Paul Johnson/Ted Roof

beej67 said:
I have direct word from GT faculty that multiple BOR decisions, both with regard to limits on major offerings at GT, and regard to expansion of major offerings at UGA, were made purely for reasons related to maintaining a UGA football competitive advantage.

GT is not only playing with one hand tied behind our back, our state rival is the one that tied the knot. We can either accept that, or we can divest ourselves from being a state institution. We can easily go private from a revenue standpoint, as the majority of our income now comes from research instead of tuition. The significant hurdle is that the BOR owns some of the land.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't that benefit both the school and athletics?
 
beej67 said:
I have direct word from GT faculty that multiple BOR decisions, both with regard to limits on major offerings at GT, and regard to expansion of major offerings at UGA, were made purely for reasons related to maintaining a UGA football competitive advantage.

GT is not only playing with one hand tied behind our back, our state rival is the one that tied the knot. We can either accept that, or we can divest ourselves from being a state institution. We can easily go private from a revenue standpoint, as the majority of our income now comes from research instead of tuition. The significant hurdle is that the BOR owns some of the land.
Click to expand...

We could be the Notre Dame of the South!


What if we merged with Georgia State to become GPISU?
 
Anybody who's watched the coaching carousel this year is crazy to call for a coaching change right now. We'd end up with Mike Singletary or someone.
 
beej67 said:
I have direct word from GT faculty that multiple BOR decisions, both with regard to limits on major offerings at GT, and regard to expansion of major offerings at UGA, were made purely for reasons related to maintaining a UGA football competitive advantage.
Click to expand...
I do not believe this is true.
 
KrazieJacket said:
Wouldn't that benefit both the school and athletics?
Click to expand...

In my opinion, absolutely. But it will take a capital investment that's very large, to buy the land back from the BOR. You can be guaranteed they will leverage every ounce of legal and political power they have to not lose GT from their roster of state schools.

GT has been very smart in making sure that our recent campus expansions are not on state owned land. We may even have a plan for this in the file somewhere. But it will take tremendous amounts of cash.

18in32 said:
I do not believe this is true.
Click to expand...

I heard it direct from the mouth of my grad school advisor in a conversation three or four years ago, when I dropped by to chat about other things. This is real stuff. Go check the CVs of the BOR.

Ever wondered why a couple years after GT landed Calvin Johnson due to GT's academics, UGA miraculously got several bottom dweller engineering programs ramrodded through approval? Football. They didn't want to lose a recruit to GT who wanted to be an engineer. No shit.

This is what they actually mean when they say "we run this state." It's not about recent football wins, it's about their nuthold on politics, which they can then use for many different things, football being one of them.
 
beej67 said:
I heard it direct from the mouth of my grad school advisor in a conversation three or four years ago, when I dropped by to chat about other things. This is real stuff. Go check the CVs of the BOR.
Click to expand...
I believe you that you heard it. And I believe you that your GA was told it. Heck, I even believe that some douchery on the BOR led people to talk this way. But I do not believe there was ever a situation where a persuasive academic & business argument was laid out by GT to take some kind of BOR-approval-required action, and the approval was denied for football reasons.

Do you have any idea what specific requests were supposedly denied for football reasons?
 
18in32 said:
I believe you that you heard it. And I believe you that your GA was told it. Heck, I even believe that some douchery on the BOR led people to talk this way. But I do not believe there was ever a situation where a persuasive academic & business argument was laid out by GT to take some kind of BOR-approval-required action, and the approval was denied for football reasons.
Click to expand...

Why don't we have a law school? Journalism school? Why does UGA have an engineering program now?

edit:

If we wanted to put a major in place to actually hide athletes, in the same way UGA does, who do you think would be responsible for approving or denying it?

edit2:

Take the USNWR top ten engineering schools list. Highlight each one of those schools with a P5 football program in blue, and each one without a football program in red.

Now do the exact same exercise, but instead highlight the ones who also have broad major offerings in blue, and the ones with limited major offerings in red.

Is there any difference in the results of the exercise? Does one school stand out, perhaps? And is there a specific appointed government body that's preventing that one school from adopting broad major offerings?
 
Last edited:
beej67 said:
Take the USNWR top ten engineering schools list. Highlight each one of those schools with a P5 football program in blue, and each one without a football program in red.

Now do the exact same exercise, but instead highlight the ones who also have broad major offerings in blue, and the ones with limited major offerings in red.

Is there any difference in the results of the exercise? Does one school stand out, perhaps? And is there a specific appointed government body that's preventing that one school from adopting broad major offerings?
Click to expand...

Here, let me get you started. Here's your list.

MIT
Stanford
Cal
Cal Tech
Carnegie Mellon
Michigan
GT
Purdue
Illinois
Texas
Texas A&M
USC (Viterbi)
Columbia
Cornell
UC San Diego
UCLA
Princeton
Wisconsin
John's Hopkins
Northwestern
UC Santa Barbara

Some of these schools have broad major offerings, some have narrow, but the only school on this list who has narrow major offerings and is attempting to play Power Five Football is Georgia Tech.

What body dictates whether Georgia Tech can expand our major offerings?

Here's the BOR CV:

Alford - GT
Bowers - Troy
Rutledge - UGA
Hopkins - UGA
Hull - UGA
Leebern - UGA
Marsh - UGA
Poitevint - UGA
Pruitt - Georgia State
Reed - Michigan
Shailendra - GT
Smith - Georgia Southern
Stelling - UGA
Tarbuttin - GT
Tucker - UGA
Wade - UGA
Walker - UGA
Waters - UGA
Wilheit - University of the South

UGA has 11-7 votelock, by appointment of the governor.

Who among here seriously expects better than what we've got when the people who decide what we are allowed to do as a university are essentially a Dwag tailgate?
 
Last edited:
beej67 said:
Why don't we have a law school? Journalism school? Why does UGA have an engineering program now?

edit:

If we wanted to put a major in place to actually hide athletes, in the same way UGA does, who do you think would be responsible for approving or denying it?

edit2:

Take the USNWR top ten engineering schools list. Highlight each one of those schools with a P5 football program in blue, and each one without a football program in red.

Now do the exact same exercise, but instead highlight the ones who also have broad major offerings in blue, and the ones with limited major offerings in red.

Is there any difference in the results of the exercise? Does one school stand out, perhaps? And is there a specific appointed government body that's preventing that one school from adopting broad major offerings?
Click to expand...
I take it all those questions in response to my question mean you don't have an answer to my question?
This is like all the talk of academics hindering our talent. I understand the intuition that supports your conclusions. But in the real world you gotta go beyond intuitions and surmises and assumptions.
 
You have fun with your fingers in your ears. 3 ACCCG appearances in 10 years is actually pretty amazing considering the situation we're in.
 
To beej67, I do not doubt what you are saying and making points about regarding the B0R but I would like to add some points for discussion.

- I, a few years ago now, talked to the person representing my district on the BoR. I asked him about schools wanting to add courses of interest / majors. He told me that the BoR does not initiate that activity but the individual schools are the ones that must come to the Board with a request / proposal to have that done. I have yet to be able to find from anyone where GT has done that and been declined. Especially anything proposed that would, in and of itself, help us in any way to be more competitive athletically. I would Praise Heaven if we did that, and go to the wall if someone can show me where we have done that and been denied.

- I bow to your knowledge as regards the portions of our school on land (or buildings) owned by the BoR. I can see this being somewhat “tricky” regarding finances now and in the future. Of course, I assume, if for no other reason, the Board would need to be open to selling us the property back if nothing else.

- Goung Private? How many in the larger GT community would be willing to do this for reasons we might want to as regards our focus here? How do we know the HillNerds would not make it even more egregious for the GTAA than now?

Private School. I can see that as a benefit, PERHAPS. But I can see it also doing great harm to the focus of our discussion here. Leaving the SEC damn near destroyed the GTAA whether anyone wants to admit it or not. President Pettit, if memory serves, hired Homer Rice to come and dismantle the GTAA.

I could see going “Private” as doing something similar to that by giving GT more of a snobbish, elitist image to the general public that will not help us one bit. Actually, for our discussion here, it potentially could hurt us more than help IMO. We would become even more irrelevant in our city / state, not unlike Tulane to La., vandy to Tenn., Rice to Texas.

Many thought going Indy in 64 would make GT the n.d. of the South. How did that work out?

If we were to ever go Private, I want to see it written in stone, that programs / majors would be added to benefit the GTAA. Nothing less.
 
Last edited:
beej67 said:
You have fun with your fingers in your ears. 3 ACCCG appearances in 10 years is actually pretty amazing considering the situation we're in.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I couldn't quite hear you...? Say that again...?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top