So who is it all you complainers want for HC, and

If it is a choice between Chan and coach X, then scores of coaches and assist. coaches would do fine. Let's use Ted Roof as an example. He would not be on my top 10 list, but if it came down between Roof and Chan, I'd go with Roof. At least Roof loves and understands Tech and Tech people. Even if Roof failed like Chan, I'd rather make Roof a millionaire over Chan.
.
.
.
BOO
 
Originally posted by OfficiallyBuzz:
I agree with BDG about Roof. If I were to choose a young up and coming coach I don’t think there is a better choice. I not sure how well he would do but like BDG I would rather pay the million to Roof.

The top of my list at this point is Mac and he would come here in a heartbeat.
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">OB,
I agree with your post completely.
 
why is it that when we look at recruits .. we look at who else offered while trying to gauge how talented a potential recruit may be

but we don't do the same for coaches .. in this instance Mac? anyone stopped to think why Mac is not getting a HC offer anywhere? there must be a reason ...

i don't know what it is .. maybe he would make a good HC, maybe he is being denied an opportunity, maybe he is a diamond in the rough waiting to be found, maybe he isn't good .. i don't know

what makes people think that mac would have done a better job? would the injuries not have happened? would QB play have significantly improved? would we have gotten Tenuta as our DC to improve it or would we have retained Roof? how would our defense have played had we retained Roof? would we have lost the Wake game? would we have won the NC St and UVa games?
 
yj8, there are hundreds of coaches that you could put their names in Mac's place and ask the same questions you asked. And like Mac's name, no one can give you a single answer to any of the questions you pose.

Those of us that like Mac, like him because the only motivated GT team we have seen in two years is the team he coached. Could he do it for 13 games a year? I don't know. I just know the one game he coached had a fired up team that wanted to play football. He let BOB and Roof do their jobs and got 110% out of every coach, player and fan.

Take any game coached by CG or by GOL and you will not find a single one that had the spirit and intensity that Mac's one game did.

Is that enough reason to hire Mac? I don't know but it sure puts him in front of what we have now.
 
I agree on Mac...

Before this year, people were saying the exact same thing about the Oak Raiders coach (Callahan) - ie, that he had been a "career" line coach, and/or offensive coordinator, never a HC etc etc etc...and look what he has done this year.

I was initially opposed to the idea of Mac, but I think people have to remember, the Head coach doesn't necessarily have to be the brains behind the "X's and O's", but he has to assemble a good staff and be a leader..I believe Mac has both qualities, and could have inspired both coaches and players...

Now, at this point, I gotta admit, I'm 100% in BeeWare's camp - I think it would have worked out far better with Mac (would have retained some of our best recruiters in recent memories, would have seen inspired play by the team...Of course its all speculation, but in hindsight I believe we'd have been better off with Mac
 
ylojk8's "Mac" theory is flawed. Ralph Friedgen proves that it is wrong to think that a long-time assist. coach can't make it in the head coach spot.
.
.
.
BOO
 
There is a very small top to the coach’s pyramid, not many opportunities at the top while the base is very large.

My memory is about 162 Div 1-A schools, let’s say averaging 15 ships per year. That’s a lot of potential offers to the better athletics.

So the analogy based upon a comparison of HC job offers to kids getting scholarship offers is hard to make.

Where is this topic going? Lot's of past discussion on this issue. Anything new now?
 
Originally posted by bobby dodds ghost:
ylojk8's "Mac" theory is flawed. Ralph Friedgen proves that it is wrong to think that a long-time assist. coach can't make it in the head coach spot.
.
.
.
BOO
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">I love Mac but there isn't similar situation between Fridge and him. Not even close. One has been a long time co in college ranks and a co in the pro ranks.
 
We could have kept Tech money in Tech family (Robinson or Roof) and been better off than what we got with CCG. Same goes for Mac.

I refuse to believe any of those 3 would have let 51-7 happen.

I also think we could have gotten any of them for considerably less than $1mil per as a starting pkg. just like we got GOL for less at the start. After proving their worth, they could make the big money, just like we did with GOL.
 
Originally posted by bobby dodds ghost:
ylojk8's "Mac" theory is flawed. Ralph Friedgen proves that it is wrong to think that a long-time assist. coach can't make it in the head coach spot.
.
.
.
BOO
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">i didn't even put forth a theory .. what theory are you talking about? your reading comprehension skills need some work dude

i just threw out some questions for the mac orgy crowd.

GMC 68 summarized the pro mac arguments very well .. very refreshing to read some sane comprehendable arguments rather than vain "ABC"s
 
i think we are going to need a proven winner at the college and pro level that is a real hard ass after the Gailey fiasco. the only choice I ca think of is Tom coughlin. He was succesful at BC and at Jax until salary cap and his abrasive personality wore people out. Since Tech is not considered a final stop for head coached 4-5 years of Coughlin might do the trick
 
Since the thread is so long and already so negative. I'm going to take my shots at Gailey too. I don't know what it is about the guy but he doesn't sell himself or the program. He just doesn't have the look or feel of a winner. He just comes off as fake to me.

I've never been more down about GT football than I am right now. The program has been in worse shape than this but I think we are headed downhill quickly. This belief has as much to do with the current state of school leadership as it does CG.
I'm usually an optimist so this is a new thing for me. Still, he has my full support for another year. Hopefully, I'm very wrong and have misjudged the man and the job he will do for GT.
 
I agree. We will need a kick butt coach to come in here and clean up the mess. Coughlin might be a great interim solution if not him, maybe we kiss and make up with O'Leary.

Ted Roof was the right man for this job. He would have grown into it and taken the program to new levels of achievement (my opinion). The old line crowd would never have accepted Mac because he has UGAG on his diploma.

Go Jackets!
 
Right now we have three TECH MEN
that would be approachable in the event of a coaching change. Roof, Spencer, and Jimmy Robinson (that's all I can think of anyway. wouldn't it be great to get these guys all together on the same staff?). That's the route I'd take. Mac second. Tom Coughlin? I'd rather have GOL back.
 
I want to give Chan more time before I decide if he's the man or not. So, at this point in time, I'm not gonna throw any names out there.

I know alot of people on this site are down about the way the season ended (I hated the ending as much as anyone)...and they're down about what they think will happen with recruiting.

My advice is to just take a deep breath and don't worry so much. Until February 5th, we won't know how recruiting will be. We simply don't know everything that's going on behind the scenes. Plus, we have spring practice and 2-a-days for Chan to implement whatever he thinks will help this team win.

Let's take a step back and not worry so much. August is a long way away.
 
Bugboy I agree. Everyone on this board know how I feel about CG. I have never felt that he is the man to lead us to success on the playing field. He has so many deficiencies, such as a total lack of public relations skills, can't inspire his team, and he is obviously is a slow thinker on the sidelines. But despite all these negative qualities we would be absolutely foolish to fire him now. However, I will be very surprised if he is here in 2004. I honestly feel that with our schedule this year we won't win more than four games. Chan will never out coach anyone on our schedule and it seems that he is bringing his staff back intact and that isn't good. BOB has demonstrated absolutely without question that he cannot develop a young QB. About the only bright
spot on our horizon is that after this year the powers that be won't allow him enough time to totally destroy our program as BL did. No one hopes that I am wrong more than myself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top