Tech in the SEC

Carson was not Dodd's choice. It was our president Dr. Harrison that insisted on hiring Bud Carson. Furman Bisher has said on many occasions that Dodd had Doug Dickey lined up to replace him but the deal was shot down by Harrison. Dickey was a good coach and had some fine teams at Tennessee but for some reason was not completely happy there as evidenced by him
taking the Florida job when the gators were not all that good. Bud Carson was an excellent coach with the personality of a moose but he had surrounded himself with outstanding assistants
but his downfall was that he didn't have the support to be successful. It shouldn't be so but we all know that politics will make us or break us
and in Carson's case it broke him.
 
Bud Carson is one of the best defensive coaches to come through Tech. He was not a head coach. His offenses were very vanilla and unimaginative.

His inept skills on the offensive side of the ball doomed his career as a head coach. It had little to do with the quality of players on the team.

I have heard rumors Carson also had some of the same problems as Dubose and did not keep his focus on his primary duties as football coach.

rolleyes.gif
 
Am I the only one who remembers the word "De-emphasis" applied to Tech football?
Seems like they used that word at Army and Navy also, though it became a moot point for them as player size became a limiting factor.
 
Originally posted by Big Buck:
Carson was not Dodd's choice. It was our president Dr. Harrison that insisted on hiring Bud Carson. Furman Bisher has said on many occasions that Dodd had Doug Dickey lined up to replace him but the deal was shot down by Harrison. Dickey was a good coach and had some fine teams at Tennessee but for some reason was not completely happy there as evidenced by him
taking the Florida job when the gators were not all that good. Bud Carson was an excellent coach with the personality of a moose but he had surrounded himself with outstanding assistants
but his downfall was that he didn't have the support to be successful. It shouldn't be so but we all know that politics will make us or break us
and in Carson's case it broke him.
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">And what's wrong with the personality of a moose?!?!?!?!
grin.gif
 
Originally posted by bellyseries:
I've mentioned this before, and I expect others remember the details better than I, but the real turning point for Tech football was Sputnik. The country panicked when the Russians beat us to space. We had NO idea that the USSR was even competitive with us in science and technology: we thought they just stole from us (the "A"-bomb, the"H"-bomb). so when the first satellite went up, the nation was galvanized. Tech IMMEDIATELY began to talk "de-emphasizing" football, and it was downhill from there. (Our last gasp, the '65 team starring the young left-hander, was known to real Tech fans to be winning almost sheerly on will, we had no business going undefeated nearly all year.)

Everybody panicked, particularly about math, and how US school kids did not know any, after Sputnik, and schools like GT really had no choice but to push football back and focus on academics. meanwhile Ole Miss and bama,etc, were spending huge amounts of energy on cultural "conservatism" (read: segregation), and football fit that attitude.

Anyway, Tech grew in various very positive ways, and by the mid-60's simply was no longer an SEC fit. When we went indie, the program really suffered. UGAg had the highly organized, highly professional young Dooley for a coach, and they just took over state football. The fact that Dooley had the only decent program in GA, SC, and Fla, and still couldn't dominate like Bear was doing, or like Dodd did in the early to mid-50's, shows that he had much bigger limitations than the doggies will admit, but he beat us.

That's my rant, and the end of my two-fingered typing patience. Maybe it adds a little perspective to why we left the SEC.
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Very informative, except for the little barb about Cultural Conservatism. I've never heard an explanation like this when talking about Tech's old problems. We can now blame our demise on Sputnuk.
tongue.gif
 
In your case I find nothing wrong with a GTMoose.
But my point was that Carson was abrasive at times
and that is not a desired trait in a position as highly visible as a head coach. To his credit he hired an exceptional defensive staff-of which a couple of them distinguished themselves in the NFL. After becomming head coach he and Dodd didn't
get along too well and we all know too well that
when this happens the subordinate usually loses.
Let's play some football. I'm ready.
 
Originally posted by GT98:
bobby dodd's ghost, disagree about the "best" football conference--top to bottom it is the BIG 12. They passed the SEC a few years ago.

And of course, to make matters worse, the community college up I-85 went through their best period ever during the late 70's to early 80's...

I would not want GT associated w/the SEC again largely due to the fact that it is a rogue conference. With the exception of Vandy, the other colleges dropped any pretense of academics and will do absolutely anything; especially unethical and illegal activities in order to field a competitive team.
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">As a degree holder of both Vanderbilt and UGA, I feel the need to respond to the characterization of UGA as a "community college" that has "dropped any pretense of academics" IMO, a student can get just as good an education at UGA as Vanderbilt.

Other than perception as reflected in the ever popular U.S. News and World Report rankings, there is not much difference in the academics between these two schools. UGA is just bigger, has better facilities, and is a hell of a lot cheaper in tuition. Some of the top students in my law school class had undergraduate degrees from UGA, while others with ivy league degrees struggled.

And as to the "rogue conference" that has now taken a back seat to the Big 12, just look to last year's national title game. UT or UF would have given Miami a decent game whereas Nebraska didn't even belong on the same field with Miami.

The Big 12 is definitely a great football conference and looks to be even better this year, but the SEC is right there in the hunt this year with usual suspects UT and UF, and now UGA and LSU on the rise. Rather than predicting the demise of the SEC, which is not going to happen, instead you should divert your attention toward ideas on making the ACC a football powerhouse.

I think the ACC has gotten a lot better since adding FSU, but adding Miami, Virginia Tech and Syracuse, and splitting the conference into two divisions would make the ACC one of the top three football conferences in the country. It would also generate more revenue for everyone by adding an ACC championship game. For now, you're still a basketball conference with the exception of FSU.

Let me know how much the SEC has slipped after UGA hands GT its 5th loss of the season (6th if GT slips against the lowly 'Dores)
 
Dore Dawg... I for one am proud of the fact that the ACC is nothing like the SEC. Take your glasses off and realize that there are serious problems in your conference. Half are either on probabtion, or flirting with it.... thats a fact and a disgrace !! I am disappointed from the standpoint that I am a college football fan, I dont like to see those situations exist anywhere in the sport.

Also, to say that UT or Tenn would have played Miami better last year is just an opinion that you are entitled to, I think the SEC as a whole as slipped, the conference has slipped in terms of athletic strength, and most certainly, national respect. In my opinion, neither would have fared very well against Miami last year.

Georgia has been "on the rise" for the last 20 years... I will believe it when I see it, but in my opinion... they are just another middle of the pack SEC team. But then again, with the exception of the Herschel years, they were an average team under Dooley.. not much has changed.

Dont be so sure about your "W" against Tech this year, with either UGA or Vandy. Visit our board often, and especially in early December, I would love to hear what you think of your second year coach then, and your first year coach .... dont be too surprised if UGA is flirting with 5 losses this year, and to think that Vandy is going to come to Atlanta and win... well, you have been hanging out in the Smyrna bars too long...
 
Very informative, except for the little barb about Cultural Conservatism. I've never heard an explanation like this when talking about Tech's old problems. We can now blame our demise on Sputnuk.
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">"little barb"? Are you kidding? Bugboy, do you remember the '60's at all? That's no "little barb," it's just a remark about Southern facts. The joke about Eddie MaShan (sp?)-among Tech fans-was "Why is Tech having quarterback problems? Because a ______ won't work on Saturday." This from people sitting on the front porch farting mint from their juleps while other folks worked. I use a GaTech example just to show I'm not going after bama only. We all had that attitude, and Eddie played in the '70s, not the '60s.
 
Originally posted by bellyseries:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif"> Very informative, except for the little barb about Cultural Conservatism. I've never heard an explanation like this when talking about Tech's old problems. We can now blame our demise on Sputnuk.
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">"little barb"? Are you kidding? Bugboy, do you remember the '60's at all? That's no "little barb," it's just a remark about Southern facts. The joke about Eddie MaShan (sp?)-among Tech fans-was "Why is Tech having quarterback problems? Because a ______ won't work on Saturday." This from people sitting on the front porch farting mint from their juleps while other folks worked. I use a GaTech example just to show I'm not going after bama only. We all had that attitude, and Eddie played in the '70s, not the '60s.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">The problem I had with your comment was attaching the description of "cultural conservatism" to racism. It gets done alot in this day and age and it's untrue and unfair. There are many of us cultural conservatives that are not racists. There are also liberals who are racist. In today's world, the media often associates conservatives with racism. I guess this belongs on the off-topic board, but I couldn't let it slide.
tongue.gif
 
Long-winded rambling Dawg..

UGA isn't anywhere close to Vandy or GT in academics. UGA sucks. Deal with it.

The ACC had more bowl-eligible teams than the SEC. The SEC is full of trouble-making, academically underachiving party schools. Deal with it.

If we add Miami, VT, and Syracue, we are instantly the best football conference. Period.

These things are as obvious as the nose on your face. You just choose to be delusional.
 
Originally posted by bellyseries:
Peace, BeeBrother bugboy.

GO JACKETS!!

smile.gif
smile.gif
smile.gif
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">No problem, Belly. You're cool in my book.
 
1) Agree with your objections to the 'cultural conservative' label being associated with the segregated South of the 60s bugboy. It is just a way that liberals attempt to shut up people who have intelligent disagreeaces with them these days.

2) Dawg-Dore, you have got to be delusional. Really, your logic skills are lacking. I'm sure you suck at analogies and higher math. Just because you can get a good education at Ugag or just because there are top notch grads at Ugag doesn't mean that school is equal to Vandy or Tech. Give me a freakin' break. BTW, the Ivy League produces some of the biggest educated fools (despite their SATs) with some of the most hare-brained ideas on the planet, so I'm not surprised some of them didn't make it.

3) Again to Dawg-CommodeOdor, what is it with Dawg fans and delusion? Is there a toxic leak in the water system at Athens? Lead paint chipping off and falling into people's Cokes at Sanford and Son stadium? Florida and Tennessee would NOT have given Miami any better of a game than Nebraska. Good grief. Auburn beat you and they couldn't even beat UNC. Boston College was the 4th place team in the Big East and beat you guys. Georgia a rising team? How does duplicating your record from last year make you a "rising team"? LSU, I can see. At least they made it to the SEC championship game. Again, you SEC doofuses equate recruiting hyped-up high school kids with actual on the field success.

4) The in-state sweep will be back again this year as FSU, Clemson and Tech will all take their in-state SEC enemies down.

5) Fact: the SEC has had MORE probations and scandals than any other conference in the country. Still, SMU got the death penalty for LESS than some SEC schools (Bama, Kentucky) have been found guilty of. If the SEC isn't a rogue conference, they do the best impression of one I've ever seen.
 
ahhhh, hate to correct you conyers jacket, but the bowl eligible teams from the sec last year were Auburn (peach bowl), Alabama (Independence bowl), LSU (Sugar Bowl), Arkansas (Cotton Bowl), Ole Miss (didn' go to a bowl, but was 7-4), Tenn. (Citrus Bowl), Florida (Orange Bowl), UGa (Music city Bowl), USC (Outback Bowl). That is nine teams that are bowl eligible. The Acc, as you know, only has nine teams, and one of them is Duke. So, there is no way you had more bowl eligible teams. (you had Maryland, GT, FSU, Clemson, WFU, N.C. St., and UNC, that's seven.)
 
Vufan,

He was referring to the percentage of bowl eligible teams, not the raw number. With 3 addt'l schools, you're raw number should always be higher. However, 7 of 9 is a better percentage than 9 of 12; not by much, but that is not the point. We constantly hear that the SEC is the greatest collection of football schools ever seen and that they should secede and play against NFL teams in order to play a competitive ooc schedule.

The reality (i.e. head to head records) over the last decade suggests that the ACC is not that far behind the SEC. The SEC is a better conference in football, but the difference is NOT the continental divide that most SEC homers would have you believe.
tongue.gif
 
Originally posted by Technician:


2) Dawg-Dore, you have got to be delusional. Really, your logic skills are lacking. I'm sure you suck at analogies and higher math. Just because you can get a good education at Ugag or just because there are top notch grads at Ugag doesn't mean that school is equal to Vandy or Tech. Give me a freakin' break. BTW, the Ivy League produces some of the biggest educated fools (despite their SATs) with some of the most hare-brained ideas on the planet, so I'm not surprised some of them didn't make it.

3) Again to Dawg-CommodeOdor, what is it with Dawg fans and delusion? Is there a toxic leak in the water system at Athens? Lead paint chipping off and falling into people's Cokes at Sanford and Son stadium? Florida and Tennessee would NOT have given Miami any better of a game than Nebraska. Good grief. Auburn beat you and they couldn't even beat UNC. Boston College was the 4th place team in the Big East and beat you guys. Georgia a rising team? How does duplicating your record from last year make you a "rising team"? LSU, I can see. At least they made it to the SEC championship game. Again, you SEC doofuses equate recruiting hyped-up high school kids with actual on the field success.

4) The in-state sweep will be back again this year as FSU, Clemson and Tech will all take their in-state SEC enemies down.

5) Fact: the SEC has had MORE probations and scandals than any other conference in the country. Still, SMU got the death penalty for LESS than some SEC schools (Bama, Kentucky) have been found guilty of. If the SEC isn't a rogue conference, they do the best impression of one I've ever seen.
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Technician, your points are well-taken. You're right that my math skills blow, otherwise I wouldn't have gone to law school, but no one makes it in this field without the ability to reason and analogize.

Your reading comprehension skills are apparently as lacklustre as my math b/c I never compared UGA and GT.

Of course GT and VU are perceived as much better academically than UGA, and IMO both GT and VU have great academics. And if you look at the average ability of the student body, I agree that GT and VU are way ahead b/c they are so much smaller and admit only very qualified applicants.

But my point is that UGA's academics are much better than you think and their admissions criteria are getting more stringent (I think the average SAT score is now over 1200) and if you can get just as good an education at UGA as VU, why pay the extra money for VU, and miss out on one of the best college towns in the country? Y'all calling it a "commuter college" that has "dropped any pretense of academics" is a bunch of delusional GT propaganda.

Comparisons b/t UGA and GT are like comparing apples and oranges b/c both offer such different curricula, but I think both schools complement each other well and there's no reason why any resident of Georgia should have to go outside the state for a good education.

As to my delusion over UGA football, you may be right, but I'm no more delusional than y'all were at the beginning of last year when GT was a dark horse for a national title shot before pissing it away against mediocre ACC talent.

I like to compare UGA this year with our second-year head coach to Bob Stoops in his second year in which OU won the national title. OU lost 5 games the year before including a disappointing bowl loss to Ole Miss. Look out for them Dawgs! They were close in every game last year and can only get better now that they're not breaking in a new quarterback, which y'all are going to have to suffer through this year. If I'm wrong, I'll be here in early December to take my beating like a man.

Furthermore, your prediction of an in-state sweep is right on the money, but it's going to be a sweep in the other direction just like it was last year.

And finally, I'm not so delusional that I don't realize that the SEC has had some recruiting scandals, some major (Alabama, UK, and now MSU), some minor (UT and Ark.), but those schools are going to have to deal with the consequences now and in the end they're going to see that it wasn't worth the harm that they have done to their programs.

As far as UGA is concerned however, every thing I've heard about Richt is that while he may be a dogged recruiter, he is clean and plays by the rules. Further, you're naive if you think that SEC schools are the only ones committing violations. Rick Neuheisel has as much as admitted to multiple violations while coaching at CU.

GO DAWGS!!
 
Originally posted by 1865Jacket:
Dore-Dawg,

You are definately right about the delusions that may tech fans (myself included) had about having a shot at a BCS bowl game last year. But admit it, UGA fans have this delusion almost every year. It seems not too long ago that all this talk about richt bringing uga to an SEC title was happening about Donnan. UGA loved Donnan the first few years and they'll love Richt for a few. But the bottom line is, if Richt keeps doing what he did last year (putting up the same record as Donnan the year before), UGA fans will become disillusioned with him as well and will be calling for his head.

How are we supposed to take your comment about Richt's second year and Stoops? Are georgia fans, once again, talking of gridiron glories well before any tests have been passed? I don't think Richt is in quite the same position Stoops was in. You have a brand new secondary and some questions on both lines. I could be dead wrong about all this, but I'll start believe it AFTER the dawgs get through the first few tests of the season (namely South Carolina, Tennessee, and Alabama).

GO JACKETS!!!
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Sure, I'll admit that Dawg fans have been optimistic in the past and it hasn't panned out yet. And I still like Donnan and don't think he's a bad coach.

That said, I like Richt even better and only time will tell, but as long as the season hasn't started yet and we are still undefeated, I'm going to be pumped about this year's team. Now if we go 0-2 against Clemson and S. Car., I'll have my tail between my legs.

OK, OK, the comparison b/t Stoops and Richt may be overly optimistic but both are young coaches, both had some disappointing losses in the first year, both took over teams that pre-existing talent, and both started out with good left-handed quarterbacks. Our defense isn't in the same league with OU, but the offense could win a lot of games this year, maybe not undefeated but two losses isn't out of the realm of possibility.

And Richt did a lot of good last year beating UT in Knoxville and breaking the losing skid against you techies. Sure he made some bad choices against Auburn and BC, but those can be easily corrected and don't expect him to make those mistakes again. At least he's got balls and is man enough to admit to his mistakes.
 
Ol' Belly has the key here: yes you CAN get just a good an education at UGA as at GT, however, you can graduate from UGA without hittin' a lick, and that just ain't true on North Avenue. Yes, in general, Industrial Mgt, the major of choice for athletes at Tech is somewhat easier than engineering, but it certainly isn't phys ed!

And let's pop another ballon, here: the "great" college town of Athens. Yes, it IS a great college town - one party after another. Atlanta has EVERYTHING to offer from the business world, as well as entertainment. Face it, DD, Athens ain't the real world, Atlanta is.
 
Let's see Dore-Dawg...

You have a very interesting schedule this year. Several teams on your schedule have as good or better talent. These teams are UT, UF, GT, Bama, Allbarn, Clemson, & USC. UGAg could win these games, win some of them, lose some of them, or lose them all.

Every year we hear the same crap out of Athens... oooooh this is they year we win the SEC! Pfft I am waiting for that day so I can sell my SECCG tickets to some crazy pup fan and make a bundle!

Since I see you didn't mention your defense I take it you are in agreement about it being suspect. I know, I know you guys have so much talent to plug in there. Funny I seem to remember Oklahoma having a VETERAN defense.

I like GT's chances against you guys this year. Your defensive line should be fair, LB's will be good, and secondary will be toast much of this year.

I like your offense & figure you will score a lot of points this year. However, so will your opponents.

bash.gif
 
Back
Top