Dodged A Bullet

[GoldZ]

LOL so Fritz is in the same league as Satan?

Read your post I'm replying to---slowly this time.

 

[GTFLETCH]

I think it is a mediocre, lazy hire. I was expecting something better after what Cabrera told us, but it is what it is. I'm fully prepared for.500 ACC seasons with losses against UGA. I won't even be mad. I'm hoping for more, but it takes more than "the players play hard for him" to convince me. He is an upgrade over clown, but who isn't? I wish him the best for Tech's sake.

I will take 6-6 and a bowl game at this point, that would be better than Clown Collins body of work.

 

[TechRush]

I will take 6-6 and a bowl game at this point, that would be better than Clown Collins body of work.

So you are saying Dave Braine was right. 6-6 and a ööööty bowl game versus some other scrub on a random Tuesday at 2:00 is what we should just come to grips with. Temper the expectations.

 

[GT flunkout]

I will take 6-6 and a bowl game at this point, that would be better than Clown Collins body of work.

That should always be Tech's floor. It was the bottom for almost 2 decades.

I remember leaving Shreveport in 2010 after we lost to finish 6-7 on the year. It was my first losing season in 14 years as a Tech fan, and only got there by losing a bowl game.

 

[whiskey clear]

You're completely ignoring the development seen this past fall - but if that makes you feel worse, it's no problem with me.

I'm looking at the whys and noting the record of the excessive number of 1 and done transfers we had at the position from 2019 through 2021. I'm seeing the reality that this year, finally, we had an OL unit that had been together for 2+ years. I'm acknowledging the legacy that CBK has done a good to very good job at building and maintaining an OL everywhere he has been prior to coming back to Tech.

This, plus the play on the field after he became IHC convinced me that he can get it done.

All of those “accomplishments” when judging the totality of his record do not merit becoming HC. Only “Tech man” and “couldn’t afford anyone else” does. And that doesn’t bode well.

 

[stinger78]

All of those “accomplishments” when judging the totality of his record do not merit becoming HC. Only “Tech man” and “couldn’t afford anyone else” does. And that doesn’t bode well.

If Key’s resume doesn’t tilt the scale in his direction, what does? Twenty years as an assistant at the highest levels under two of the best (and one clown). And, what about all those other assistants who make the jump each and every year? Some are successful, others aren’t. Why continue to deride our coach?

 

[whiskey clear]

If Key’s resume doesn’t tilt the scale in his direction, what does? Twenty years as an assistant at the highest levels under two of the best (and one clown). And, what about all those other assistants who make the jump each and every year? Some are successful, others aren’t. Why continue to deride our coach?

Your first question is really the only good one so I will address it though I directly mentioned it in the post you replied to. “Tech man” and “couldn’t afford better.”

Other than being an assistant coach for many years what do you think tips the scales of giving him the job? For that matter what is that even worth? As you point out, many of their assistants, most even, haven’t panned out as head coaches. So what tips the scale for you other than “Tech man” and “cheap hire?”

 

[stinger78]

Your first question is really the only good one so I will address it though I directly mentioned it in the post you replied to. “Tech man” and “couldn’t afford better.”

Other than being an assistant coach for many years what do you think tips the scales of giving him the job? For that matter what is that even worth? As you point out, many of their assistants, most even, haven’t panned out as head coaches. So what tips the scale for you other than “Tech man” and “cheap hire?”

Many have panned out as well. There are no sure bets for a new HC anywhere. None. There have been coaches with very little experience that did very well, and those who have not. Dabo comes to mind. There have been those with lots of previous HC experience who did well, and those who have not. Many examples both ways there. There have been those who had a little HC experience with both results as well as those with coordinator experience. Many examples of both. As for Key, he was a successful position coach/recruiting coordinator for 15 years under O’Leary. So much so that Nick Saban restructured his staff to get him when he came available in 2016. Then he spent 3 successful years under Saban. What’s not to like about that?

 

[stinger78]

Many have panned out as well. There are no sure bets for a new HC anywhere. None. There have been coaches with very little experience that did very well, and those who have not. Dabo comes to mind. There have been those with lots of previous HC experience who did well, and those who have not. Many examples both ways there. There have been those who had a little HC experience with both results as well as those with coordinator experience. Many examples of both. As for Key, he was a successful position coach/recruiting coordinator for 15 years under O’Leary. So much so that Nick Saban restructured his staff to get him when he came available in 2016. Then he spent 3 successful years OL coach under Saban. What’s not to like about that?

 

[samsgt02]

Your first question is really the only good one so I will address it though I directly mentioned it in the post you replied to. “Tech man” and “couldn’t afford better.”

Other than being an assistant coach for many years what do you think tips the scales of giving him the job? For that matter what is that even worth? As you point out, many of their assistants, most even, haven’t panned out as head coaches. So what tips the scale for you other than “Tech man” and “cheap hire?”

Key took 3-1/4 years of really bad losing ACC records and immediately brought us a winning ACC record. Beat two ranked ACC teams and had some losses. Most of those games were with multiple Quarterbacks due to injury. The team didn’t quit, except that one QB on the last play. I think he corrected that guy too. That’s a pretty good resume bullet point other than “Tech man” and “cheap hire.” Now is not the time to be sh!tting on our new coach.

edit: One guy did quit completely, who never played our biggest rival. Even though he had one last opportunity to. That guy is a team cancer.

 

[clapper]

All of those “accomplishments” when judging the totality of his record do not merit becoming HC. Only “Tech man” and “couldn’t afford anyone else” does. And that doesn’t bode well.

There's a bit to unpack here.

First, "couldn't afford anyone else". There were plenty of others that would be interested, able and willing to come here for a reduced cost (if there is, in fact, that need, which I think we can agree on). That is neither J's nor CBK's fault. It is reality. We have a hole to dig out of. How long have we known that? Yes, that limits our prospects, but IWIWI and doesn't diminish the fact that we need a head coach. Yet, it still strikes people off the list and reduces the pool. I saw no one that was mentioned in the media, or on this board, that we couldn't afford had we needed to.

Second, 'Tech Man'. There are qualities that come to mind that are very positive and also describes the traits have made many of us successful. It is NOT something to use as a negative. And it is certainly not restricted to only those who have graduated from GT. It is definitely something that we can relate to and would take pride in with our coach, graduate or not.

Having said that, the coaching search was in its infancy when J arrived. He likely had already created a short list of candidates before he got here, but he hadn't had a chance to dive into the financials yet. And I think we can all agree that ICBK was not on that list at that point (J's first game before he was even on campus full time was the Virginia game for God's sake).

So, taking that into account, how does CBK stack up with the known prospects? No head coaching experience is a negative right off the bat, but not to the point of striking him off the list. We certainly would consider others with a similar resume. At least one poster is raising Garrett Riley's name - a guy with three years OC experience, linked only to the North Texas State job at the moment. One candidate had a terrible defense. ICBK had already improved ours. One candidate was in his sixties. ICBK is eighteen years younger. One candidate was the next shiny toy that would bring hype to town. We just got rid of a HC like that, who showed what happens when that experiment fails. ICBK was already cleaning that mess up. ALL of those candidates had the negotiating leverage of a current contract. Every single one of them, including ICBK, had negatives to go along with the positives. Of course, none of them except CBK can say that they have had the privilege of coaching under O'Leary or Saban, much less both of them.

We are rolling the dice no matter who we hire. You think we are settling, but you don't know. None of us do. I never got on board with supporting any candidate, but I said I would support the AD's choice. I can see how he came to this conclusion.

 

[andrew]

So, taking that into account, how does CBK stack up with the known prospects? No head coaching experience is a negative right off the bat, but not to the point of striking him off the list. We certainly would consider others with a similar resume. At least one poster is raising Garrett Riley's name - a guy with three years OC experience, linked only to the North Texas State job at the moment.

I do not think this is a fair comparison. It's not just that he has no head coaching experience, it's also that he has little experience and success as a coordinator as well.

To use your example, Garrett Riley has had three straight winning seasons as an OC, won an award as best assistant coach in the country, and is currently in the playoffs. Brent Key had two years as OC almost ten years ago in which the team went 12-1 the season before he was promoted, then went 9-4 and 0-12 after he took over.

Obviously there are many other factors involved in a team's success/failure, but I would not consider those resumes to be similar.

 

[whiskey clear]

Many have panned out as well. There are no sure bets for a new HC anywhere. None. There have been coaches with very little experience that did very well, and those who have not. Dabo comes to mind. There have been those with lots of previous HC experience who did well, and those who have not. Many examples both ways there. There have been those who had a little HC experience with both results as well as those with coordinator experience. Many examples of both. As for Key, he was a successful position coach/recruiting coordinator for 15 years under O’Leary. So much so that Nick Saban restructured his staff to get him when he came available in 2016. Then he spent 3 successful years under Saban. What’s not to like about that?

He was only there for 3 years. Left there to become part of a complete failure of a staff with Collins and was arguably the weakest link on the staff with OL results. I bet you predicted our OL would be awesome by now because “succeeded under Saban.”

Saban has been coaching forever. His tree contains as many failures as successes so not much to hang a hat on by itself.

Coaching tree talk is mostly nonsense imo. I bet most of Saban’s “tree” can also claim to be under at least a half dozen other head coaches “trees.” Ted Roof falls under O’Leary’s tree. Guess Key should give him another try? Speaking of your example of O’Leary. Who were the best of dozens and dozens of coaches that worked for him? BOB, Godsey, Randy Edsal….well I’d take those 3 over Key…even Edsal.

The only thing Key has proven successful at is riding the coattails of successful head coaches. He was an abysmal OC at UCF. He has performed poorly at Tech as an OL coach.

So other than being a “Tech man”, “a cheap hire”, and assistant for a couple of good HCs….what do you see that indicates he will succeed? A couple of surprising wins over over rated Pitt and UNC? He also had a couple of surprising losses to putrid teams.

 

[whiskey clear]

Key took 3-1/4 years of really bad losing ACC records and immediately brought us a winning ACC record. Beat two ranked ACC teams and had some losses. Most of those games were with multiple Quarterbacks due to injury. The team didn’t quit, except that one QB on the last play. I think he corrected that guy too. That’s a pretty good resume bullet point other than “Tech man” and “cheap hire.” Now is not the time to be sh!tting on our new coach.

edit: One guy did quit completely, who never played our biggest rival. Even though he had one last opportunity to. That guy is a team cancer.

Those are some things…I just don’t think they are very legitimate.

 

[stinger78]

He was only there for 3 years. Left there to become part of a complete failure of a staff with Collins and was arguably the weakest link on the staff with OL results. I bet you predicted our OL would be awesome by now because “succeeded under Saban.”

Saban has been coaching forever. His tree contains as many failures as successes so not much to hang a hat on by itself.

Coaching tree talk is mostly nonsense imo. I bet most of Saban’s “tree” can also claim to be under at least a half dozen other head coaches “trees.” Ted Roof falls under O’Leary’s tree. Guess Key should give him another try? Speaking of your example of O’Leary. Who were the best of dozens and dozens of coaches that worked for him? BOB, Godsey, Randy Edsal….well I’d take those 3 over Key…even Edsal.

The only thing Key has proven successful at is riding the coattails of successful head coaches. He was an abysmal OC at UCF. He has performed poorly at Tech as an OL coach.

So other than being a “Tech man”, “a cheap hire”, and assistant for a couple of good HCs….what do you see that indicates he will succeed? A couple of surprising wins over over rated Pitt and UNC? He also had a couple of surprising losses to putrid teams.

So, IOW, nothing matters but what you want to matter? OK, cool. I see how it is.

Have a great day, WC!

 

[whiskey clear]

There's a bit to unpack here.

First, "couldn't afford anyone else". There were plenty of others that would be interested, able and willing to come here for a reduced cost (if there is, in fact, that need, which I think we can agree on). That is neither J's nor CBK's fault. It is reality. We have a hole to dig out of. How long have we known that? Yes, that limits our prospects, but IWIWI and doesn't diminish the fact that we need a head coach. Yet, it still strikes people off the list and reduces the pool. I saw no one that was mentioned in the media, or on this board, that we couldn't afford had we needed to.

Second, 'Tech Man'. There are qualities that come to mind that are very positive and also describes the traits have made many of us successful. It is NOT something to use as a negative. And it is certainly not restricted to only those who have graduated from GT. It is definitely something that we can relate to and would take pride in with our coach, graduate or not.

Having said that, the coaching search was in its infancy when J arrived. He likely had already created a short list of candidates before he got here, but he hadn't had a chance to dive into the financials yet. And I think we can all agree that ICBK was not on that list at that point (J's first game before he was even on campus full time was the Virginia game for God's sake).

So, taking that into account, how does CBK stack up with the known prospects? No head coaching experience is a negative right off the bat, but not to the point of striking him off the list. We certainly would consider others with a similar resume. At least one poster is raising Garrett Riley's name - a guy with three years OC experience, linked only to the North Texas State job at the moment. One candidate had a terrible defense. ICBK had already improved ours. One candidate was in his sixties. ICBK is eighteen years younger. One candidate was the next shiny toy that would bring hype to town. We just got rid of a HC like that, who showed what happens when that experiment fails. ICBK was already cleaning that mess up. ALL of those candidates had the negotiating leverage of a current contract. Every single one of them, including ICBK, had negatives to go along with the positives. Of course, none of them except CBK can say that they have had the privilege of coaching under O'Leary or Saban, much less both of them.

We are rolling the dice no matter who we hire. You think we are settling, but you don't know. None of us do. I never got on board with supporting any candidate, but I said I would support the AD's choice. I can see how he came to this conclusion.

2 others were supposedly interviewed but turned Tech down for one reason or another (supposedly). Lot of conjecture there but either of those 2 guys were far more likely to succeed than Key. If Colorado could hire Deion….one would think Tech could figure out how to. (I think culture had more to do with not even considering him than money did).

Key was a “safe hire” mostly because he’s a “Tech man” and managed to barely exceed insanely low expectations as interim.

His hiring is completely underwhelming and not exciting unless you regularly get boners for “Tech men.”

 

[gtleviathan]

He was only there for 3 years. Left there to become part of a complete failure of a staff with Collins and was arguably the weakest link on the staff with OL results. I bet you predicted our OL would be awesome by now because “succeeded under Saban.”

Saban has been coaching forever. His tree contains as many failures as successes so not much to hang a hat on by itself.

Coaching tree talk is mostly nonsense imo. I bet most of Saban’s “tree” can also claim to be under at least a half dozen other head coaches “trees.” Ted Roof falls under O’Leary’s tree. Guess Key should give him another try? Speaking of your example of O’Leary. Who were the best of dozens and dozens of coaches that worked for him? BOB, Godsey, Randy Edsal….well I’d take those 3 over Key…even Edsal.

The only thing Key has proven successful at is riding the coattails of successful head coaches. He was an abysmal OC at UCF. He has performed poorly at Tech as an OL coach.

So other than being a “Tech man”, “a cheap hire”, and assistant for a couple of good HCs….what do you see that indicates he will succeed? A couple of surprising wins over over rated Pitt and UNC? He also had a couple of surprising losses to putrid teams.

Surprising losses? Those were business-as-usual losses the last few years. The wins, however, were actually surprising.

 

[whiskey clear]

So, IOW, nothing matters but what you want to matter? OK, cool. I see how it is.

Have a great day, WC!

I love agreeing to disagree. You have a nice day as well.

 

[LegendaryGT]

2 others were supposedly interviewed but turned Tech down for one reason or another (supposedly). Lot of conjecture there but either of those 2 guys were far more likely to succeed than Key. If Colorado could hire Deion….one would think Tech could figure out how to. (I think culture had more to do with not even considering him than money did).

Key was a “safe hire” mostly because he’s a “Tech man” and managed to barely exceed insanely low expectations as interim.

His hiring is completely underwhelming and not exciting unless you regularly get boners for “Tech men.”

At this point you're just trolling. Give it a rest.

 

[stinger78]

Surprising losses? Those were business-as-usual losses the last few years. The wins, however, were actually surprising.

You must focus on losses to the exclusion of all else. Get with it.