Where you think we should be?

G

Geetee

Guest
When Gailey was hired, is our program's current standing about where you thought it'd be at this time?

Gailey has had career highlights since inking the contract such as signing CJ, beating AU and Miami, but it also comes with a record losses and recruiting classes that are less than stellar. I think the staff has made the most of those that have signed on with GT given the rank of our classes every year...maybe with the exception of CJ. He's had some good games...not to his full potential, however.

So, is this where you thought we would be? If so, great. If not, what were your expectations?
 
No, I pretty much always expect more. I don't think we're in dire straights or have a terrible program but I did think we would have seen better results on the field than we have. I always expect a minimum of 7 wins from an 11 game regular season. We've hit that once I think. More than 7 is a good year. 7 depending on the schedule can be. 8 is my dividing line for 12 game seasons.

I think we're doing a better job of recruiting kids who can make it at Tech. We will always have some grade casualties, but we shouldn't see the attrition we had under O'Leary or in Chan's first year. I think we've now got a pretty solid base of players, especially on the lines and that from a talent level we can be competitive in the conference.

Where we have fallen short is obviously in QB production, whatever the reason (let's not start that again okay?), and with the bad losses that seem to plague us.

I do think Chan was saddled with a couple of issues that no one, including him, anticipated. Flunkgate, losing guys like Gathers and Hollings, probation, etc. But I also think Chan has not lived up to his responsibility to put more points on the board and to make the team tougher overall, so the blowouts and bad losses don't happen.

I still think that next year is crucial for Chan given the new AD who will be coming on board. He has to show a new boss that he's the guy, and nothing between him and Braine will matter. It's all on him IMO.
 
Should:
I think we should be a consistant presence in the top 25, it should be odd for us to not be ranked, even if we hover in the 20s and high teens all the time. In an 11 game regular season that likely translates into winning 8 games most years, or 7 and looking really good in the losses, in 12 it probably means 8. Start splitting Clean Old Fashioned Hate with the mutts, thats getting really really old, at least 1/3... and it really pains me to type that I think being sucessful 33% of the time is alright.
With the talent we have on the field, and the coaching talent that we have on paper anything less than that should be unacceptable.
Want:
Have a realistic (if darkhorse) shot at division/conference title most years, and pull it out or come very close 3/10.
 
When GT hires a new coach, I always expect - though am often disappointed - that he would turn out to be the right man for the job. IMO, that means in his FIRST season, he would win the games he's expected to win, and surprise at least one of the teams he was not expected to beat. His second year, he should win more than he did the first year, and not lose to someone that he is expected to beat. By the third season, he should be competing for a conference championship, and by the fourth, for a National championship. CG hasn't done it.
 
No Excuse In The Medocrity We Have Experienced....

since the Dodd years except for a few years under Ross and O'Leary/Fridge. A program with the tradition of GT should always be in the hunt for 8+ win seasons except for a rebuilding year every now and then. So what has happened the last 40 years, well we have heard numerous opinions on this topic so let's just look forward. There is absolutely no reason to have an administration that does not demand a top notch football program. I personally think Clough should be given an ultimatum, get the folks in there who can recruit AND coach, giv'em full support, or we'll find somebody who can. There is no sense in losing to inferior teams every year like we did against NCST and Utah this year. If we had any kind of offensive coach that can recruit and halfway develop a QB, we would have won 9 and beat UGA like a drum the last two years. You can win and win big at Tech, Ross and O'Leary proved that. I actually think Dodd must have been a poor AD. When we fell behind in keeping the facilities top notch and whatever else caused us to fall after his coaching rein, he should have been jumping up and down on the Presidents desk raising cain and getting the big money boosters behind him. Well, we got great facilities and a chance to have a big time football program if it will be put on the priority list. And yes, sometimes you have to make exceptions like Tarver was given recently.
South Georgia Jacket
 
Re: No Excuse In The Medocrity We Have Experienced....

I don't know that Tarver was given an exception. It sounded more like he was given consideration any student could have gotten with some support from somone at the Institute, like an advisor or faculty member.
 
Engineer your expectations show that you don[t have a clue when it comes to what our proram faced when CCG first got here and what they still face in terms of recruting the type of player that is necessary to win an national championship. We are not a football factory and don't have the advantages that they do. It amuses me that you continue to give CPH a free ride after every loss but continue to slam CCG and both have similar winning percentages since they've been here. How many conference titles has CPH won since he's been here bearing in mind too that it's easier to build a 13 man squad than it is an 85 man squad?
 
Panther, I know exactly the shape the program was in when CG arrived. I've been following Tech football since the 60's, and have seen all of the ups and downs of the program during that time. My point was that I have seen new coaches go into programs that are in disarray and an make enough of an impact the first couple of years to start building momentum, and that momentum carries over into recruiting and rebuilding the fan base as well as fielding a team that plays to its talent level consistenly, not against some teams but not others. I have not seen that with this coaching staff.

The reason I give PH a 'free ride', as you say, is that he has shown that he can coach players to or above the expectations, can recruit with the top programs in the country, and can get the fan base excited about the program. Do you see a difference? If you don't, fine. But I do, so please don't equate a difference of opinion with a lack of knowledge.
 
Very true, Dean. In fact, no two programs are alike. But if we set our expectations at winning 7 or 8 year after year, and going to a 2nd or 3rd tier bowl game, then that's most likely what we'll get.
 
There's a difference between expecting 7 or 8 a year and expecting that as a start. What I mean is, to me 7 wins out of 11 is just okay, it isn't a good year. I expect better but at worst we should win 7. Does that make sense?
 
It absolutely does make sense. The question that someone - not those of us on this board, but the administration and more influential alumni and boosters - needs to answer is: is 7 wins year after year after year enough, or do we 'expect' better?
 
NC, yes it does.
What I can't understand is how some to many want to project our possible future success by looking at the average number of wins over the last 40-50 years.

Winning or losing future football games is not a probability equation unless there is no effort to improve.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Very true, Dean. In fact, no two programs are alike. But if we set our expectations at winning 7 or 8 year after year, and going to a 2nd or 3rd tier bowl game, then that's most likely what we'll get.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's very true. But, I know I've never said that 7 or 8 wins a year is where my expectations stop at. That's where they start and go up from there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top