Which of the original nine ACC teams has survived

GTCrew

GTCrew

Patrick Henry
Joined
Jul 25, 2002
Messages
49,807
the expansion best so far?

GT has the best conference record since the expansion, even if the YTD results from this year are included.

I know we can do better, but I still don't understand how we can be so down on ourselves all the time.
 
we may have the best conf record by i think its 2 games now....

but Wake and FSU have won a title.

So I would say wake or FSU. If you factor in records...then FSU is the winner.

we are down on ourselves not b/c we don't win our handful of games, its b/c we don't ever seem to do better than our handful. Then the second we take 1 step forward we take 2 back. Secondly since expansion, saying we have the best record of the original 9 isn't saying much either.

Frankly under Gailey, GT football has been rather irrelevant on the national scene and in GA. We had one year of relevance in the ACC.
 
We encountered the exact same scenario as nine other programs. We have outperformed them on average although Wake was 3 points better than us on a given Saturday and FSU played a stellar game late season as well. By any standard we have done better than six of the original teams.

We seem to be taking two steps forward and one back, not the other way, but what do I know. Baby steps is how juggernauts are built IMHO. I would love to storm to a 1990 type championship, but I am fairly happy with the overall direction.

Like everyone, I hate the UGA streak. To say we are irrelevant in GA is ignorant.
 
GTCrew said:
We encountered the exact same scenario as nine other programs. We have outperformed them on average although Wake was 3 points better than us on a given Saturday and FSU played a stellar game late season as well. By any standard we have done better than six of the original teams.

We seem to be taking two steps forward and one back, not the other way, but what do I know. Baby steps is how juggernauts are built IMHO. I would love to storm to a 1990 type championship, but I am fairly happy with the overall direction.

Like everyone, I hate the UGA streak. To say we are irrelevant in GA is ignorant.
Click to expand...

You are right, Pete Carroll (inherited a losing team) Urban Meyer (inherited a 8 win team like Gailey), Jim Tressel (inherited a 8 win team), took forever to build their empires. They had a whole lot of baby steps. So we should be more patient. We should offer Gailey another 5 year extension. Let me guess....this paragraph will offer up a bunch of yea buts...Heck even when richt inherited UGA, one could argue they were in not much better shape than when Chan inherited GT. But yeah...MR took a bunch of baby steps, all of two years. Lets see, lets throw in Tedford at Cal and his couple years of baby steps, or maybe we should talk about the baby steps RR had at WVU, all 3. Please man, I appreciate patience in a world of give me now results. But after 6 years enough is enough.

Secondly I don't remember nor care about what our ACC record was in 2004 or 05 or 03. All I know is we don't have 1 ACCC ring, nor any BCS bowls and FSU and Wake have 1; heck we haven't even managed to finish in the top 25 under gailey.

Finally we are taking two steps forward and one back? Really? B/c if last year was one step forward what is this year? Another forward? I wouldn't say so. This year is going back to what the first 4 of Gailey's tenure have been. Maddening inconsistency, Flat teams, unprepared teams, out schemed, WTF playcalling amongst other things. If anything...the best analogy is we have taken no steps, looked like we took one forward, only to find out we quickly are going to take one back with a more talented and experienced team.

I can't think of one program in today's 85 scholarship limit, that is being built with a bunch of little baby steps, where the regime started with an 8 win team. Not one.

Let me ask you something. How can we be relevant in a state when we are 0-6 vs UGA, never have one a conf title in over 9 years, never been to a BCS bowl, and haven't finished in the top 25? Where is our relevance? Is it in recruiting, where we are out done nearly every year vs UGA? Is it in attendance, or fanbase? Explain to me where I am ignorant to say we aren't relevant? Perhaps its everyone in the media, saying this is why they just can't get onto GT football under Gailey....perhaps that is a good indication of us being relevant and I am an idiot. Let me know how we are relevant? Until we start beating UGA 30-50% of the time...look I am not even saying over 50% of the time, and until we start becoming a more consistent team...we won't be relevant. And to date, nothing Chan has done, has proved he can get it done.
 
Hell, 33jacket, while you're comparing us to Florida, USC, and Ohio State why don't you throw Mack Brown, Nick Saban (the LSU one) and Bob Stoops in there?

Wow.
 
You must be pretty young if you think 9 was the original number. First there were 8, then South Carolina left in the early 70's to make it seven, then we joined around 1980 to bring it back up to 8. FSU joined about 1992 to make it 9.
 
Since the most recent expansion of UM, VT & BC
2004 season through 10/20/2007

Titles: FSU, WF

W-L:
GT .... 18-12
FSU .. 16-12
UVA .. 15-12
CU .... 15-13
WF .... 14-15
MD .... 12-14
UNC ... 12-15
NCSt ... 8-19
DU ...... 1-27
 
ContactBuzz said:
Hell, 33jacket, while you're comparing us to Florida, USC, and Ohio State why don't you throw Mack Brown, Nick Saban (the LSU one) and Bob Stoops in there?

Wow.
Click to expand...

Ok fine. Spurrier at SC. A doormat school. Look at the job being done at Kentucky.

How many of those coaches would you rather have than Chan? All of them right? If you had them here at GT wouldn't you expect better results than Chan? I would. Would they be as good as OSU or Ok...no...but close...yeah probably.

We would have at least
1. Finished in the top 25
2. Beat UGA at least once...
3. Cracked the 5 loss barrier.
 
Look I realize we have extra challenges being the school we are. I understand it takes more to do it here than at Ok LSU, etc etc. That isn't my point

My point is; for the last 6 years we have largely been an irrelevant program. Period. And if anyone thinks Chan is doing as good a job as those coaches at all those other schools, fine...I don't and I think we would be better under better leadership. The proof is in the pudding...Oleary was able to take a 1-10 team and make them relevant in 3 years. It should have been quicker for Chan to do it; let alone 6 years later.
 
33jacket said:
Let me ask you something. How can we be relevant in a state when we are 0-6 vs UGA, never have one a conf title in over 9 years, never been to a BCS bowl, and haven't finished in the top 25? Where is our relevance?
Click to expand...

We're relevant because we're winning. No, we're not beating ugay and we haven't gone to the BCS but we're still winning games. And beating teams the experts say we're not suppose to. The problem is we're also losing games we're suppose to win. That inconsistancy is what I believe has fans (me included) frustrated. We're not consistant.

But we're doing things to try and correct that problem the last couple of years by getting a new special teams coach, new recruiting coordinator, and new OC. Give it time. And if that doesn't work we'll eventually get a new head coach.
 
33. sounds like you woke up on the wrong side of the bed. There's so much to respond to but I will mover forward and say this.

You want Chan gone, Then get his ass fired now. But let me tell you this you better by GOD get someone in here that's going to win next year because I and a lot of others will be on the next coaches ass to win RIGHT NOW!

You think Chan has it rough with his haters? The next coach will wish he hadn't come in if he doesn't produce right away. I've talked to a lot of people and while they are not happy with Chan they see firing him as a huge set back. I've talked to 50's 60's 70's and 80's alumni and former players about it.

They see recruiting getting much better, they see ticket sales improving. They see an AD who cares about Tech.

I've said it before and I will say it again and you can call me "mediocre" all you want. You better make GOD DAMN sure the next coach here wins NOW or we are screwed.
 
I was thinking in terms of athletic budget and recruiting base. We'll never compete with UF, USC, and Ohio State in those areas.

UK and USC-East are a little better for comparison. They have us in athletic budget (which allows for them to pay a guy like Spurrier & Kentucky could pay someone better than Brooks but noone wanted it) but we have a better recuriting base than both.
 
TCJacket said:
We're relevant because we're winning. No, we're not beating ugay and we haven't gone to the BCS but we're still winning games. And beating teams the experts say we're not suppose to. The problem is we're also losing games we're suppose to win. That inconsistancy is what I believe has fans (me included) frustrated. We're not consistant.

But we're doing things to try and correct that problem the last couple of years by getting a new special teams coach, new recruiting coordinator, and new OC. Give it time. And if that doesn't work we'll eventually get a new head coach.
Click to expand...

I still fail to see how you can be 0-5 vs UGA, and never finish in the top 25 and say we are relevant?

By nature, doesn't what define being relevant mean you have an impact in some type of way? If we are 0-6 in the last 6 instate, it doesn't appear we are relevant, if we never have finished in the top 25, it doesn't appear we are relevant there. Our only relevance was one year in the ACC last year. Otherwise, its been 4 going on 5 years of non-relevance and mediocrity in this conference as well. Proof:
4-4
4-4
4-4
5-3
7-1 (relevance)
2-3 (so far...headed toward 4-4 or 5-3 again)

So...outside our one year of conference relevance...isn't it safe to say we have been irrelevant in the ACC; and on a national level completely irrelevant, and instate vs UGA completely irrelevant. I just don't know how else to describe it.

Maybe someone has a better way to....I don't see anything but irrelevant mediocrity outside one year in the ACC.
 
I heard you can become relevant by doing one armed pushups.


beej67,
or was that "respect" .?
 
refrigeratormover said:
I've said it before and I will say it again and you can call me "mediocre" all you want. You better make GOD DAMN sure the next coach here wins NOW or we are screwed.
Click to expand...

THAT's exactly what I've been saying!!!

Of course, coming from the mover it just carries a whole lot more weight...in more ways than one!
 
refrigeratormover said:
33. sounds like you woke up on the wrong side of the bed. There's so much to respond to but I will mover forward and say this.

You want Chan gone, Then get his ass fired now. But let me tell you this you better by GOD get someone in here that's going to win next year because I and a lot of others will be on the next coaches ass to win RIGHT NOW!

You think Chan has it rough with his haters? The next coach will wish he hadn't come in if he doesn't produce right away. I've talked to a lot of people and while they are not happy with Chan they see firing him as a huge set back. I've talked to 50's 60's 70's and 80's alumni and former players about it.

They see recruiting getting much better, they see ticket sales improving. They see an AD who cares about Tech.

I've said it before and I will say it again and you can call me "mediocre" all you want. You better make GOD DAMN sure the next coach here wins NOW or we are screwed.
Click to expand...

perhaps I did....and my hair is messy

but 1 I don't appreciate words like God damn in a public forum, that is poor taste

and 2, How is firing chan a huge setback? From what? I am not sure it is even a setback. That is your opinion vs mine. There is no fact to his removal being a setback.

The choice of the replacement coach is critical, and should have about 3 years to work his wonders, but even chan won't win much next year; so I am not sure next year is a good place to put pressure on winning for any coach as the team will be devoid of experience and key players.

Jon if you really believe this is the best we can do, and Chan is the man, and the 6 years he has been here have been acceptable to you..that is cool. I know its a man who inherited a winning program, has been unable to adapt to the college game, has made decisions on a 3 year delay, has not produced a team worthy of top 25 status or beat UGA...I just don't understand why all of that over a 6 year timeframe is acceptable.

And furthermore, I don't know why some think a new coach that is the right choice couldn't do better? I am not saying this person could win next year with the fact the team would be so young, I am saying this person I would expect better results on a national and vs UGA than chan has produced.

Also this new coach winning right away...by no means is a judge of a good move. Look at Weiss. But, with that said, by the third year this person should accomplish things chan has yet to. Beat UGA, finish in the top 25, avoid 5 losses. Not too high guys...no one is saying BCS bowl or win the nat champ...
 
TampaJacket said:
33jacket -- demanding relevance.
Click to expand...

LOL...I am checking out of this discussion. I have said my bit. At some point, the patience factor has a line, with all of us. Mine was this year. Some are willing to be more patient I am not.

Right now we are just arguing opinions, no one is right one way or the other...which makes if fun, but some take it too personal.
 
33jacket said:
perhaps I did....and my hair is messy

but 1 I don't appreciate words like God damn in a public forum, that is poor taste

Poor taste or not what's said is said!

and 2, How is firing chan a huge setback? From what? I am not sure it is even a setback. That is your opinion vs mine. There is no fact to his removal being a setback.

Have you even given the thought of how the players may react? The recruits may react? I don't think so. Players are loyal to their coach and if they feel he got screwed then chances are they will make the new coaches life hell. Trust me, I know!

The choice of the replacement coach is critical, and should have about 3 years to work his wonders, but even chan won't win much next year; so I am not sure next year is a good place to put pressure on winning for any coach as the team will be devoid of experience and key players.

Don't start giving a new coach 3 years NOW to put in place his program. If he has the talent, which everyone admits the talent her is the best it's been in 20+ years he should win right away.

Jon if you really believe this is the best we can do, and Chan is the man, and the 6 years he has been here have been acceptable to you..that is cool. I know its a man who inherited a winning program, has been unable to adapt to the college game, has made decisions on a 3 year delay, has not produced a team worthy of top 25 status or beat UGA...I just don't understand why all of that over a 6 year timeframe is acceptable.

I don't believe it's the best we can do and yes we have had major screw ups. The program he adapted he lost 10 or more because of flunkgate, outside of the top 5 programs noone could over come that. I more than most hate the fact we are 0-6 against the nad lickers but that will change.

And furthermore, I don't know why some think a new coach that is the right choice couldn't do better? I am not saying this person could win next year with the fact the team would be so young, I am saying this person I would expect better results on a national and vs UGA than chan has produced.

Again, you want Gailey out then I will say again you better make sure the next one wins. That's all I got to say.
Click to expand...

selah!

PS: It's JOHN Just messing with you!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top