good (TO, Mason, Thomas, Harvin) or 2) expected to be good based on recruitment (Swilling, Camp, Curry, Jordan-Swilling).
I would argue most everyone ATL is progressing, but we can agree to disagree.
 

Akinji07

Inventor of Thursdays
Joined
Mar 28, 2011
Messages
28,423
I couldn’t care less if you disapprove of the season so far, but don’t spew a bunch of bullshit and not at least expect your argument to be rebutted. I think the majority of us get the deal at this point. Any gold-colored glasses about this transition being easy and painless have gone out of focus at this point.

I look forward to where CGC can lead this program. I think he is the right guy for this task and hopefully longer.

I’m more skeptical on Patenaude, but do believe his task is monumental. It’s not only about the players being a bad scheme fit...it’s that the entire offense is seeing everything at this level for the first time. Schematically, teams defended the 3-O completely differently than they are defending us this year. Couple that with lesser talent in areas and it’s been really bad. Obviously it’s hard to ignore a goose egg on the scoreboard, but we actually moved the ball up and down the field decently well against Temple. We topped 300 yards of offense, which is right in line with what Maryland did at Temple the week after laying 650 yards against Syracuse.

Maybe things aren’t as good or as bad as they seem? I plan to wait at least until they’ve had a full season or two before I act like a whiney, little bitch about it.
We lost to an FCS team and couldn’t score any offensive points on Temple. That’s not a bunch of bullshit that’s a fact. Maybe I have more expectations from a team going under “such a monumental transition in college football.” Like not losing to Citadel and scoring at least a few points against another team with lesser talent.
 

aeromech

Dodd-Like
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
11,295
They have told you the strategy, and it is also obvious if you look at our lower ranked recruits in this class. The strategy is to get "prototypical" players and run a standard offense. We are using the recruit charts Alabama uses. A panicked approach would be to take a dozen offensive linemen and we are not doing that. We are not overreacting and reaching for serviceable linemen. We are following the strategy they told us they were gonna do.

....
It looks like we have 6 OL commits as of right now and I think we are the only P5 offer for about half of them. We have slots to fill so I am ok with it; but it isn't exactly like you are making it sound.
 

GTCrew

Well, I'll be...
Joined
Jul 25, 2002
Messages
37,420
It looks like we have 6 OL commits as of right now and I think we are the only P5 offer for about half of them. We have slots to fill so I am ok with it; but it isn't exactly like you are making it sound.
I believe 6 is where the chart would have us. All four of our OTs are on 247's top 100 list. That other schools didnt waste offers on guys we have locked down doesnt keep me up at night.

The chart says they need to have long arms. For example, Cade is the shortest at 6'4" but he has a 6'7" wingspan. Our other not P5 offered OT is 6'7" tall. As I said, you can identify this pattern with all our "lowest ranked" recruits. We are clearly interested in measurables like height.

And only like 11 of the top 100 OTs are unsigned. We did a bangup job and now we need to get them on campus. It would not suprise me much to see all this years linemen recruits ATL in 2020. They can save their redshirts for if they get injured.
 
Last edited:

18in32

Petard Hoister
Joined
May 23, 2010
Messages
18,677
You're seeing what you want to see. There was definitely improvement and a solid strategy saturday, as crazy as it sounds given our point total. But we moved the ball up and down the field much better than any prior game, and if TO hadn't fumbled we would have done pretty well. But he did fumble, and we only scored 2 points, so people like you think the coaches are morons.
Very misleading to keep pointing to TO's two fumbles because they don't explain the offensive woes by a long shot.

There are eight teams averaging more fumbles than we are, and none of them is scoring less than we do. Some of them are scoring way way more than we do. Michigan, for example, averages more fumbles than we do so far, but they're scoring 32.5 ppg to our 10 ppg.
 

aeromech

Dodd-Like
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
11,295
I believe 6 is where the chart would have us. All four of our OTs are on 247's top 100 list. That other schools didnt waste offers on guys we have locked down doesnt keep me up at night.

The chart says they need to have long arms. For example, Cade is the shortest at 6'4" but he has a 6'7" wingspan. Our other not P5 offered OT is 6'7" tall. As I said, you can identify this pattern with all our "lowest ranked" recruits. We are clearly interested in measurables like height.

And only like 11 of the top 100 OTs are unsigned. We did a bangup job and now we need to get them on campus. It would not suprise me much to see all this years linemen recruits ATL in 2020. They can save their redshirts for if they get injured.
Ok I'm following you now. By chart I thought you meant they met some criteria a player has to meet to make the Alabama recruiting radar. We actually have a couple of guys under 6'4" as OG's. But recruiting 6-7 (maybe even 8) on OL makes sense after the low numbers the past 2 years.
 

GTCrew

Well, I'll be...
Joined
Jul 25, 2002
Messages
37,420
Ok I'm following you now. By chart I thought you meant they met some criteria a player has to meet to make the Alabama recruiting radar. We actually have a couple of guys under 6'4" as OG's. But recruiting 6-7 (maybe even 8) on OL makes sense after the low numbers the past 2 years.
7-8 would mean they are straying from the chart. It might make sense because we did not recruit OTs under PJ (247 says only OT signee in last 5 years was Harrison Jump). PJ played guards at tackle.
 

GTCrew

Well, I'll be...
Joined
Jul 25, 2002
Messages
37,420
Resume your regularly scheduled temper tantrums?
 

georgia_tech_swagger

Jolly Good Fellow
Joined
Dec 4, 2001
Messages
1,876
My biggest grievance with the grievances is that they're misdirected beyond Patenaude showing highly questionable QB substitution preferences.

College athletics is a top down success but the fans only focus on the last three rungs of that ladder: head coach, coordinators, assistants. Since Homer Rice departed the GTAA hasn't had an AD worth a flying fornication until Stansbury arrived. Think about all the successful hires of the last twenty years ... Heppler, Hall, O'Leary, Cremins ... ALL of them Homer Rice hires. Braine got us Hewitt's perpetual contract and infinite Gailey renewals. Radakovich brought us incompetence on NCAA investigations and spending on credit card like we were the United States Congress. Bobinski was a full on no talent *** clown that actively set back by at least 4 years the following programs by nickel and diming them and making terrible hires or contract moves: volleyball, baseball, men's basketball, football, softball.

But AD isn't the top rung of the ladder. That brings us to Bud Peterson. By all accounts a fine human being and a helluva engineer. But he didn't give two ****s about the athletic programs. It's my understanding that he cared so little he more or less let Hank McCamish hire the new AD after he wrote the check for McCamish Pavilion. That's what got GT none other than Bobinsquatch. And just look at what a fine job Peterson did in making sure the academic side stayed above board and avoided fraud, what since he had all that free time from not caring about the GTAA that much.

Peterson is now gone. Thank God. The person replacing him is an alumnus with a strong fundraising history. Now if he also simply cares about the GTAA enough to get The Hill out of the way and provide a nurturing environment instead of an actively hostile one for the GTAA ... that's the top rung solved.

So far so good on Stansbury. I believe he's behind clearing house on the baseball assistants with immediate upgrades that show recruiting impact year one. He tried to give Pastner the cheap axe. He did give Joseph the cheap axe. So he's not above being a hatchet man if the job requires it. EXCELLENT. Especially given the history of contract extensions around here (we'll call it a wash for Stansbury here since he did extend Pastner... a wash is still an upgrade). So far so good on his hires (football, softball has been a slam dunk of a hire). That's the next rung sorted.

For me Geoff Collins is O'Leary 3.0 (Ross-O'Leary-Collins). Everybody that Collins didn't bring from Temple is an immediate O'Leary connection other than Choice. Key, Coleman, Collins, and Glover all mentioned O'Leary in their introductory pressers. So far so good, even if the offense is flat out offensive.

The stars do seem to be aligning. But there's still a mountain of Bobinski poo to be excavated and disposed off. The floor is probably going to be the end of November ... football get waxed by the inbreds at the same time Pastner fields a winless-in-conference team where all anybody wants to talk about is probation and Ron Bell. The next 12-18 months are gonna be abject misery to be a GT fan outside of baseball ... and that respite only lasts until regionals. Then it flares up.

I know AI2020 is top priority for the GTAA and for good reason ... but I'd like to see the A-T Fund overhauled yesterday and have it baked into season tickets to replace the TECH Fund. The A-T Fund should be put on fields that matter to remind fans. And every time we choose to avoid going to games because things are so bad your cardiologist demands you stop going, we need to reflexively have a culture that reinforces sending that now unused money to the A-T Fund. With hold your butt from the seat to show you're not happy? Fine, no problem. Just keep sending the money. If you hate everybody working at the GTAA you can still mark it for permanent endowment ... a voice of permanent support to the GTAA mission even if you're skeptical of all those working there. Living in IPTAY land serves as a constant reminder of just how inadequate the A-T Fund is in its current form.

Lastly, I'd love to see a facilities master plan. I don't mean the "here's the band aids we're putting on in the next five years" like we've had since Radakovich arrived. I mean a genuine 50 year plan, because with Atlanta real estate YOU BETTER look that far ahead to plan on facilities like BDS. I wish we had the balls to have a Capstone project where architecture students submit their designs for badass stadiums where the facade matches the Tech brickwork you see on campus but where the inside is acoustically designed to retain all noise and where the emphasis on seating volume is placed on the sidelines and box seats and everything is NFL style chairback. I'd love to know if closing Techwood or running it beneath the stadium is viable. That's your simplest long term fix. If not, you probably have to move BDS into what is now Home Park, but that has the bonus of uniting all the athletics facilities in one spot. Both options effectively mean redoing the just redone Edge Center. So accepting that this is off the table at least a decade or two ... but I'd still like to see a facilities plan that looked that far ahead and addressed all the facilities in a sensible manner. And if Coca Cola or BofA or Rocky Mountain Pizza for all I care is willing to cough up 8 figures a year for naming rights ... you do it. If it means BDS is no longer the oldest stadium ... you do it. It certainly isn't or won't be the winningest for long, and I'd rather embrace the innovation DNA than cling to Heisman lore from the 1910's. I can damn sure tell you a recruit looks at the current BDS way more than some Heisman nostalgia when deciding where to go....
 
Last edited:
Top