An interesting Question

[beeware]

Axe,
I am not getting into this resume game. There is nothing in Gailey's resume that proves he will be successful at Tech. Only time will tell. We had a great staff and a great POSITIVE leader in Coach Mac. He could have kept the good things that O'leary did and improved the negativity. But Braine wanted his own puppet and he got him. Now we are stuck with him. Maybe Gailey will do fine. I hope he does. And of course TECH has enough talent on hand this year that he couldn't possibly fail THIS YEAR. I have been a hard core TECH fan all my life but it is disappointing to me that TECH never seems to learn a thing about these coaching changes.
I realize that I am not going to change your mind and you are not going to change my mind. Let us both hope that our current players are willing to play for this staff and that sometime between now and next year that Gailey's learning curve improves tremendously and that he develops at least a little recruiting ability.
Peace.
Just my opinion.

 

[beeware]

ahso,
Heaven forbid that we would actually give Coach O'leary some credit for the job he did here. What could we have been thinking? Surely it is much better to give Gailey all this credit, without the benefit of coaching a SINGLE game at TECH, than to give O'leary any credit for 5 straight bowl games and the TALENT LEVEL that Gailey is inheriting.
Sheesh.

 

[Culb]

My opinion about Mac is that he had no business interviewing for the HC job. Maybe he would have kept around much of the GOL staff. But that staff underachieved last year. The GOL staff was nothing to get excited about, IMO. Which is why Chan let most of them go. The 5 straight bowl games I give to Fridge, not O'Leary. I think GOL cost us more games than he won for us last year. I said halfway through the season that I wouldn't be sad to see him go, and I'm not.

I really only wanted O'Brien and Kelley to stay. They seemed like the best fit for Tech from that staff. They are great at what they do, and I'm glad one of them got retained.

Roof probably should have stayed, but with the negativity surrounding him from last season, I don't blame Chan for not keeping him on as DC.

All in all, I fell like the old staff, while cohesive and working, was nothin spectacular. I fell that this staff is sort of an All Star staff, with Chan hand picking the best he can find that were available. The old staff could coach well, this one will coach better. The old staff could recruit well, this one will recruit spectacularly.

Like most peole, I am tired of not living up to expectations, and with the mediocrity that seemed to be surrounding us. While we make fun of UGA for firing Donnan after his successful years, it wasn't because he was bad, only because they thought they could do better with a new coach. I feel the same way about our program that they did. And I'm just as optimistic as they were, if not more so. Let's try to be nice to each other now.

 

[beeware]

culb,
It is funny that you mention Donn_n because that brings up a very interesting point.
All this glory and blind faith that 'almost' everyone wearing the thick gold colored shades is showering on Gailey, is very reminiscent of exactly what all the dawgs were saying when they hired Donn_n. And we all know how THAT turned out.
Why don't y'all let him find his way to the stadium before you pronounce him Dodd, or Heisman, or even Donn_n.

 

[bugboy]

Good post, Culb. Sort of sums up my feelings as well. The old staff was good. The new staff is better, starting at the top.

The only argument I can see supporting keeping Mac is if you think he'd keep the old staff around. This argument holds if you think the old staff was better, which I don't. Outside of that, I can't think of one reason to keep Mac as the HC. Really, all he offered was continuity...to a point. As Axe points out, Mac was not GOL by any means...and he damn sure aint no CG.

Given how we WASTED our talent advantage last year, the best thing that could have happened has happened. Our old HC, who wasn't up to the task without the Fridge, left us of his own accord. The new guy who was hired has a better resume (meaning a better coaching background) than the guy he replaced and Mac.

To me, it's that simple. CG was the best available choice for us, and Braine took him.

Remember Mark Bradley's article right after O'leary resigned. The title was "Tech Got Lucky". Well folks, he was right. Period.

 

[bugboy]

Beeware,
Let me add one thing. The best thing about any of O'Leary's coaching staffs was FRIDGE. Without the Fridge, we were mediocre. O'Leary's record without the Fridge was ONE lousy game over .500 from 1995 to 2001 when the Fridge was not his assistant. With the Fridge, we were 21 games over .500 during that same period. But Fridge is long gone.

So, keeping MAC around as the HC would have perpetuated the mediocrity.

Our program needed some shaking up after last year and we got it. No one knows where CG will take this program, but based on his history as an HC and an OC, he'll be a good one.

 

[oldfoggy]

Well guys it's this way, there was only one Dodd maybe the best coach of all time, can you imagine the record he would have had, had he had the talent that the Bear had. So lets not compare CG to GOL until time has gone by and we can look in hindsight then review the results. As for GOL I figure he cost us at least 2 games this year with his 2 point try. I also think he cost us games in other years as well. So lets not cry over GOL he didn't want to stay here and I hope CG is as sucessful as I think he will be. At least we now have an honest coach.

 

[jimbobGT]

beeware, I don't want to jump on you and this is nothing personal, but what is O'leary without friedgen? He is so average. And wasn't Mac just responsible for the OL? You want a guy who runs the OL to start running the team? Its a huge jump.

I agree Mac would probably easier to play for, but I don't think most of us feel as bitter as you about the coaching debacle. Mac is an OL coach, not even an OC, Gailey as been a head coach in the NFL and done well. I honestly want to see how well Gailey makes game time adjustments and that will show how good of a coach he'll be here at Tech. If you don't see a difference in Gailey and Mac, I think there are some other reasons that you feel so much allegiance to Mac.

 

[Axe]

Originally posted by beeware:
Axe,
I am not getting into this resume game. There is nothing in Gailey's resume that proves he will be successful at Tech.

<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Beeware, that is exactly what I said in my post. We have no idea what Chan will do as the coach of GT. We also have no idea what Mac would have done. To assume he would do the same as GOL is foolish. He may have done better, he may have done the same, he may have done worse. We don't know he is a different man.

You said you don't want to get into resumes, but I ask you how else do you pick a coach? Doesn't the coach have to be carry basic qualifications for the job? Can Dave Braine hire anyone he wants just because he thinks they will get the job done. As an AD doesn't he have a responsibilty to hire a HC with a resume that suggests he is qualifed to be a D-I head coach. Clearly, CG has that resume. You may think he's going to fail and that's fine, but he is qualifed to be HC at GT.

I'm not asking you to change my mind. I'm simply asking you to tell me in an objective fashion how Mac is qualified to be HC at GT. I see 1 year of Div. II experience and 1 year as a co-OC at a Conference USA school. Our least experienced coach on the current staff(Nix)has more experience than that. Could any other Div. I-A school justify hiring this man on a hunch?

 

[FHstinger]

Beeware, comparing CG with Bill Lewis is illogical. Based on his resume, BL should never have gotten the HC job. Aside from his last year at ECU before coming to Tech, BL had losing records at ECU and Wyoming every year. All I can figure is that his last second win over NC State in the '91 Peach Bowl really impressed Homer Rice. On the other hand, CG's resume, well, 'nuff said.