Adding Miami is a good thing?

[71YellowJacket]

We don't belong in the same conference with Miami or FSU. Who is kidding who here with all the fascination with the ACC adding Miami?

Yes, the conference will be stronger football wise, but that won't necessarily make our team more competitive.

If you haven't looked recently, Miami offers a variety of education-lite majors for the football career inclined. There is American Studies, Social Work, Education, and my favorite, Athletic Training. What real jock can't make the dean's list in Athletic Training?

FSU, hell it's even easier. You don't even have to obey the law to be successful at FSU.

Wake up everybody. Year in and year out Tech can not compete with football power houses like these two. Much less compete with just about any team in the SEC save Vanderbilt who has to be wondering how they got invited to the party. Hey Vandy, it's because you roll over..

Tell me again, why we are better off with Miami in the ACC??

 

[GoldZ]

Thanks 71 for a little reason vs. the irrational fascination that seems to be the rule. We "could" compete with them, but we "won't". Too academically snobbish (NOT to be confused with a desire of becoming an Athenish style football factory).

As for recruiting, why do people think kids will be attracted to a rigorous/narrow curricula just because Miami is in the league? Even if they were, the odds of The Hill accepting the majority of ugag's, fsu's, and Miami's recruits is nil. I believe the likely outcome of the expansion will be that of Miami,VT, & Syracuse's recruiting will improve...not ours. THWG

 

[GTTerrific]

Some young men want to get an education and compete. GT isn’t for everyone, but there are young men and women out there that GT is good for them as well as they are good for us. We’ve not Vandy, UGA, UT, FSU, or any other school. We are Georgia Tech.

Just recently we did recruit some kids who could have gone to school at the schools you guys are talking about. They decided to come to GT. Why do you think Kenny Scott choose GT over UT or Miami? Why did Grant not waver and go to FSU or Oklahoma? Yes, there might not be masses to choose from like some other schools have, but GT has a lot to offer.

Do you gents know how many players’ percentage wise makes it to the next level, NFL? Yes, schools like Miami do well. So do FSU and UGA. Still the percentage is extremely low. It’s about three percent. An education is very important. It’s important for GT to go after the right student athlete to get the right fit on and off the field.

Some fans including myself are not afraid to compete with anyone. I have the mind set that it only makes a person or team better. These young men on the football team live for this stuff. That’s what their life is all about. In life itself that’s what I’m all about as well. I don’t tuck my tail and run. Going up against competition only makes us better.

You guys want to talk about the truth. The truth is it takes a lot of money to fund these programs. Expansion is a must at some time if the conference wants to keep up.

Bringing in a school like Miami will give the conference added markets for TV to start with. They’re will be other benefits like bowl money. The key is getting the right schools to follow bringing something to the table, so the money won’t be spread too thin. It will give the conference an added game in football and probably a conference championship.

Besides, that would be a killer road trip.

 

[oldfoggy]

Back when I had my little heart problem and my doctors told me I needed more exercise I chose golf. I went out and got the best guys to compete with. I didn't win at first but kept playing and playing and eventually I got even with some of them and ended up winning my fair share. The kid who will come to Tech will want to compete and the same thing will happen that happened in round ball. The competition will bring the kids who like the school, it's courses of study and we will end up just like we did in b ball. Maybe not today nor tomorrow but it will happen the same way it did back in the SEC days.

 

[catjacket]

71, do you understand that Athletic Training is Sports Medicine? Lots of A&P, kineseology, biology, etc. NOT a crip major by any means!

BC is the only proposed ACC addition which is a Tier One academic school; Miami, Pitt, Syracuse and VT are all Tier Two schools, and WVU is Tier Three. The ACC currently has five Tier One schools (GT, Duke, Wake, UNC and UVA) and four Tier Two schools. While academics is NOT driving the expansion, it is one of the criteria governing who will be added.

I love GT's fit in the current ACC, but, let's face it, there are no other conference schools with a curriculum so narrow. So what difference will it make if we add Miami, Syracuse and BC (the three most likely candidates)? They and every other ACC school are not going to stop offering liberal arts degrees any more than GT will add an education school!

 

[GoldZ]

We don't have to add a "education" school to compete. There are enough legit technically oriented programs that can be added to help not only the football team but the diversity of the student body overall.

Too many,IMO wane about the potential loss of the Tech Experience...i.e. learning to survive against tough odds, if majors are added to the currently very limited curricula. I say baloney. More "Tech people" need to walk a mile in an athlete's shoes to understand that even with the tutors etc. they go through hell to pass their courses because of the incredible work load they face as athletes. Many a 1400 SATer at Tech would wilt under the stress and demands placed upon the football players. The article in the AUC this week about Brian Lee depicts IMO the Tech Experience. It's this "experience" for the most part that brings the recruiters to our campus...NOT the course content.

The "truth" is the players that ugag, Miami, & fsu regularly send to the NFL are faster, stronger, and more athletic than the vast majority of the one's we don't send are. This "truth" equates to an unlevel playing field which benefits neither GT or the kids playing for us. I hear concern over the school's charter, when this subject is debated...well what is the FOOTBALL team's charter? Somehow I don't think it's... just do the best you can guys with your hands tied. If we want to add the likes of Miami & VT to ugag & fsu, we better get off our high brow academic pedestal and start levelling the playing field. THWG

 

[ahsoisee]

I don't believe the valid concept of college is that it exists to have a football team. A college exists for education.

The football programs should adapt to the goal of the schools education. The schools educating criteria should not adapt to the football program.

Tech, and schools like Tech, have always competed very well when these schools have the right coach for the talent received.

Why was Tech competetive when Dodd was coach, when Frank Broyles and Ray Graves were coordinators, when Ross was coach, and when Friegden was coordinator?

Why did Duke compete well when Spurrier coached there?

There are enough athletes around the nation wanting the type of degrees received at Tech to produce competetive teams at Tech.

Haven't we won more national championships than Georgia? Until last years loss to Fresno State, didn't we have the highest percentages of bowl games won of any college team?

Is it more difficult when the teams are mismatched physically? Sure, but it is not so drastic, it cannot be overcome with good coaching.

 

[MsTechAnalysis]

Ahso:
You cannot be more correct with the following statement:

"Tech, and schools like Tech, have always competed very well when these schools have the right coach for the talent received."

This is for Tech and every other successful school the mainstay of a fruitful, consistent winning program! Tech had/has the ability to garner those athletes countrywide who want this curriculum. There is no reason not to continue but those (2) ingredients HAVE TO BE THERE!

 

[GoldZ]

Interesting points ahsoisee. I believe the following to be true:

1.) Changes/upgrades to our curricula does not have to be a zero sum game. It seems that every time a suggestion is made that might help us athletically that it equates to a recommendation to completely sell out, as have our neighbors. It's quite reasonable to me that said changes could benefit BOTH the school and team, and that done correctly will have no semblance of similarity to what is going on in Athens.

2.) Sure the purpose of the school is to educate, but what is the purpose of the football team? To entertain? To provide an occasion for alumni to meet? To give the athletes and students a chance to let off some steam? Of course not. It's to represent the school and it's agenda of excellence. Losing and playing on an unlevel playing field does not in any way serve excellence IMO. The truth is most D-1 programs have a great deal of impact on the school itself and can not be surgically removed from the benefit or detriment of it. The financial and imaging impact provided by the football team is inexorably linked to the educational goals of the school. I'm sorry that most of the academians were never chosen to be on their neighborhood or highschool teams, but the reality is that truly gifted athletes are far more rare than the 1400 SATers.

3.) Coach Dodd is unfortunately from a bygone era with little similarity to today's game and pool of athletes. Spurrier was 20-13 at Duke (so he overcame to some extent their handicaps...is that what we desire?) Even Ross & da Fridge, both wonderful coaches (maybe our best ever!) were able to recruit some (although not enuf for sustained success) truly outstanding players that would not be allowed to be part of this past year's class. Very disturbing. Maybe the current staff/admin can pull it off. I certainly hope so, but have serious doubts.

4.) As to there being enough SA's for our program to be competitive...where are they? Why aren't we signing them? Maybe it all comes down to what our individual beliefs are about the meaning of "competitive". 7-4 on average, middle to lower tier bowls, & 3/10 vs. ugag most certainly isn't mine. Myself and 1000's of others got no satisfaction walking out of Sanford last year and yelling..."No big deal...we have a narrow curricula!" Take that dawgs. THWG

 

[bugboy]

Originally posted by 71Bee:
We don't belong in the same conference with Miami or FSU. Who is kidding who here with all the fascination with the ACC adding Miami?

Yes, the conference will be stronger football wise, but that won't necessarily make our team more competitive.

If you haven't looked recently, Miami offers a variety of education-lite majors for the football career inclined. There is American Studies, Social Work, Education, and my favorite, Athletic Training. What real jock can't make the dean's list in Athletic Training?

FSU, hell it's even easier. You don't even have to obey the law to be successful at FSU.

Wake up everybody. Year in and year out Tech can not compete with football power houses like these two. Much less compete with just about any team in the SEC save Vanderbilt who has to be wondering how they got invited to the party. Hey Vandy, it's because you roll over..

Tell me again, why we are better off with Miami in the ACC??

<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">We are not inherently better off with Miami. Our well-being depends on what we do at Tech to help our own program win. But the conference as a whole is better off with Miami and the $$$ they will bring to our TV contracts, bowl money and general increase in fan interest (more sellouts).

The 85 scholarship limit is the mechanism that has been used to level the playing field. As long as we have that limit in place, we'll be in good shape. If we make it academically harder to get good athletes in here, then it's our own fault, not the fault of the ACC for letting in Miami.

 

[ahsoisee]

GoldZ, I understand and agree with ability to add or change some degrees to make Tech somewhat of a broader school to get some of the athletes that would like to come here.

My main point is the complete sell-out of the education standards to accomodate football and it appears some are making those suggestions.

My main point is that the football team should not drive the education goals of a College or University. It appears some become so obsessed with winning that the record of the football team should be the goal of the institution.

 

[71YellowJacket]

Ahsoisee,

The power of your logic is inescapable, well by most of us. Wish I had said it.

The conclusion of this same argument in the mid 60s led Tech to seek out colleges with a similar academic standards and compete athletically with those schools; goodbye SEC and eventually hello ACC. Soon afterwards, the collective ACC wisdom shifted because of a concern that the ACC wasn’t getting the TV coverage needed and wouldn’t it be great to bring in FSU and give our players the opportunity to play a powerhouse program. Some opportunity, how many times have we beaten them sense they joined the conference?

Now as before the needs and desires of the football fan base are driving the decisions on which schools should be included in the conference rather than the compatibility of academic standards. Off we go with the cart pulling the horse or in this case jackasses.

Well, here I go jumping on the bandwagon with a new Conference based upon playing powerhouses:

Southern Division:
Georgia
Alabama
FSU
Auburn
Tennessee
Florida
Georgia Tech

Rest Division:
Kansas State
Nebraska
Ohio State
Miami
Oklahoma
Texas
Vanderbilt-we don’t want to be the only loser

This kind of schedule should fill our stadium, raise the TV revenues, and thrill our fans who love big time competition.

 

[GoldZ]

ahsoisee, good points again and I share your concerns. Having said that, there is a world of difference between what I am suggesting and what most of us understand is the situation to our east. I too don't believe that the football program should drive the bus, but the academians/admin/fans/coaches/Regents etc. need to recognize the FACT that the team is not only on the bus, but rather a very important part of how well the bus runs.

My concern/belief is that with no internal changes, our record vs. ugag,fsu,Miami, & VT over the next 5 years would approximate something like 5-15. This is damaging to ALL concerned. THWG

 

[Father WASP]

I see your point 71. I think many of us are just so weary of an ACC that continually is led by the nose of the Duke's and Wake's that ANY football oriented decision we jump at.

I agree our program is not a year in year out equal to Miami or even FSU's for that matter - remember when their joining was to elevate the rest of the league?

I remain, however, in the camp that expansion will be a good thing.

With the right leadership, (and it's not in place now), there is nothing that would prohibit GT from competing with a Miami similar to the way VA Tech does now - few victories but usually competitive and definitely ahead of the rest of the league.

 

[71YellowJacket]

FatherWasp,

I am for expansion too, but with schools closer to us academically.

How about Boston College, Pittsburg, and Vandy? Between FSU and Miami, I would prefer to lose FSU and take Miami. I know that won’t happen so here is my take on a better ACC alignment with Miami and FSU.

North Division: South Division:

Boston College Miami
Maryland Georgia Tech
Virginia Tech North Carolina
Virginia North Carolina State
Wake Forest Duke
FSU Clemson

If the ACC expanded to 14 teams:

Pittsburg Vanderbilt

Make it really good by losing FSU and picking up Notre Dame.

 

[FHstinger]

ACC expansion:

North Division

Miami
Maryland
Virginia
Virginia Tech
West Virginia
Wake Forest

South Division

Clemson
Duke
FSU
GT
UNC
NC State

 

[ThomsonJacket]

Some of you seem scared of a little competition!

The only way to improve is to be pushed,driven and motivated to beat the other guy, show him you are better!

I don't buy all this

oh we can't compete with them cause they don't have smart people playing sports!

Since when did you have to be unintelligent to play sports well?
Plaese stop hiding behind this self-created myth,
stand up and say we can play against any team in the nation and win! Geezzz

cry babies!

 

[luckyjacket]

Thompson, I am in full agreement with you. This discussion reappears every time Tech football is down. Instead of "were not very good, how do we get better?", its always the academics that justify the losing.

I do not recall any bitching about academics in 1990 or as late as preseason 2000 when we went in as a top ten pick. Did the boys on the hill allow cupcake studies during those short term periods of success? Of course they did not.

Just to pick one other school, how did Oklahoma justify their down time before Stoops arived? Maybe they didn't.

Tech is tough, so what! We have to deal with it, and win with it. I would not want it any other way.

What it comes down to is leadership from the top being able to identify and sell the great Tech tradition to 85 student athletes that will flourish here. Lets move on.

 

[71YellowJacket]

Originally posted by Thomsonjacket:
Some of you seem scared of a little competition!

The only way to improve is to be pushed, driven and motivated to beat the other guy, show him you are better!

I don't buy all this

oh we can't compete with them cause they don't have smart people playing sports!

Since when did you have to be unintelligent to play sports well?
Plaese stop hiding behind this self-created myth,
stand up and say we can play against any team in the nation and win! Geezzz

cry babies!

<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Thompsonjacket,

You are either a young dreamer or not strong on economic analytical skills. Think of it as supply and demand. Instead of sports, let’s think of lovely ladies, in deference to your off-topic posts.

If you will only date beautiful women who are smart you have x to choose from. However if you will date beautiful smart and beautiful dumb ones you have x+ y to choose from. Because the total of smart and dumb exceeds x you have more to choose from and a greater possibility of dating success than your friend and fellow Tech grad who will only date beautiful smart ones (a man of good taste). Now, your friend may enjoy a brief spate of dating success and in the short-term even surpass your dating performance (in terms of quanity), but in the long-run, the laws of supply and demand will prevail.... Now if you add to your bevy, beautiful dumb and smart thieves, you will be dating the girls from FSU…

and your friend will end up marrying a beautiful lawyer who makes $1M per year.

 

[71YellowJacket]

Originally posted by luckyjacket:
Thompson, I am in full agreement with you. This discussion reappears every time Tech football is down. Instead of "were not very good, how do we get better?", its always the academics that justify the losing.

I do not recall any bitching about academics in 1990 or as late as preseason 2000 when we went in as a top ten pick. Did the boys on the hill allow cupcake studies during those short term periods of success? Of course they did not.

Just to pick one other school, how did Oklahoma justify their down time before Stoops arrived? Maybe they didn't.

Tech is tough, so what! We have to deal with it, and win with it. I would not want it any other way.

What it comes down to is leadership from the top being able to identify and sell the great Tech tradition to 85 student athletes that will flourish here. Lets move on.

<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">luckyjacket,

I admire your enthusiasm but let's think this through.

To my mind their are 3 things needed to be a Division 1A powerhouse, consistently in the top 10 or 15 teams each year.

You must have money, coaching, and a large supply of the best athletes. If any of these are limited or absent you won't be there year end and year out.

Money is needed to provide the best facilities, coaches , and if you are cut from the same cloth as FSU or Bama, players.

The best coaches are needed to recruit the best athletics and prepare the players physically and provide the best strategy for winning each week.

It’s highly competitive at the top, probably not much difference between the top 10 teams and the next 15 on the list.

Check the records, all the way back to the date FSU joined the ACC. How many times have we beaten them; including 1990?