USC and UCLA to Big Ten

daBuzz said:
How many times do you guys have to post something stupid about the AD without realizing that the AD has absolutely no decision making capability here?

This is a GT President decision, just like it was in 2012. DRad was our AD then and wanted to go to the B1G and said as much to the GT President. Bud Peterson shot that down and signed the GOR. Similarly, TStan could suggest the same now and Cabrera could go right ahead and make the same decision to stick with ACC.

B1G actually wanted Tech in 2012 and Bud signed this albatross of an agreement instead. Those with paid membership on Quinlan's site likely read his message where he confirmed that this happened in 2012 and confirmed that Radakovich badly wanted Tech to go to the Big 10 for the increased money so that we could pay off the debt. Instead, Bud hung this millstone around our neck.
Click to expand...

Who said DRad really wanted to go to BIG? That is news to me.
 
daBuzz said:
How many times do you guys have to post something stupid about the AD without realizing that the AD has absolutely no decision making capability here?

This is a GT President decision, just like it was in 2012. DRad was our AD then and wanted to go to the B1G and said as much to the GT President. Bud Peterson shot that down and signed the GOR. Similarly, TStan could suggest the same now and Cabrera could go right ahead and make the same decision to stick with ACC.

B1G actually wanted Tech in 2012 and Bud signed this albatross of an agreement instead. Those with paid membership on Quinlan's site likely read his message where he confirmed that this happened in 2012 and confirmed that Radakovich badly wanted Tech to go to the Big 10 for the increased money so that we could pay off the debt. Instead, Bud hung this millstone around our neck.
Click to expand...
I don’t know one way or other about the factual stuff here, but I do know that Bud Peterson is a cancer and one of the worst things to ever happen to Tech.
 
savbandjacket said:
I don’t know one way or other about the factual stuff here, but I do know that Bud Peterson is a cancer and one of the worst things to ever happen to Tech.
Click to expand...

It's incredibly frustrating when you realize that the biggest impediment for athletics success isn't the other schools that they are competing against, but GT itself.
 
clapper said:
I'd bet Cabrera is probably as big a supporter of moving to the B1G as anyone on campus. He's pushing inter-school research collaborations hard. Purdue, Michigan and Illinois are with us in the Top 10 in engineering. Northwestern is Top 20. Maryland is #21. I could see him pushing hard for this change and getting some solid support from those schools.
Click to expand...
I hope you are right.
 
savbandjacket said:
I don’t know one way or other about the factual stuff here, but I do know that Bud Peterson is a cancer and one of the worst things to ever happen to Tech.
Click to expand...
He deserves a special place in GT athletics hell.
 
BrentwoodJacket said:
I hope you are right.
Click to expand...

I surely do hope you are right. We need to do everything we can to get in the Big Ten. We need our President and AD doing everything they can. Getting into the SEC would be just for sports. But, getting in the Big Ten would be for academics and athletics. Work hard to get the invitation and accept it the very minute it comes, if it ever does. Just tell the ACC thanks, bye and sue us. If the ACC wants to go to court and talk about how much they need Georgia Tech, it would just add to my joy.
 
I've heard that CPJ had strong opinion and a big influence on us not joining the B1G in 2012.
 
KrazieJacket said:
How does this work considering many have heard the AD doesn’t get to be in discussions, only the president?
Click to expand...
They may not be in the actual discussion with the league office but they have their input to the pres.
 
GoGATech said:
They may not be in the actual discussion with the league office but they have their input to the pres.
Click to expand...
You mean the ones who don’t give two öööös about football? Which have you experienced actually care or know anything about football? I don’t remember any.
 
KrazieJacket said:
You mean the ones who don’t give two öööös about football? Which have you experienced actually care or know anything about football? I don’t remember any.
Click to expand...
When I was at GT in the early 80s, I had a candid conversation with President Pettit about this very subject. To boil down his answer, he said: "Football pays for everything." I will not forget that conversation. Its still true today although other funding sources have emerged but none as lucrative as football.

It takes a lot of money to run GT - the BoR of Georgia wants GT to support itself so they can route all the retained earnings to the dwags. Pettit understood this clearly and supported the GTAA as a "cash cow" when Rice took over the GTAA. Rice pulled favors with ABC to get the 1980 game against the dwags on national TV because we were desperate for the payout. But for that single move, I don't think we'd be in the ACC today - our athletic program was on the brink of bankruptcy.

There is so much stuff that y'all don't know. We have to make a ton of money with football - that revenue is baked into the budget of how GT operates. If we can't get it from the ACC, we have to strongly consider moving to the B1G.

My guess as a hunch given what is going on is that the ACC is soon to be dissolved and GT as well as a few other teams will move to the B1G and a few others to the SEC. A third of the ACC will simply be left behind.
 
00Burdell said:
When I was at GT in the early 80s, I had a candid conversation with President Pettit about this very subject. To boil down his answer, he said: "Football pays for everything." I will not forget that conversation. Its still true today although other funding sources have emerged but none as lucrative as football.

It takes a lot of money to run GT - the BoR of Georgia wants GT to support itself so they can route all the retained earnings to the dwags. Pettit understood this clearly and supported the GTAA as a "cash cow" when Rice took over the GTAA. Rice pulled favors with ABC to get the 1980 game against the dwags on national TV because we were desperate for the payout. But for that single move, I don't think we'd be in the ACC today - our athletic program was on the brink of bankruptcy.

There is so much stuff that y'all don't know. We have to make a ton of money with football - that revenue is baked into the budget of how GT operates. If we can't get it from the ACC, we have to strongly consider moving to the B1G.

My guess as a hunch given what is going on is that the ACC is soon to be dissolved and GT as well as a few other teams will move to the B1G and a few others to the SEC. A third of the ACC will simply be left behind.
Click to expand...
Good post and good perspective. Ideally I would have hoped for Tech to remain in a strong, viable, and nationally relevant ACC , and could wish for a return to smaller conference sizes (10 members or less). Alas, it seems those days are behind us, so it appears to be SEC, Big10, or bust.
 
00Burdell said:
When I was at GT in the early 80s, I had a candid conversation with President Pettit about this very subject. To boil down his answer, he said: "Football pays for everything." I will not forget that conversation. Its still true today although other funding sources have emerged but none as lucrative as football.

It takes a lot of money to run GT - the BoR of Georgia wants GT to support itself so they can route all the retained earnings to the dwags. Pettit understood this clearly and supported the GTAA as a "cash cow" when Rice took over the GTAA. Rice pulled favors with ABC to get the 1980 game against the dwags on national TV because we were desperate for the payout. But for that single move, I don't think we'd be in the ACC today - our athletic program was on the brink of bankruptcy.

There is so much stuff that y'all don't know. We have to make a ton of money with football - that revenue is baked into the budget of how GT operates. If we can't get it from the ACC, we have to strongly consider moving to the B1G.

My guess as a hunch given what is going on is that the ACC is soon to be dissolved and GT as well as a few other teams will move to the B1G and a few others to the SEC. A third of the ACC will simply be left behind.
Click to expand...

You’re asserting that football revenue keeps the school (the academic side) afloat? That seems rather far-fetched - football can barely keep the GTAA afloat.

JRjr
 
GTJay said:
Good post and good perspective. Ideally I would have hoped for Tech to remain in a strong, viable, and nationally relevant ACC , and could wish for a return to smaller conference sizes (10 members or less). Alas, it seems those days are behind us, so it appears to be SEC, Big10, or bust.
Click to expand...
GT will never return to the SEC for a number of reasons - some from GT and some from SEC members - there is a lot of history there. There are a few SEC teams that would welcome us back with open arms. But the process favors the dissenters - those who are glad we left. Unfortunately, the programs that are happy we left (although few in number) can easily block our return. We will never be allowed to rejoin the SEC. Its B1G or death.
 
vapspwi said:
You’re asserting that football revenue keeps the school (the academic side) afloat? That seems rather far-fetched - football can barely keep the GTAA afloat.

JRjr
Click to expand...
That conversation took place in 1983. Things have changed a bit since then but the underlying economics have not. Pettit's point was that if football was providing enough revenue (cash) to float many of the programs that the BoR wouldn't support (and which are responsible for establishing GT as a world-class University) then we could establish a degree of independence from the BoR. I don't think any GT President since Pettit really grasped this. The pres that went to the Smithsonian was probably the only other Pres who got it.

But the string of idiot ADs starting with Braine was our downfall.
 
00Burdell said:
That conversation took place in 1983. Things have changed a bit since then but the underlying economics have not. Pettit's point was that if football was providing enough revenue (cash) to float many of the programs that the BoR wouldn't support (and which are responsible for establishing GT as a world-class University) then we could establish a degree of independence from the BoR. I don't think any GT President since Pettit really grasped this. The pres that went to the Smithsonian was probably the only other Pres who got it.

But the string of idiot ADs starting with Braine was our downfall.
Click to expand...

In the interest of clear communication, please differentiate between athletic programs and academic programs. Does football revenue support all the non-rev sports like volleyball and tennis? Yes. Do those programs make GT a world class university? No. Does football support the academic programs that DO make GT a world class university? No, other than providing media exposure.

I’m not really sure what you’re getting at with the BoR stuff.

JRjr
 
vapspwi said:
In the interest of clear communication, please differentiate between athletic programs and academic programs. Does football revenue support all the non-rev sports like volleyball and tennis? Yes. Do those programs make GT a world class university? No. Does football support the academic programs that DO make GT a world class university? No, other than providing media exposure.

I’m not really sure what you’re getting at with the BoR stuff.

JRjr
Click to expand...
My convo with Pettit was pre-Title IX so there is only so much I can do to extrapolate that conversation into a post-Title IX world.

Bottom line: Pettit undetstood how athletics and academics could support each other. As I said previously, I don't think any other GT president except maybe Clough really understood this. Seems to me that the recent string of GT Presidents and GT Athletic Directors can't seem to get on the same page and agree to maximize the income/revenue potential of our athletic department. This a dreadfully sad state of affairs.

As an edit, I will add (per my convo with Pettit) that the money the football program generated (pre-1980) directly supported GT's academic budget. I cannot characterize how that works today - back in the 70s, you could run an athletic dept on a shoestring budget so there could be a lot of money left over to support the academic side. That was the context of my discussion with Pettit. Is that true today? I seriously doubt it but I'm approaching dinosaur territory as a Tech fan so don't want to convey that I understand how things work in the 2020s.

Times have obviously changed - athletic budgets have exploded and consume all available sports revenue and then some. Add NIL to the mix and I'm out - I have no idea how to model this.
 
Last edited:
00Burdell said:
My convo with Pettit was pre-Title IX so there is only so much I can do to extrapolate that conversation into a post-Title IX world.

Bottom line: Pettit undetstood how athletics and academics could support each other. As I said previously, I don't think any other GT president except maybe Clough really understood this. Seems to me that the recent string of GT Presidents and GT Athletic Directors can't seem to get on the same page and agree to maximize the income/revenue potential of our athletic department. This a dreadfully sad state of affairs.
Click to expand...
Our AD's have been incompetent and our presidents have been indifferent toward athletics. We are lucky we still have a chance to survive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top