question about bowls....

G

Geetee

Guest
(mainly for GeeTeeLee from a prior thread)...

You (geeteelee) yourself in making a bragging point about our bowl streak said that what GT has achieved in this regard is "an accomplishment even though 5 of the 9 bowls were toilet bowls ".

Are you kidding me? That really makes you proud and want to boast about as a GT accomplishment when even you call them that? There are so many bowls now that just getting to bowl isn't that a big of a deal any longer. Now, if it weren't bottom feeder bowls or "toilet bowls" as you referred to them, that'd be a different story. Not to mention, that our performance in these bowls lately has not been anything to boast about either...

We beat Tulsa. woohoo.
We beat Syracuse who was about to fire their coach. rah.
We lost to Fresno is an empty baseball stadium that had just suspended 7 or 10 starters. pitiful.
We lost in a huge way to a 6-5 Utah team in another empty baseball stadium that even started a back up qb. beyond pitiful.
Our fans have not travelled well, either, to any of these games.

Yet, you want to boast about that being an accomplishment? Sure, there are other teams who have not gone to bowls as long, but to boast about ours when the bowls have been "toilet bowls" with losses against weak opponents is a stretch.

We need to control our own bowl destiny..and that only comes with a winning program. A winning programs starts out with good coaching. ..and we all know that is not going to change..so it looks like more of the "toilet bowl" same. We need a shake up with GT.
 
No offense, but have you ever seen a dog eat his own vomit?

I agree with what you are saying, but is this just a regergeration of the same shouting match? Those that agree agree. Those that don't don't.
 
cheer up...just pretend like all is well with GT football like some here prefer to do and you'll feel better.
 
Listen, nobody thinks all those bowls are significant in and of themselves...or at least no one who really thinks about it does. But being in a lower tier bowl IS better than not being in one. What the bowl streak really means is we haven't had a losing season in 10 years. That doesn't mean the program is in great shape. But it does mean we aren't Duke or Wake or State or UNC or Miss or Miss St or anybody else you want to mention. We're in that group of schools like Clemson that are pretty decent year to year, capable of beating anyone but also capable of losing if we aren't on our game. We are treading water. That's not where we want to be but we also don't suck.

What I don't understand is this need everyone has to be black and white on everything. Why is it you have to be critical of everything or rah rah about everything? Whether you think the glass is half full or half empty it's about half. We need to improve, but we aren't terrible. That's not okay but it could be worse. The simple fact as it relates to football is NOTHING major is going to happen until we have a new AD. So Chan has that long to get where he's trying to get. If he does he'll be here a while, if he doesn't he'll be gone as soon as the new guy makes up his mind. So going over the same ground every day is just dumb.
 
[ QUOTE ]
So going over the same ground every day is just dumb.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, why do you keep responding?
 
[ QUOTE ]

Are you kidding me? That really makes you proud and want to boast about as a GT accomplishment when even you call them that?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not partcularly proud of those individual bowls. Nothing to brag about there. But it IS a point of pride that we have had 9 consecutive winning seasons, again VERY few schools can say that.

Why do you want to diminish what accomplishments the team has made?
 
You're right, we should not take away from an overachieving team, which has consistently won 7 games with average talent at most positions, below-average talent at QB, and gnerally sub-par sideline coaching. I for one applaud them for that, but I want more.
 
[ QUOTE ]
But being in a lower tier bowl IS better than not being in one. What the bowl streak really means is we haven't had a losing season in 10 years. That doesn't mean the program is in great shape. But it does mean we aren't Duke or Wake or State or UNC or Miss or Miss St or anybody else you want to mention. We're in that group of schools like Clemson that are pretty decent year to year, capable of beating anyone but also capable of losing if we aren't on our game. We are treading water. That's not where we want to be but we also don't suck.

[/ QUOTE ]

NCJacket has summed up my feelings on this subject. I'm glad that the program has not slipped to the levels mentioned above, but like many of us feel, the program is not where I want it to be, or where I feel the GT program should be.
 
How Does A Team ....

with average talent and below average performance from its QB 'overachieve' if it also has subpar coaching?
 
The problem with all of the below deck "bowl" games is that they have apparently paved the way for satisfaction with mediocre performance.

To cite only one possible example: What does anyone think the level of urgency will be with Tenn. this coming year? They could have gone to a toilet bowl this past year with a win over Vandy.
I happen to believe that Tenn. missing a toilet bowl this year will benefit them greatly in '06.
Of course even if they had gone to the MCB or another no-name bowl, they have enough fans to sell their allotment.

Still, I would bet a large sub sandwich that Phil Fulmer is happy that his team did not get their "Guess wristwatch" reward this year. They have higher aspirations than merely going to a field trip bowl.

Would Tech fans have a different opinion of the last 4 years if the lowest rung bowls had not existed?

My opinion is that we would have made some changes sooner if we had sat at home.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Would Tech fans have a different opinion of the last 4 years if the lowest rung bowls had not existed?

[/ QUOTE ]

I went back and researched the number of bowls that existed prior to GT's nine game bowl streak. The streak began in 1997 with a 35-30 victory over West Virginia in the Carquest Bowl. Prior to that (the '96 season) there were 18 bowl games (there are now 28).

Yes, I think if GT had been shut out of the bowl picture over the previous four to five years then overall most fans would probably have a different outlook on where the program is right now.

Let me say that I am glad that GT is not being shut out of bowls at a time when practically every 6-5 team is getting an invite. At the same time, I'm ready for the next step.

By the way, cfbdatawarehouse.com is a great site to find info on year-to-year team records, bowl games, etc.
To check it out, here's the link...

College Football Data warehouse
 
Tennessee didn't even have a choice of what bowl they would attend this year since they didn't qualify. However, they would have attended the MCB if they had finished 6-5 and Tech would have stayed home at 7-4 - so I don't think they would have been too insulted about attending a lower teir bowl.
 
Tech would not have ben shut out, we would have been invited to another lesser bowl in place of a 6-5 team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top