Here’s the Thing

I don't know why he hasn't gotten sick of the stupid stuff. Maybe the $7k per day. Haha. But I doubt he needs the money now.
Getting rich often doesn't slake your desire for money but deepen it. I don't know CPJ enough to say with any certainty. My guess is that at this point he's more motivated by a desire to prove people wrong and win championships. I've never doubted CPJ's desire — just his ability to get us over the hump.

And, I'm sure he loves being around the kids.
 
You might not know a lot of rich people... getting rich often doesn't slake your desire for money but deepen it. I don't know CPJ enough to say with any certainty. My guess is that at this point he's more motivated by a desire to prove people wrong and win championships. I've never doubted CPJ's desire — just his ability to get us over the hump.

And, I'm sure he loves being around the kids.
Yeah, I don't dispute what you're saying about money, but I really don't think that describe's CPJ. I also don't dispute that he's more motivated by a desire to win and prove people wrong as well. But I disagree that CPJ is the reason we can't "get over the hump."
 
The guy is paid $200k+ per month. That’s $7k per day. He (allegedly) had chances to leave in 2009. Nowadays anyplace he’d go would pay much less.

And there’s so much insular navel gazing on this board it’s ridiculous. GT fans are *less* demanding than major programs’ fans. CPJ has a much longer leash here than at a place like Tenn or Nebr. For heavens sake Fla just fired a guy who took Muschamp’s disaster and won two straight East crowns. No way CPJ would’ve survived 2010-2013 anywhere else.

The reality is he’d be crazy to leave — unless he just was sick of coaching at the Div I level and wanted to go into semi-retirement helping out a minor school.

Do we have room for a third mascot?

I'm a ramblin' wreck from Georgia Tech and a helluva insular navel gazer
 
I just going to throw this out there: Paul Johnson's win % at Tech is .590, and Chan Gailey's (who is almost universally disliked by Tech fans) was .580.

It seems to me that a lot of Tech fans have bought into the mindset that if we don't run a unique system, we can't compete at the highest levels. Another poster pointed out that the football landscape has changed over the years, and that is true. Even back to the Dodd days, one of the biggest recruiting problems was getting the rural kids with an academic background that could handle Tech's academics. However, today there is a huge pool of athletes in the metro Atlanta area who do have the academic background to handle the rigors, and they frankly don't consider Tech because of the system he runs and his personality.

Maybe Tech will never do better than Johnson, who knows? And I am not advocating firing him. But it does sadden me to see a number of people just settle for mediocrity.
Chan is reviled because his ultra conservative game management led to pretty much every bad team staying within a single score of us (we couldnt even blow out a I-AA team) and then superior teams would destroy us 51-7 style. PJ's system destroys lesser teams, competitive against good teams, and gives us a punchers chance to upset a superior team. In Chan's system, we never had a chance. I'm actually surprised their overall records are similar but I am sure the 3-9 disaster year greatly leveled the comparison. I consider that year an outlier.
 
Chan is reviled because his ultra conservative game management led to pretty much every bad team staying within a single score of us (we couldnt even blow out a I-AA team) and then superior teams would destroy us 51-7 style. PJ's system destroys lesser teams, competitive against good teams, and gives us a punchers chance to upset a superior team. In Chan's system, we never had a chance. I'm actually surprised their overall records are similar but I am sure the 3-9 disaster year greatly leveled the comparison. I consider that year an outlier.
I am not carrying the banner for Chan Gailey, but he badly beat a very good Auburn team, beat #3 Miami, and a number of other good teams. Really, it all boils down to the fact he couldn't beat Georgia, and that really is how every Tech coach is ultimately judged.

I am not trying to create a moratorium on Paul Johnson, I just don't agree, at all, with the premise that running the triple option is the only way to keep Tech competitive. A number of people point out the disadvantages Tech has, but it also has advantages. Bobby Ross seized upon that and won a national title.

This "system" he runs has provided some good wins, but it has also dumbed down recruiting and left some things on the table.
 
I am not carrying the banner for Chan Gailey, but he badly beat a very good Auburn team, beat #3 Miami, and a number of other good teams. Really, it all boils down to the fact he couldn't beat Georgia, and that really is how every Tech coach is ultimately judged.

I am not trying to create a moratorium on Paul Johnson, I just don't agree, at all, with the premise that running the triple option is the only way to keep Tech competitive. A number of people point out the disadvantages Tech has, but it also has advantages. Bobby Ross seized upon that and won a national title.

This "system" he runs has provided some good wins, but it has also dumbed down recruiting and left some things on the table.
Football in 2017 is different from football in 1990. But, to your main point, PJ’s system may not be the only way to keep GT competitive. But trying to outbid and outrecruit colleges with lower academic standards and much higher budgets is a fool’s errand in my opinion.
 
Football in 2017 is different from football in 1990. But, to your main point, PJ’s system may not be the only way to keep GT competitive. But trying to outbid and outrecruit colleges with lower academic standards and much higher budgets is a fool’s errand in my opinion.
I agree that football in 2017 is different....for all programs. My point is simply this; Another coach, with another approach could certainly give Tech a chance, as well. I keep seeing these "Ted Roof has to be run off" comments. I wonder how many realize he is coaching a bunch of players that none of the major programs wanted, and many were only recruited by FCS teams.

As I have stated in other posts, there is a trade off for running this system. As long as he is at Tech he will have some decent years, but typically seasons around .500. He will beat some decent teams, but continue to sugn 0-3 star talent, and play the type of ball he does now. Frankly, I don't know if that is "acceptable" to the Tech fanbase as a whole, maybe it is. But I definitely don't believe that if Tech lost Paul Johnson, they couldn't conpete
 
I agree that football in 2017 is different....for all programs. My point is simply this; Another coach, with another approach could certainly give Tech a chance, as well. I keep seeing these "Ted Roof has to be run off" comments. I wonder how many realize he is coaching a bunch of players that none of the major programs wanted, and many were only recruited by FCS teams.

As I have stated in other posts, there is a trade off for running this system. As long as he is at Tech he will have some decent years, but typically seasons around .500. He will beat some decent teams, but continue to sugn 0-3 star talent, and play the type of ball he does now. Frankly, I don't know if that is "acceptable" to the Tech fanbase as a whole, maybe it is. But I definitely don't believe that if Tech lost Paul Johnson, they couldn't conpete
Maybe I’m wrong, but I thought the fire Roof threads actually meant fire someone else but people didn’t want to be banned.

Roof has done a good job IMO, and I was critical of hiring him.

As for recruits, we’ve done pretty good this year. Matter of fact, I’m pretty sure we been fairly consistent at recruiting since 2000
 
I wonder how many realize he is coaching a bunch of players that none of the major programs wanted, and many were only recruited by FCS teams.
When GT starts losing, we all start saying the reason is recruiting — our players just don't have as much talent as other teams. I'm sure that's true to a degree, but the idea that we're alone in the FBS in playing a bunch of why-not-give-em-a-chance FCS players is ridiculous — and frankly a little demeaning to our student-athletes.

It is hard to fact-check which players have legitimate offers from other P5 schools... but I'm pretty sure the likes of Bruce Jordan-Swilling and A.J. Gray had plenty of good offers elsewhere. Those aren't "projects" that have flowered at Tech. Those were great HS athletes that we persuaded to come here. It can be done.
 
When GT starts losing, we all start saying the reason is recruiting — our players just don't have as much talent as other teams. I'm sure that's true to a degree, but the idea that we're alone in the FBS in playing a bunch of why-not-give-em-a-chance FCS players is ridiculous — and frankly a little demeaning to our student-athletes.

It is hard to fact-check which players have legitimate offers from other P5 schools... but I'm pretty sure the likes of Bruce Jordan-Swilling and A.J. Gray had plenty of good offers elsewhere. Those aren't "projects" that have flowered at Tech. Those were great HS athletes that we persuaded to come here. It can be done.
Yeah we do have some good players that had offers elsewhere. Most of our scholly athletes had FBS offers too, so not just FCS level athletes here. More like conference USA level athletes plus a few who couldve gone to the factories.

However, it's not a matter of convincing blue chips to come to GT instead of UGA, Clemson, etc, it's a matter of finding the much-lower percentage of these athletes with the minimum academic prowess to handle real college classes. We already start with a much smaller recruiting pool than any other school other than ND, Stanford and the academies. You are kidding yourself if you think we are on the same level as ND and Stanford, though. ND is a great school (like us) with a national following (unlike us) and has a history that's part of college football itself. Plus, ND is the destination of choice for any catholic athletes. Stanford's selling point is the Stanford degree. I would trade my GT degree for a Stanford degree any day. Just way more doors open. Finally, coaches previous to CPJ were allowed exceptions which eventually led to flunk-gate.
 
When GT starts losing, we all start saying the reason is recruiting — our players just don't have as much talent as other teams. I'm sure that's true to a degree, but the idea that we're alone in the FBS in playing a bunch of why-not-give-em-a-chance FCS players is ridiculous — and frankly a little demeaning to our student-athletes.

It is hard to fact-check which players have legitimate offers from other P5 schools... but I'm pretty sure the likes of Bruce Jordan-Swilling and A.J. Gray had plenty of good offers elsewhere. Those aren't "projects" that have flowered at Tech. Those were great HS athletes that we persuaded to come here. It can be done.

Name another team that recruits less star players than us and has had consistent success in the last 10 years. Name one P5 team that has not had a top 25 class in 10 years but has been to two NY6 Bowls. Name one that has been to 3 conference championships. And I don't mean that rhetorically. I legitimately want to know if there is a team that recruits like us and is achieving at a higher level.
 
I am not carrying the banner for Chan Gailey, but he badly beat a very good Auburn team, beat #3 Miami, and a number of other good teams. Really, it all boils down to the fact he couldn't beat Georgia, and that really is how every Tech coach is ultimately judged.

I dunno, beating an overrated #3 Miami is the same as beating FSU this year who started the year at #2. Not so impressive once the season plays out. Miami has been average pretty much every year in the ACC until this year. The only really good wins over a good team that Chan gave us were the two Auburn upsets. O'Leary probably did the most here but he was allowed exceptions that any coach going forward will not have. Bobby Ross had one amazing year plus a 7 and 8 win year before moving on.

The real problem is if we were to go to a different coach and style, it would either have to be an up and coming young coach who move on to a football factory after his first good season here, or a retread coach who needs a job like Chan. Is either a better choice than what we already have?
 
I just going to throw this out there: Paul Johnson's win % at Tech is .590, and Chan Gailey's (who is almost universally disliked by Tech fans) was .580.
Gailey's ACC was not as tough as Johnson's ACC. I think Gailey faced a tougher UGA team, but Johnson faced a much tougher Clemson so that's a wash. Besides that, the bottom dwellers during Gailey's tenure have improved significantly over the last 10 years, Duke/UNC specifically.
 
O'Leary probably did the most here but he was allowed exceptions that any coach going forward will not have.
I'm curious your source of information that O'Leary was allowed exceptions that CPJ is not...? As I understand it, CPJ has built a lot of trust with the hill, and gets the exceptions he asks for.

Of course, getting an exception doesn't mean much if the player doesn't stay academically eligible. But as Adam Gotsis once said — marveling at how American college football is run — there's so much academic support you really have to try hard to mess up.
 
Maybe I’m wrong, but I thought the fire Roof threads actually meant fire someone else but people didn’t want to be banned.

Roof has done a good job IMO, and I was critical of hiring him.

As for recruits, we’ve done pretty good this year. Matter of fact, I’m pretty sure we been fairly consistent at recruiting since 2000
Georgia Tech Rivals recruiting team rankings:
2012: #56
2013: #84
2014: #47
2015: #39
2016: #67
2017: #41
 
I dunno, beating an overrated #3 Miami is the same as beating FSU this year who started the year at #2. Not so impressive once the season plays out.
It was Nov. 19 when we beat #3 Miami. Our victory knocked them down to #9/#10, where they stayed until the end of the season. They lost to LSU in the Peach Bowl and finished the season ranked #17.
 
Name another team that recruits less star players than us and has had consistent success in the last 10 years. Name one P5 team that has not had a top 25 class in 10 years but has been to two NY6 Bowls. Name one that has been to 3 conference championships. And I don't mean that rhetorically. I legitimately want to know if there is a team that recruits like us and is achieving at a higher level.
If you want to know, you're going to have to do the research yourself, I'm afraid.

The problem with this line of argument — "frankly, look how good we are despite the recruiting rankings!" — is that this discrepancy could be explained either by the fact that we're GT and we outperform expectations via hard work, fan support, excellent coaching, etc. or by the fact that recruiting rankings are inaccurate indicators of 'talent' levels for the vast majority of college athletes.

(As CPJ has said many, many times — everybody knows the five star guys are incredibly talented athletes. But when you get down into the 4 star, 3 star and unranked players, it's a lot less obvious, and opinions vary.)

And if the latter is the explanation, then poor recruiting isn't actually the reason we can't beat UVA.
 
Georgia Tech Rivals recruiting team rankings:
2012: #56
2013: #84
2014: #47
2015: #39
2016: #67
2017: #41
2002: 62
2003: 50
2004: 56
2005:62
2006: 57
2007: 18

Again, I'd say we've been pretty consistent at recruiting since 2000.
 
Yeah I'm always baffled by people saying how great a recruiter Chan was. His classes were comically bad until he stripped the Recruiting Coordinator title away from Dave Wilson and gave it to Giff Smith, and he had Geoff Collins on board as the in-house coordinator. He also had a TERRIFIC strength and conditioning coach, and a DC who could make the most out of what he had.

I mean he gets credit for hiring the S&C coach, but he was not a great recruiter.
 
Back
Top