it is time for the each one to weigh in

ncjacket said:
In case you haven't noticed Kyle, the GTAA has been in the red the last few years. DRAd has turned it around this year and we look to be in the black, but don't know if we have the $4M or whatever it would cost to buy him out if we decide we need to.
Click to expand...
Actually, ncjacket, I don't think we were ever in the red. There was a trend where we would eventually get in the red, but we never reached the red.

I doubt it would be $4M, more like $1.8M like I stated in another thread.
 
I hate to sound like an AD, but I'll evaluate when the season is over.

If our players keep starting this slow out of the gates and spotting the other team 14-point leads at the end of the 1st quarter, we will finish below .500 and the decision will be obvious.
 
mm42 said:
I hate to sound like an AD, but I'll evaluate when the season is over.

If our players keep starting this slow out of the gates and spotting the other team 14-point leads at the end of the 1st quarter, we will finish below .500 and the decision will be obvious.
Click to expand...
What if we finish 8-5 on the year with a win over UGA? Does Gailey keep his job? I think yes.
 
gtfan1147 said:
We should have won the game.

Punt returners one job is to field punts.

Receivers cannot drop passes.

You cannot commit bad, undisciplined penalties.

You cannot allow teams to go 96 and 81 yards on their first two drives and make them look like 2005 USC.

You can't get field goals while the other team scores touchdowns.

We'll see about preparation, chemistry, and if this team can circle the wagons on Saturday.

Finally, my prayers are with Correy Earls, I hope that ordeal was more precautionary than anything else. WOuld have loved to get a customary thumbs up as he left the field though.

And my weigh-in and rant today came in at approximately 215 pounds.
Click to expand...

Yes!

And whatever happened to benching somebody's **$ when they miss a game changing catch?!!?!? Sit him down a play or two....dang.
 
GTKyle said:
ok, ok, ok, what if we TIE UGA so our final record is 7-5-1. What then?
Click to expand...
Ties are impossible in D-I; the overtime rules allow for a game to go on forever until someone wins.

And yes 3-9 with a win over UGAy would be very satisfying to me.
 
GTKyle said:
What if we finish 8-5 on the year with a win over UGA? Does Gailey keep his job? I think yes.
Click to expand...

UGA is shaping up as a good football team. By the time we play them, they could be very good. A win over UGA would be fantastic and IMHO Chan would be around another year (if he wants to be) provided he wins a total of 8 or more.

So far, we have no quality wins. Expected wins over Army, Duke and NC leave three quality wins available in order to come to 8 wins total. One of those would have to be UGA. That means we would have to upset only 2 of the following: Clemson, Maryland, Miami, VT or the bowl game.

That's certainly not an insurmountable task and at this juncture it represents a very reasonable coaching challenge...no less than 3 quality wins, one of which is UGA plus five ho-hum wins. All in all, Kyle, I kind of like this test as a bare minimum expectation for our veteran ball team.
 
I'll preface with the fact that back in 2002 I was not happy with the hiring of Chan Gailey as the new head football coach at Georgia Tech --but he was now the head coach so he would certainly have my support.

CCG's first season at GT was good (7-4) going into the UGA game --but sitting in Athens and watching that 51-7 debacle was just disgusting --and humiliating to say the least. Further demerits for the Silicon Valley loss to Fresno St.

The 2003 season was actually a precursor to what the next five seasons under CCG would bring --high highs and low lows. Defeating Auburn 17-3 and leading FSU in Tallahassee until the final minute only to get blasted a week later at BDS by Clemson. Bad losses to Duke and UGA were followed by a blow-out win in the Humanitarian Bowl.

But ever since that time I've lived with the highs of unexpected victories (another Auburn win, this time at Jordan-Hare, Miami in' 05, VT last season) and the lows (UNC in '04, NCSt in '05, the ACCGC last season --not to mention UGA the last three years).

I had very high expectations going into this season --a minimum of 9 wins, Coastal Division repeat and hopefully an ACC title --and a win over UGA. But two games into the conference schedule and GT sits in the cellar of their division --3 games behind UVA of all teams. I was way off with my expectations.

Fire Chan? I would prefer not to. Under O'Leary (5) and Gailey (5) GT has had 10 straight winning seasons --and of course you have to go back to Bobby Dodd for the last time that happened (which actually included a couple of .500 seasons in the mix).

Is the program stable? Sure. GT played in the ACCCG last year. Recruiting has been very good --good players seem to want to come here and play for Chan. We haven't seen a terrible season since '94.

Is the program stagnant? Seems that way. 9-5, 7-5, 7-5, 7-6, 7-6 reads like a program stuck in neutral --you're not rolling backwards down a cliff --but your not climbing the mountain either. Chan is 2-3 in bowl games --and we no longer lay claim to the best bowl winning percentage --which was something to be proud of.

Will the program ever take that next step under CCG? I have no idea ...probably not. I see no realistic expectation of winning 9-10 games consistently. How long will FSU and Miami remain below their expectations as elite teams? VT is already showing signs of improvement. BC seems stable. GT loses to UVA every other season.

I'm happy that as GT fans we seem safe from a debacle of 1-2-3-4 win seasons. We're a better program than that now. But I am not happy with finishing around .500 every season.

There have really been three things that have bothered me about CCG --and one of them is no longer a problem. I never understood why CCG latched himself onto RB like he did --particularly during the last three games last year prior to the Gator Bowl. TB should have had a couple of series against UGA and WF. TB should have had a little more experience under his belt going into this season --it would have been of benefit to him.

The other two things are going 0-5 against UGA --particularly when opportunity was for the taking in one/maybe two of those games --and the lack of consistency with CCG's teams just drives me crazy.

Chan may survive another 7-8 win season --but he better defeat UGA @BDS. Seeing the losing streak hit seven (with CCG responsible for six) will not (and of course does not) sit well with the fan base --including the old-gold that do not want to see the eight-game win streak of the 50's in jeopardy of being equaled @SS in '08.
 
It doesn't matter how bad the team does, or how loud y'all bitch. Chan is only leaving if he chooses to do so for at least the next two years. And it has nothing to do with a contract buyout. We could find the money to get rid of him easier than we could to fund just about anything in the AA. There would be donors lining up to contribute (at double A-T fund points!!!).

He has never had a losing season and he's had a couple of back-to-back monster recruiting classes. He went to the ACCCG last season, lost his best player on both sides of the ball, plus his starting QB. His teams are in the top three in the conference in wins since he's arrived. He made all y'all happy at South Bend (and before that against Auburn...twice), in Miami, in Blacksburg.

He probably knows better than anyone that he hasn't made the fanbase happy. He also knows that if he can't find an equal or better job anywhere, we are stuck with him. I'm pretty sure that sending out the internet lynch mob doesn't exactly help in the interview process.
 
GT65_UGA89 said:
I'll preface with the fact that back in 2002 I was not happy with the hiring of Chan Gailey as the new head football coach at Georgia Tech --but he was now the head coach so he would certainly have my support.

CCG's first season at GT was good (7-4) going into the UGA game --but sitting in Athens and watching that 51-7 debacle was just disgusting --and humiliating to say the least. Further demerits for the Silicon Valley loss to Fresno St.

The 2003 season was actually a precursor to what the next five seasons under CCG would bring --high highs and low lows. Defeating Auburn 17-3 and leading FSU in Tallahassee until the final minute only to get blasted a week later at BDS by Clemson. Bad losses to Duke and UGA were followed by a blow-out win in the Humanitarian Bowl.

But ever since that time I've lived with the highs of unexpected victories (another Auburn win, this time at Jordan-Hare, Miami in' 05, VT last season) and the lows (UNC in '04, NCSt in '05, the ACCGC last season --not to mention UGA the last three years).

I had very high expectations going into this season --a minimum of 9 wins, Coastal Division repeat and hopefully an ACC title --and a win over UGA. But two games into the conference schedule and GT sits in the cellar of their division --3 games behind UVA of all teams. I was way off with my expectations.

Fire Chan? I would prefer not to. Under O'Leary (5) and Gailey (5) GT has had 10 straight winning seasons --and of course you have to go back to Bobby Dodd for the last time that happened (which actually included a couple of .500 seasons in the mix).

Is the program stable? Sure. GT played in the ACCCG last year. Recruiting has been very good --good players seem to want to come here and play for Chan. We haven't seen a terrible season since '94.

Is the program stagnant? Seems that way. 9-5, 7-5, 7-5, 7-6, 7-6 reads like a program stuck in neutral --you're not rolling backwards down a cliff --but your not climbing the mountain either. Chan is 2-3 in bowl games --and we no longer lay claim to the best bowl winning percentage --which was something to be proud of.

Will the program ever take that next step under CCG? I have no idea ...probably not. I see no realistic expectation of winning 9-10 games consistently. How long will FSU and Miami remain below their expectations as elite teams? VT is already showing signs of improvement. BC seems stable. GT loses to UVA every other season.

I'm happy that as GT fans we seem safe from a debacle of 1-2-3-4 win seasons. We're a better program than that now. But I am not happy with finishing around .500 every season.

There have really been three things that have bothered me about CCG --and one of them is no longer a problem. I never understood why CCG latched himself onto RB like he did --particularly during the last three games last year prior to the Gator Bowl. TB should have had a couple of series against UGA and WF. TB should have had a little more experience under his belt going into this season --it would have been of benefit to him.

The other two things are going 0-5 against UGA --particularly when opportunity was for the taking in one/maybe two of those games --and the lack of consistency with CCG's teams just drives me crazy.

Chan may survive another 7-8 win season --but he better defeat UGA @BDS. Seeing the losing streak hit seven (with CCG responsible for six) will not (and of course does not) sit well with the fan base --including the old-gold that do not want to see the eight-game win streak of the 50's in jeopardy of being equaled @SS in '08.
Click to expand...
Excellent post. You pretty much summed up the feelings of most of the fan base.

After the few consistent 7 wins seasons that the fan base had endured we STILL had hope and confidence in Gailey and this team to have a 10+ win season. It is becoming clear, however, that this program simply isn't progressing. We have all the talent, the supporting coaches, the schedule, but do we have the right head coach? I still have hope for a solid season with a win over UGA, but that hope is becoming dimmer and dimmer with each passing loss.

I think we can agree that it isn't the losing so much, but the way we are losing. Our losses just reek of unmanaged preparation and mental mistakes. To lose to an inferior UVA team by false starting and muffing punts at critical times is despicable.

I just hope for Gailey's sake that he is able to pull off a win over UGA this year. I really like the guy personally. I think he is very classy and a wonderful representative of Tech athletics. His job, however, is to win football games, and going 2-7 in your last 9 games clearly isn't doing that.
 
GTKyle said:
Actually, ncjacket, I don't think we were ever in the red. There was a trend where we would eventually get in the red, but we never reached the red.

I doubt it would be $4M, more like $1.8M like I stated in another thread.
Click to expand...

Maybe our operating revenue never went in the "red," but we weren't making nearly enough to pay off the debt after stadium expansion, baseball renovation, etc.
 
floridajacket said:
Maybe our operating revenue never went in the "red," but we weren't making nearly enough to pay off the debt after stadium expansion, baseball renovation, etc.
Click to expand...
DRad sent out an email or newsletter or something. Maybe it was in WTGW but I remember seeing a graph and it showed by something like by 2009 we would be in the red. That is the reason he said for doubling student athletic fees and the creation of the Tech fund.
 
GTKyle said:
DRad sent out an email or newsletter or something. Maybe it was in WTGW but I remember seeing a graph and it showed by something like by 2009 we would be in the red. That is the reason he said for doubling student athletic fees and the creation of the Tech fund.
Click to expand...

No, that's when Tech's cash reserves would have ran out, a different thing from being in the red. To get there, Tech would have to lose money in successive years, as we were before the Tech Fund and everything else D-Rad did.
 
GTKyle said:
DRad sent out an email or newsletter or something. Maybe it was in WTGW but I remember seeing a graph and it showed by something like by 2009 we would be in the red. That is the reason he said for doubling student athletic fees and the creation of the Tech fund.
Click to expand...

Perhaps an accounting class is in order? Our operating position was in the red...meaning we were losing money on an annual basis. Our reserves had not been depleted, but we clearly we using them to cover operating losses. This means we were losing money. Any more help we can give you?
 
ramblinwise piling on here:

As for the Tech Fund and DRad saving Tech's AA... someone has already pointed out that if they just raised the ticket prices $5 they would have raised the same revenue as the Tech Fund so, no I still don't think it was the right way to do it. Thank goodness we are in the black however. Don't know why we had to take the route thru the wizard of oz instead of closing our eyes and clicking our heels...

Gailey... I really appreciate the guy for his positives, but I think if ANYONE dropped 7 straight to UGay they should bow, blow a kiss and then exit stage right and let someone else give it a shot. Yes, its that important.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top