The ghosts of Homecoming past

ND is an Academic School with a great National Reputation and their FB is popular with their Student Body, Duke Basketball had been popular for a very long time, and I'm talking about before Coach K was there.

In the Deep South , a CFB crazed City like Atlanta, GT FB should be more popular, even if we are a College with weak Alumni support, in an Area of almost 7 million people in the 13 County MSA, finding 25K Sidewalk Fans to help us achieve sellouts should be pretty easy.

You've picked two programs who win a lot to compare with Tech, which doesn't win a lot. Notre Dame football is 94-34 over the past ten years with four appearances in title games/the playoffs. Duke basketball is one of the most successful programs in the entire country year-in and year-out over the past several decades.

If Georgia Tech football achieves success approaching the level of either of those programs, I guarantee you we will be selling out games and football will be very popular with the student body. But if we keep going 3-9, or even settle back into the 7-5 rut CPJ had us in, we're going to have tepid support no matter how much outreach we do.

The number one, two, and three factors in generating student interest and attracting sidewalk fans is winning.
 
Last edited:
Duke basketball is one of the most successful programs in the entire country year-in and year-out over the past several decades. Notre Dame football is 94-34 over the past ten years with four appearances in title games/the playoffs.

If Georgia Tech football achieves success approaching the level of either of those programs, I guarantee you we will be selling out games and football will be very popular with the student body. But if we keep going 3-9, or even settle back into the 7-5 rut CPJ had us in, we're going to have tepid support no matter how much outreach we do.

The number one, two, and three factors in generating student interest and attracting sidewalk fans is winning.
I used ND & Dook as example of Student Bodies at Academic Schools that love their FB Team & MBB , there's no reason for academics being a barrier to good student support.

Honestly, what has GT FB done to market GT FB to the Metro Atl. CFB Fan?

CFB on TV gets the highest ratings in Metro Atlanta than anywhere else in the USA, there's has to be a way to get 15K to 25K into becoming sidewalk fans for maybe 2 Games each season.

When great Marketers also have a popular product, they usually find a way to cash in, P5 CFB is a great product, we just have to find a way to market ourselves better.

Think about how bad Traffic must be to attend a UGA Gm, they've found a way to get Fans in the Stadium, maybe instead of looking down our Noses at UGA maybe we can learn something from them.

Was looking a History Channel Documentary on Food Wars, this episode was BK vs Mickey Ds, Ray Kroc studied BK , they came on the scene after Mickey Ds but were killing them because they were the first to come up with a large sandwich, The Whopper.

Kroc knew he had to innovate and come up with their own large sandwich to compete, Kroc kept tinkering around and came up with what he called "The Royale" (cause Kroc wanted to 1-up burger King, get it Royale), they test marketed it and it failed horribly, until a Secretary suggested they call it the Big Mac, cause it was big and the Company was named McDonald's, and the rest is history.

The lesson here is Just maybe we can put our Academic snobbery aside and maybe learn what places like UGA are doing right and see what we can apply to our situation

Over the last 30 years combined with how popular CFB is in Atlanta we have won enough to fill a 55K Stadium, something else is wrong with GT and it's place in Atlanta, after we win it all in 1990, there was no huge uptick in attendance
 
Just damn! All those guys in the pictures are now in their 60's. Sic transit gloria mundi!!
 
In the 30s or 40s, Tech had a school of commerce, but the BOR took it from us because it gave us an advantage over the mutts, which they just couldn't allow to happen. That school eventually morphed into Ga State. Again, that was not the fault of the Tech administration; that wa mutt politicians' fault.
(IMO)Part Revisionist history and part tinfoil hat conspiracy theories.

Back in 30s or 40s, there were no huge TV Deals, no huge Nick Saban Coaching contracts, to summarize there was no decided monetary reason for politicians to worry that much over CFB that was popular in that Era , but nothing like it is now in the Cable TV Era.

Didn't GT have their fair share or Corp Leaders, Politicians, and Civic Leaders, maybe more than UGA did?

With so many GT Power Brokers in all Areas of the State how did they pull that off, as late as the Early 70s Lester Maddox was the GA Governor with just a HS Diploma, in fact back in those Days a lot of Elected Officials from around the State were HS Grads and I'm not talking about Pace Academy types either, basically poorly educated rural idiots.

I wasn't around then, but I find it hard to believe that a CFB rivalry back then was important enough for those kind of changes to be made
 
(IMO)Part Revisionist history and part tinfoil hat conspiracy theories.

Back in 30s or 40s, there were no huge TV Deals, no huge Nick Saban Coaching contracts, to summarize there was no decided monetary reason for politicians to worry that much over CFB that was popular in that Era , but nothing like it is now in the Cable TV Era.

Didn't GT have their fair share or Corp Leaders, Politicians, and Civic Leaders, maybe more than UGA did?

With so many GT Power Brokers in all Areas of the State how did they pull that off, as late as the Early 70s Lester Maddox was the GA Governor with just a HS Diploma, in fact back in those Days a lot of Elected Officials from around the State were HS Grads and I'm not talking about Pace Academy types either, basically poorly educated rural idiots.

I wasn't around then, but I find it hard to believe that a CFB rivalry back then was important enough for those kind of changes to be made
No offense meant, but if you don't think the Tech-Georgia rivalry was intense back then, you are extremely naive. I would suggest you read any of a number of Tech histories that have been written and see that is definitely not revisionist history or a tin-foil hat conspiracy theory. It is fully documented.

Check out, among other things, the following passage from https://finding-aids.library.gatech.edu/repositories/2/resources/329

History of the Georgia School of Technology Evening School of Commerce
The Georgia School of Technology's Evening School of Commerce was organized in 1914 and continued until 1933. According to some sources, the Evening School of Commerce actually began a year earlier, in 1913, with classes offered on the Georgia Tech campus, in the Chemistry building. In any case, for the following years the School operated in various locations in downtown Atlanta. A co-educational school, it was formed to accommodate working men and women seeking further training in business. Faculty included regular Georgia Tech faculty as well as several special lecturers drawn from the Atlanta business world. Students were able to work toward the degree of Bachelor of Commercial Science by completing 120 hours of college work. (My addition here --- the first female Tech graduate graduated from this School of Commerce)

In 1930 the School moved to 223 Walton Street, a building that was purchased and renovated in time for the 1931-1932 school year. The School remained there until 1938. Two years after the move to Walton Street, the School was taken over by the newly formed Board of Regents for the University System of Georgia, and it changed names to the University System of Georgia Evening School. After further name changes in the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s, the School became known first as Georgia State College in 1961, and finally as Georgia State University in 1969.

This doesn't indicate that the move was made because of football, but the following certainly at the very least implies that ---

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Georgia_Institute_of_Technology

The Great Depression threatened the already tentative nature of Georgia Tech's funding. In a speech on April 27, 1930, (Tech President) Brittain proposed that the university system be reorganized under a central body, rather than having each university under its own board. As a result, the Georgia General Assembly and Governor Richard Russell Jr. passed an act in 1931 that established the University System of Georgia (USG) and the corresponding Georgia Board of Regents; unfortunately for Brittain and Georgia Tech, the board was composed almost entirely of graduates of the University of Georgia. In its final act on January 7, 1932, the Tech Board of Trustees sent a letter to the chairman of the Georgia Board of Regents outlining its priorities for the school. The Depression also affected enrollment, which dropped from 3,271 in 1931–1932 to a low of 2,482 in 1933–1934, and only gradually increased afterwards. It also caused a decrease in funding from the State of Georgia, which in turn caused a decrease in faculty salaries, firing of graduate student assistants, and a postponing of building renovations.

As a cost-saving move, effective on July 1, 1934, the Georgia Board of Regents transferred control of the relatively large Evening School of Commerce to the University of Georgia and moved the small civil engineering program at UGA to Tech. The move was controversial, and both students and faculty protested against it, fearing that the Board of Regents would remove other programs from Georgia Tech and reduce it to an engineering department of the University of Georgia. Brittain suggested that the lack of Georgia Tech alumni on the Board of Regents contributed to their decision. Despite the pressure, the Board of Regents held its ground.
 
You've picked two programs who win a lot to compare with Tech, which doesn't win a lot. Notre Dame football is 94-34 over the past ten years with four appearances in title games/the playoffs. Duke basketball is one of the most successful programs in the entire country year-in and year-out over the past several decades.

If Georgia Tech football achieves success approaching the level of either of those programs, I guarantee you we will be selling out games and football will be very popular with the student body. But if we keep going 3-9, or even settle back into the 7-5 rut CPJ had us in, we're going to have tepid support no matter how much outreach we do.

The number one, two, and three factors in generating student interest and attracting sidewalk fans is winning.

Your assumption that turnout is directly related to winning football games is misplaced. I'm not going to say that winning doesn't have an impact because it absolutely does, but you obviously haven't even looked into the situation. The highest yearly attendance in FBS for the last several (non-Covid aka 2019 and previous) years was....yep you guessed it......Michigan. Because they have such a storied recent history of being a dominant program and not anywhere near a dumpster fire.

Before you say but what about clemsdumbson, and bama.....Penn St is #2 (must be pedophilia that puts tails in the seats), or #3 Ohio St (Now we have the first perennial powerhouse.) #4 Bama (figures) #5 Texas A&M (who is this?), #6 LSU (Attendance rose as a championship season mounted.). We'll end with #7 Texas. (WTF? hasn't done anything since vince young and colt mccoy).

I'm not going to assume direct correlation, but as @savbandjacket said the question was about turnout at the events surrounding the football games. The majority of these programs have pretty strong traditional backgrounds so we can look at the list above and deduce that the turnout at the associated events is also higher but the reason is based on that tradition since It's pretty obvious that winning isn't the only thing drawing fans. The only school that really backs up your narrative in the above list is LSU, and maybe alabama but I haven't seen a bad alabama team in a long time to compare recent attendance.

Winning is part of the equation, and sure it would probably equal more bodies, but I'm not convinced that if we were to string together 2 or 3 major bowl win seasons that suddenly the streets are packed for the parades or the mini or anything else again. So much of that is the student body and the demographics and the social atmosphere and saying it's not is shortsighted.

Ultimately, I think we can all agree that we would all like to see some success so that we can test the hypothesis.
 
Your assumption that turnout is directly related to winning football games is misplaced. I'm not going to say that winning doesn't have an impact because it absolutely does, but you obviously haven't even looked into the situation. The highest yearly attendance in FBS for the last several (non-Covid aka 2019 and previous) years was....yep you guessed it......Michigan. Because they have such a storied recent history of being a dominant program and not anywhere near a dumpster fire.

...

Ultimately, I think we can all agree that we would all like to see some success so that we can test the hypothesis.

This we can agree on. I actually really hope we can become a dumpster fire like Michigan, whose last five seasons look like the following:

9-4
10-3
8-5
10-3
10-3

Perhaps Geoff Collins can call up Jim Harbaugh and get some tips on lighting the dumpster fire. Maybe all the juice is dousing the flames.

By the way, I don't mean to imply that if we just start winning 9+ games regularly we'll be drawing like Michigan. But I think we'd be damn close to selling out every game, and the events surrounding the football game would get a lot more attendance as well. But it we keep winning three games a year, or even 6 a year without ever breaking through for really good seasons, then it doesn't matter what else we do, we're not going to draw or generate sidewalk interest.
 
Last edited:
More ghosts from the past....the gigantic homecoming displays that graced the yards of the various fraternity houses. Something else about homecoming that has faded away
 

Attachments

  • 248484464_10220832433581093_3522033648101259795_n.jpg
    248484464_10220832433581093_3522033648101259795_n.jpg
    48.1 KB · Views: 38
  • 248704877_10220832436221159_7258356910478396089_n.jpg
    248704877_10220832436221159_7258356910478396089_n.jpg
    691.1 KB · Views: 42
Your assumption that turnout is directly related to winning football games is misplaced. I'm not going to say that winning doesn't have an impact because it absolutely does, but you obviously haven't even looked into the situation. The highest yearly attendance in FBS for the last several (non-Covid aka 2019 and previous) years was....yep you guessed it......Michigan. Because they have such a storied recent history of being a dominant program and not anywhere near a dumpster fire.

Before you say but what about clemsdumbson, and bama.....Penn St is #2 (must be pedophilia that puts tails in the seats), or #3 Ohio St (Now we have the first perennial powerhouse.) #4 Bama (figures) #5 Texas A&M (who is this?), #6 LSU (Attendance rose as a championship season mounted.). We'll end with #7 Texas. (WTF? hasn't done anything since vince young and colt mccoy).

I'm not going to assume direct correlation, but as @savbandjacket said the question was about turnout at the events surrounding the football games. The majority of these programs have pretty strong traditional backgrounds so we can look at the list above and deduce that the turnout at the associated events is also higher but the reason is based on that tradition since It's pretty obvious that winning isn't the only thing drawing fans. The only school that really backs up your narrative in the above list is LSU, and maybe alabama but I haven't seen a bad alabama team in a long time to compare recent attendance.

Winning is part of the equation, and sure it would probably equal more bodies, but I'm not convinced that if we were to string together 2 or 3 major bowl win seasons that suddenly the streets are packed for the parades or the mini or anything else again. So much of that is the student body and the demographics and the social atmosphere and saying it's not is shortsighted.

Ultimately, I think we can all agree that we would all like to see some success so that we can test the hypothesis.
Dude, all that post told us was who has the largest stadiums.

1MichiganMichigan Stadium (Ann Arbor, Mich.)107,601
2Penn StateBeaver Stadium (University Park, Pa.)106,572
3Ohio StateOhio Stadium (Columbus, Ohio)102,780
4Texas A&MKyle Field (College Station, Texas)102,733
5TennesseeNeyland Stadium (Knoxville, Tenn.)102,455
6LSUTiger Stadium (Baton Rouge, La.)102,321
7AlabamaBryant-Denny Stadium (Tuscaloosa, Ala.)101,821
8TexasDarrell K Royal-Texas Memorial Stadium (Austin, Texas)95,594

See a pattern there, chief?

Utah has sold out every home game for years. They just expanded their stadium (again), but it still doesn't have 100000+ seats like Michigan, Penn State, etc. Doesn't mean their stadium doesn't have a rocking game day experience - it does. And I do not believe that Utah's "tradition" is the reason.
 
No offense meant, but if you don't think the Tech-Georgia rivalry was intense back then, you are extremely naive. I would suggest you read any of a number of Tech histories that have been written and see that is definitely not revisionist history or a tin-foil hat conspiracy theory. It is fully documented.

Check out, among other things, the following passage from https://finding-aids.library.gatech.edu/repositories/2/resources/329

History of the Georgia School of Technology Evening School of Commerce
The Georgia School of Technology's Evening School of Commerce was organized in 1914 and continued until 1933. According to some sources, the Evening School of Commerce actually began a year earlier, in 1913, with classes offered on the Georgia Tech campus, in the Chemistry building. In any case, for the following years the School operated in various locations in downtown Atlanta. A co-educational school, it was formed to accommodate working men and women seeking further training in business. Faculty included regular Georgia Tech faculty as well as several special lecturers drawn from the Atlanta business world. Students were able to work toward the degree of Bachelor of Commercial Science by completing 120 hours of college work. (My addition here --- the first female Tech graduate graduated from this School of Commerce)

In 1930 the School moved to 223 Walton Street, a building that was purchased and renovated in time for the 1931-1932 school year. The School remained there until 1938. Two years after the move to Walton Street, the School was taken over by the newly formed Board of Regents for the University System of Georgia, and it changed names to the University System of Georgia Evening School. After further name changes in the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s, the School became known first as Georgia State College in 1961, and finally as Georgia State University in 1969.

This doesn't indicate that the move was made because of football, but the following certainly at the very least implies that ---

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Georgia_Institute_of_Technology

The Great Depression threatened the already tentative nature of Georgia Tech's funding. In a speech on April 27, 1930, (Tech President) Brittain proposed that the university system be reorganized under a central body, rather than having each university under its own board. As a result, the Georgia General Assembly and Governor Richard Russell Jr. passed an act in 1931 that established the University System of Georgia (USG) and the corresponding Georgia Board of Regents; unfortunately for Brittain and Georgia Tech, the board was composed almost entirely of graduates of the University of Georgia. In its final act on January 7, 1932, the Tech Board of Trustees sent a letter to the chairman of the Georgia Board of Regents outlining its priorities for the school. The Depression also affected enrollment, which dropped from 3,271 in 1931–1932 to a low of 2,482 in 1933–1934, and only gradually increased afterwards. It also caused a decrease in funding from the State of Georgia, which in turn caused a decrease in faculty salaries, firing of graduate student assistants, and a postponing of building renovations.

As a cost-saving move, effective on July 1, 1934, the Georgia Board of Regents transferred control of the relatively large Evening School of Commerce to the University of Georgia and moved the small civil engineering program at UGA to Tech. The move was controversial, and both students and faculty protested against it, fearing that the Board of Regents would remove other programs from Georgia Tech and reduce it to an engineering department of the University of Georgia. Brittain suggested that the lack of Georgia Tech alumni on the Board of Regents contributed to their decision. Despite the pressure, the Board of Regents held its ground.
Governor Richard Russell, Jr. graduated UGA Law School.
His successor, Eugene Talmadge, graduated UGA Law School.
His successor, Ellis Arnall, graduated UGA Law School.
His successor, "Humman" Talmadge, graduated UGA undergrad and UGA Law School.
His successor, Melvin Thompson, earned his Master's Degree and did his Ph.D work at UGA.
.
.
.
Current Governor Brian Kemp, graduate UGA.

Anyone see a pattern? Sonny Purdue, Roy Barnes, Zell Miller, Joe Frank Harris, George Busbee . . . all dwags. Sure, there has been a very occasional Nathan Deal (Mercer - but at least one his kids is a dwag), but it is nearly 100 years of almost nothing but dwags. Hey, at least if Stacey Abrams had won . . . she isn't a dwag.
 
We had an impressive Homecoming winning streak going when I was in school. Two glorious and improbable wins continued that streak. In '73 Duke drove inside the red zone down 12-10 to kick the winning field goal. The kick was up and groans went through the RAT section until it was ruled wide right. We broke into laughter. It was as good of a home cooking call as I had seen.

The streak was on the line my Senior Year when inexplicably we thought the Notre Dame Fighting Irish would be a good Homecoming opponent. They were. We won 23-14. ND Homecoming displays were excellent - I loved the leprechaun with crossed hands in front of his groin and a yellow jacket on a pulley making stinger runs at him captioned, "They're after me lucky charms." Good times.
 
Dude, all that post told us was who has the largest stadiums.

1MichiganMichigan Stadium (Ann Arbor, Mich.)107,601
2Penn StateBeaver Stadium (University Park, Pa.)106,572
3Ohio StateOhio Stadium (Columbus, Ohio)102,780
4Texas A&MKyle Field (College Station, Texas)102,733
5TennesseeNeyland Stadium (Knoxville, Tenn.)102,455
6LSUTiger Stadium (Baton Rouge, La.)102,321
7AlabamaBryant-Denny Stadium (Tuscaloosa, Ala.)101,821
8TexasDarrell K Royal-Texas Memorial Stadium (Austin, Texas)95,594

See a pattern there, chief?

Utah has sold out every home game for years. They just expanded their stadium (again), but it still doesn't have 100000+ seats like Michigan, Penn State, etc. Doesn't mean their stadium doesn't have a rocking game day experience - it does. And I do not believe that Utah's "tradition" is the reason.

Your logic is busted. Otherwise, it is if you build it, they would come. So get your wallet out and let's crank open a 200k seat stadium. We both know you will still only find 30k in attendance.

I'm glad you brought up Utah. It's just down the road from me and a great comparison for school size. Enrollment, stadium size, and attendance is about the same as Tech. The difference is the demographic. The MUSS (student section club) at Utah is 7000+ and it's consistently capped at membership. The Swarm + Goldfellas + Reck Club + any other club membership that has a seating block at the games is maybe 2500. Hell the band is the second largest student organization at the games.

Those are the ones involved in these homecoming extracurriculars. Not the 40 yr old sidewalk fan who likes when Tech wins. So what this tells you is that our student's participation/enthusiasm as a whole is terrible and that leaks over to support for the football and other teams.
 
This we can agree on. I actually really hope we can become a dumpster fire like Michigan, whose last five seasons look like the following:

9-4
10-3
8-5
10-3
10-3

Perhaps Geoff Collins can call up Jim Harbaugh and get some tips on lighting the dumpster fire. Maybe all the juice is dousing the flames.

By the way, I don't mean to imply that if we just start winning 9+ games regularly we'll be drawing like Michigan. But I think we'd be damn close to selling out every game, and the events surrounding the football game would get a lot more attendance as well. But it we keep winning three games a year, or even 6 a year without ever breaking through for really good seasons, then it doesn't matter what else we do, we're not going to draw or generate sidewalk interest.

I guess we can have differing definitions of dumpster fire, but as Bobby's financial planner, I hope even you would feel that paying a coach $9 million a year would be a terrible investment for those records. Especially with NIU-esque losses on record. We can have 3x as much juice flowing around here for that money. I didn't look to see what his new deal was, but hopefully they were smart enough to reel that disaster in.
 
I guess we can have differing definitions of dumpster fire, but as Bobby's financial planner, I hope even you would feel that paying a coach $9 million a year would be a terrible investment for those records. Especially with NIU-esque losses on record. We can have 3x as much juice flowing around here for that money. I didn't look to see what his new deal was, but hopefully they were smart enough to reel that disaster in.

Well I think that's a different statement. You said my assumption that winning is directly tied to attendance is misplaced and that I "obviously haven't even looked into the situation" because Michigan has led the nation in attendance recently. I really don't see how that disproves that attendance is tied to winning when Michigan has had three ten win seasons in the past five years.

Michigan wins a lot! They've got 47 wins over the past five seasons. Sure, for the amount they're paying maybe they should be getting more, but they're still winning way more often than not. If we did that our attendance would go way, way up, as would interest in all the events surrounding our program. Even if we had to pay $9 million a year for those wins (if only...)
 
Well I think that's a different statement. You said my assumption that winning is directly tied to attendance is misplaced and that I "obviously haven't even looked into the situation" because Michigan has led the nation in attendance recently. I really don't see how that disproves that attendance is tied to winning when Michigan has had three ten win seasons in the past five years.

Michigan wins a lot! They've got 47 wins over the past five seasons. Sure, for the amount they're paying maybe they should be getting more, but they're still winning way more often than not. If we did that our attendance would go way, way up, as would interest in all the events surrounding our program. Even if we had to pay $9 million a year for those wins (if only...)

The assumption is though. See, Texas isn't winning, A&M isn't winning, PENN state is cold and hot from sub .500 several year stretch to .700s in recent years. Michigan was all over the board from 2005 to 2015 but all those schools are still were putting 100k fans in the seats during those years.

Take a look at Michigan 2014 season, 4th year of Hoke as HC, had time to implement his system and players, 3 years removed from 11-2 with previous 2 year lackluster .538 and .615. 2014 team goes .417 but still puts 734,364 over 7 home games or 104,909/game. I picked that because it's the low point which should equal the worst attendance if Wins affect the results. It's barely off current attendance. That should be all the evidence you need.

The only difference for our record compared to these teams is that we are currently in the 6 year slump starting 2015. We've had two 11-3 seasons since 2009, the rest of the records for all those schools are comparable if you look at them side by side. Michigan had 4 equivalent or better, Texas 2, A&M 1, Penn 4, and we're not spending ludicrous money to do it.

If your point is that winning as a tradition puts fans in the seats......we have that tradition, and even more so than a lot of schools, but winning recently obviously is not a direct link to football or outside activity attendance. There have been many articles written about Tech attendance even back during our winning seasons because the school knows it is an issue. My statements just point out that a lot of it goes back to how our students participate and that participation is being affected significantly by things other than the W column.
 
Back
Top