- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: When does Paul Johnson get canned from Ga Tech?
Posted on 12/1/12 at 10:54 pm to NorthshoreTiger76
Posted on 12/1/12 at 10:54 pm to NorthshoreTiger76
Theres a soft spot in my heart for the option so i root for them/him 
Its the most fun offense to watch when run properly and with success
Its the most fun offense to watch when run properly and with success
0
Posted on 12/1/12 at 10:55 pm to mattz1122
They're in the ACC not the SEC. Only 4 other schools in the conference even care about football. I don't know the numbers but I can't imagine BC, Maryland, Duke, Wake and the like are more committed to their program than GT.
Posted on 12/1/12 at 11:00 pm to saintsfan22
Tons of talent in ga but Tech can't get every kid. Would never make it into school. Paul Johnson has struggled to find a decent qb but I believe he has 2 on his roster now that can put us over the edge. I will give him another year or 2 before I'm fully on the fire CPJ train
Posted on 12/1/12 at 11:03 pm to ATLwreck
Paul Johnson is a great coach but he needs to hire a couple of ace recruiters, there is NO good reason for GT lacking talent at FB/HB.
This post was edited on 12/1/12 at 11:05 pm
Posted on 12/1/12 at 11:23 pm to saintsfan22
quote:
Ga Tech is surrounded by all kinds of talent in a city you can easily convince 18 year olds to live in, especially black ones.
Well when your football players have to take calculus it's hard to put together an elite team.
We don't have the easy liberal arts majors to go along with the top tier majors like a ND or Stanford for the athletes to coast along through.... another unfortunate consequence of this is there aren't many women on campus which hurts recruiting.
I don't really care that Paul Johnson won with Gailey's recruits ... Gailey coulsn't win with Gailey's recruits.
quote:quote:
Are academic requirements a factor?
If UNC could grease them through the system for years GT should be able to.
we have a bit more academic integrity
Posted on 12/1/12 at 11:27 pm to ctalati32
quote:
Well when your football players have to take calculus it's hard to put together an elite team.
Stanford managed, even Northwestern to a smaller degree. And I'm sure ya'll have nerds to do their work for them.
quote:
we have a bit more academic integrity
Posted on 12/1/12 at 11:33 pm to ctalati32
quote:
another unfortunate consequence of this is there aren't many women on campus which hurts recruiting.
Yeah, isn't there some ridiculously disproportionate guy/girl ratio at GT?
Posted on 12/1/12 at 11:38 pm to brewhan davey
quote:
Yeah, isn't there some ridiculously disproportionate guy/girl ratio at GT?
Yeah the year after I graduated it got to the best guy-girl ratio in its history... it was 70-30.
Posted on 12/1/12 at 11:39 pm to ctalati32
quote:
Yeah the year after I graduated it got to the best guy-girl ratio in its history... it was 70-30.
Define best
This post was edited on 12/1/12 at 11:39 pm
Posted on 12/1/12 at 11:39 pm to saintsfan22
quote:
Stanford managed, even Northwestern to a smaller degree. And I'm sure ya'll have nerds to do their work for them.
Again we don't have the BS liberal arts majors for the athletes to coast through.
Plus every student has to take calculus and physics, you can't avoid it in the liberal arts majors
Posted on 12/1/12 at 11:47 pm to brewhan davey
quote:quote:
Yeah the year after I graduated it got to the best guy-girl ratio in its history... it was 70-30.
Define best
As in when I was there it was 28% girls and it's finally 30% girls ... though then you have to imagine the type of girls that would actually go to an engineering school and getting that much in return
Posted on 12/1/12 at 11:50 pm to ctalati32
Good gracious.. I'm sorry that was your college experience. My aunt went to MIT for biochemical engineering (she's a very attractive woman, btw, and has a very outgoing personality as well - you would never peg her as the engineering type). I can imagine she would have had to fight off several advances.
Posted on 12/1/12 at 11:51 pm to ctalati32
According to your website ya'll have a Business school:
-Stick the whole football team in there
-Get them better "tutors"
-Recruit like a real school
As for the lack of girls there's plenty of quality college aged tail in ATL even if they aren't GT's campus.
-Stick the whole football team in there
-Get them better "tutors"
-Recruit like a real school
As for the lack of girls there's plenty of quality college aged tail in ATL even if they aren't GT's campus.
Posted on 12/1/12 at 11:56 pm to ctalati32
Let's play a little "blind resume"...
These are the total 2002-2011 records for Stanford, Georgia Tech, Vanderbilt and Northwestern in no particular order. Which is which?
1. 77-52
2. 62-62
3. 56-63
4. 37-83
These are the total 2002-2011 records for Stanford, Georgia Tech, Vanderbilt and Northwestern in no particular order. Which is which?
1. 77-52
2. 62-62
3. 56-63
4. 37-83
Posted on 12/2/12 at 12:03 am to NOTORlOUSD
N'western
Stanford
GT
Vandy
Stanford
GT
Vandy
Posted on 12/2/12 at 12:07 am to NOTORlOUSD
Which way are these schools trending about now?
My point is Ga Tech should be better than this.
quote:
1. 77-52
My point is Ga Tech should be better than this.
Posted on 12/2/12 at 12:08 am to brewhan davey
quote:
Good gracious.. I'm sorry that was your college experience.
After I realized I hated being an engineer I went back to school to do some post-bacc classes at LSU so I got some of the college experience
Posted on 12/2/12 at 12:13 am to ctalati32
Yeah, GA Tech needs some sort of BS "Engineering Sciences" degree or something like that.
Don't know what to tell you about the womenz though. They'll probably never want to go to Tech in general.
Don't know what to tell you about the womenz though. They'll probably never want to go to Tech in general.
Posted on 12/2/12 at 12:28 am to ctalati32
The answers were...
1. 77-52 - Georgia Tech
2. 62-62 - Northwestern
3. 56-63 - Stanford
4. 37-83 - Vanderbilt
Here is another "blind resume" - these are the offensive PPG and SOS values for Georgia Tech, LSU, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and Texas A&M. Which is which?
44.8 PPG, 31st SOS
39.0 PPG, 34th SOS
38.0 PPG, 43rd SOS
36.2 PPG, 47th SOS
31.4 PPG, 32nd SOS
30.2 PPG, 23rd SOS
26.8 PPG, 9th SOS
1. 77-52 - Georgia Tech
2. 62-62 - Northwestern
3. 56-63 - Stanford
4. 37-83 - Vanderbilt
Here is another "blind resume" - these are the offensive PPG and SOS values for Georgia Tech, LSU, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and Texas A&M. Which is which?
44.8 PPG, 31st SOS
39.0 PPG, 34th SOS
38.0 PPG, 43rd SOS
36.2 PPG, 47th SOS
31.4 PPG, 32nd SOS
30.2 PPG, 23rd SOS
26.8 PPG, 9th SOS
Posted on 12/2/12 at 1:09 am to ctalati32
quote:
As in when I was there it was 28% girls and it's finally 30% girls
Frick. That would suck. Also, I bet a good percentage of that 30% were probably ugly too.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News