<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">huh? last time i checked the head coach impacted how the football team plays....and their record...and both of those weren't very good this year....i dont think we're taking much of a leap saying that Gailey "impacted" this team to a 7-6 record (vs a weak schedule) and a few very very poorly played games
the negativity on this board
- Thread starter GTTerrific
- Start date
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">MsTechAnalysis, if you will discredit the coaching staff (I don't care who that staff constitutes) after a bad loss and come up with posts like you support the players despite the coaches but refuse to support the coaching staff after a good win, i will point this out.
i don't understand why you would get angry because of this. how am i crossing a line if i am quoting your own words? how is that a problem? they were your words .. you said them, you posted them on the board
i'm sorry if quoting your own words make them a personal attack
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">ylojk8 - I guess that's the problem here. 8 wins is a failure at FSU or Maryland and it takes 6 wins for you to consider it a failure. 6 - 8 wins is mediocre and you wind up about where we did last year - apparently a success to you.
GTTerrific
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2001
- Messages
- 4,036
MsTech,
Been paying close attention to this thread. Feel I understand where you're coming from now. Before you had used reference to "calling out" you before. At the time I didn't really understand what exactly you meant. Do believe I do now.
Want to publicly apologize to you for doing so.
That goes for beeware as well. I've done the same to him. (Believe he's a him
) Sorry for doing so beeware.
Alrighty now!! GO JACKETS!
Been paying close attention to this thread. Feel I understand where you're coming from now. Before you had used reference to "calling out" you before. At the time I didn't really understand what exactly you meant. Do believe I do now.
Want to publicly apologize to you for doing so.
That goes for beeware as well. I've done the same to him. (Believe he's a him
Alrighty now!! GO JACKETS!
This board is the Tech doomsayer board, led by the prodical doomsayer, Beeware. I would venture to guess if Gailey turns it around next year, Beeware would simply disappear rather than come on the board and take his medicine. The sad thing is that discussion of Gailey constantly on this board has rendered this board void of any useful or interesting information about GT. Virtually any post about football turns into a bash Gailey or Braine post.
CrackerJacket
Flats Noob
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2002
- Messages
- 634
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">You're laughable Beeware.
Time and again I have watched you skirt
around arguments you cannot debate with
crap like this.
You're good at it, I'll give you that much.
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">ylojk8 - I guess that's the problem here. 8 wins is a failure at FSU or Maryland and it takes 6 wins for you to consider it a failure. 6 - 8 wins is mediocre and you wind up about where we did last year - apparently a success to you.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">DaveTech, what is your definition of success then? you're not supportive of our present coaching staff either. what would constitute a successful season? what would constitute a failure?
MsTechAnalysis
Jolly Good Fellow
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2002
- Messages
- 1,816
GTTerrific:
Saw your post and thank you for your positive response! I know we are all here because of our love and commitment to Georgia Tech and its athletics.
I truly appreciate your positive feelings!
Saw your post and thank you for your positive response! I know we are all here because of our love and commitment to Georgia Tech and its athletics.
I truly appreciate your positive feelings!
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">POT CALLING KETTLE...POT CALLING KETTLE
can't debate the message???
for 13 months now, you have avoided the "message"
of
1. why 7-5 in 2001 is so wonderful...and yet 7-5 is in 2002 is a season lost.
2. how our "wonderful seattle bowl staff" was not so wonderful. i.e. danny crossman and peter mccarty being quite possibly the worst position coaches we have had here....david kelley being a huckster... ted in over his head as DC...
3. without ralph, george is just 2 games over .500 like....7-5....with ALL THAT TALENT as you say
4. ALL THAT TALENT...o'leary did not leave the cupboard full like you claim....just ask the NFL..
5. mcwhorter joining the "YOU DON'T HIRE AN ASSISTANT FROM THE CURRENT STAFF CLUB". joining the likes of torbusch, dubose, goff, west, bobby williams...mac could have been on the list with solich (neb) this year..any bets on doba from wash. st. joining the list in a year or two.
( larry coker you say???? well, then we need to define what ALL THAT TALENT really means, because he's got it)
there are are so many more...but let's start with those 5...i'll be waiting....
The Jacket
The Coat
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2002
- Messages
- 33,554
I agre 100% bama.
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Certainly not 6th place in the ACC, the worst loss ever to Ugag, and losing a bowl to half a football team. GOL won 8 games in 01 and I think people were pretty disappointed in that outcome as well. There was grumbling get rid of Roof, get rid of BOB.
I would consider Ralph or Amato, or Groh definitely successful this year. Ralph - first two 10 win seasons and most wins by new coach. Amato - most wins in school hsitory.
Contrast CG worst loss in history to ugag.
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Certainly not 6th place in the ACC, the worst loss ever to Ugag, and losing a bowl to half a football team. GOL won 8 games in 01 and I think people were pretty disappointed in that outcome as well. There was grumbling get rid of Roof, get rid of BOB.
I would consider Ralph or Amato, or Groh definitely successful this year. Ralph - first two 10 win seasons and most wins by new coach. Amato - most wins in school hsitory.
Contrast CG worst loss in history to ugag.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">6th place in the ACC is nobody's definition of success. o'leary went 7-5 in the regular season. my # of wins, i meant regular season wins.
Now what is YOUR definition of success?
interesting to note that Tech under Gailey beat two out of the three coaches that you consider successful
This headline from Knoxville says it all:
Fulmer gets no pay raise for first time in 10 years
Vols' coach does get 1-year contract extension after subpar 8-5 season
Maryland won 11 = successful
NC State won 11 = successful
Virginia won 9 = successful (improving at the end not regressing)
You are right that CG beat two of those coaches. Too bad you have to win the ones you are EXPECTED to win also to be considered successful. ( and not lose to your biggest rival by almost 50 points)
Fulmer gets no pay raise for first time in 10 years
Vols' coach does get 1-year contract extension after subpar 8-5 season
Maryland won 11 = successful
NC State won 11 = successful
Virginia won 9 = successful (improving at the end not regressing)
You are right that CG beat two of those coaches. Too bad you have to win the ones you are EXPECTED to win also to be considered successful. ( and not lose to your biggest rival by almost 50 points)
DaveTech, you're right that you have to win against teams that you're expected to win to be successful. and if you're the underdog, you have to win against teams that you are not supposed to win to be successful.
nobody is suggesting that Tech had a successful season. however it was NOT a FAILURE either.
it was a MEDIOCRE season, which is NOT enough to FIRE a new HEAD COACH! It is NOT enough to treat him like a LEPER, which is what many fonts do here.
nobody is suggesting that Tech had a successful season. however it was NOT a FAILURE either.
it was a MEDIOCRE season, which is NOT enough to FIRE a new HEAD COACH! It is NOT enough to treat him like a LEPER, which is what many fonts do here.
I'm not going to touch this thread except to say that there are several posters here and they know who they are without naming them that are negative all the time win or not. Sure I've been negative at times but remember the negatism only hurts the person being negative and not at whom it's aimed. As for Mac come on down to Texas here and see or talk to UT and start complaining about Mac not getting promoted.
bamawreck, don't hold your breath waiting for Beeware to respond to your questions.
glad that i'm not the only one beeware is fooling around here.
seems like in the past few weeks, he developed a cult following .. LOL
answer bamawreck's questions beeware, you debater you. are you a debater or a masterdebater?
glad that i'm not the only one beeware is fooling around here.
seems like in the past few weeks, he developed a cult following .. LOL
answer bamawreck's questions beeware, you debater you. are you a debater or a masterdebater?
the negativity on this board is overbearing, overwhelming and overflowing.
this should have one sure effect on the crowd .. lowered expectations .. TECH is headed down the toilet right?
however, i am certain that our local negative thought police, the CULT icon of this board, will come out and impart crazy spin on the already spinning top
somehow as we go into the season, despite being convinced and policing us to be convinced that Gailey is leading us into the crapper, spin will be imparted that we should still succeed.
for example, statements like the following will be thrown out
"we should succeed inspite of Gailey"
"there is too much talent on this team to not succeed"
Gailey cannot be a success at Tech therefore as long as the football program is under his supervision as head coach, the entire negative crowd should EXPECT failure and nothing less.
Gailey does not coach up talent, rather he "coaches talent down", so no amount of talent on our team should effect the performance, because the future performance of this team has been guaranteed, and it has been GUARANTEED to be a failure and nothing else.
this is a heads up. expectations will be raised despite having a failure as the HC. Talent level will be cited as the reason despite the fact that the HC doesn't know how to coach the talent.
it'll be an interesting football offseason on this board.
this should have one sure effect on the crowd .. lowered expectations .. TECH is headed down the toilet right?
however, i am certain that our local negative thought police, the CULT icon of this board, will come out and impart crazy spin on the already spinning top
somehow as we go into the season, despite being convinced and policing us to be convinced that Gailey is leading us into the crapper, spin will be imparted that we should still succeed.
for example, statements like the following will be thrown out
"we should succeed inspite of Gailey"
"there is too much talent on this team to not succeed"
Gailey cannot be a success at Tech therefore as long as the football program is under his supervision as head coach, the entire negative crowd should EXPECT failure and nothing less.
Gailey does not coach up talent, rather he "coaches talent down", so no amount of talent on our team should effect the performance, because the future performance of this team has been guaranteed, and it has been GUARANTEED to be a failure and nothing else.
this is a heads up. expectations will be raised despite having a failure as the HC. Talent level will be cited as the reason despite the fact that the HC doesn't know how to coach the talent.
it'll be an interesting football offseason on this board.
