Next GT head Coach

Any nfl coordinators or position coaches wanting their own program? We used to be pretty happy with recruiting when Giff Smith was here, but I don’t think he’s ever been more than a position coach and probably lacks skill set to be in charge.
 
Athletic Supporter said:
I've said it before in another thread, but I dig Will Healy.

Granted he's young, and is in the middle of a pretty lucrative 4 year contract at Austin Peay.

That said, he has strong ties to GT and could bring some serious energy. But I don't know. It's just a hunch.
Click to expand...

At this point “strong Tech ties” should almost, but not quite be a resume negative.

Should be a point during an interview where applicant needs to explain why that should not be a factor in their favor.

Has never worked out for us to hire someone with that as a positive.

Tons more examples of successful coaches actually having ties to their current teams’ biggest rivals.
 
Gus Malzahn may become available if Auburn can figure out that 30 million dollar buyout. Lol
 
Athletic Supporter said:
I've said it before in another thread, but I dig Will Healy.

Granted he's young, and is in the middle of a pretty lucrative 4 year contract at Austin Peay.

That said, he has strong ties to GT and could bring some serious energy. But I don't know. It's just a hunch.
Click to expand...
Hunches are as good as anything. They're all anybody's got.
 
texstinger said:
No need to go here. Peterson wants to rape the GTAA for any monies he can get for his administrative con artists.

The goal is to kill GT athletics.

They have already made great strides - they have fans believing beating alcorn is bigger than beating ugag.
Click to expand...

yep,
I already told Joe Erwin (Alumni Foundation) that Tech apparently doesn't need my money if Bud can waste 1 mil on thieves.
Not great job on hiring ADs either.
 
Last edited:
texstinger said:
No need to go here. Peterson wants to rape the GTAA for any monies he can get for his administrative con artists.

The goal is to kill GT athletics.

They have already made great strides - they have fans believing beating alcorn is bigger than beating ugag.
Click to expand...
I think the real question is who goes first, Peterson or CPJ. If we could get an athletics supporter in the President's suite it might be easier to attract a better head coach.
 
gtg970g said:
I think the real question is who goes first, Peterson or CPJ. If we could get an athletics supporter in the President's suite it might be easier to attract a better head coach.
Click to expand...

Sep 9, 2018
"For the first time in school history, all of Georgia Tech's undergraduate engineering programs are ranked in the top five of their respective disciplines by U.S. News & World Report, with the College of Engineering tied for 4th overall among engineering schools. "

In other words, if Peterson leaves it will be because he wants to.
 
Whoever we get after CPJ will need to do some rebuilding, especially if we move away from the option offense. Therefore, I am against any coach that has been suggested that is over 55 years old and would prefer someone under 50. Those of you suggesting coaches eligible for social security really aren't thinking.
 
aeromech said:
Sep 9, 2018
"For the first time in school history, all of Georgia Tech's undergraduate engineering programs are ranked in the top five of their respective disciplines by U.S. News & World Report, with the College of Engineering tied for 4th overall among engineering schools. "

In other words, if Peterson leaves it will be because he wants to.
Click to expand...
Do you keep up with current events?
 
aeromech said:
Sep 9, 2018
"For the first time in school history, all of Georgia Tech's undergraduate engineering programs are ranked in the top five of their respective disciplines by U.S. News & World Report, with the College of Engineering tied for 4th overall among engineering schools. "

In other words, if Peterson leaves it will be because he wants to.
Click to expand...
Tech fell from #7 to #8 public school while stagnating in overall rankings
 
gtphd said:
Tech fell from #7 to #8 public school while stagnating in overall rankings
Click to expand...

If our football program fell from #7 to #8 would this thread even exist?

"Among public universities, Georgia Tech's engineering program ranks second behind the University of California, Berkeley."

Let me guess, stagnating at #2 in the nation is 'settling for mediocrity'.
 
aeromech said:
If our football program fell from #7 to #8 would this thread even exist?

"Among public universities, Georgia Tech's engineering program ranks second behind the University of California, Berkeley."

Let me guess, stagnating at #2 in the nation is 'settling for mediocrity'.
Click to expand...

So treading water is a reason to hold a job? A president is measured on three metrics: university rankings, alumni support/donations, and institutional operation.

- Peterson held rankings flat, and ultimately dropped a spot this year. That's adequate to below adequate performance.
- Peterson is alienating alumni and not driving support. Donations are growing at a lower rate than comparable schools and the biggest marketing tool the school has (the athletic association) performed at an all-time low in 2017. That's below adequate performance.
- Peterson has embarrassed the institute in this area through ineffective control and leadership.

So his grades are:
- Adequate to below adequate (C/D)
- Below adequate (D)
- Embarrassing (F)

But... well... we're ranking near UC Berkeley (which we were ranked near before he started). Maybe we should keep him. I don't expect a president to be excellent in all areas, but I expect him to be excellent in one and adequate in the others. What's worse is that I don't see a plan to get any single area to above adequate performance. Think about it: his solution for ineffective organizational control is to "spend more time" on it. The only reason he has a job is that he reports to a bunch of political appointees.
 
aeromech said:
Whoever we get after CPJ will need to do some rebuilding, especially if we move away from the option offense. Therefore, I am against any coach that has been suggested that is over 55 years old and would prefer someone under 50. Those of you suggesting coaches eligible for social security really aren't thinking.
Click to expand...
I'm 100% sincere that I want someone in their 30s or low 40s. We need a ton of energy to recruit where we would want and I don't think an old stodgy type is going to be able to do that here.
 
gtphd said:
So treading water is a reason to hold a job? A president is measured on three metrics: university rankings, alumni support/donations, and institutional operation.

- Peterson held rankings flat, and ultimately dropped a spot this year. That's adequate to below adequate performance.
- Peterson is alienating alumni and not driving support. Donations are growing at a lower rate than comparable schools and the biggest marketing tool the school has (the athletic association) performed at an all-time low in 2017. That's below adequate performance.
- Peterson has embarrassed the institute in this area through ineffective control and leadership.

So his grades are:
- Adequate to below adequate (C/D)
- Below adequate (D)
- Embarrassing (F)

But... well... we're ranking near UC Berkeley (which we were ranked near before he started). Maybe we should keep him. I don't expect a president to be excellent in all areas, but I expect him to be excellent in one and adequate in the others. What's worse is that I don't see a plan to get any single area to above adequate performance. Think about it: his solution for ineffective organizational control is to "spend more time" on it. The only reason he has a job is that he reports to a bunch of political appointees.
Click to expand...
I don't like Peterson because (1) he's a fully paid-up member of the academic left, and (2) he's apparently been less than fully supportive of the GTAA, though honestly the data on this are sketchy.

That said, it's not reasonable to blame him that GT is not advancing up the rankings quickly enough. When you're as close to the top as GT already is, incremental gains are all you can expect. It's asymptotic.
 
18in32 said:
That said, it's not reasonable to blame him that GT is not advancing up the rankings quickly enough. When you're as close to the top as GT already is, incremental gains are all you can expect. It's asymptotic.
Click to expand...

What's his plan to take GT to the next level academically? Clearly, that involves expanding majors and degrees granted. Sure it won't be easy, but it's also his job to develop a plan and manage the Board of Regents.

Maybe we should ask a broader question: what's different today than when he started? How many of those differences were pure trajectory and how many are attributable?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top