Program changing win

JacketForLife said:
Why so triggered at never winning in Miami?
Click to expand...
Because it makes somebody say, “this coach did what no other coach in the history of the ACC has done, lose to The Citadel.” And then you’re triggered. Only now, you can’t blame the players because they are obviously good enough to beat Miami. And round and round we go on the Ferris wheel of stupid.
 
BuzzLaw said:
Because it makes somebody say, “this coach did what no other coach in the history of the ACC has done, lose to The Citadel.” And then you’re triggered. Only now, you can’t blame the players because they are obviously good enough to beat Miami. And round and round we go on the Ferris wheel of stupid.
Click to expand...
This.

I think everyone is in agreement that this year's team can't be compared to last year's due to the dramatic changes we're going through.

It's also a pretty divisive topic and will continue to be until we start winning at a high level.

So why do it?
 
BuzzLaw said:
Because it makes somebody say, “this coach did what no other coach in the history of the ACC has done, lose to The Citadel.” And then you’re triggered. Only now, you can’t blame the players because they are obviously good enough to beat Miami. And round and round we go on the Ferris wheel of stupid.
Click to expand...

I'm not triggered by losing to The Citadel in an obvious rebuilding year during the most monumental transition in college football history.

The Citadel game is exactly what the players said it was. Poor buy-in and poor practice during the week equals a loss against The Citadel.

What's great is they continued to persevere and believe in the staff. And like Bed said, proof of concept.
 
johncu said:
This.

I think everyone is in agreement that this year's team can't be compared to last year's due to the dramatic changes we're going through.

It's also a pretty divisive topic and will continue to be until we start winning at a high level.

So why do it?
Click to expand...

Why do you defend medicority? Really, why? It's divisive and hurts the program.
 
JacketForLife said:
I'm not triggered by losing to The Citadel in an obvious rebuilding year during the most monumental transition in college football history.
Click to expand...
College football is 150 years old. This isn’t the “most monumental transition in college football history.”

There were teams that literally had to stop playing football then restart their programs because of a World War - multiple times. We just changed an offensive scheme.
 
johncu said:
(post redacted) nm not worth it

If you don't see the irony in your comment, given your blase' acceptance of losing to an FCS team, I don't know what to tell you.
Click to expand...

Whether or not I see irony in my comment is irrelevant to the fact that you constantly defend mediocrity and opine for a past mediocre coach.

And wtf are you talking about "blase acceptance of losing to an FCS team"? Because I didn't think CGC or CDP should be fired?
 
Last edited:
JacketForLife said:
Whether or not I see irony in my comment is irrelevant to the fact that you constantly defend mediocrity.
Click to expand...
Of course I do, because the real world is so much more nuanced than the black-and-white win or lose view that the "wE dOnT aCcEpT mEdIoCriTy" people like to pretend exists.

For example, even though we still got blasted by Duke and UNC, it was obvious that we were improving. Is it not "accepting mediocrity" to take moral victories from those results? Hell, beating a 3-3 Miami team is pretty mediocre in and of itself, but I'm damn sure happy with it given the circumstances.

I defended Gailey's mediocrity for a time and still feel like he was a solid coach, albeit one who would never reach the promised land. I was too young to defend O'Leary's mediocrity, but I would have done the same for him because it was obvious that he did a lot of good for GT despite never winning the ACC or beating FSU.
 
johncu said:
Of course I do, because the real world is so much more nuanced than the black-and-white win or lose view that the "wE dOnT aCcEpT mEdIoCriTy" people like to pretend exists.

For example, even though we still got blasted by Duke and UNC, it was obvious that we were improving. Is it not "accepting mediocrity" to take moral victories from those results? Hell, beating a 3-3 Miami team is pretty mediocre in and of itself, but I'm damn sure happy with it given the circumstances.

I defended Gailey's mediocrity for a time and still feel like he was a solid coach, albeit one who would never reach the promised land. I was too young to defend O'Leary's mediocrity, but I would have done the same for him because it was obvious that he did a lot of good for GT despite never winning the ACC or beating FSU.
Click to expand...

Do you, boo boo. You deserve Chan Gailey Equilibrium the rest of your life. I'm glad T.Stan finally got the C.ompetent G.enius C.oach to save you from that. (And the 11 year small ball experiment that almost harmed our program forever)
 
gtphd said:
College football is 150 years old. This isn’t the “most monumental transition in college football history.”

There were teams that literally had to stop playing football then restart their programs because of a World War - multiple times. We just changed an offensive scheme.
Click to expand...
The difference is that most everyone else was also doing the same thing at the same time. We are doing a pretty significant restructuring in relative isolation.
 
A very good win because it was needed.

But it is more like a "weekend changing" win.

There are huge wins - like beating a top 5 team or getting in the CFP.

But even those are not "program changing" wins unless you use them to build sonething off them.
 
It’s a very large transition. WGAF if it’s the largest in football history or not? It’s a big change.
giphy.gif
 
savbandjacket said:
The difference is that most everyone else was also doing the same thing at the same time. We are doing a pretty significant restructuring in relative isolation.
Click to expand...
Doesn’t uGA contest some of our COFH wins because we had regular students and they didn’t during WW2?
 
JacketForLife said:
Why do you defend medicority? Really, why? It's divisive and hurts the program.
Click to expand...

Really? What is this?

JacketForLife said:
I'm not triggered by losing to The Citadel in an obvious rebuilding year during the most monumental transition in college football history.

The Citadel game is exactly what the players said it was. Poor buy-in and poor practice during the week equals a loss against The Citadel.

What's great is they continued to persevere and believe in the staff. And like Bed said, proof of concept.
Click to expand...

If defending mediocrity hurts the program, you just defended full blown crap.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top