MsTechanalysis, I agree with you and I said so on too many occasions but my feelings are that since he is our coach I wish him success because if we have to bring in someone else we will be going through these rough times for sure. Honestly we are not in a very favorable position to be sure. I will judge Chan this year more on how well the team plays and how motivated they are over wins and losses. As you pointed out we won the Duke game but I left the game feeling like we lost because the team was so uninspired and the coaches themselves seemed confused and on a different page altogether. I don't think we will have to wait too long into the season before we will know whether we have a lemon or not. I hope for the Tech fans sake that our team performs well.
A Word For chan...
- Thread starter **DONOTDELETE**
- Start date
CrackerJacket
Flats Noob
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2002
- Messages
- 634
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Bashing players and coaches is considered making
a contribution now? That's a disappointing attitude
from an old font.
I've seen YLO at practices and scrimmages sitting
right there with Master B, ContactBuzz, and others
who desperately want to see GT football succeed.
Like myself, he tries to argue points and support
the program here from his own "realist" point of
view. Unlike myself, he hasn't given up on making
points with some of the posters here.
Personally...I had (and have) some grave concerns
about our coaching. BUT...I think alot of those
problems left the Flats and headed up towards UMD.
Poor offensive philosophy, poor QB play, and some
unlucky injuries kept us from a 9 or 10 win season
last year.
Decent QB play and coherent offensive play calling
could go along way to surprising some people this
season.
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
Cracker.. good to see you particpate in the discussion.. Ironic that you shut down this topic at the other place..
As you can see there was some very worthwhile discussion & a few opinions appear to be moderating based on rational views presented by both sides..
As you can see there was some very worthwhile discussion & a few opinions appear to be moderating based on rational views presented by both sides..
71YellowJacket
Damn Good Rat
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2002
- Messages
- 1,262
Whether you are a Chan Masher or Basher, the academic disaster has brought the coach more time as the focus of those dissatisfied with GTAA performance shifts to Braine.
I think it’s very conceivable that we could go 2-10 next season, and Chan would survive but not Braine. To me this is unfortunate, not because I want Chan to fail but we don’t need two or three more seasons before Chan is clearly identified as a winner or a loser.
So what happens? Chan wins 5 or more, very unlikely, he will clearly be seen as a winner and we move on. Anything less, we along with Chan, remain in limbo land thru the 2005 season.
I think it’s very conceivable that we could go 2-10 next season, and Chan would survive but not Braine. To me this is unfortunate, not because I want Chan to fail but we don’t need two or three more seasons before Chan is clearly identified as a winner or a loser.
So what happens? Chan wins 5 or more, very unlikely, he will clearly be seen as a winner and we move on. Anything less, we along with Chan, remain in limbo land thru the 2005 season.
statelinejacket
Damn Good Rat
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2002
- Messages
- 1,417
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">I to believed Tech(Dave Braine)made the wrong choice, Chan Gailey has proven his chosen profession is football coaching and has always been able to sell himself as such. I am quite sure he has put in the hours at coaching clinics and has all the qualifications to be employed as a coach of football. But where o where has he proven himself to be an excellent coach. Maybe if he had followed up the one bright spot on his resume, namely the Troy State championship and stayed at the college level with excellent teachers for head coaches he may have been better prepared to be a highly successful coach for Georgia Tech. I don't know though because he did serve under one very successful NFL coach, namely Bill Cowher of the Pittsburgh Steelers. Only when I look at Coach Gailey I see none of the Bill Cowher characteristics that made him successful. Folks because a Doctor or a Lawyer or a Banker is educated, qualified, and employed as such is no indication that they are excellent Doctors, Lawyers, or Bankers. Or in closing Football Coaches.
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
Asho.. A good resume to me for a head coach coming into GT is a man who has been successful at another D-1 school.. Like Bobby Ross for example... Chan doesn't possess that as yet, and if he coaches like he did last year he never will either...
The money.. gailey came in makinig 900K.. What did O'Leary come in at?... Richt came in at 650K.. He then earned his way up... chan & his agent negotiated a paycheck in a range that deserves far more than a dispirited team, coaching blunders & a humiliating trip to the woodshed like UGA administered to us, not to mention that fiasco at that high school stadium in California with Jerry Tarkanian U... Oh, with 1/3 of their team on suspension...
gailey has another year.. He will be the coach this year.. He has his chance, that of all arguments is moot.. Doesn't mean he deserves a free pass from the much deserved criticism he has received, does it? The way I look at, yes, he will be given the chance to redeem himself this year.. But based on his performance (or lack thereof) last year he has deservedly been disciplined by the braine letter, in the media & on the boards.. and his coaching tenure has been placed on a "probationary" status... Hopefully he will heed the warning & not repeat all the silly stuff...
I will be honest with you.. whether someone likes or dislikes gailey as a person has little to do with their views of his coaching ability.. They may dislike his personality in relatinship to how it affects his job, but thats relevant... Let's face it, Bobby Ross wasn't exactly Albert Schweitzer..
The money.. gailey came in makinig 900K.. What did O'Leary come in at?... Richt came in at 650K.. He then earned his way up... chan & his agent negotiated a paycheck in a range that deserves far more than a dispirited team, coaching blunders & a humiliating trip to the woodshed like UGA administered to us, not to mention that fiasco at that high school stadium in California with Jerry Tarkanian U... Oh, with 1/3 of their team on suspension...
gailey has another year.. He will be the coach this year.. He has his chance, that of all arguments is moot.. Doesn't mean he deserves a free pass from the much deserved criticism he has received, does it? The way I look at, yes, he will be given the chance to redeem himself this year.. But based on his performance (or lack thereof) last year he has deservedly been disciplined by the braine letter, in the media & on the boards.. and his coaching tenure has been placed on a "probationary" status... Hopefully he will heed the warning & not repeat all the silly stuff...
I will be honest with you.. whether someone likes or dislikes gailey as a person has little to do with their views of his coaching ability.. They may dislike his personality in relatinship to how it affects his job, but thats relevant... Let's face it, Bobby Ross wasn't exactly Albert Schweitzer..
71YellowJacket
Damn Good Rat
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2002
- Messages
- 1,262
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Please note goldz, I said it is conceivable we could go 2-10 and Chan survive (or words to that affect) it wasn't a forecast. How could this happen? Summer school isn't over yet.
G
Geetee
Guest
No arguing than Chan SO FAR stinks. Lackluster performance in his first year. Players quiting on our leader in games (see UGA). Losing to Fresno State who lost 6 or 8 starters the week before our game. Blah recruiting class. Loses 10 players to academics under his watch.
He stinks. He is boring. And one more 5 or 6 win season will only serve to keep him and continue us sprialing downward.
He stinks. He is boring. And one more 5 or 6 win season will only serve to keep him and continue us sprialing downward.
There are more that would take the opposing argument against you than for you, so you are wrong on your post.
Since you are wrong on your post, and there are plenty fans that would argue with you, it proves you are not the type of poster that one could believe.
If he stinks and is boring, so was O'Leary who lost 11-14 games in his first 2 1/3 years with no bowls and 0-3 against UGA. O'Leary and his staff also stunk through 3 1/3 years even with his first good season of 7-5. His record was only 18-19 after 3 1/3 years.
Also, O'Leary stunk when the wheels came off in 2001 with a 7-5 record by a team slated for top ten in the nation. That year actually started the spiral downward and it just went down one more game to 7-6 in Gailey's first year.
If Gailey stunk with the best record (7-6) of all Georgia Tech coaches from the past, then all of the other coaches at Tech stunk too, even Bobby Dodd.
So, it appears you are blowing smoke and don't have any facts behind your smoke.
It is also obvious the offense was not very good last year. It is also obvious the quarterbacks did not do well last year. It is also obvious O'Brien was in charge of the offense and the quarterbacks.
It has also been proven the control of the SAs academics was taken out of the hands of the head coach after O'Leary left, and was placed under the control of others. Braine has assumed complete responsibility for that situation, so that absolves Gailey in that situation and makes your statement inane.
I just read an article in Lindy's ACC Magazine that Tech had one of its best recruiting years of quality athletes. I believe these guys are more qualified than yourself to express this view. Another point where you are wrong.
It is possible the lackluster year was due to O'Brien's influence on the offense and the team. He has been replaced by a real quarterback coach and offensive coach.
Maybe some of the players quit on the head coach because of sympathies to last year's holdover coach of O'Brien.
It appears your statements are all completely false.
It is fine if you want to give your opinions, but you stated these things as facts and said no one could argue them. Well, consider them argued.
Since you are wrong on your post, and there are plenty fans that would argue with you, it proves you are not the type of poster that one could believe.
If he stinks and is boring, so was O'Leary who lost 11-14 games in his first 2 1/3 years with no bowls and 0-3 against UGA. O'Leary and his staff also stunk through 3 1/3 years even with his first good season of 7-5. His record was only 18-19 after 3 1/3 years.
Also, O'Leary stunk when the wheels came off in 2001 with a 7-5 record by a team slated for top ten in the nation. That year actually started the spiral downward and it just went down one more game to 7-6 in Gailey's first year.
If Gailey stunk with the best record (7-6) of all Georgia Tech coaches from the past, then all of the other coaches at Tech stunk too, even Bobby Dodd.
So, it appears you are blowing smoke and don't have any facts behind your smoke.
It is also obvious the offense was not very good last year. It is also obvious the quarterbacks did not do well last year. It is also obvious O'Brien was in charge of the offense and the quarterbacks.
It has also been proven the control of the SAs academics was taken out of the hands of the head coach after O'Leary left, and was placed under the control of others. Braine has assumed complete responsibility for that situation, so that absolves Gailey in that situation and makes your statement inane.
I just read an article in Lindy's ACC Magazine that Tech had one of its best recruiting years of quality athletes. I believe these guys are more qualified than yourself to express this view. Another point where you are wrong.
It is possible the lackluster year was due to O'Brien's influence on the offense and the team. He has been replaced by a real quarterback coach and offensive coach.
Maybe some of the players quit on the head coach because of sympathies to last year's holdover coach of O'Brien.
It appears your statements are all completely false.
It is fine if you want to give your opinions, but you stated these things as facts and said no one could argue them. Well, consider them argued.
Statelinejacket, that is absolutely true. A good resume does not mean a hire will succeed, but it gives a good indication. Only time tells. That is the reason you give a hire the time, to see if he can do the job.
O'Leary was 11-14 in his first 2 1/3 years with no bowls and 0-3 against UGA. Even in his first mildly successful season, 7-5, his overall record in 3 1/3 years was still just 18-19.
A hire has to be given time. If you are going to give O'Leary 3 1/3 years with a losing record, surely a first year of 7-6 merits another year for Gailey. He is only one of two coaches in Tech history to win 7 games in his first year.
Any company or any AD and school would give that hire another year to make changes and have a chance to succeed.
It is evident to me, those who wanted to lynch Gailey has done so out of a dislike for him, and it has nothing to do with his abilities as a coach at this particular time.
Those who have called for his lynching can be honest, and say I want him fired because I don't like him. That is fair and acceptable, but you cannot use his record to fire him, or you would have fired every coach that has ever been at Tech after their first year.
So, you can keep pretending it is his record, but it is obvious, it is not his record that is the catalyst behind your desire to fire him.
It is hard to hide the truth, because it shines in the darkness and makes things easily seen.
As far as many of the posters stating the wins and losses that must be achieved, it will have to be mixed with the overall performance of the team.
When it comes to sports, I am a poor loser. I have always been a poor loser. I do not like to lose when competing in a game, and I do not like to see my teams lose.
My philosophy of athletic competition stresses the coach as being the most important ingredient in winning or losing. I believe the coach is more important than the quality of the players.
Give me an excellent coach and average material. I will give you an average coach and excellent material, and I will beat you just about every time.
So, I am seldom hard on a player, but I am very hard on a coach. One of my favorite sayings is, "a team is a mirror image of its coaching".
I will be much harder on Gailey if he does not coach well than most people on this board. However, I will be fair and not judge him on the season, because I either like him or dislike him.
O'Leary was 11-14 in his first 2 1/3 years with no bowls and 0-3 against UGA. Even in his first mildly successful season, 7-5, his overall record in 3 1/3 years was still just 18-19.
A hire has to be given time. If you are going to give O'Leary 3 1/3 years with a losing record, surely a first year of 7-6 merits another year for Gailey. He is only one of two coaches in Tech history to win 7 games in his first year.
Any company or any AD and school would give that hire another year to make changes and have a chance to succeed.
It is evident to me, those who wanted to lynch Gailey has done so out of a dislike for him, and it has nothing to do with his abilities as a coach at this particular time.
Those who have called for his lynching can be honest, and say I want him fired because I don't like him. That is fair and acceptable, but you cannot use his record to fire him, or you would have fired every coach that has ever been at Tech after their first year.
So, you can keep pretending it is his record, but it is obvious, it is not his record that is the catalyst behind your desire to fire him.
It is hard to hide the truth, because it shines in the darkness and makes things easily seen.
As far as many of the posters stating the wins and losses that must be achieved, it will have to be mixed with the overall performance of the team.
When it comes to sports, I am a poor loser. I have always been a poor loser. I do not like to lose when competing in a game, and I do not like to see my teams lose.
My philosophy of athletic competition stresses the coach as being the most important ingredient in winning or losing. I believe the coach is more important than the quality of the players.
Give me an excellent coach and average material. I will give you an average coach and excellent material, and I will beat you just about every time.
So, I am seldom hard on a player, but I am very hard on a coach. One of my favorite sayings is, "a team is a mirror image of its coaching".
I will be much harder on Gailey if he does not coach well than most people on this board. However, I will be fair and not judge him on the season, because I either like him or dislike him.
GoldZ
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2002
- Messages
- 6,341
71YellowJacket, if we go 2-10, I would be very surprised to see Chan return. If we do and he does, then it will speak volumes to our "standards of excellence", and no I don't believe it could be defended as "patience" or anything of the sort.
I believe we win 6, IF, he has patience with Bilbo, at least a little luck with injuries, AND he isn't painfully predictable on first down. THWG
I believe we win 6, IF, he has patience with Bilbo, at least a little luck with injuries, AND he isn't painfully predictable on first down. THWG
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">too big cojones (for your own good) .. we're both waving pom poms. mine are gold, yours are black. we're both wearing glasses, mine are gold, yours are black.
you cannot see anything good that happened last year. you refuse to do that. i saw the good and the bad. i choose to dwell on the good. i believe the bad is correctable.
anyways, don't get as excited as the alien in your avatar. if you tailgate at o'keefe along with GTT and AFRJ, i'm sure that we'll get to meet this coming season. you can tell me off in person, to my face. for that you will need your cojones.
till then maybe you will see both the bad and the good and dwell on both. it'll help *you* contribute to this football forum. i'm sure you think that the prediction you made in the awesome prediction thread about us going 3-9 with 2 blocked punts in every game is worthwhile contribution. LOL
2 Big Techsticles
Flats Noob
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2002
- Messages
- 533
The 3-9 was worthwhile. That can very well happen.
The blocked punts remain to be seen.
I look forward to discussing Coach Chan with you at AMC. I'll even spot you a beer. See ya for the Auburn game.
The blocked punts remain to be seen.
I look forward to discussing Coach Chan with you at AMC. I'll even spot you a beer. See ya for the Auburn game.
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
Ahso, I think you were a little hard on GeeTee there.. I figure there's 2 kinds of posts, analytical & emotional.. GeeTee's definitely falls into the emotional category... Yours are almost always analytical, altho its offseason so maybe you will become unglued a little bit during the season like some of us still do during the offseason...
bellyseries
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2001
- Messages
- 4,229
My emotion, Beebad: you and GeeTee both stink.
Happy now?
Happy now?
gtfan1147
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2001
- Messages
- 4,857
We are in an era in which most people expect and demand results immediately. All things considered, Chan did not have a bad year last year with the injuries, bad breaks, and QB play. I mean do you go with a guy that knows the offense but isn't that great or do you go with a guy that does not know the offense but has talent? I think Chan did well for his first season at a major college football program. Give him a chance!
BeeBad, I wish there was an age noted for each person under his profile when it was accessed.
It would make it easier to respond to each post. For instance, I would treat teenagers and college students different than I would more mature people.
Some posts sound like they come from my grandson. He says such dumb things and does not know any better. In cases like this, I would just shake my head, roll my eyes, give him a hug, and ignore his remarks.
Well, I might not ignore his remarks, but I would not be so harsh.
It would make it easier to respond to each post. For instance, I would treat teenagers and college students different than I would more mature people.
Some posts sound like they come from my grandson. He says such dumb things and does not know any better. In cases like this, I would just shake my head, roll my eyes, give him a hug, and ignore his remarks.
Well, I might not ignore his remarks, but I would not be so harsh.
ramblinwise1
beware the zealot
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2001
- Messages
- 18,393
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Ahso.. sage advice which I will utilize immediately.. rolling eyes, ignoring his remark & giving belly a hug.. \Originally posted by BeeBad:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Originally posted by ahsoisee:
BeeBad, I wish there was an age noted for each person under his profile when it was accessed.
It would make it easier to respond to each post. For instance, I would treat teenagers and college students different than I would more mature people.
Some posts sound like they come from my grandson. He says such dumb things and does not know any better. In cases like this, I would just shake my head, roll my eyes, give him a hug, and ignore his remarks.
Well, I might not ignore his remarks, but I would not be so harsh.
bellyseries
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2001
- Messages
- 4,229
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Ahso.. sage advice which I will utilize immediately.. rolling eyes, ignoring his remark & giving belly a hug.. \Originally posted by ramblinwise1:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Originally posted by BeeBad:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Originally posted by ahsoisee:
BeeBad, I wish there was an age noted for each person under his profile when it was accessed.
It would make it easier to respond to each post. For instance, I would treat teenagers and college students different than I would more mature people.
Some posts sound like they come from my grandson. He says such dumb things and does not know any better. In cases like this, I would just shake my head, roll my eyes, give him a hug, and ignore his remarks.
Well, I might not ignore his remarks, but I would not be so harsh.
But YOU now, you've got those pretty brown eyes....