when does the 'adversity' excuse end?

goldmember

goldmember

Damn Good Rat
Joined
Aug 20, 2002
Messages
1,423
when does the \'adversity\' excuse end?

serious question, i know chan has faced more than his share of adversity, won't bother listing it all but i know it is real and not all of it his fault (some of it entirelly not his fault).

My question is when does it end? i assume the flunkgate excuse runs out next year (although i think it really shouldn't be an issue this year)....
then we have probabtion - another 3 years..
so does Gailey get 10 years so long as the wheels don't fall off because of all of the crap he's had to deal with?
 
Re: when does the \'adversity\' excuse end?

Good question. During the current regime, probably never.
 
Re: when does the \'adversity\' excuse end?

[ QUOTE ]
Good question. During the current regime, probably never.

[/ QUOTE ]
So, with another regime and it just "goes away"?
 
Re: when does the \'adversity\' excuse end?

I thought it should have this year, but without question anyone of a reasonable mind, pro CG, anti CG, or somewhere in-between.....must agree that it's '06 for sure. 4th year qb starter, OL returns bigger/stronger/smarter, DL returns bigger/stronger/smarter/deeper, more athletes available for ST's, 5th year coaching staff, 3rd year best ever in school's history wide receiver, 2 excellent LB's return, Peek at TE, TC & RG & LG at running back, Travis returns as kicker, & JJ returns as receiver.

I guess the naybobs will say something like...OMG, we lose our safeties & Hendo....we have an excuse!?

I don't see why a reasonable expectation (not to be confused with wish) for next year wouldn't be 8-3...minimum. THWG
 
Re: when does the \'adversity\' excuse end?

When Braine exits Georgia Tech forever. The sooner the better, imo. Half-assed is better than no ass but it's still half-assed.

We need an infusion of TECH blood.
 
I haven\'t looked at the schedule, but I don\'t

disagree that next year we need to make a 'move'

8-3 would be nice. I do know that we have Notre Dame, Miami, @UGA, and @VT on the schedule so that would mean 1-2 big wins and 0-1 other losses.

Or do we play 12? 8-4 would be much easier.

But I'll say it again. GT will not fire a coach at 6-5. Won't happen. If we lose out including the bowl and go 6-6 we will not fire Chan.

I'll bet any amount of money that we will have to miss a bowl to fire a coach. That includes 6-6 (6-7) seasons back to back. We are not Nebraska or Alabama or UGA. The sooner folks take that to heart, because it is the absolute truth, the sooner some of y'all will be sane again.

Face it: a lousy coach cannot win 6 forever. Even Fridge fell below that standard. So you will get a new coach very soon if Chan really is lousy. If he keeps winning six or seven, no decision will be made.
 
Re: I haven\'t looked at the schedule, but I don\'t

Well if no decision is made he will be gone because his time will run out. I do not believe 6-5 will get him an extension. A bowl game victory (regardless of how low level)and 7-5 might do it for him because Braine will want to leave the mess for someone else to clean up. Braine probably will strongly suggest some staff changes but doesn't have the guts to enforce it. We won't fire Gailey this year unless Miami and more importantly georgia run us out of the stadium. We might not have the million bucks to buy him out.
 
Re: I haven\'t looked at the schedule, but I don\'t

I wasn't suggesting we make a move. I'm suggesting the "excuses" are undoubtedly over for '06.

As for suggesting 6-5 as a continued long term standard at Tech, well there you have it...the biggest albatross other than academic snobbery the program currently faces. Perhaps THE biggest because as long as that is the case, the destructive and unnecessary snobbery for sure won't have any impetus for change. THWG
 
Re: I haven\'t looked at the schedule, but I don\'t

True leadership would not base it on the record alone. It should also be based on how we play, and we have played, for the most part, the same for 3 years. With some exceptions on D, our kids are not coached up. Our kids a put in bad positions, they are often not motivated, and lack discipline.

We must beat ugag this year.
 
Re: I haven\'t looked at the schedule, but I don\'t

ugag does look vulnerable, but make no mistake about it, it will take our best effort. Reggie will have to be more accurate, PJ, EH, JA, GW, KS, CJ, & CR will ALL have to be healthy after Miami, Scott will have to shut down Massaquoi and Landry and both OLB's will have to deal with Pope.

IMO, it will take all of the above combined with the coaching staff finding a way for us to not sleepwalk through the first half. THWG
 
Re: I haven\'t looked at the schedule, but I don\'t

GoldZ, don't forget this one's at home so it's up to the fans as well to keep the guys adrenaline up. The gaggers will be loud so it's up to the fans in GOLD to keep the emotion high.
 
Re: I haven\'t looked at the schedule, but I don\'t

Agree JJ! The only thing that would kill the 12th man effect is another zombiefied effort like yestrday's 1st half. Not likely though. THWG
 
Technical point...

Chan will continue to be our head coach as long as we are making a bowl game. I don't know if he will get extensions before or after or whenever. I just know that as long as we are playing in Bowls we will not part ways with Chan.
 
Re: Technical point...

Your post reads like only a prediction, and not a statement of preference, but I can only assume that you are happy as long as we make a bowl game every year. I hope that our administration, and the majority of alumni, want more for our program than a long succession of 6-5 seasons and 2nd or 3rd-tier bowl games. I know I do.
 
Irrelevant.

The motivation or desires or wishes or expectations are irrelevant. I hear it here all the time. But this is a chiseled in stone fact. As long as we make a bowl we will keep Chan if he wants to stay. Take it to the bank.

I wanted to marry Cindy Crawford. When I was younger I didn't date girls in my league because I had high standards. So I didn't date at all. That was stupid in retrospect. I 'refused to accept mediocrity' I suppose you could say.

Enough for my stupid story. The fact is 6-5 is OK. At GT it is not great, but it is not below average. Everyone smart knows that Chan cannot continue to go 6-5 forever. We will get better or worse. Then a decision will be made.

When dating in high school, you break up when a better option is obvious or your current girl needs booting. At 6-5 we don't have obvious better options and Chan hasn't done anything to force our hand so to speak. I'd love to tell you Spurrier is available, but he ain't. We got Meyer type risky decisions at best.

This isn't rocket science folks. 6-5 won't get you fired at GT. It just won't.
 
Re: Irrelevant.

[ QUOTE ]
This isn't rocket science folks. 6-5 won't get you fired at GT. It just won't.

[/ QUOTE ]

That may be true. However, the contract terms may be renegotiated with less guaranteed payments and more incentive-based rewards.

Some people say that the money does not matter. However, there is a limited amount of budgetary resources. Money spent on one sport or one coach is not available to pay other coaches.

Consider this hypothetical.

Suppose Hewitt wins a title in basketball and wants a big raise, where does the money come from? At some point in the future, the question may be asked, can we obtain the same performance for a lower price so that we can keep Hewitt?

I do not think we can forever pay a high premium and receive results that are 6 - 5. I am not saying that a change will or even should be made.

However, saying that Chan will always have a job at GT with a 6 - 5 record is not the same as saying that he will always have a job at GT with that record and will continue to receive a guaranteed salary premium. The compensation will necessarily be more performance based.

That conclusion is just basic economics unless there is a belief that because GT's decision-makers are nice guys, we should continue to pay a compensation premium to the detriment of other sports without a significant increase in the football performance above the level that is attainable at a lower cost.

College athletics has been turned into a business, and the resource allocation decisions for an Athletic Director are similar to those of a CEO of a small corporation.

I agree that Chan will get at least a short-term extension this year with 6 wins. However, we need to wait until the end of the season before a reasonable compensation is determined for his services based upon market rates for coaches and expected future performance. If we can get another win out of the next 2 games and a win in a bowl game to finish 8 - 4, then it is more likely that future performance will be better than 6 - 5 in perpetuity. Contract terms will somewhat reflect the outcome of the next few games.
 
Why does everyone think Chan is highly paid?

He might take less for a longer term contract (more stability), but at 1M a year is he really above average for ACC Head Coaches? It is my opinion, without a complete review, that his salary matches his performance. Average.

The idea that his salary is 'premium' doesn't jive with what I recall reading in the paper about recent contracts.
 
Re: Why does everyone think Chan is highly paid?

I think you're probably right about Chan's salary. I'm pretty confident that Miami, FSU, Clemson, UVA, NCState and MD pay more. I'd be surprised if BC doesn't as well. So for those who want to whine about salaries, we're probably getting what we pay for.
 
Re: Why does everyone think Chan is highly paid?

Lets see now I'd have paid an average engineer about 35K so that sounds about right to me. But then again if I had an engineer who only completed about 50% of his tasks successfully I'd have had him looking for a job somewhere else!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top