A Few Questions about Gailey and 2003...

[bugboy]

It seems this board is split about 50/50 with the Hate-Gailey/Non-Hate-Gailey posts. Notice, I didn't say Pro-Gailey. Because there are many that don't hate him or want him fired, but are riding the fence. But that's how I see it on this board right now. There are a sizable number of fonts that don't like Gailey one bit (after a long, revealing tenure of 11+ months) and want him gone because they think he's running our program into the ground.

So, I have a few questions...

1) What exactly are the concrete reasons that you think Gailey is running the program into the ground? What's your beef? Don't give me this "deer in the headlights in front of the press" bullcrap. I want to know exactly what he's done to run our program into the ground.

2) What could the GT Football team do in 2003 to make you a believer in Gailey?

Just so you'll know... My answer to number 1) is that he's done absolutely nothing to run this program into the ground. Got that? Nothing. The loss to GA was dis-heartening, but IMO, not proof that the program is going south. It's too early to judge him that harsh.

As for number 2, the thing I want is 12 games of maximum intensity. If we go out and lay an egg like we did against MD and GA in 2002, I'll be very worried about Gailey and what he brings to the table. We need to be a team that makes other teams fight and scratch to get their wins over us. I noticed that about Richt when he was hired at UGA. Immediately, they became a much tougher team to beat. No more blowouts. If we can come out in 2003 and play really hard for 12 games, I think good things will happen for Chan Gailey and for the fans of Georgia Tech.

 

[techrod]

Bugboy, I'm stradling the fence almost on the Chan side. I have criteria that i will be looking at. 1. the bowl game. If he can rally this team after the Athens incident Ithink that would say a lot. 2. recruiting. We have to have a good rec. class, and it looks very good so far, but a long way to go. 3. Anybody but Suggs to start. ANYBODY.If these 3 go right then I'm on board for good!!!

 

[GT98]

Originally posted by techrod:
Bugboy, I'm stradling the fence almost on the Chan side. I have criteria that i will be looking at. 1. the bowl game. If he can rally this team after the Athens incident Ithink that would say a lot. 2. recruiting. We have to have a good rec. class, and it looks very good so far, but a long way to go. 3. Anybody but Suggs to start. ANYBODY.If these 3 go right then I'm on board for good!!!

<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Put me next to Techrod's thoughts; I agree w/pretty much everything he typed. Show some passion/desire in the bowl game (win!), finish recruiting strong and gave us all hope that someone else will get a shot at QB.

 

[Axe]

Oldfoggy,

Those teams appear to be growing their talent bases at a rapid rate. In addition, I prefer to evaluate the entire program and the entire season. I thought those coaches did better jobs with their teams this year than Chan did even though we beat them.

Both those teams have solid QBs, which plays a huge role in all this. Like I said, I hope I'm wrong about Chan.

 

[bugboy]

Axe,

I think it's fine to be a fence-sitter at this point in time. I'd say that's where I am at this point. I just really get angry at some of the stuff that's said on this site about Gailey.

I'd say I'm cautiously optimistic at this point.

As far as comparing Gailey to Groh, Amato and Fridge...I'd say the jury is still out. It's too early to assume that he won't be as good as those 3 guys (although, IMO, he'd have to improve greatly to be a Fridge).

 

[bobby dodds ghost]

He'd have to EAT greatly to be a Fridge!

.
.
BOO

 

[jacketguy]

I would say that I echo Techrods post.. I have said all along that I can take a loss, but not when we display poor fundementals and arent hitting people... the things that have concerned me most this year would be that (1) Gailey hasnt rid himself of the "pro-mindset", or so it seems, (2) We had too many breakdowns in the fundementatal game this year... there were times that we just looked and played very badly .. i.e missing 57 tackles in the Georgia game.. dropped passes, etc. (3) Anyone but Suggs.. he didnt win me over this year.. does he have talent, yes.. can he play in the clutch.. I dont think so.. he just doesnt appear to be much of a leader to me.. (4) The coaching staff in general were whipped when it came to game time adjustments.. too many times it seems we are playing "not to lose", instead of "playing to win"

BDG.. loved your humor !! If I keep eating these holiday snacks, I may reach the Fridge myself !!

 

[ahsoisee]

My take! Of course, it is somewhat "same song 10th verse". I am beginning to sound like Beeware with the repetitions.

I believe we had the material to beat every team on our schedule this year. I did not believe we would beat Maryland at their house because of Friegden. I predicted 11-1.

I think we had a less than desirable coaching effort overall for the year. I am not sure of the exact person or person's to place the blame. Personally, I don't believe all the coaches and all the players were together as a team. I have my ideas of some of the problems, but can not prove any of them.

I don't know where the responsibility lies for keeping Suggs at QB the whole year, but we had more QBs than Bilbo, so we cannot use the excuse that Bilbo did not know the playbook. Camp was a respectable replacement. We could have pulled a QB back from another position.

Since Gailey is responsible for the bottom line, the flak is justly aimed at him. It was up to him to make the appropriate coaching changes or adjustments during the year and/or the proper player personnel changes.

Should he be fired after one year? That would be the most rediculous action to date. He must be given at least this next year to make any changes (coaches and/or player personnel) necessary and to recruit for this season.

Am I disappointed in his results? Yes? However, I will not call for his head until I see more tangible evidence one way or the other.

Do I think it was mistake to hire Gailey? Absolutely not. He was the best candidate available when considering qualifications. The guidelines are a predictability of success or failure, but does not assure success in every case.

 

[Axe]

I'm not a Chan-Hater, nor am I calling for him to be fired. However, I haven't seen anything that would lead me to believe he can compete with the likes of Amato, Fridge, or Groh, on an even playing field. IMHO, GT is not on an even playing field with those schools let alone Clemson and FSU.

I've always felt that GT has to have top-notch coaching to excell. Chan just appears to be a mediocre coach. I don't see any one trait that will make him rise above the crowd. That's not a bash in my mind, most coaches are mediocre and only treading water until they are fired. I enjoy the nature of college athletics, so I would never call for him to be fired after one winning season. However, if this was a professional team I would cut my losses and take my next shot. The college game shouldn't work like that. The college experience of the kids should be the most important thing. Firing CG after one year would be a black-eye for them and the program.

My hope with Chan is that he can lead GT to winning records and bowl games. I hope I'm wrong and he does more, but that is what I expect out of the program under his command.

 

[oldfoggy]

To me the jury is still out on CG. Having said that, you (Axe) said that he can't compete with Fridge, Groh or Amato. Gees here I thought that we beat Amato and Groh so compete yes I believe he can.