Chris Petersen for new GT Coach!

[midatlantech]

I say we take a chance on a young coach that doesn't need a lot of money.

 

[loyalGTfan]

Well sir, I hate to break it to you, but aiming for "elite program else disappointment" isn't very healthy. I hope we get a coach who can do as good, and perhaps a wee bit better, than Chan has. Don't throw your eggs in the 'elite' basket, settle for the 'improvement' basket and you're more likely to enjoy the next few years.

I think we have a lot of options for coaches that might be able to show us an 'improvement,' and we should by all rights be able to get one or two of them, so I'm pretty happy with our chances to not get shafted.

Well if we don't want to aim for the elite then we keep chan... I mean he wins games... poor decisions but he does...The next couple of years I'll settle for improvement because that's what it'd probably take if we made a coaching change. We wouldn't be a nonstoppable team if that happene the first couple of years... But I only want Gailey gone if there is a vast improvement in the coaching change... Why take the recruiting hit and of course his huge buyout if we just get somebody that is the same or is just a wee better?

 

[beej67]

Why take the recruiting hit and of course his huge buyout if we just get somebody that is the same or is just a wee better?

Personally, I think the image of stagnancy hurts us as a program. If Chan wins out regular season, then we don't appear stagnant. If he doesn't, then we definitely do, and not only does that mean we don't progress long term, it means we regress.

I don't think he's as bad a coach as everyone's letting on. Everyone jumps on Chan for not calling a pass play on 3rd down looking at a 50 yarder to beat UVA, but Grobe (someone highly regarded as a possible replacement) made exactly the same call in exactly the same situation just last weekend, and he missed his field goal too. Paul Johnson made the opposite decision last year vs BC in his bowl game, and it cost him that game. Yet these guys are somehow better than Chan.

And hell, maybe they are. One thing's for certain, if Tech loses again this year, we'll certainly find out!

Someone has to fall on their sword for the results of this season. That's just the samurai nature of college football.

 

[thwg]

Personally, I think the image of stagnancy hurts us as a program. If Chan wins out regular season, then we don't appear stagnant. If he doesn't, then we definitely do, and not only does that mean we don't progress long term, it means we regress.

I don't think he's as bad a coach as everyone's letting on. Everyone jumps on Chan for not calling a pass play on 3rd down looking at a 50 yarder to beat UVA, but Grobe (someone highly regarded as a possible replacement) made exactly the same call in exactly the same situation just last weekend, and he missed his field goal too. Paul Johnson made the opposite decision last year vs BC in his bowl game, and it cost him that game. Yet these guys are somehow better than Chan.

And hell, maybe they are. One thing's for certain, if Tech loses again this year, we'll certainly find out!

Someone has to fall on their sword for the results of this season. That's just the samurai nature of college football.

Grobe did do almost the same thing and it was DUMB. I'm so tired of dumb deicison-making by a place that competes with MIT for students. As for coaching, Grobe seemes to get more out of his players than Gailey but not exponentially more.

Gailey's worst indicator as a coahc is he has been the QB developer/OC for six seaons and we suck at what he coaches. If he weren't so hands on and seemed ticked about where we were as an offense it would be one thing but he actually defends his QB development as if it's something to be proud of.