Posts
WE SHOULD NOT HAVE TO MATCH SMU
So SMU donors have built a coffer of over $10MM for a long term deal for a new coach and seem willing to offer upwards of $2MM or more if necessary per year. Just one mans opinion, but we should not have to match SMU in a bidding war to get Paul Johnson. Why? SMU may be full of big money donors ready to raise the Pheonix from the ashes, but they are strictly 2nd tier versus a BCS school like GT.
If PJ takes the SMU job because of the money, then it is clear to me that he has serious doubts about what he could do at a program that doesn't really need rebuilding. It makes me seriously question his competitive juices. PJ has said repeatedly that his offense would work well at the highest level and that he wants that challenge. He would get that challenge at GT - not SMU.
However, I have NO doubt PJ could work miracles at SMU. He could continue his miraculous reputation as a turnaround artist / offensive genious. However, to me, he would be known as a guy who is good at shooting fish in a barrel - low hanging fruit if you get my drift. I don't want to take one thing away from the wonderful work he has done at Navy. He deserves every award he gets. But to me, he's ready for a bigger challenge. SMU is not it.
At the end of the day, we would have to be "in the ballpark" in terms of money, but no way GT should have to match to convince him to come here - that is if his competitive juices really are what I think they are. What on earth does PJ have to prove at SMU?
THE HEWITT FOOTBALL CONNECTION
Interesting subplot - remember that Paul Hewitt is the current president of the BCA (Black Coaches Association), which is considering filing suit against the NCAA to make a point about the lack of African-American coaches. Interesting because your own boss is about to make a major hire. The only reported African-American candidate we have interviewed is Charlie Strong, although that's more than most have done to be fair.
Interestingly, Hewitt does have something to say about it - although for some reason you haven't seen it. Here are some quotes from him related to Duke's head coach search, as they just interviewed Gramblings HC Rod Broadway.
“You know who really needs to be paying attention to these hires? Not you and me and the university presidents, but the players,” said Georgia Tech head coach Paul Hewitt, president of the Black Coaches Association. “Why go play for this school when, the minute I get hurt or don’t have eligibility left, I’m not viewed as a valuable person?”
Georgia Tech is, like Duke, looking for a head coach after firing Chan Gailey. Both universities reportedly are interested in Navy coach Paul Johnson, for one. “As the president of the BCA, what we want to see in a hire is inclusiveness,” Hewitt said. “We want people to have a chance to show their wares.”
Hewitt adamantly rejected the assertion that he or the BCA seek the hiring of coaches based on the color of their skin, or due to any other ethnic attribute. Rather, they don’t want people automatically excluded on that basis, either from search committees or pools of candidates.
The Yellow Jacket coach noted that, since the NFL adopted the so-called “Rooney Rule” in 2003 mandating that teams interview at least one minority candidate, there has been a surge in the hiring of black head coaches. Among those cited by Hewitt was Pittsburgh’s Mike Tomlin, a longshot to replace Bill Cowher until he got a chance to interview for the job.
Hewitt received e-mails that took the 3,000-member BCA to task for its advocacy. “I quote here: ‘What do you people want?’” Hewitt said. “Like we are the cause of
the poor hiring record in college football. … I think that anybody that suggests that blacks and people of color have had a fair shake in college football is really living in the dark.”
CRAZY IVAN?
Seeing the Will Muschamp saga play out struck a chord as I watched Alec Baldwin in The Hunt for Red October on my DVR last weekend. I just imagine D-Rad as Jack Ryan and our Board of Trustees and/or the hiring committe having the following conversation:
BOARD: Don't you see, he's trying to get on the inside. He is the enemy.
D-Rad: I don't think so. I've studied WM for years. I've met WM. Have you met WM?
BOARD: He'll sabatage everything we've worked for.
D-RAD: I don't think so. His father-in-law is a Tech man. Did you know that?
BOARD: We'll be a laughing stock
D-RAD: Don't you see. He'll never be able to go back. His home country will arrest him on sight.
BOARD: Are you sure about this?
D-RAD: The SOB is trying to defect. The SOB is trying to defect.
BOARD: Did you say something?
D-RAD: I did............ BOOM!!!!!!
OTHER ACC RUMBLINGS
Guess who is the new head coach at Arkansas? Jim Grobe. Wow! Great get by Ark and you have to say THEY made a splash.
Also, Tommy Bowden parlayed his relationship with the Arkansas AD into a hefty pay raise and contract extension that will keep him at Clemson through something like 2014. I work with a former Clemson player who respects TB but thinks Clemson missed a golden opportunity. They just had a chance to have Tommy Bowden PAY Clemson to leave and they didn't do it. He is a slightly improved version of Chan Gailey in many Tigers opinions. Tiger fans were salivating over the strong possibility of getting Rich Rodriguez, who has Clemson coaching history and loves the south. In the words of one ex-Clemson player - Tommy just played us like a fiddle.
Oh yeah - what do you think the odds are that Wake Forest gets into the Paul Johnson sweepstakes now? If there is one team out there looking for a coach that has the players that understand something about the triple option - it's Wake Forest. Ohh..... the horror........... the horror......
However, the Wake job would not offer the same opportunity to leave PJ's legacy if you ask me. Grobe was about as successful on a sustained basis as just about anyone could be. Not a ton of upside to that job if you ask me.
.......... by the way, the SEC just got that much better. Losing Grobe is a big loss for the ACC.
.......... one last point on Grobe. Show me a rumor mill that had that one on their radar? Just goes to show you that things can be kept secret if people want them to.
One last note from the ACC - Check out this cool graphic on how the coaches voted in the final polls. Note that Frank Beamer voted LSU #1 and VaTech #2. Do you think he was aching for a rematch?
FURTHER DISTRACTIONS
As if we needed another distraction, the search for LSU's new Athletic Director has "officially" begun. Just know that until Dan Radakovich says publicly he's not interested, his name is going to be linked with this job.
22 comments:
Things are not looking good right now...Drad to LSU, PJ somewhere else and we make the big mistake of settling on Tenuta or a lesser name, Hewitt is terrible and should/will be fired, we don't have enough "money" to go after top level coaches, etc. I blame a lot of this on the previous AD. Oh well...
Things keep getting worse. Where did this black cloud come from? We knew that DRAD would jump to LSU as soon as the AD job opened up, so why did we hire him???
Also, why can't the ACC hold onto its coaches?? Grobe to Arkansas (hoped he would stay and keep the ACC competitive), Spurrier left Duke, Mack Brown left UNC, Bobby Ross, etc. etc. etc. Besides Beamer and Bowden (who were well established before joining the conference), there are few loyal and loved coaches. Until we get a few to stay in conference, we will ALWAYS be a second tier conference, and a holding spot for future SEC coaches. That is the ONLY reason why I was fearful of Muschamp. He would be gone in 4 years if he was successful. We don't need that.
Amen on Hewitt. Seems to have stalled as well. Hopefully we can take care of that before DRAD goes to LSU. As this is posted, we are 2 minutes away from possibly losing to GSU. Yikes.
notice that Les Miles and Bob Stoops are the only people who put their own team ranked as #1 (except for tressel, but when you're #3 and the top 2 teams lose, there is little you can do).
No, I thought the best part of the link was Bob Stoops naming LSU 6. He's still pissed from 2002 when the Tigers whipped their ass.
I still think that I want Hatcher more than any of the other coaches on the list anyways. I think we can get him and get him to stay for a while. I know the wife of the quarterbacks coach at Georgia Southern and she told me today that Hatcher is excited about the job if he gets it. That's a good sign because we want someone who's energetic about the program.
Paul Hewitt is not a bad coach. He just keeps on getting screwed over by good recruits leaving early and I'll explain why....
Most of the recruits that Georgia Tech bring in, are brought in because of Tech's surroundings. You're in Atlanta, party town of the south and you can get great coverage in the ACC. Think about it, if you're thinking about joinging an elite conference in college basketball, you think of the ACC and why not hang out in Atlanta while you're at it. The problem is, these same athletes that are just in it for the glamour, are just in it for the money.... i.e. Thaddeus Young, Javaris Crittenton, and most of all Chris Bosh who probably would have lead us to an NCAA championship in 2004. It's a tough conference to play in and Paul Hewitt runs a good floor so dont think that he's going anywhere any time soon.
Charlie Strong is still a GREAT candidate though.
I didn't realize that the LSU job was open this soon. I find that the most disturbing news of all. puts the thought in the back of DRad's mind that he won't have to be accountable for the hiring decision long term.
Coach Hewitt is a fine coach that just needs to hire an equivalent to an offensive coordinator for Bball. I am so tired of watching the kids stand around on offense waiting for the other guy to move. I think he needs to give up the individual instruction he touts so often and work on more team play and movement.
Why does Hewitt not recurit white basketball players ? Vandy beat is with them.
I have less of a concern with the color of the guys Hewitt recruits, in fact I could care less. My concern is that the team is the same game after game, year after year (excluding the ONE super year slash flash in the pan slash aligning of the stars). Our guys do not know how to run an offense, inbound the ball, play TOUGH IN YOUR FACE MAN TO MAN D, our guys are tall at positions usually short, however this height is offset by them being generally too slow to keep a more traditional sized guy in front of them (ie…we get beat off the dribble…leaving people open…which means easy shots…which is the opposite of reasonable defensive philosophy). I keep hearing he teaches individual technique, is this why I have to hold my breath every time we try to inbound the ball? Is this why we don’t have a Duke like efficiency with ball movement and control to get a good shot almost every possession? Is this why we have defensive laps and guys are left WIDE FREAKING OPEN behind the three point stripe time and time again?
These are a lot bigger problems than the color of the players. Who cares if they are green? If they play as a team as and harder than the other team, they would win. I think our guys generally play hard……..but……..we look lost on the floor quite often….not just this last game…not just this season…but last season…and the one before…etc etc…
Part of it is not having a true point guard, I guess. We don’t seem to have team concepts though. Watch Duke…they are smaller than our guys…but will kill us with team play and effort…not just this season…but more seasons than not…where is our offensive ball control and manipulation of the other team to get wide open shots time after time? Why do I cringe when we inbound the ball year after year? This is really bizarre.
I have to assume your point about white guys is that they generally play smart, conservative, in your face man up, good shooting, good passing, good team play…which is exactly what we are missing….but I suggest it’s more to do with what’s being coached than the players. We are stereotyping, of course, but stereotypes exist for a reason. They are a often occurring recognized pattern which proves it’s self true more times than not, so even though it’s politically incorrect to talk about facts like in a stereotypical way…I think with a smaller/quicker/non-2guard-converted/truer point guard (which we seem uninterested in recruiting), we would be better off. Still though, we need a methodical offense that is unstoppable…and tenacious man to man D….works at Duke doesn’t it…/ponder.
I think part of your point is a funny thing in modern America though. You can ask why there isn’t more of one color in certain situations…but you cannot ask why there isn’t more of another color in the same situation….or you will be called ugly names. This is a huge problem in America…it sounds racist actually…ironically.
I really don’t care in the end…I just want to win…and feel like our guys act like they know what they are doing as a team…I don’t feel that way for years now.
I agree with them not having to be white, but to whoever asked that question or started that topic.... you're a dumbass.
It's BASKETBALL!
If we were talking about Baseball or Swimming or our women's volleyball team, then you may have something to ponder about, but it's not.
Basketball is a black man's game and it will stay a black man's game. To find a good white basketball player is like trying to find an infant at a Rage Against the Machine concert. If we go out recruiting around the Atlanta area, we're going to find fantastic black basketball players who's mother's would prefer them to stay within the area, so why not try to get them in, no matter what skin color they have.
Hewitt for AD!
NOT!
On John's comment and the anon reply.
There are actually any number of interesting factors in differences between white players on average and blacks at the college level. You are right that talking about differences between races is considered beyond the pale, but still it is interesting to observe diversity. Anyway, when you are looking at the top recuits it seems that on average the white kid is more likely to stay in college longer than the black of the same or higher natural ability. Obviously a Hansbrough is a great example but UNC and Duke and other schools make a point of getting some of those kids. This may partly be b/c more of the white kids may be seen as having slightly less NBA potential, or at least need more seasoning and so will stay in college longer and feel compelled to push themselves hard if they have less natural athleticism. They also on average will be more likely to come from a financial or social position w/in their family that means they feel the draw of the NBA salary less than the J-Crits and T-Youngs.
These points aren't really all that racially specific. E.g., it is more social circumstances that a highly athletic black kid might feel it more imperative to make it to the NBA quicker even if they will ride the bench there for a couple years while they develop than a white kid from different circumstances.
So what is my point as far as white/black recruiting? Hewitt may be trying too hard to get that one off Ohio State kind of year where you can pull off a coup and get 2 of the top 10 high school players and make a deep run in the one year you have them. Rather he would be much better served to seek stability and continuity to create the basketball factory that a Coach K or Roy Williams has been able to do where you get those slightly less top recruits (white or black) that indicate b/c of social background, etc., that they will stay in school. Then the one McD AA can get thrown in the mix. Btw, I don't know why he didn't make a better effort to get that Aussie kid, he is great although I can't remember his name!
If he insists on running a style of O and D which fit the personnel he had in 2004 PERFECTLY then he has to recruit authentic replacements for the Anthony McHenry's and the Marvin Lewis's etc. That team usually had 4 guards on the floor at a time all of whom could pass and handle the ball reasonably well to very well. But that was the only team that fit that bill.
Which leads to my basic Hewitt complaint, you can't hammer square pegs into round holes of his scheme no matter what color the pegs.
Hewitt needs to worried about his own situation. If it was up to me, he would be looking for a job. I don't where the run at the National Championship came from. He looked like a genius at that point, but its been all down hill from there and now we may be the worst defensive team I have ever seen. A near miss at Georgia State? Come on, that is another chapter in the ridiculous and embarrassing debacle our basketball team has become. There is far too much talent on that team for this to be going on. Maybe he and Felton could form a coalition. Hewitt (sometimes) is a pretty good recruiter and Felton is one of the best bench coaches in the country. He has beaten us with nobodies several times. He, on the other hand, cannot seem to recruit. (I don't know what that had to do with anything, it just occurred to me)
Mr. Hewitt needs to step it up. There is no doubt that, like Chan, he is a class act, but he seems to have become completely clueless from the bench.
Agreed. If our recruits played as hard and together as Felton's kids, we would be world champs.
Early defections are not the problem IMO, and we should continue to persue top talent, even if they play only one season. The problem is that the 3 and 4 year players, who also had solid credentials coming in, have not developed or improved appreciably.
College BB is a guard's game and backcourt speed is crucial. CPH has not adequately addressed this need for a few seasons now. Because of this, our bigs also suffer because they are dependent on playmakers to set them up at the right time. We need speed and we need playmakers. Good teams typically make more FT's than their opponents attempt, but we are TYPICALLY at the FT line less than our opponents. This is because our roster lacks creators who can apply real pressure to the defense. We are a jump-shooting team that blows hot and cold, and we are predictible.
I have been a CPH supporter in large measure due to his ability to attract top talent. I am frustrated however, and do not like the direction things are going.
When Hewitt first arrived, he brought an intense, full court pressure style defense. His philosophy was to go deep in the bench and wear an opponent out by the last 6 minutes. This tactic was quite a breath of fresh air from Bobby C's last throes, when he sat idly on the bench and didn't call for ANY defense at all.
Sadly, Hewitt has forgotten this method, and his teams are becoming eerily similar to Cremin's last squads. If he doesn't turn it around, his fate will be the same, only there will be no court named after him.
Are the Knicks hiring yet??
I agree with the need for Hewitt to bring in at least two top-notch assistants, one for offense and one for defense. As far as individual instruction goes I'm not seeing guys getting a lot better as they progress through the Tech basketball program. If you look at our big men in particular (Aminu, Dickey, Smith) none have really progressed that much and all lack a go to post move. I think CPH has recruited a very talented team but he hasn’t adapted his offensive and defensive strategy to suit the personnel. We should be taking advantage of our length and size by getting the ball inside more on offense and playing softer man or match up zone on defense. Also CPH has to do a better job of managing the flow of the game. I’ve lost count of how many times already this season we have gotten into a good rhythm only to have substitutions screw things up. A little more patience would be a good thing since no one knows what our best lineup is right now. I bet there are multiple combinations that will work but CPH and staff have to find them and give them time to blossom.
screw this, talk about football...
Back in the day when the football team was terrible Tech fans could always look forward to the basketball season. Now there is not much of anything to look forward to. I believe GT athletics (when it comes to mens bball and fball) is at an all time low right now. It seems like UGA is on the verge of passing us in the basketball arena too even though they just had a huge scandal/rebuilding period just a few years ago. The sky is the limit at UGA it seems. At Tech it is the same old "can't even inbound the ball" crap every single year. It seems like CPH only recruits 6'8 guys that can run fast, jump high, and athletic but cannot dribble, pass, or create. There offense is a joke. It consists of one guy dribbling the ball and four guys standing there around the 3-point line watching. And their defense consists of three guys collapsing on the inside pass only to have the inside guy feed it to the wide open three. OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
damn pretty fly ....
i guess you better tell all those white european teams that are beating america's best pro's that they aren't supposed to do that eh. i dont recall that happening with such regularity until the nba became the ghetto ball league.
we invented the sport and now our pros are routinely taken to school by those poor non=athletic white players from europe.
the only reason its a black man's game is because while most ethnicities are stressing education first and foremost blacks in the ghettoes look at bb as their only way out. bb in the ghetto is like the lottery. they all hope to win the lottery or nothing. more often than not it is nothing.
funny but if you look at the top teams in the ncaa they are littered with plenty of good white players.
they just dont make it at gt 'at the moment' is all. now why is that?
no way can i imagine that there werent better white players than our player from senegal available still.
i do believe that paul hewitt has a hard time recruiting white players. maybe he just cant relate???????
Good grief "oh man" give me a M-F break! If 7-5 in football with a bowl game combined with a mediocre basketball team is the "all-time low" of our program then we must have the greatest athletics program in the history of mankind. Quit your bitching. Ask Notre Dame (2-9 in football w/ back to back , lost to our "pathetic" basketball team) about all-time lows. Pour out your heart to a Baylor or a Buffalo grad and see if you get any pity for how terrible our athletic situation is. Yes, it sucks that UGAg has better football and basketball programs than us. Big surprise - they also have a $#@% ton more money than us to build those programs.
This coaching search is introducing the Jacket Nation to a little thing called Karma. When you run off a good man like Chan Gailey who has done nothing but win and improve the foundation of your program, other people will take notice. Coaches have to deal with alot in their jobs and they will think twice about working for a school that has a bunch of complaining wanna-be jocks for fans.
when exactly did Chan win? again, on TALENT ALONE this team can win 7 games. and as for chan's recruiting... there are 2 types of recruiting
1. Getting the guy you want - which admittedly chan did a pretty good job of brining in talent
2. Keeping the guys who dont come to you, from going to your enemy! CHAN WAS TERRIBLE AT THIS.
If the bulk of your recruits are in-state, then your goal as coach is to get them to come to tech. if they don't, then you keep them from going to UGA and the 8 schools in immediate competition for your state's recruits (i.e. Clemson, SC, Auburn, Alabama, Tennessee, Florida, Florida State, Miami). There's nothing wrong with losing a GA recruit to OSU or USC or Texas or Oklahoma...but there is somethign wrong when we're happy that we got the #4 and 5 recruits in the state to come to Tech when #1,2,3 all went to UGA!
We can run the tecmo bowl offense and win 7 games, especially when you play Army, Samford, Duke, UNC every year... Just run UP + B...
Mr. "We can win 7 on talent alone"... Won't you be surprised when we don't win 7 this year! Listen, if we won 7 automatically on talent then Chan wouldn't have been the first coach in Tech history to coach more than one game (sorry Mac McWhorter) and have never had a losing season.
And you're really bitching about Chan losing recruits 1,2,and 3 to Georgia and getting 4 and 5? You are apparently new to the state of Georgia. Let me let you in on a little secret. Our hated rival to the north has ALWAYS gotten the best recruits. ALWAYS. With the exception of the influx of G.I. Bill military guys in the late 40s through the 50s we have always had a talent deficit to the dawgs. Don't know why? Drive through any parking lot in Georgia outside of Atlanta and start counting bumper stickers. I guarantee that 90% of the time (the other 10% would be corporate parking lots of engineering-heavy businesses) Georgia G's will outnumber GT's AT LEAST 5 to 1. The fact that Chan got 4 and 5 at all says that he beat the odds. Look at our history at recruiting from the top 11 players in Georgia:
http://ghsfha.org/super11.php?aYear=2006
Chan (or Giff) did better than any GT coach since they started the Super11 at recruiting top GA talent.
But the past is past - bring on Paul Johnson. Thankfully we got a good guy. Hopefully we won't run him out on a rail if he doesn't win 10 games a year like our neigbors UGA (also known as "the Joneses")
no. i'm not complaining that the top georgia guys went to UGA...they have the money, they have the alumni support and resources to pursuade big name recruits (40,000 students to 13,000 students will do that to you...)
i'm complaining about all the other IN-STATE talent that he lost to direct competitors. I lived in Georgia all my life, and now i live in Austin Texas, where football is king. Texas has way too much talent, and way too few BIG name schools fighting for it, so its easy for Mack to keep people in texas. He has Oklahoma, LSU, and Texas A&M. And i'll tell you, Texas fans HATE losing recruits to Oklahoma, and if you look closely on that team, there are not more than 10 people, if that from outside of texas.
Obviously GA is probably a distant 5th or 6th in HS football (Texas, Ohio, Florida, California, Pennsylvania)...but there is a lot of talent here, and every year you see less and less GA people on Tech's roster and more and more of them on Clemson, NCST, Maryland, Florida State, etc... which are our direct rivals. My point is that chan did a great job brining in the talent he did, and was probably better than any recruiter we've had...but he was terrible at keeping weapons out of the hands of our enemies. I have no problem going out of state to recruit, and for tech to be successful, we have to recruit out of state...but not at the expense of your own home grown talent...
And yes, we won 7 games on talent alone. had we had any interference from our coaching staff at all... Perhaps we would have adjusted defensive schemes against Boston College? Called a more adequate 2pt conversion call against Maryland instead of the ridiculous shot-gun run to choice? put a RB in the backfield with Nesbitt in the game instead of a fullback (its hard enough to put him in the game when every expects him to run, but to put Cox back there with him and make him completely 1-dimensional is terrible..but again, on TALENT ALONE, he got 7-8yards per carry)? kept our safeties back to actually play their position against virginia so their TE's didnt catch passes BEHIND our defense?
Its just like LSU this year...with any semblance of coaching from Les Miles, that team is undefeated. People praise him because he is daring and goes for it on 4th downs, etc... NO! He HAD TO GO FOR IT ON 4th DOWN, otherwise he would have lost all those games. The talent on that team OVERCAME his ineptitude as a head coach. and the same is true for tech with Gailey..
What good is it bringing in talent if you vastly underutilize it? (Dwyer, Michael Johnson, Morgan Burnet, hell, even Calvin was under-used).
as for this "Georgia G's will outnumber GT's AT LEAST 5 to 1" ... that is GT's fault. GT fans criticize people who are UGA fans who didn't go to Georgia. we're not the power house we were 100 years ago, ...and we need the support of our community. we need more people who aren't alumni to be fans and show support, thats what helps build a program
but you're right...the past is the past, so why argue semantics over an ex-coach. look to the future. this is the chance tech needs to redefine who they are, and build our fan base. sorry for the lengthy post
Post a Comment