Now, don't get me wrong, I am not a personal supporter of Dave Braine. I am not a personal supporter of Chan Gailey.
I am a supporter of Tech athletics and anyone in the administration trying to enhance Tech athletics. Of course, if I find out someone is purposely trying to sabotage Tech athletics or has very bad character traits, I would not want them at Tech.
Since I did not attend Tech, I rarely enter into the debates regarding the academics other than its effect on the sports teams.
I did defend Braine and the committee when they hired Gailey. I still believe Chan was an excellent candidate, even if he does not turn out to be successful at Tech.
Since Braine is the athletics CEO and member of the committee, I am convinced both Braine and the committee made the same decision that 99% of all committees would have made in that situation.
So, regardless of the eventual effectiveness of Gailey, I still think Braine and the committee found the best candidate at the time.
I have also supported the decision to retain Gailey, at least through this year, because it is the right thing to do, and any coach deserves at least two years to show his mettle. Also, a record of 7-6 for any first year coach is not sufficient to get rid of him.
After stating all of the above, I have a question or situation to pose to the board.
On Chan Gailey, I think his future is in his hands, and we will have a pretty good idea of his worth after this season.
I know nothing about Braine, other than the bits of information from the news media and the Tech boards.
I know he has hired Hewitt, Gailey, and Joseph. He may have hired other coaches, but someone else will have to add that information if there are additional hires.
We have to judge each individual on their decisions and actions.
It seems apparent some of the blame may be placed at his feet for the recent change in academic policies leading to the failure of 10 athletes.
I doubt all of their failures could be laid at his feet. I would think some of the blame would have to go to the athletes themselve, possibly the coaches of the last regime who brought in marginal academic athletes, possibly Carol Moore and the tutoring staff, and even possibly Gailey himself.
It appears, there might be enough blame to go around in that fiasco for a lot of people. However, lets assign partial blame to Braine.
I am not sure of all of his duties as AD, but he has to be judged on them. Since I don't know all of his duties and how he has performed in them, I will discuss the hires he has made at Tech.
I will play "what if?", with the hires.
Gailey goes 8-5 or 9-4, beats UGA, and wins the bowl game. Hewitt wins 20 games this year and goes to the Sweet Sixteen. Joseph wins seventeen or eighteen games and goes to the NCAA tournements this year.
Braine has already corrected the mistake in the tutoring process.
We have a very good year recruiting both academically and high quality athletes.
If all of this takes place, is Braine retained in good standing with the Tech community, or is there a segment of the fan base that still wants to see him go?
If all of the other suppositions take place, and a segment of the fan base still wants to get rid of Braine, what is the reason?
Comments requested from all sides of the issue.
I am a supporter of Tech athletics and anyone in the administration trying to enhance Tech athletics. Of course, if I find out someone is purposely trying to sabotage Tech athletics or has very bad character traits, I would not want them at Tech.
Since I did not attend Tech, I rarely enter into the debates regarding the academics other than its effect on the sports teams.
I did defend Braine and the committee when they hired Gailey. I still believe Chan was an excellent candidate, even if he does not turn out to be successful at Tech.
Since Braine is the athletics CEO and member of the committee, I am convinced both Braine and the committee made the same decision that 99% of all committees would have made in that situation.
So, regardless of the eventual effectiveness of Gailey, I still think Braine and the committee found the best candidate at the time.
I have also supported the decision to retain Gailey, at least through this year, because it is the right thing to do, and any coach deserves at least two years to show his mettle. Also, a record of 7-6 for any first year coach is not sufficient to get rid of him.
After stating all of the above, I have a question or situation to pose to the board.
On Chan Gailey, I think his future is in his hands, and we will have a pretty good idea of his worth after this season.
I know nothing about Braine, other than the bits of information from the news media and the Tech boards.
I know he has hired Hewitt, Gailey, and Joseph. He may have hired other coaches, but someone else will have to add that information if there are additional hires.
We have to judge each individual on their decisions and actions.
It seems apparent some of the blame may be placed at his feet for the recent change in academic policies leading to the failure of 10 athletes.
I doubt all of their failures could be laid at his feet. I would think some of the blame would have to go to the athletes themselve, possibly the coaches of the last regime who brought in marginal academic athletes, possibly Carol Moore and the tutoring staff, and even possibly Gailey himself.
It appears, there might be enough blame to go around in that fiasco for a lot of people. However, lets assign partial blame to Braine.
I am not sure of all of his duties as AD, but he has to be judged on them. Since I don't know all of his duties and how he has performed in them, I will discuss the hires he has made at Tech.
I will play "what if?", with the hires.
Gailey goes 8-5 or 9-4, beats UGA, and wins the bowl game. Hewitt wins 20 games this year and goes to the Sweet Sixteen. Joseph wins seventeen or eighteen games and goes to the NCAA tournements this year.
Braine has already corrected the mistake in the tutoring process.
We have a very good year recruiting both academically and high quality athletes.
If all of this takes place, is Braine retained in good standing with the Tech community, or is there a segment of the fan base that still wants to see him go?
If all of the other suppositions take place, and a segment of the fan base still wants to get rid of Braine, what is the reason?
Comments requested from all sides of the issue.
