Is Tech Going The Way of Vanderbilt?

Geeteelee, I don't know why you and other elitist bother posting on this board if you care so little about Tech football. You would tell Daryl Smith to go to hell because he didn't score high enough on the SAT for you. As far as the Atlanta recruit goes, all indications were he was a good student, he just didnt have the precious 950 on the SAT score. I don't want to be like UGA. My point was other schools can inflate their graduation rates with joke majors. I don't know about you but I actually graduated from Tech. It's my belief that Tech is a foot soldier school. The key to sucess is effort more than a high SAT. I can look back at the classes I did well and the key was I prepared well. I believe a kid with a 800 SAT score and a strong work ethic can succeed at Tech. Maurice Clarett had a 1220 SAT but no desire to go to school. If Clough wants to continue this, he should be honest like Davidson and move us to Division III. I have no desire to be cannon fodder for FSU, VPI, Miami and UGA.
 
Originally posted by Father WASP:
I kid you not. This morning's news reports have the Vanderbilt President declaring war on athletics. His words, not mine.

This just goes to show if you let any pipe smoking, liberal moron with a crusade run amok what can happen to an institution.

Where do you think Clough hangs his hat. My guess he's right at home with this limp wrist from Nashville, and smirks right along with the Triangle crowd - UNC, State and Duke - when tossing anti-football strategies over their wine and brie.

But, at least at Vandy they officially shut down the athletic department, here, we have Braine who has done much of the same unofficially through incompetence.

Solution? Fire Braine now and send notice to Clough that it is not his money, his seats, or even his football program. He is a public official and has been hired as a steward. He is a servant of the people. As such they could lose that arrogant attitude for starters.
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">WASP, don't know if you remember that Clough was the one who went down to invite Donna Shalayla's Miami Hurricane's into the league. He was one of the BIG players in all of the expansion and was one of the first people to approach Miami.
Sometimes I wonder what the hell you are thinking when you post.
 
Originally posted by Father WASP:
His support of expansion was good. However, his backing of Braine and refusal to accept his resignation speak volumes.

In the corporate world whenever you get someone who is an incompetent or has a knack for alienating a large percentage of the people he comes in contact with - don't blame him, blame his boss. It's so convenient to have a hatchet man out front. It is no different on a college staff.

We don't need to get into a chronological list of the incidents that have occurred on Braine's watch, but at this point Clough has made it clear he is in the boat with him.
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Take a step back and stop being a jackass. The "Fire Everyone sort 'em out later" song and dance is getting old and won't help a damn sole. Calm down and focus on what IS beneficial for Tech.

If we are going to be force fed Dave Braine, then giving him our feedback is crucial right now. I have a feeling though we will not be force fed Dave Braine for much longer. I think Clough backed Braine because (whether you care to admit or not), Braine has done some good things for Tech in the Big Picture of things. I think Clough was hoping that he alone could pull Braine out of the cross hairs long enough to show everyone that Braine was a good AD. Unfortunately, we've been forced to deal with Braine's micro-management blunders too long. I think everyone is beginning to realize this. How many mistakes can one person make?

Really think that by this time next year, we will be looking for a new AD or possibly already have one. However, saying Clough needs to go to is the stupidest thing I've heard from any Tech fan.
 
...why would we give them away?
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">I hear what you're saying flunkout and you say a lot of truth.

The answer to your question, as devil's advocate, is simple: Winning. If you consider the success Tech manages to have with its current limitations, imagine how much success GT could have with all the benefits PLUS most of the limitations removed.

I agree with those who talk about the "uniqueness" of Tech. But lets look at what is really happening. That is a lonely and I say dying path. The same people who cherish the uniqueness want the AD and President fired because a bunch of football players couldn't hack it academically. Which way do you want it? Look at the exponential growth of that pot of gold in front of big time athletics. The ACC already sold its soul this spring with Georgia Tech administrators right out front. Who thinks they won't want to take the obvious next step to get to the next level? I don't see how GT can continue to walk in the middle of the road and not get squashed. As prices climb, club seating becomes the norm (and it is around the country like it or not), capital investments are made, Love of the ol' Alma Mater won't be enough anymore. You have to follow through with results on the field to satisfy the customer base.
 
As far as the Atlanta recruit goes, all indications were he was a good student, he just didnt have the precious 950 on the SAT score.
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">So one recruit has got your panties in a wad? Do you KNOW that he had a strong work ethic? Do you KNOW that he wanted to attend Tech at all? Do you KNOW that the admissions department didn't take other factors into consideration? Do you KNOW that Daryl Smith wouldn't be accepted today?

Let me answer for you: unless you're this kid's brother, unless you work for GT admissions or GT recruiting staff, the answer is no, you don't know. No one in admissions will tell you that there is a cut-off at 950 for ANYONE.

Call me elitist if you wanna. Georgia Tech is an elite school. FYI I made well over 950, but I struggled mightily to graduate. So much so I was unable to try to walk-on to the swim team or golf team as was my plan. SAT is certainly not an exclusive indicator of success at Tech.
 
Thankyou GEETEELEE, B4GT, and GTFlunkout - this endless criticism of Clough is getting ridiculous, especially from people who have NO IDEA of his priorities. He has always been an avid supporter of TECH athletics - he went to school here in the early to mid 60's. He knows that we can be very successful in all sports and maintain a high academic reputation for ALL students, not just those that are not athletes. If some folks can't accept the difficulty of the mission and the fact that we won't win every game, there are plenty of other schools that will be glad to take you as a fan.

Ask yourselves: why are you a TECH fan to begin with? We've never been dominant, but we do do things right. That makes the success we do have sweeter.
 
3518, your post only makes sense if your allegations are true. And I've seen nothing to suggest they are. No one has said we can't admit players with less than a 950 SAT. What has been said is that lower SATs should trigger deeper consideration of other issues. If a kid can demonstrate that he can be successful at Tech my vote would be to let him/her in. Your point about a kid with a 1100 flunking out makes the other point actually. SAT is no guarantee of success at Tech. But a higher SAT predicts a better chance of success. When we change Tech's academic mission dramatically for the sake of the football team, Tech sports will end IMO. The vast majority of people who donate $$ and support the program would walk away I believe. Minor changes, adding a few majors, etc., those things are fine if done the right way. But the attitude that some seem to have that we should provide cake majors for football players for the sole purpose of fielding a championship team would destroy what GT is.
 
Georgia State started as the Business school for Georgia Tech so there will always be a connection. However there is no need for the schools to merge, nor word the Georgia Board of Regents go for it. For the same reasons that they would not allow Tech to expand it’s majors…A university in Atlanta with broad based majors would be a recruiting powerhouse…It would dominate the School in Athens…

Nor would it hurt your precious academic reputation.
 
Actually, this looks like a good thing to me from several perspectives...

Number 1: More good student athletes will be available for Tech. Wouldn't be surprised if many of the Vandy players try to transfer. They will fit the bill of student AND athlete.

Number 2: In general, college athletics needs a shake up and the demolition of the powerful AA departments might be a very good thing. Most AD's need to be cut off at the knees, and Braine needs to be cut off a little higher up.

I think the SEC is going to exorcise Vandy in the coming future. This gives them a good philosophical reason to do it...
 
A thought just occurred to me. If Braine is ousted, does Clough or GT have to fill the AD position? What if Vanderbilt is setting the new standard for Colleges and Universities!

Maybe, we had better keep Braine until he retires. Maybe, we won't have another AD after Braine leaves.

We could be banging our heads against a brick wall for nothing.

stickflip.gif
 
Dear elitist/academic snobs...get over yourselves.
Ask yourself this...were you thrilled and proud when D.Smith crushed Auburn's vaunted running backs, or when Mark Logan made his great td catch, or for that matter JH's wonderful years as our qb?
If so, shut the firetruck up because you are being hypocritical beyond belief. The odds are very much against any of these wonderful young men being admitted to this, or any of our future recruiting classes...FACT, not opinion.

D-1 football in the 21st century is so far removed from the ideal of competing against 90+% of schools using academically superior athletes, that it may as well be on another planet. It's an ideal that just like my beloved old South, should die.

Most of you elitist/snobs grossly underestimate the incredible importance football means to GT. There's a reason 50,000 people don't show up and pay to witness final exams. It's a relative societal importance issue. Sorry to step on all of the "charter" zealots toes, but the football team has a charter too, and it damned well doesn't state..."Let's just do the best we can with one hand tied behind our backs"!

The disadvantage that most (not all) of the snobs have vs. the rest of us, is that we did have the same academic experience that they did, but they for the most part did not have the experience of having played football. Sorry again to step on toes, but you simply can't have the full perspective of what a major role athletics plays in "education".

As for the guys mentioned above and MANY like them (the 850 club), our entire football heritage is built upon their talents. If in fact it bothers you that these young men attended Tech, then go buy yourselves tickets to Harvard's games. I graduated from there too, and I can tell you it's soulless compared to the GT experience, largely due to the football experience.

By the way, the fact that 85 wonderfully talented kids scored less than you on a standardized test has NO...absolutely NO bearing on the value of your GT degree. THWG & Academic Snobs
 
I agree with Golz. What the Vanderbilt President has done is scary. It could threaten college football itself.

Athletic departments are positive forces in terms of college football. Their sole purpose is to promote college athletics. A university President's is to tend to the schools educational mission. What happens if they feel that entertaining the masses is a waste of university resources?

Vanderbilt's President has just taken the reigns and will presumably include the athletic department's budget in with the university. (Athletic association's are independent entities. There budgets are not part of the schools at large). I assume that donations will now be made to Vanderbilt University and they will ear mark it as they like. What happens if you have a President with no appreciation for football? He might not spend money on football and there might be no way for a fan to guarantee that his donation goes towards what he likes. It seems to me that some President could decide it would be better spent adding another professor to the womens studies department.

Ironically, the move will also make a President more vulnerable to the attacks of the population at large. If the President is in charge of football, then people might start calling for his head if he doesn't win or fire a coach. Look at President Adams for an example of what can happen when a President gets involved. Suddenly, a President's performance might be judged on how he handles athletics and not academics.

Lets get real about what we want. We don't really want our football players to be guys who were attending Tech anyway and just went down to try out for the team. Most schools with rich football traditions would become poor programs. We would loose the tradition and pagentry of college football and it would be ashame.
 
First of all, nobody on the hill is going to admit there is a 950 rule. There has been controversy about the SAT being racially biased. However, unwritten rules can be enforced like written ones. I agree with NCJacket that a few extra majors would help out. Goldz is correct with his post as well. 85 players on scholarship is not going to hurt Tech's reputation. It's a shame that certain people on this board. are content to go 3-8. Bobby Ross and Homer Rice proved you can win at Tech doing things the right way
 
GSU,

Nor would it hurt your precious academic reputation.

Just what in the hell does this mean?

Its totally disjointed from the rest of your remark.
 
He's right. Our reputation is precious, and NO it wouldn't harm it at all. THWG
 
Jacketlaw says:

Ask yourselves: why are you a TECH fan to begin with? We've never been dominant, but we do do things right. That makes the success we do have sweeter

Never been dominant? You need to do some reading. We were dominant, AND we did it right.

What's sad is you are not the only one that has no clue about Tech history.
 
GO back and read Kirbee and 3518's comments again.Print them out or database them to be pulled out 5 yrs from now and see if it isn't true.
 
Thanks for the perspective GoldZ. I agree.

The point for you others, in case you haven't noticed, is that a day of reckoning is coming. Sort of like Bush's either "you are either with us or against us" statement.

A larger divide is developing between the 60-80 schools at the football top, primarily because of the BCS, and they will probably break away because of morons like this crusader at Vandy.

Tech for many years as been on the edge of both groups, and they, along with others, are going to have to make a decision. Now the ACC as a league is strong, but some individual schools, like Duke, are laggards on football. What will happen to them is anybody's guess.

Tech is much like Tulane and Vandy. Tulane is probably going to drop football entirely, Vandy thinks it is about as important as giving academic scholarships only and joining the IAA Conference Davidson plays in.

Barrel you point to Clough's trip to Miami to invite them in, but somebody needs to dig up some articles with some quotes that indicate some direct commitment to Tech's FOOTBALL PROGRAM.

We fired 10 football players for academics. Why is it the adults, like Braine, are not held to even higher standards or have hidden accountability? Why is Carol Moore still employed soaking up taxpayer money? Why do we not have a dedicated strength coach for football? Why is Braine allowed to send out insulting letters to the very people he is to rally?

The point is this. As indicated at Vanderbilt - it CAN happen here. I've seen no declarative statements to assure it won't.
 
"Tech is much like Tulane and Vandy"

LMAO! I need some of whatever you're smoking.

Tech is NOTHING like either of those schools, academically or athletically. Vandy is the laughingstock of their conference athletically and a large private school heavy on liberal arts, while Tulane is a mediocre athletic program in a second-tier conference, also a large liberal arts private school.

MEANWHILE....Tech has gone to 30 bowls (6 straight), won 4 football MNCs (one just a scant 13 years ago), been to the final 4, is perennially ranked in baseball and golf, and is competitive in every sport (no doormats) in one of the most demanding Division 1-A conferences in the land.

Tech is a mid-sized PUBLIC school with a great academic reputation for its ENGINEERING and TECHNICAL majors.

Now, exactly how is Tech like either Tulane or Vandy again?

Geeeeeeeez. This is ridiculous.
 
When I walked out of the stadium last year in Athens I felt exactly how Vandy feels playing Tennessee - that's how we've become alike.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top