Provided DRad pulls the trigger

Kirbee, let's please remember that it is not a fanbase that bitches about everything here, it is a small portion of the fanbase that bitches about everything.

There may be hundreds of Tech fans here and only a handful have actually stood up to be counted on canning Chan (pre VPI game admittedly).
 
AllAmericanBuzz said:
I always support the head coach. I want Gailey to win the next 3 games and lead us to a bowl victory. Not because I'm a die-hard Gailey fan, but because I'm a Tech fan and I think our players deserve to win out.

Once the dust settles on this season, I'll support DRad to make a coaching decision based on how we finished. If he feels Gailey is the best option, great. If he feels the program needs to go in another direction, that's great too. I'll support the new coach just as much.

I will, however, never be excited to see our team lose because I want a coaching change.
Click to expand...
I agree, word for word.
 
Kirbee - beer is good. Booze works too.

I'm actually absolved of my previous bet - that I'd buy all of Stingtalk a shot if we made the ACCCG.


Let it be known that if Tech goes 7-6 this year and doesn't fire Chan, I owe Kirbee a beer, and if we do fire Chan he owes me one. (and boy am I gonna need it...)
 
knoxjacket said:
We should support the new coach even if it isn't our numero uno, can't miss candidate. Agreed?
Click to expand...

Yea, right. That support will last until the new coach has a Chanesque type loss and/or a 7 win season, then it will be turmoil all over again. The Tech Nation will never be satisfied. I foresee turmoil for decades to come.
 
UncleBee said:
Yea, right. That support will last until the new coach has a Chanesque type loss and/or a 7 win season, then it will be turmoil all over again. The Tech Nation will never be satisfied. I foresee turmoil for decades to come.
Click to expand...
Hire the right coach and hopefully you wont have to worry about chanesque type games.
 
Hire the right coach and hopefully you wont have to worry about chanesque type games.
Click to expand...
Pfft. Here's the definition of a 'chanesque' loss as I see it:

either a blowout loss,

or a close loss where players screwed up to give the game away on a few key plays,

or a close loss where key coaching decisions went wrong in hindsight

or a definitive loss to a team you thought you had better athletes than.

Right?

See, that encompasses probably half the losses experienced by any team this season, across the depth and breadth of college football. Seriously, pick 5 teams at random and look at their losses, and tell me none of them meet the 'chanesque' criteria. Florida, Georgia, Clemson, Auburn, and South Carolina, all fairly nearby teams, have all had losses this season that fit into one of the above baskets.
 
I stated in another thread that all new coaches should receive a full pardon on anything done in the first year (within reason of course). One blowout or two in the first season should be expected.
 
beej67 said:
Kirbee - beer is good. Booze works too.

I'm actually absolved of my previous bet - that I'd buy all of Stingtalk a shot if we made the ACCCG.


Let it be known that if Tech goes 7-6 this year and doesn't fire Chan, I owe Kirbee a beer, and if we do fire Chan he owes me one. (and boy am I gonna need it...)
Click to expand...

Since you mentioned booze and we are Tech men, after all. We could always settle on a modest bottle of whiskey. If that's not your drink of choice, settle on the beer.

Note: I don't lose for Chan getting fired for a record worse than 7-6. That is not what I'm betting. Tech has to go 7-6 for the bet to be in place.
 
Note: I don't lose for Chan getting fired for a record worse than 7-6. That is not what I'm betting. Tech has to go 7-6 for the bet to be in place.
Click to expand...
Clearly.

Shall we broaden it slightly, so that I lose if we go 7-6 or worse and keep him, and you lose if we go 7-6 or better and he gets fired?

Since you mentioned booze and we are Tech men, after all. We could always settle on a modest bottle of whiskey. If that's not your drink of choice, settle on the beer.
Click to expand...
What about whiskey shots at the bar down the street from Mover's house, loser buys?
 
beej67 said:
......Seriously, pick 5 teams at random and look at their losses, and tell me none of them meet the 'chanesque' criteria. Florida, Georgia, Clemson, Auburn, and South Carolina, all fairly nearby teams, have all had losses this season that fit into one of the above baskets.
Click to expand...

Problem with your diatribe is that none of those teams had Gailey as head coach.
 
Problem with your diatribe is that none of those teams had Gailey as head coach.
Click to expand...

Huh?

Here's the point:

No matter who we get as a head coach, many of his losses will undoubtedly appear 'chanesque' to us, because what we consider to be 'chanesque' losses are actually quite common among all teams and all coaches.

I would, for instance, say that every single team that's lost to Virginia this year had a 'chanesque' loss.
 
Please BJ, don't interject logic into the equation! We are the only Division I team to have such losses!
 
BarrelORum said:
I personally agree and think most people will get behind the new coach. I think the problem is for these die hard Gailey fans who think he is the second coming of Dodd and they appreciate his image of the program. I think those people will be so chapped that many of them will not support the new coach because their guy was yanked.
Click to expand...

I think you have it backwards here, BOR. IIRC back when we were looking for a new coach and Chan Gailey was hired he was way off the radar for most GT fans. I'm sure there were some in the know but I think it is probably safe to say most of us were caught a little off guard. In fact there has been a group who have been and still are so chapped that many of them will not support Gailey because he isn't their guy (this is not to suggest that all people who don't support Chan are in this group, but I know you know that there are those who fit that category).

That having been said the majority of people who support Chan Gailey are not doing so because they are emotionally attached to him. Most of the people who support Chan Gailey do so because he is our head coach and they will be vocal in their support because of that. Most of the folks who support Chan Gailey feel that there are rational, legitimate reasons to think things might get better and believe that there's a better chance we'll make some incremental improvements with the influx of talent and another year under Coach Bond as well.

I think you'll find that there are many GT fans who are concerned about the possibility of taking a huge step back if Chan is let go. And many of them feel that way not because of any personal or fan loyalty to Chan but because they are risk-averse or genuinely believe that not many others could have done better given the circumstances of the last few years. But they'll go out and vocally support the guy who is the HC at GT whether his name is Chan Gailey or not.

Right now I don't know where I stand on Coach Gailey. You know that I've defended him in the past and you might recognize that I haven't been doing so lately (which probably speaks volumes). It doesn't mean I've totally given up on him but it does mean that I'm extremely disappointed with this season and feel that the poor performance on the field is not because of any of the normal challenges one associates with GT (more restrictive academics and stuff like that). So while I go to the games and cheer for the team and the coaches because they all represent GT I'm very concerned whether or not we can take the next step with Chan at the helm. I'm not convinced one way or the other and that's not a good place to be.

But to finish up my point, I think that many of the people who support Chan are EXACTLY the kind of people who will openly support a new coach no matter who he is because that's one of the same reasons they opened their arms to Chan when he came in.
 
kirbee said:
First off you've got to be kidding. That will never happen. Unless we hire Bob Stoops. And that's not happening either.

You're talking about a fan base that bitches about everything from the uniform colors to the size and placement of the logo on the field for crissakes. GT fans have the emotional maturity of a 4 year old.

This is all very likely moot. Chan will be back next year as long as he posts the regular 7-6. Take it to the bank.

Same verse same as the first: 1) beat Duke and UNC. 2) Lose to UGA and some WAC team. 3) Off season turmoil. Rinse/repeat.
Click to expand...
ACC has only 6 tie-ins to bowls this year so a 6-6 GT team would probably more than likely be shut out- UVA, VA Tech, Clemson, FL St, Wake, BC are going bowling. If UNC wins out they would be a 6-6 team that would go before us in a heartbeat. Plus at this point if we dont win out, who gives a rats ass what crap bowl we go to after the last 5 years- no one
 
beej67 said:
Huh?

Here's the point:

No matter who we get as a head coach, many of his losses will undoubtedly appear 'chanesque' to us, because what we consider to be 'chanesque' losses are actually quite common among all teams and all coaches.

I would, for instance, say that every single team that's lost to Virginia this year had a 'chanesque' loss.
Click to expand...

So why is it that the local and national media have branded our team above all others as the most schizoid? A GT season under Gailey is like a box of chocolates. You don't know if you are going to get a cherry or a turd. The only HC that gets beat in as historic fashion as Gailey is Callahan at Nebraska.
 
Right now I don't know where I stand on Coach Gailey. You know that I've defended him in the past and you might recognize that I haven't been doing so lately (which probably speaks volumes). It doesn't mean I've totally given up on him but it does mean that I'm extremely disappointed with this season and feel that the poor performance on the field is not because of any of the normal challenges one associates with GT (more restrictive academics and stuff like that). So while I go to the games and cheer for the team and the coaches because they all represent GT I'm very concerned whether or not we can take the next step with Chan at the helm. I'm not convinced one way or the other and that's not a good place to be.
Click to expand...


Thank you for perfectly expressing the way I feel.


Whoa! :eek: Is there some kinda physic connection goin' on here?
 
JTS said:
So why is it that the local and national media have branded our team above all others as the most schizoid? A GT season under Gailey is like a box of chocolates. You don't know if you are going to get a cherry or a turd. The only HC that gets beat in as historic fashion as Gailey is Callahan at Nebraska.
Click to expand...


You have a point but beej67 also is correct. They aren't mutually exclusive.

I forget the particular game, but Granny Clampett even made a comment about our Jekyll and Hyde behavior as a team.

Having said that, I think TECH fans tend to overanalyze and attribute normal fluctuations common to all college teams as "Chanesque".

LSU just had a "Chanesque" game of a sort. But they were good enough to pull it out with sheer talent, so all is forgiven.

So, all NCAA teams tend to have uneven performance, but we seem to get more than our share even according to objective sources. So the biased sources close to the program amplify those normal fluctuations.

The scary thing for me is to review many of the coaches on the hot seat this year and realize that most of them were highly touted and came into programs with much support and high hopes. Sometimes you combine a hot coach with a top program with lots of support and things STILL go wrong.

I am ready to risk a downturn in the hopes of getting out of our stagnant pattern. But you have to accept that the risk is there.

P.S.
The local radio media is mentioning Mark Richt as a candidate for the A&M job. Interesting, even if it is just radio blowhards speculating.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top