Would you rather?

Which outcome would you prefer?

  • GT goes 7-5 / bowl game and Collins stays

    Votes: 145 91.2%

  • GT goes 3-9 and Collins is fired

    Votes: 14 8.8%
  • Total voters
    159
  • Poll closed .
Liberty said:
If we go 5-7 and look like we’re improving, well that will be the hard decision point now that we’ve mismanaged this situation so poorly. 7-5 and we beat up Dook, etc and still look like a bag of hammered dog öööö, sayonara baby.
Click to expand...

It would be kind of impressive if we managed to more than double our win total but not look like we are improving.
 
andrew said:
It would be kind of impressive if we managed to more than double our win total but not look like we are improving.
Click to expand...
It would only have taken a couple ööööty plays for us to have been 2-10. Similarly we could have easily been 5-7 if directional missed the 2pt, da U ööööed up one more time. Would not have made us improved, we’d just have a better record.
 
Liberty said:
It would only have taken a couple ööööty plays for us to have been 2-10. Similarly we could have easily been 5-7 if directional missed the 2pt, da U ööööed up one more time. Would not have made us improved, we’d just have a better record.
Click to expand...

Yeah but you still need to find two more wins.
 
This poll confirms my suspicion following the infamous "you don't want to see it [progress]" presscon and the skyrocketing butthurt that ensued: we have "fans" that want Tech to lose.

Sad.
 
Liberty said:
It would only have taken a couple ööööty plays for us to have been 2-10. Similarly we could have easily been 5-7 if directional missed the 2pt, da U ööööed up one more time. Would not have made us improved, we’d just have a better record.
Click to expand...
If we land on 5-7, maybe we don’t get the mass evacuation of talent last month like we saw. Then again, at 5-7 maybe we don’t overhaul the staff either…..
 
joeye said:
If we land on 5-7, maybe we don’t get the mass evacuation of talent last month like we saw. Then again, at 5-7 maybe we don’t overhaul the staff either…..
Click to expand...
It’s sad that our W/L record is the only thing driving needed staff changes. Bad way to run a business.
 
gtchief said:
This poll confirms my suspicion following the infamous "you don't want to see it [progress]" presscon and the skyrocketing butthurt that ensued: we have "fans" that want Tech to lose.

Sad.
Click to expand...

Poll:
1. Would you rather be tortured to death
2. Watch another man öööö your wife

Gtchief:
I can't believe how many people want to watch their wife get ööööed by another man. Pathetic.
 
QuadF said:
Poll:
1. Would you rather be tortured to death
2. Watch another man öööö your wife

Gtchief:
I can't believe how many people want to watch their wife get ööööed by another man. Pathetic.
Click to expand...

I don’t really see that as the same analogy.
 
QuadF said:
Poll:
1. Would you rather be tortured to death
2. Watch another man öööö your wife

Gtchief:
I can't believe how many people want to watch their wife get ööööed by another man. Pathetic.
Click to expand...
Your analogy would make sense if the poll presented a choice between two negative outcomes. But there is no conclusion that going 7-5 next year is negative without data points beyond it, namely future seasons.

Try again.
 
coit said:
I don’t really see that as the same analogy.
Click to expand...

Both options suck. Conflating the choice of which sucks less as an actual desire for that option is dishonest.

If you don't see keeping CGC as a negative outcome, you may be insane or secretly CGC.
 
gtchief said:
Your analogy would make sense if the poll presented a choice between two negative outcomes. But there is no conclusion that going 7-5 next year is negative without data points beyond it, namely future seasons.

Try again.
Click to expand...

Of course it's predicated on future seasons that's why OP framed it that way. Do you think the fire CGC crowd is motivated by something other than expected future outcomes?

The problem you have is that there's 3 solid years of data predicting future outcomes, and only a single fantasy year that you have to suggest otherwise.
 
QuadF said:
Of course it's predicated on future seasons that's why OP framed it that way. Do you think the fire CGC crowd is motivated by something other than expected future outcomes?

The problem you have is that there's 3 solid years of data predicting future outcomes, and only a single fantasy year that you have to suggest otherwise.
Click to expand...
Yes...we're adding a fantasy data point at the end of a sequence. And there's no logic that a sequence starting low and ending on a marked increase will decrease in "future outcomes". That's a whole lot of bias.
 
gtchief said:
Yes...we're adding a fantasy data point at the end of a sequence. And there's no logic that a sequence starting low and ending on a marked increase will decrease in "future outcomes". That's a whole lot of bias.
Click to expand...

You're right, its complete fantasy. If you want to ignore that it's wouldn't be a steady rise but a massive abberation (and not a particularly good one) from a consistent series of the worst gt football go ahead. I'd rather be biased by historical data than fantasy.
 
QuadF said:
You're right, its complete fantasy. If you want to ignore that it's wouldn't be a steady rise but a massive abberation (and not a particularly good one) from a consistent series of the worst gt football go ahead. I'd rather be biased by historical data than fantasy.
Click to expand...
If you reject the premise of one of the hypothetical situations and the outcomes from it then your opinion in this poll isn't really relevant. In fact the positive hypothetical here already breaks your prediction. So why are you here?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top