We've been here before; Again, Part 2

In the business world, when you are being dominated by an opponent, you change the game on them. We brilliant leaders of top ranked Georgia Tech continue to try to meet them head on. Every single part of the game is to their advantage.
1) End of season is an advantage to deep depth and certainly an advantage to the side that studies the least.
2) There is more turnover at the SEC schools. So play them early.
3) Playing early also doesn't affect our end of season, such as getting in the way of enjoying a bowl game or ACCCG.
4) Playing early allows the loser to get over it within the next week because of the next game. This will help us develop a fan base and will end the ridiculous acrimony between the schools. I hate visiting UGA and I hate them visiting. So don't play them.
 
gtphd said:
The State isn't going to give Tech the land and assets for free. It would cost billions (if not tens of billions) for Tech to acquire that.

In the very long-term, it would make sense for the GTF to slowly buy land and property from the State and lease it back at a small profit. That would basically be a guaranteed investment to grow the endowment and would help Tech get more leverage over the State when it comes to budgeting and BoR issues.
Click to expand...

I though we owned our land.


MacDaddy2 said:
give them an ultimatum, more majors or we drop the series with the fleabags
Click to expand...

We are required by state law to play Georgia in football.
 
midatlantech said:
In the business world, when you are being dominated by an opponent, you change the game on them. We brilliant leaders of top ranked Georgia Tech continue to try to meet them head on. Every single part of the game is to their advantage.
1) End of season is an advantage to deep depth and certainly an advantage to the side that studies the least.
2) There is more turnover at the SEC schools. So play them early.
3) Playing early also doesn't affect our end of season, such as getting in the way of enjoying a bowl game or ACCCG.
4) Playing early allows the loser to get over it within the next week because of the next game. This will help us develop a fan base and will end the ridiculous acrimony between the schools. I hate visiting UGA and I hate them visiting. So don't play them.
Click to expand...

I have to admit that I was one of the ones who was against this but am beginning to change my mind. those reasons are good as well as it was be great exposure for both programs. Also, we really really n eed to balance our home schedule. I can season tickets being a major issue next year.

We could drop UGA. In reality both AD's would probably be happy. You get to add a home game. We would not add a powerhouse guys and neither would UGA. We would both try to add cupcakes that would be home games every year.
 
beej67 said:
I though we owned our land.
Click to expand...

Maybe someone with more knowledge can chime in, but my understanding is that the Georgia Institute of Technology, which is a State agency, owns the vast majority of the land and the Georgia Tech Foundation, a private entity, owns a small portion of land in Tech Square.

For Georgia Tech become a private university, the land and assets owned by the State agency would need to be acquired by the private entity. Then the private entity (or a different private entity) would need to hire the State employees. I'm not sure if the grants and contracts the state holds would need to be rewritten. About half are through the Georgia Tech Research Institute, which is a private entity, so they would not be affected. The rest might need to be amended / rebid (more likely you would have a 10 year plan to transition to private, and new contracts and grants would be assigned to the private entity).
 
Beej, can you please provide us a reference point to the statute that requires this?
 
gtmg said:
We could drop UGA. In reality both AD's would probably be happy. You get to add a home game. We would not add a powerhouse guys and neither would UGA. We would both try to add cupcakes that would be home games every year.
Click to expand...

:) they already have a cupcake at the end of every regular season, I hate it but its true!
 
This thread is full of great posts, discussion, and sound ideas. 33jacket is dead on the money, IMHO, and this part of his post speaks especially loud and clear.

33jacket said:
You can't be gray in this world. Be black or white but stuck in the middle pretending to be a football school, and pretending to be an academic school does nothing.
Click to expand...

We need to remind ourselves that nothing is ever as good or as bad as it seems. There are some glimmers of athletic success amid the gloom and doom, just as there is much frustration at our seemingly ineptness against UGA football.

We need to take stock of who we are and who we want to be. For example, if we were given only two choices, would we want to be like MIT or like LSU?

Fortunately, we have other reasonable choices but they come with the caveat that expecting to be number one in both academics and athletics is not very reasonable or easily achievable.

Georgia Tech is to the SEC what Atlanta is to Georgia...that is, an aberration of sorts. However, we are in the ACC and that gives us a better fit with who we are than being in the SEC, IMHO. If we recruit the entire east coast, we can find lots of athletic talent that are also scholars who like Atlanta and Georgia Tech. We did pretty well recruiting NC last year, IIRC, and two of our true sophomore defensive starters are from D.C. and Maryland.

So just what do you want to give up, add, or spend to beat UGA? My vote goes to simply being Georgia Tech, doing what we do, and being damn proud of it. Then, as far as UGA is concerned...piss on 'em.
 
Essobee said:
This thread is full of great posts, discussion, and sound ideas. 33jacket is dead on the money, IMHO, and this part of his post speaks especially loud and clear.



We need to remind ourselves that nothing is ever as good or as bad as it seems. There are some glimmers of athletic success amid the gloom and doom, just as there is much frustration at our seemingly ineptness against UGA football.

We need to take stock of who we are and who we want to be. For example, if we were given only two choices, would we want to be like MIT or like LSU?

Fortunately, we have other reasonable choices but they come with the caveat that expecting to be number one in both academics and athletics is not very reasonable or easily achievable.

Georgia Tech is to the SEC what Atlanta is to Georgia...that is, an aberration of sorts. However, we are in the ACC and that gives us a better fit with who we are than being in the SEC, IMHO. If we recruit the entire east coast, we can find lots of athletic talent that are also scholars who like Atlanta and Georgia Tech. We did pretty well recruiting NC last year, IIRC, and two of our true sophomore defensive starters are from D.C. and Maryland.

So just what do you want to give up, add, or spend to beat UGA? My vote goes to simply being Georgia Tech, doing what we do, and being damn proud of it. Then, as far as UGA is concerned...piss on 'em.
Click to expand...
I agree with most of your post but if we play them every years and they have the advantage of recruiting etc then pissing on them is about all we can do.Sidel walk fans like me and others want a win over Ga and competetion vs them every year..Everybody knows a Tech degree is priceless but we aint playing degrees ,we are playing football.I am sure you are right,we become a LSU or BAMA etc or we become and stay TECH with high standards.We are in a quandary .
 
mack said:
I agree with most of your post but if we play them every years and they have the advantage of recruiting etc then pissing on them is about all we can do.Sidel walk fans like me and others want a win over Ga and competetion vs them every year..Everybody knows a Tech degree is priceless but we aint playing degrees ,we are playing football.I am sure you are right,we become a LSU or BAMA etc or we become and stay TECH with high standards.We are in a quandary .
Click to expand...

Mack, I'm old enough that I am a sidewalk fan of sorts. The Georgia Tech I attended doesn't exist today except in my fading memory. When I was there it was during the time we owned UGA on the football field...eight straight...and amazement that we could ever lose to them.

Since then, it has been a Jekyll-Hyde existence for Tech and it becoming increasingly clear that Dr. Jekyll is taking over and Mr. Hyde is fading away. There's lots of things I do not like about that, such as losing relevance to rural Georgia along with UGA adding engineering programs. I don't like losing to UGA on the football field either and I wish Tech had more professors who spoke clear English.

So I am betwixt and between, just like Tech, and that is no way to go through life. We all need to pick one thing and try to do that better than anybody else; we need to strive to be the best there is at one thing. Someone who tries to be all things to everyone usually winds up being nothing to anyone.
 
"Jack of all trades, master at none"

I don't think Tech is anywhere near that though. UGA is not near us in regards of academic relevance, and we've actually be improving (27th in the world last year to 24th this year). I think it's been apparent over the past few decades that we've decided to head towards the academics side rather than football, which I'm perfectly fine with because that's where my priorities are now. We still can have good teams (1990 and 2009 for example), so it's not the end of the world.
 
Having not attended GA Tech, I can't offer much of an opinion. I graduated from Southern Tech. I have always respected and bragged about the caliber of student athletes that attend Tech over other schools. I am sure there is some middle ground that can be found to help the program. My questions is how does VA Tech do it? They have won ten or more games 8 years consecutive. What do they do differently that allows them to excell each year?
 
Jacket-n-Athens said:
Having not attended GA Tech, I can't offer much of an opinion. I graduated from Southern Tech. I have always respected and bragged about the caliber of student athletes that attend Tech over other schools. I am sure there is some middle ground that can be found to help the program. My questions is how does VA Tech do it? They have won ten or more games 8 years consecutive. What do they do differently that allows them to excell each year?
Click to expand...

They probably let in the NCAA minimum athletes. They are also not nearly as good of a school as we are.
 
andrew said:
They probably let in the NCAA minimum athletes. They are also not nearly as good of a school as we are.
Click to expand...

This. U[sic]Ga's engineering school is going to be on par with VPI. And, VPI oversigns.

I've been disappointed with a lot of things recently, but I have to say that checking the board and seeing drivel from 33, MTrain, and JackoffForLife, I'm grateful that I'm not like them.
 
andrew said:
They probably let in the NCAA minimum athletes. They are also not nearly as good of a school as we are.
Click to expand...

60 Minutes had an expose about Va Tech's football program, and it wasn't nice. Football players were taking housing subsidies and also staying in federally subsidized housing (basically pocketing the subsidies), there wasn't any real education, and frankly it looked like an embarassingly bad factory program.
 
AE 87 said:
I've been disappointed with a lot of things recently, but I have to say that checking the board and seeing drivel from 33, MTrain, and JackoffForLife, I'm grateful that I'm not like them.
Click to expand...

I don't know if I would call it drivel. I would call it a different perspective on the Institute.

I imagine that if you took the faction which wants to lower academic standards/add joke majors (and it is a decent sized faction) and the ones who do not want to do anything like that, it would look an awful lot like "former players and sidewalk fans" and "non-athlete alumni."

Two different groups with two different top priorities. It's not like what they're saying isn't true; it is. If we ever want our football program to become like VT's (eight straight ten win seasons) or beat U[sic]GA consistently, we will need to compromise on academics.
 
33jacket said:
Lost to UGA again right?

Student section a joke right?

Fans full of red and a joke right?

You guys ever look and wonder whats happened of the past decade to make our record one of the worst stints, if not the worst in the history of the rival?

Here are the facts

- in 2002, flunkgate happened. The admin ratcheted back what type of athlete Tech could accept. We still accept players well below the tech standard, but well above what we did in the 90s. Result. 1-9.

- No coach, no system, can compete with UGA with our standards today. Is PJ perfect, no, is he not doing as good as he could in some areas, yes, but the fact is our standards today are so high out of fear, APR reqs, and elitism we are doomed.

- Oleary got in thugs. I roomed next to em. They were UGA types. They smoked pot in their dorms. Two are in jail now and felons. One was on crack. A famous player had more prostitutes than heidi fleiss. But....
WHAT THUGS? WAS I ONE OF THEM? LOL
- We won 3 straight. We competed. UGA also had talent, but was not as well coached.

- Then 11 failed out, Oleary guys but after he left.
THAT WAS ALSO DO THE FACT THAT GAILEY DIDNT DO ANYWHERE NEAR A SMUCH MONITORING CLASSES AS GOL DID.... NOT EVEN close! Mandatory breakfast and study hall with GOL --yes, with gailey - NO!

- We remember the 3 straight, we don't really remember the failed out.

- Your degree, wasn't lessoned during oleary's era, pre failouts or post failouts. Note to you, if you think that GT is clean you are a fail. We changed in the past 10 years. We ratcheted down the program. We need to go back to the older days. We don't need thugs. I am not saying that. We can recruit good kids to compete. Reference 2007. But we need a total school commitment to do it. Today it is not there.

- We already let below avg standards in, why not go the whole way and let kids in to compete? You can't be gray in this world. Be black or white but stuck in the middle pretending to be a football school, and pretending to be an academic school does nothing. Either have a serious program and feed it, or don't, but don't act like you do.

- Because they need to stay in school say you? Ha says I. We give them the ööööing tests. I know. I am good friends with the head of the academic advisors. Its not an issue. In 2007 Chan told the admin he can't compete. We got 12 exceptions. One was Nesbitt. He stayed 4 years. No problem with keeping Bebe in. Its a hoggwash excuse. We can keep these kids in school.

- Does tech want to fix this? Do we want to make it a rival again? We have to let in a Notch above NCAA requirements. We can compete. We have. We have scaled back. We already let kids in who couldn't get in on their own, so I don't want to hear it devalues this or that. It doesn't. We already do it. We can find a bunch of good kids to compete, below today's line, but still able to make it through.

At what point, after a decade of being inept, will folks stand up and demand some change? Another 10 years?

the fact is the fail of tech for the last decade is a systemic failure of leadership, conservatism, elitism, and a faction of voices that is convinced we can be MIT Mond-Frid and VT on saturday. We can't. If we truly want to fix this, we have to have systemic program changes, allow more 'exceptions' to compete, and move fwd. I am not talking about creating fake degrees. I am talking about letting in what we did in 2007 more often, or going back to the 1990's standards, and ensuring they get the support and rigor to get through school. Its really simple folks, simple to fix. However, as dismayed as I am about today, I am more frustrated that we will continue to pretend, stuck in the gray area, and 10 more years will go by where we win 1. Maybe 2. Lets hope soon, enough is enough and the school commits to fielding a more competitive team through allowing recruits that today would be below the line, yet still above NCAA mins.
Click to expand...
SURE Would like to talk discuss your sources and history with my 1st hand experience
 
Essobee said:
Mack, I'm old enough that I am a sidewalk fan of sorts. The Georgia Tech I attended doesn't exist today except in my fading memory. When I was there it was during the time we owned UGA on the football field...eight straight...and amazement that we could ever lose to them.

Since then, it has been a Jekyll-Hyde existence for Tech and it becoming increasingly clear that Dr. Jekyll is taking over and Mr. Hyde is fading away. There's lots of things I do not like about that, such as losing relevance to rural Georgia along with UGA adding engineering programs. I don't like losing to UGA on the football field either and I wish Tech had more professors who spoke clear English.

So I am betwixt and between, just like Tech, and that is no way to go through life. We all need to pick one thing and try to do that better than anybody else; we need to strive to be the best there is at one thing. Someone who tries to be all things to everyone usually winds up being nothing to anyone.
Click to expand...
Well said,some of us remember the good ole days and the young ones here hate that but the reality is in my mind is if we could compete with the pups under Chan and GOL why not now.Forget Flungate etc Chan gaveus four NFL lineman and a defensive back and a running back and still had no idea how to beat GA.GOL had problems with grades but he got quality folks on the field and won three in a row.

I Think we can do this again but only if we make the hard choices. Do we want athletes and call them SAs only and let them take some type of study to keep them eligible? Do we to some ,weaken a degree from Tech if we do this? Do we recruit all over the nation like other schools rather than get second star guys ? Do we scrap the option or PJ due to the fact that guys who want to pass the ball will get little time or lineman who want to pass block and go to the NFL will shun us for big time passing offenses? Will we try to get the big stud who has been running wide and tell him he may be a A back! All this comes up in the equation but its like anything else,when the Fathers At TECH ,whoever they are get tired of losing then we will start winning.So far winning seven or eight playing a weak schedule seems to be the norm.I say if we are going to play Division 1 football we must adapt practices others schools use or we will never cut it big time again. Yeah tough choices but somebody will be making them in the future.
 
andrew said:
I don't know if I would call it drivel. I would call it a different perspective on the Institute.

I imagine that if you took the faction which wants to lower academic standards/add joke majors (and it is a decent sized faction) and the ones who do not want to do anything like that, it would look an awful lot like "former players and sidewalk fans" and "non-athlete alumni."

Two different groups with two different top priorities. It's not like what they're saying isn't true; it is. If we ever want our football program to become like VT's (eight straight ten win seasons) or beat U[sic]GA consistently, we will need to compromise on academics.
Click to expand...

If anybody was trying to make a cogent argument for adding majors, lowering academic standards etc, I wouldn't be calling it drivel.

When somebody blames our offensive scheme for yesterday's loss, that's drivel. Anyone that complains about GT elitism is spouting drivel. I'm sorry, but as long as we sing, "I'm a ... hell of an engineer," some people are going to take that as an elitist better-than-you attitude.

We ended up not dramatically out-performing expectations in a rebuilding year, but we won 8 reg season games which for the 3rd time in 4 years under CPJ -- a feat we accomplished only once in 6 years of CCG. Our kids played until the end. We weren't hanging our heads -- another new thing for the CPJ era compared to the last one.

If Jordan Luallen--the 4* dual-threat qb recruited in the same class as TW--had stayed, who knows what would've happened?
 
AE 87 said:
If Jordan Luallen--the 4* dual-threat qb recruited in the same class as TW--had stayed, who knows what would've happened?
Click to expand...
Nothing differently would have happened. We were dominated in a way that no one player could have overcome yesterday. UGAg let off the gas and spared us some embarrassment in the second half. Running the ball to wind down the clock in 4th qtr kept them from adding at least 2 more TD's the way Murray was throwing yesterday.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top