Who would do better at GT than Paul Johnson?

Allen Koholic said:
All I want is some names. Changing everything else (The Hill, the GTAA, the academic offerings) goes without saying and would clearly help Paul Johnson as well. I said after the third straight loss to UGA that I would support changing the direction of the team.

Names. That's it. Names.
Click to expand...

Well, fan names don't always work so well.

I'd like to see Johnson succeed here. But we should have the other changes in place for at least one year before considering a new coach, assuming we don't already have that coach in hand.

Success has a lot to do with the head coach, but even more to do with how the school provides support to 1) recruit; 2) evaluate recruits; 3) train athletes; 4) tutor athletes to maintain the veneer of being an academic institution; 5) mangage the day-to-day of the school; 6) provide after-graduation jobs to players.

Tech invests a lot in many of these things, but seems to drop the ball in a lot of others---for example, how many times in the past 4 years have we shown up wearing the wrong type of cleats to an away game? And as for #6, not many of our alumni own dealerships or law firms where you can hire a semi-popular star for a good salary and corresponding boost in PR/sales.

You can also see how important the school's staff is for evaluating talent (these are people outside the coaching staff): see Florida.

If GT made some of the changes we've all heard about, I'd like to see Johnson have a few more years. I like the offense, and am not eager to change things.

If, Johnson leaves, we could draw up a list of who we'd love to have, but there' s a lot more to it than that. Coaches I'd like to hire, but who will never come to GT:

1. Ken Whisenhunt. Not realistic.
2. Greg Schiano. Not realistic. But he is unemployed. And many NFL HC's who lost have won in college: Spurrier, Carroll (the first time), Schiano, Mora, etc.
3. Greg Roman. Probably wants to be NFL headcoach as 49er's HC.
4. Kliff Kingsbury. He's not coming here.
5. Pat Fitzgerald. Not leaving Northwestern. And I'm sure a lot of our fans would complain about his w-l record.

Coaches we might get, if there was mutual interest:

1. Ted Roof. Not a fan of this, but lots of programs like losing with home-grown talent. And who knows, he's turned into a great DC. But for all the people who want to lose with home-grown talent (the same who wanted Curry as AD), consider how Ted Roof was as Duke's headcoach.
2. Dan Mullen. A long shot, but I think he realizes there is a ceiling at Mississippi State and I think he also realizes that large programs are not always run by people smart enough to hire him after running into that ceiling. It would be easier to win at GT. UF will have made a decision by the time our job is open (hopefully it isn't), and if he isn't tabbed, the better jobs aren't coming open soon, unless LSU goes a different direction. He'd be gone from GT after 2 or 3 years.
3. Bud Foster. Not a fan of this either.
4. Pete Lembo. Ball State HC. Probably would be my top realistic choice, but he probably won't be available by the time this matters. But if we had to make a choice today, this would be the first realistic call I'd make.
5. Matt Campbell. Toledo HC. Success may be more derivative than self-created.
6. Craig Bohl. HC ND State.
7. Mark Hudspeth.

----------------
Bottom line is that I'm not convinced any of the realistic choices are an upgrade over Johnson. Nor am I convinced that some of the unrealistic choices are either. I think Johnson is a good coach. I think there were some weak spots for the coaches this year. We'll see what happens in 2014.

I'm not generally a fan of hiring coordinators.

I would not replace Johnson this year or next year barring a disaster.
 
The NDSU guy got hired at Wyoming. GT is obviously a better job than that, but there will be a test to see if he can handle FBS football. Unless they go like 10-2 next year, he won't be proven enough by the time we're looking.

Lembo is an interesting name, but I doubt he'll be available by the time we're looking again. I'm surprised he hasn't gotten a new job this year, but we'll have to see how the Penn State dominos fall.
 
TechSBP said:
Coaches we might get, if there was mutual interest:

1. Ted Roof. Not a fan of this, but lots of programs like losing with home-grown talent. And who knows, he's turned into a great DC. But for all the people who want to lose with home-grown talent (the same who wanted Curry as AD), consider how Ted Roof was as Duke's headcoach.

----------------
Bottom line is that I'm not convinced any of the realistic choices are an upgrade over Johnson. Nor am I convinced that some of the unrealistic choices are either. I think Johnson is a good coach. I think there were some weak spots for the coaches this year. We'll see what happens in 2014.

I'm not generally a fan of hiring coordinators.

I would not replace Johnson this year or next year barring a disaster.
Click to expand...

Consider how Ted was as DC while he was at Tech...but yet, he's been places and obviously learned things. Why wouldn't that be true of him as HC?

And he was HC at Duke. That's Duke as in Blue Devils. They've had all of two coaches that's done well there...and we have yet to see if the latest one can maintain his success.

I absolutely agree with you that none of the viable (and few of the unrealistic) coaches would be an upgrade.
 
Mike Leach, Bobby Petrino, and a bunch of coaches I don't know about because it's not my job to scout them.

And then there are many known quantities who will never coach at Tech (Nick Saban, Urban Meyer, Jimbo Fisher, etc. etc,)
 
gte878u said:
Mike Leach, Bobby Petrino, and a bunch of coaches I don't know about because it's not my job to scout them.

And then there are many known quantities who will never coach at Tech (Nick Saban, Urban Meyer, Jimbo Fisher, etc. etc,)
Click to expand...

Saban would not do better at GT than Johnson. Saban would freaking snap at GT and end up spoon fed somewhere.
 
aeromech said:
Saban would not do better at GT than Johnson. Saban would freaking snap at GT and end up spoon fed somewhere.
Click to expand...
Yea. I wonder if someone like Malzahn would well here, seeing as Tech can't go out and get Jucos or SEC castoffs to play QB. Saban does well because he's a good coach, but a supreme recruiter, and that's not something he'd excel at here. I don't know if any Alabama starters would be able to get through our admissions right now.
 
Saban quit the NFL because there was no way to sustain a permanent talent advantage over your opponents with the draft and cap system.

You couldn't pay Saban enough to coach here.
 
Again, somebody pull up the old: Wommack sux and has to go posts here (some are probably mine). What changed--his coaching skills or the talent available to him?
Remember this when arguing to change coaches, yet again, or when dissing Roof due to his term as Duke's HC.

When Saban was at MSU and Meyer at Utah, if we had interviewed them at that time, they would have asked---is it true that Tech players have the highest SAT scores among D-1 public schools?---well, uh yes coach that's true---either of em then say--thanks but no thanks. If DRad had of done his due diligence, he could have just gone straight to Clemson.

What we really need, is a young/healthy Homer Rice.
 
GoldZ said:
Again, somebody pull up the old: Wommack sux and has to go posts here (some are probably mine). What changed--his coaching skills or the talent available to him?
Remember this when arguing to change coaches, yet again, or when dissing Roof due to his term as Duke's HC.
Click to expand...
Wommack didn't look so awful when his defensive line was four NFL players here either.
 
GEETEELEE said:
Consider how Ted was as DC while he was at Tech...but yet, he's been places and obviously learned things. Why wouldn't that be true of him as HC?

And he was HC at Duke. That's Duke as in Blue Devils. They've had all of two coaches that's done well there...and we have yet to see if the latest one can maintain his success.

I absolutely agree with you that none of the viable (and few of the unrealistic) coaches would be an upgrade.
Click to expand...

The same people who want to hire Ted Roof are the same people who would've hired Bill Curry over Steve Spurrier---because Bill Curry was a "tech man."

Let's play a game: post-college, Ted Roof has the same resume he has now. Except, instead of going to GT, he went to Stanford and won the Heisman at LB. Would you hire him, with that resume? His record as headcoach is 6-45. Ted Roof's record at Duke is the worst of any non-interim Duke coach in Duke's history. In his final three years his teams produced a stunning 2-33 record. Those six wins include a win over the Citadel and a win over VMI.

Tech has a bad history of promoting from within when they should be hiring from without.

The only people who would hire a head coach for Georgia Tech that came in 6-45, the worst record in a dismal program's entire history, are Georgie fans and people who are dumb enough to think that going to Tech makes you special.

And as for only two good coaches:

David Cutcliffe, Steve Spurrier, Bill Murray, Eddie Cameron, and Wallace Wade were all pretty good coaches. Bill Murray was 93-51-9 at Duke.

-----------------------------
That said, Duke's defenses did pretty well during his 6-45 run. There is a lot of reason to believe he is a very good defensive coordinator. But there is no way a program like GT should risk its existence by hiring a guy who is the worst head coach, by winning percentage, in the history of duke football.
 
Last edited:
TechSBP said:
The same people who want to hire Ted Roof are the same people who would've hired Bill Curry over Steve Spurrier---because Bill Curry was a "tech man."

Uh, no....at least not "this people". Don't know of anyone who wants to hire Roof simply because he's a Tech man. OTOH, there are apparently those who want to hire Jimmy Robinson or Ken Wisenhunt for that reason.

Let's play a game: post-college, Ted Roof has the same resume he has now. Except, instead of going to GT, he went to Stanford and won the Heisman at LB. Would you hire him, with that resume? His record as headcoach is 6-45. Ted Roof's record at Duke is the worst of any non-interim Duke coach in Duke's history. In his final three years his teams produced a stunning 2-33 record. Those six wins include a win over the Citadel and a win over VMI.

Ted obviously wasn't ready to be a HC when Duke hired him. Did he learn nothing from his HC experience? Has he learned nothing from the other stints he been at? He's certainly learned about being a DC since he was here the first time.

Tech has a bad history of promoting from within when they should be hiring from without.
Shouldn't have hired O'Leary? The only application I can think of for this statement is Carson. There's many good reasons for promoting from within; it shouldn't be ruled out.

The only people who would hire a head coach for Georgia Tech that came in 6-45, the worst record in a dismal program's entire history, are Georgie fans and people who are dumb enough to think that going to Tech makes you special.
Apparently there are people dumb enough to reject someone due to a single stint in his resume and ignore what he's done elsewhere and here at Tech.

And as for only two good coaches:

David Cutcliffe, Steve Spurrier, Bill Murray, Eddie Cameron, and Wallace Wade were all pretty good coaches. Bill Murray was 93-51-9 at Duke.
Click to expand...

Holy cow. Murray was a contemporary of Dodd and his record is just as relevant to Duke being "good" as Dodd is to Tech.

I'll say it again, but with a small qualifier: Duke has had only two coaches with any success at all since Boddy Dodd was coaching at Tech. And Cutcliffe has yet to prove he can sustain his success any better than Grobe did at Wake.

And please, make no mistake: I'm not for promoting Roof for HC...but I'm not going to reject him out of hand, either.
 
GEETEELEE said:
Holy cow. Murray was a contemporary of Dodd and his record is just as relevant to Duke being "good" as Dodd is to Tech.

I'll say it again, but with a small qualifier: Duke has had only two coaches with any success at all since Boddy Dodd was coaching at Tech. And Cutcliffe has yet to prove he can sustain his success any better than Grobe did at Wake.

And please, make no mistake: I'm not for promoting Roof for HC...but I'm not going to reject him out of hand, either.
Click to expand...

I think most rational people would reject the worst coach in Duke's history as a candidate to coach at their BCS-league school. The fact is three coaches have had winning records at Duke since Dodd---and David Cutcliffe isn't one of them.

Also, Roof's tenure wasn't a "stint." It was 4.5 years. And the last three years were the worst. I think a small school might be wise to hire him as a head coach. But we'd be insane to do so.

I've long argued that Tech should drop football and division 1 sports (or, in the alternative, do what it takes to win). If we hire Ted Roof, I'll take it as a sign that GT is moving to division 3 in 10 years.
 
So we're all in agreement then... we should keep PJ.

Right?

:hiding:
 
beej67 said:
Saban quit the NFL because there was no way to sustain a permanent talent advantage over your opponents with the draft and cap system.

You couldn't pay Saban enough to coach here.
Click to expand...

All of this and twice on Saturdays ...
 
TechSBP said:
The same people who want to hire Ted Roof are the same people who would've hired Bill Curry over Steve Spurrier---because Bill Curry was a "tech man."

Let's play a game: post-college, Ted Roof has the same resume he has now. Except, instead of going to GT, he went to Stanford and won the Heisman at LB. Would you hire him, with that resume? His record as headcoach is 6-45. Ted Roof's record at Duke is the worst of any non-interim Duke coach in Duke's history. In his final three years his teams produced a stunning 2-33 record. Those six wins include a win over the Citadel and a win over VMI.

Tech has a bad history of promoting from within when they should be hiring from without.

The only people who would hire a head coach for Georgia Tech that came in 6-45, the worst record in a dismal program's entire history, are Georgie fans and people who are dumb enough to think that going to Tech makes you special.

And as for only two good coaches:

David Cutcliffe, Steve Spurrier, Bill Murray, Eddie Cameron, and Wallace Wade were all pretty good coaches. Bill Murray was 93-51-9 at Duke.

-----------------------------
That said, Duke's defenses did pretty well during his 6-45 run. There is a lot of reason to believe he is a very good defensive coordinator. But there is no way a program like GT should risk its existence by hiring a guy who is the worst head coach, by winning percentage, in the history of duke football.
Click to expand...

You're speaking my language. Great post.
 
TechSBP said:
I think most rational people would reject the worst coach in Duke's history as a candidate to coach at their BCS-league school. The fact is three coaches have had winning records at Duke since Dodd---and David Cutcliffe isn't one of them.

Also, Roof's tenure wasn't a "stint." It was 4.5 years. And the last three years were the worst. I think a small school might be wise to hire him as a head coach. But we'd be insane to do so.

I've long argued that Tech should drop football and division 1 sports (or, in the alternative, do what it takes to win). If we hire Ted Roof, I'll take it as a sign that GT is moving to division 3 in 10 years.
Click to expand...

stint

noun: stint; plural noun: stints
1. a person's fixed or allotted period of work.
"his varied career included a stint as a magician"
synonyms: spell, stretch, turn, session, term, shift, tour of duty
2. limitation of supply or effort.
"a collector with an eye for quality and the means to indulge it without stint"
 
BarrelORum said:
What excuses have been made? I think we can do better than what Paul Johnson has performed over the last 4 seasons. I'm not the AD and I don't have time to scour for quality candidates nor should any fan be expected too. If the GTAA wants to pay me to come in there and fix this mess, I'll be happy to give it a shot.

But before we decide to try a different flavor as coach, I think GT as a whole, Institute, support for Athletics, the academia, need to get their öööö together and decide what kind of team do we want.

If that has already been decided, then I'm not sure we can improve much on where we are, but I think we can improve some. Regardless, if GT the school doesn't change the way they view their athletic programs, I am done supporting them as well. I have been a supporter, contributor and season ticket holder for 20+ years. Until I see marked changes by the administration, I'm done supporting a program that they keep limiting the product's possible value. They expect you to invest competitive dollars for their product, but what they don't tell you is that they aren't supporting that product like the competition. We cannot keep operating this way. Period.

Bud Petersen needs to make an effort to be very clear on the direction of GT athletics and Bobinsky needs to crawl out of the nice cocoon he's created down at the GTAA and start speaking up for the direction of the athletic program.
Click to expand...

Careful using Peterson's name or StingTalk will pull your comment. StingTalk is like the National Media, politically correct, delusional, the truth be damned.
I am indeed a GT graduate = non engineering= and a fan for over 50 years. I am totally disgusted with GT football. I agree with you, it is the Hill, and Peterson is the leader. Could we find a better coach than CPJ, yes, but I don't believe it help in many more W's because of the Hill's restrictions.
 
alan71 said:
Careful using Peterson's name or StingTalk will pull your comment. StingTalk is like the National Media, politically correct, delusional, the truth be damned.
I am indeed a GT graduate = non engineering= and a fan for over 50 years. I am totally disgusted with GT football. I agree with you, it is the Hill, and Peterson is the leader. Could we find a better coach than CPJ, yes, but I don't believe it help in many more W's because of the Hill's restrictions.
Click to expand...

Ha, no being an idiot will get your comment pulled. Stingtalk is about as free as it gets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top