Sure. 3 huge ones would be Gonzaga, Villanova, and Wichita State.
Why isn’t Georgia Tech a Power House in Football?
- Thread starter svjkn3
- Start date
I was referring to football. Finding 5 to 10 great players to come play at basketball at a school based in a city is a totally different beast.
He's one of the best examples if there is one. Spurrier and Holtz were the great coaches at great schools before they arrived at USC. Their names served as hooks for us that eventually landed talent, and that talent and good coaching translated to some decent success.
How many times did Spurrier jab Saban about proving it a school like SC instead of places like LSU and BAMA? That's a resources-based discussion.
Really good coach with really good resources in a conference that only has a couple of teams that compete for the top position.
IMO, what took them to the next level was timing. 1) They had a coach who loved social media when social media was peaking. 2) The CFB format being introduced 3) FSU was in decline 4) Network effects that ensued following the first three factors, especially the 4-team CFB playoff format.
Clemson became the fashionable place to be. Just like Oregon did when the Nike alumni threw all of that money at their football program.
Miami is in a small suburb....Coral Gables. But you could include Ohio State which is in downtown Columbus.
That's exactly the point I'm making. They had the right coach at the right time and became national champions without the resources of OSU, Bama, Auburn, LSU, USC, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Texas, TAMU, FSU, Michigan, Georgia, Florida, Oregon. They could have easily gone the wayside as the rest of the ACC, but they had the right coach.
My argument was never against good coaching. It was that there are also factors a play which impact success that have little to do with coaching at all.
Beamer referenced it after the UGA game. "They have 5-stars all over the field." That's part of the Atlanta effect which Athens enjoys. They've had this forever, regardless of the coach in place at the time. That's resources.
Nothing exists in a vacuum. Coaching, in my humble opinion, precedes success above all other factors.
I did both. BS at USC then a MS at GaTech. Got a job out of USC that paid for my degree at GT.
Coral Gables/South Miami (of which the campus borders) is only about 5 miles from downtown proper, distance wise its not a factor worth mentioning. Now if you're talking about neighborhood, Gables/Coconut Grove is in a complete class all of it's own.
Auburn and Oklahoma are among the most valuable football programs in the country. Clemson isn't anywhere close to them. Not to mention the history and brand.
But what resources do they have that the taters do not? What do those football programs have that even we don't have at USC? Are their practice and training facilities vastly superior, or superior at all? Are they playing with outdated equipment? Are the coaches not well paid? Are the players living in substandard housing? What does an OU or Allbarn player have available to them that a tater player does not?
Don’t think many on this board really cares about GT
It's enough about it to where something needs to be done if it's questionable.
Last edited:
Absolutely. As stated previously, bad coaching can wreck any school regardless of its status.
My point is that it's not "all about coaching" by a longshot and there some limited ways to "smooth" inequities between schools. For example, expanding the 4-team playoff system is a move in that direction.
Georgia Tech does not want to be. That is the answer. I attended a conference hosted by Georgia Tech. They showed us an incredible campus and facilities. Over dinner I asked our host about football, a senior college administrator there. He said it just wasn't a part of their mentality. They left that to surrounding teams like Georgia, Alabama and Florida. While it helps with fund raising, it distracts from other areas. It is a conscious decision to have a good team, but not go after a fanatical pursuit of a championship.
Georgia Tech has more stringent admissions requirements and a less comprehensive list of degree programs, ie. "crip courses". You actually have to be a student at GT.
Last edited:
The inequities are created by some people being better at an enterprise than others, just as in other pursuits. Teams all start out with 12-13 games to play. The four-team playoff means greater distinction for those who make it. I love it.
Great football history…………Bobby Dodd………….later brings on his former player, one Jim Carlen as an assistant.
Even at Georgia Tech they reduce admissions standards for football players. Maybe not for all sports. But finding easy courses there is likely more difficult than football factory schools.
P.S. I checked and the vast majority of football players at GT choose business as a major. A general business degree is the easiest you can find at GT. Only requires one year of accounting. Interesting because at Texas the most popular major is criminology (to be a peace officer or security of some sort) with kinesiology following second (to be a football trainer). The California schools sociology is popular which may include various ethnic studies.
Last edited:
The average SAT for entering students at Georgia Tech is an eye-popping 1445. The average SAT for entering Georgia Tech football players is 1025. Don't kid yourself that they don't reduce admissions standards. Georgia Tech admitted one player with a Math-Verbal combined SAT of 590, he was of course a top rated football recruit.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
It sickens me when I realize Muschamp ran our program so far into the ground it's going to take- Latest: Southern Fried Chicken
-
-
