Letter from Braine

bellyseries

bellyseries

Dodd-Like
Joined
Dec 28, 2001
Messages
4,229
I am confident that the Letter From Braine is a fake. We are mushrooms, kept in the dark. The AA is not going to tell us anything. Besides, what does Braine know about major college sports?

It has been obvious, since last year's Spring Practice, that Gailey has survived his years of coaching a national collegiate championship and at the play-off level of the NFL as a "clueless" individual. This is amazing, but nonetheless as obvious as the nose on Bill Lewis's face.

The real plan is to move us to the Southern Conference, where these b and c level recruits MIGHT have a chance to compete. But only if we get Mac back.
 
Originally posted by bellyseries:
I am confident that the Letter From Braine is a fake. We are mushrooms, kept in the dark. The AA is not going to tell us anything. Besides, what does Braine know about major college sports?

It has been obvious, since last year's Spring Practice, that Gailey has survived his years of coaching a national collegiate championship and at the play-off level of the NFL as a "clueless" individual. This is amazing, but nonetheless as obvious as the nose on Bill Lewis's face.

The real plan is to move us to the Southern Conference, where these b and c level recruits MIGHT have a chance to compete. But only if we get Mac back.
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">
laugh.gif
Pretty good as usual Belly!
 
I was surprised by the letter. Surprised that Dr. Clough and Dave Braine felt it was necessary to go on record supporting Chan Gailey.

Anyone see it differently?

More Surprised that I'm not the only one here Saturday night; uh oh I hear my wife calling, got to go...
 
Originally posted by 71Bee:
I was surprised by the letter. Surprised that Dr. Clough and Dave Braine felt it was necessary to go on record supporting Chan Gailey.

Anyone see it differently?

More Surprised that I'm not the only one here Saturday night; uh oh I hear my wife calling, got to go...
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">It is surprising, and I think it is a direct result of venues like this one. The net has changed not only how we communicate, but how we react; it's a huge feedback loop, and it is open to every vagary of thought and emotion. If my life is not going to suit me, hell, I can get on StinGTalk and talk about this miserable bunch of creeps who are ruining my football program. Evidently, people like Braine read this, as do other Big Boys in the GT athletic world.

There's more than a bit of pop-psychologizing in this post, but I swear I am at a loss to understand the negativity we have heard here other than with some psychologizing and displacement theory, however flabby. We have people posting here who are convinced that they can read the inner life and motivations of Chan Gailey ("he has no fire in the belly"), BO'B (he's outahere, first call), Clough (he's determined to de-emphasize our sports program.) I think they are projecting other things onto GT. CG may be a failure at GT, but there's is no way to tell that after last season.
 
bellyseries,

Doing a bit of pop-psychologizing myself, there appears to be a huge disconnect between our team’s performance and our expectations.

I believe many of us were fully expecting Gailey to come out of the shoot and win 9 to 10 games minimum. It didn't happen and I don't think it will again, in the foreseeable future anyway.

We’ve discussed in detail the reasons why, small Div I school; small fan base and small student body, higher academic standards and a narrower curriculum than the teams regularly ranked in the top 10 at the end of the season. Dodd was right, we could no longer compete in the SEC and needed to leave.

Maybe we all need professional help in reconciling our ambitions and potential. In the meantime, I don't envy anyone who serves as HC for our program.
 
71 Bee, I do not agree. There is no reason we can not compete for championships. We have done it in the past and we will do it again in the future. It takes leadership from someone who has a love and vision for the program. We can get enough quality atheletes who, with the right leadership and motivation, can go out every Saturday and represent Tech in a way that we all can take pride in.

Sure we have some things that can be difficult to overcome. We have to take those supposed weaknesses and turn them into strengths. It can be done, it has been done and it will be done again. We just need the right person in charge.

Go Jackets!
 
JerrytheJacket,

I'm afraid you are exhibiting classic symptoms of denial.

This is not the 50's, IMO there is a much higher percentage of academically challenged athletes playing college football today; kids that never would have gotten in before.

Our seasons of top10 finishes will be few and far between. However, I do believe we will remain competitive in the ACC for some time to come.

Would you really want to see the curriculum changes necessary to be consistently in the top 10?
 
I think if you have a great coach then you can compete with our talent. Is Gailey that man? I don't think we've had the time to determine that but stating that we won't compete at the top for years to come is essentially saying that Gailey is not that man. You've seen it happen quite often over the past decade both at Tech and beyond where great coaches have taken what was "average" talent and turned them into winners. It will take a great coach to succeed at Tech and not an average guy.

Also, I've never understood the snotty attitude about our degrees at Tech. Personally I don't think anyone's degree would be hurt because a few degree programs were added that allowed greater flexibility for both students and athelets alike. Not to mention that it would help with the graduation rate at Tech which I think is low partly because of a lack of options once a student realizes that engineering isn't working out. I think it would help our school more than harm it. Just my opinion.
 
I remember Bobby Ross stating something to the order of when talking about the 90 team, We are possibly not a great team but capable of playing a great game. As for CG, DB and C they are all aware of what it takes to win and win big at the flats. We are not an Auburn (where you don't even need to know how to read or write) or an UGa-lly where if you know how to put on your pants then it's ok to play the game. Tech has won big, will win big again with the right coaching and right support from the faithful. This is not some fly by night school with fly by night programs but of an Institution with the highest regards for both the academics and the sports programs. I think the letter from DB might just be the first shot across the bow telling CG to get on the ball and produce.
 
In 1989 I heard Coach Dodd discuss with Homer Rice on a radio show called SideLine Sports all the detriments to winning on a big time basis. Coach Dodd stated that if Tech was located in Pittsburgh they could compete with anyone. He was
alluding to the difference in the high school academics between the South and the Northeast. I thought it was ironic but the very next night Coach Ross was on his call in show and he was informed by one caller about Coach Dodd's remark, when Coach Ross bristled and said without qualification that it could be done in Atlanta and went on to say that he didn't want to be arrogant but he fully expected to do just that. That was the year before Coach Ross brought us a national championship. I think a lots has to do with the head coach and how much confidence he has in his own ability.
 
Big Buck:

If you heard Bobby Dodd on the radio in 1989, you'd been the only one. Coach Dodd passed away in 1988.

You would have more credibility if you'd ensure your accuracy on post.

Just one person's opinion, I could be wrong.

Bobby Dodd
 
RE: The Above

Coach Dodd passed in '88

I agree wholeheartedly with Jerry the J's assessment. TECH can win at any level. We are not hamstrung. We are Georgia TECH.
 
Belly, my concerns go beyond Gailey. There are things he deserves credit for like Hollings and things he deserves blame for like the QB situation. The bigger problem is the AA and the administration are talking out of both sides of their mouth. On the one hand, we have a stadium expansion. On the other hand, we have raised academic standard assuring that the only people filling those extra seats will be from the other school. The Johnson thing bothers me because it seems he was squeezed more because the adminstration wants to improve graduation rates and not because they looked at him to see if he as an individual could succeed at Tech. Nevermind that other schools are getting better graduation rates by offering sheltered classes in easy majors. If we want to ride this academic high horse, let's be honest like Davidson and move to Division III. Otherwise, the AA and admin need to work on programs like new ways of academically developing borderline students or some expanded degree programs. Even if we had a staff of great recruiters, it is useless if they can't get anybody admitted.
 
Right On The Mark 3518! It's frustrating isn't it, that something so obvious does not receive the necessary groundswell of vocal & written support to get through to the snobs. Keep your message alive, but send it to Mssrs. King, Morris, Anderson, Hearn, and The A-T Fund. You could cc: DB I guess. THWG
 
All of the above, pro or anti Gailey means jack until this season. You can call Gailey a creep or a genius, but it doesn't mean a thing right now. 2003 is *the* defining season. It will determine whether Gailey should stay or go. It's not that I'm not interested in whether you think he should have stayed or gone already, but I'm saying it doesn't matter. Gailey didn't deliver last season. Nor did he destroy. If we turn out a 6-6 season or something this year, I will personally make the soap box and stand on it with the anti-Gailey movement, if we turn out a good season, I'll celebrate with everyone who likes Tech and Gailey. Any thing regarding Gailey's tenure said prior to the season, good or bad, is dismissable.
 
I hear you last three posters, and I have to agree that Tech needs a reasonable major, not just for athletes, but for others who are not A-1 mathematicians. My kid majored in psych and had to pass 5 calculus courses. She did it, but I dono how useful that, um, third course was.

On the other hand, I can't see an administration agreeing to a major stadium expansion and a million dollar coach if they're aiming for Davidson status.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top