ADVERTISEMENT

Why isn’t Georgia Tech a Power House in Football?

svjkn3

svjkn3

Active Member
Gold Member
Aug 31, 2019
2,099
2,725
113
Don’t just say the ACC. If Georgia is so good and they get the top players like Alabama then there should be no reason Georgia Tech can’t be better than they are especially being in the South and in Atlanta. It doesn’t make sense to me. Someone should be able to go there and make them good. Thoughts?
 
Because they are a Ramblin' Wreck.

wreck-1200x750.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarolinaCocky83 and king ward
A lot of it had to do with academics. I’m not as old as most here but about 15 years ago I use to go to Georgia Techs baseball camp. The lowest SAT score on the baseball team at the time was 1410. That was before the essay part was added. That was back when a 1100 would easily get you into Clemson or USC. (With good grades and all that of course)
 
  • Like
Reactions: uscnoklahoma2, rogue cock, svjkn3 and 1 other person
Im not sure but I would agree that it's academics. I have no idea about what kind of facilities they have or athletic budget btw.
 
svjkn3 said:
Don’t just say the ACC. If Georgia is so good and they get the top players like Alabama then there should be no reason Georgia Tech can’t be better than they are especially being in the South and in Atlanta. It doesn’t make sense to me. Someone should be able to go there and make them good. Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Maybe not really answering your question but....

I think both USC and GT being down over the last 5-ish years has been a significant factor in the current runs of both Clempson and UGA. In state recruiting in places like Georgia and South Carolina is super important.
 
I was recently wondering the same thing, but more across the board. They're pretty good in baseball on a consistent level, but despite the high academic standards they should be able to be at least competitive in both Football and MBB. Duke and Stanford should be their model.
 
  • Like
Reactions: svjkn3 and Legendary Cock
Their conference, their location, money, and their style of play. Don't give me that academic shit. I've met 8-10 players from Tech over the years. Their athletes seem to be on par with just about any of school. Just smart enough to get in with some assistance from Tudors and teachers.
 
They're also surrounded by schools that just care more about football and considerable advantages in GaTech where football is concerned. Bigger stadium, better facilities, more money invested in the program. UGA, taters, Auburn, Bama, Florida State, Tennessee...even us. The fact that they're behind in these things, plus all the above schools can offer a better gameday experience. A game at Tech, where 10,000 bored nerds happened to wander into the stadium, just doesn't cut it.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: uscnoklahoma2 and Freddie.B.Cocky
Ga Tech was nationally relevant as an SEC member and briefly as an independent until that status became unprofitable for anyone that wasn't Notre Dame. They own national championships from 1917, 1928, 1952, and 1990. That last one was split with Colorado back in the poll era.

I'd say that their decision to leave the SEC finally caught up to them because of what it signaled in terms of commitment. It was their home, just as the ACC was our home. You leave your home and you might eventually find yourself out in the cold. I guess they got comfortable being there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: svjkn3
Totally off the cuff here, but it seems like schools set in the middle of larger cities don't seem to typically have strong athletics - especially football teams. Duke and Stanford mentioned above both have beautiful, dedicated campus settings away from the hoopla.
 
They had some good teams in the 90’s and won their conference in the 2000’s. I think the nail in the coffin for that program was Paul Johnson and the triple option. It worked for about 4-5 years, but after that fans lost interest. I can remember seeing a spring game with about 15 fans in attendance. It killed them in recruiting. They used to beat Georgia regularly…now that game isn’t even a big deal.

That rebuild was a 7 year job, minimum after Johnson left the program.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Gadfly
turncock said:
Totally off the cuff here, but it seems like schools set in the middle of larger cities don't seem to typically have strong athletics - especially football teams. Duke and Stanford mentioned above both have beautiful, dedicated campus settings away from the hoopla.
Click to expand...
Respectfully disagree. USC (LA), Miami, Pitt and to somewhat lesser degrees (City size)f.Texas (Austin). If you wanted to you could even make a case (recently) UCF.

It can be done, it just takes the right combination of Admin/AD and coaching hires who are all willing to dedicate themselves to the same goals.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: rogue cock, svjkn3, Legendary Cock and 2 others
The administration doesn't care as much about football as other schools. And they stuck with the option for a long time. Most kids don't want to play option football.
 
Harvard Gamecock said:
Respectfully disagree. USC (LA), Miami, Pitt and to somewhat lesser degrees (City size)f.Texas (Austin). If you wanted to you could even make a case (recently) UCF.

It can be done, it just takes the right combination of Admin/AD and coaching hires who are all willing to dedicate themselves to the same goals.
Click to expand...
Not to mention Florida St. (historically), Ohio State, Wisconsin, Michigan...
 
  • Like
Reactions: rogue cock and svjkn3
Bud Wiser said:
They had some good teams in the 90’s and won their conference in the 2000’s. I think the nail in the coffin for that program was Paul Johnson and the triple option. It worked for about 4-5 years, but after that fans lost interest. I can remember seeing a spring game with about 15 fans in attendance. It killed them in recruiting. They used to beat Georgia regularly…now that game isn’t even a big deal.

That rebuild was a 7 year job, minimum after Johnson left the program.
Click to expand...
For me, it's this right here. ^^^

Academics may have driven the decision to hire Johnson. But after teams learned how to defend that boring triple option, the program eventually bit the dust.
 
Now that you mention it, I cant think of a whole lot of programs from big cities that could be considered really good. I'm sure there are some, just drawing a blank.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PaleoCock and TheReelEss
bucketdad said:
Now that you mention it, I cant think of a whole lot of programs from big cities that could be considered really good. I'm sure there are some, just drawing a blank.
Click to expand...
Agree. Inner city talent usually wants a change of scenery and the others tend to gravitate to inimate college settings.

Of the examples given above, Wisconsin is the only one that sticks out as an exception. Schools like OSU, Michigan, USC, etc. have rich history in football and expansive city areas have form around them. Also, cities like Los Angeles have long been considered highly desired places to live.
 
Last edited:
Silver_Coconut said:
Coaching, coaching, and coaching.
Click to expand...
If you're a very good college coach, Jim Tressel for example, where are you going to coach to be successful: Ohio State or Savannah State?

Saban and Meyer are anomalies. Their name alone pulls in recruits whereever they go. This is about recognition as much as it is coaching. For most of the coaches, you better find a school with great resources or your coaching isn't going to amount to much on the national scene.
 
PaleoCock said:
If you're a very good college coach, Jim Tressel for example, where are you going to coach to be successful: Ohio State or Savannah State?

Saban and Meyer are anomalies. Their name alone pulls in recruits whereever they go. This is about recognition as much as it is coaching. For most of the coaches, you better find a school with great resources or your coaching isn't going to amount to much on the national scene.
Click to expand...
Then why do G5 coaches get promoted every year?
 
PaleoCock said:
Agree. Inner city talent usually wants a change of scenery and the others tend to gravitate to inimate college settings.

Of the examples given above, Wisconsin is the only one that sticks out as an exception. Schools like OSU, Michigan, USC, etc. have rich history in football and expansive city areas have form around them. Also, cities like Los Angeles have long been considered highly desired places to live.
Click to expand...
Not so much these days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PaleoCock
Silver_Coconut said:
Then why do G5 coaches get promoted every year?
Click to expand...
Because there are layers. For example, programs like UCF and App State both have great resources at that level. As a result, you often find their coaching talent in the discussion for advancement to the bigger schools.
 
PaleoCock said:
Because there are layers. For example, programs like UCF and App State both have great resources at that level. As a result, you often find their coaching talent in the discussion for advancement to the bigger schools.
Click to expand...
Alright. So what's your argument against what I said?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D

The big turd pile in the room

Replies
4
Views
981
Gamecocks Forum
jonesz21
jonesz21
Gamecockben1979

Basketball underrated and why I support expanded football playoff

Replies
16
Views
704
Gamecocks Forum
Gamecockben1979
Gamecockben1979
L

High 4-star & No. 1 player in NC for '26 Samari Matthews talks South Carolina visit

Replies
0
Views
530
The Insiders Forum
Lee Wardlaw
L
Stephen Anderson

WBB Transfer Portal Thread

Replies
19
Views
1K
The Insiders Forum
Stephen Anderson
Stephen Anderson
Alan Cole

South Carolina Women's Basketball Open Locker Room Quotes (Post-Indiana)

Replies
0
Views
740
The Insiders Forum
Alan Cole
Alan Cole
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back