What is everyone complaining about?

After 2008 and 2009, a lot of fans thought Tech was on it's way to becoming a contender. The air has been coming out of the balloon for four years now.

The reflex response for a lot of people is to fire the coach, but CPJ did not arrive at Tech as an assistant somewhere. He had a long history of success as a head coach at places where winning is not easy. He's also extremely competitive, and probably hates losing more than the fans. The limitations of Tech football are not going to disappear by changing the head coach.

Some of our opponents, like Miami, Clemson, and UGA are riding the crest right now, but they had down years recently. Hopefully, the planets will line up for us soon.
 
Does this chart take into account that we play more games now? That needs to be taken into consideration.

It might be a better idea to chart based upon number of games won/number of games played.
 
BarrelORum said:
Chart winning percentage not wins. It would be more reflective.
Click to expand...

TechFan85 said:
Does this chart take into account that we play more games now? That needs to be taken into consideration.

It might be a better idea to chart based upon number of games won/number of games played.
Click to expand...


See Post #16 for that chart.


jts1207 said:
And take out FCS wins
Click to expand...


No need to do that, since we have always played 1 or 2 weak teams just about every year.
 
Can we adjust for years where we had crappy coaching and/or inadequate QB play?
 
ContactBuzz said:
Can we adjust for years where we had crappy coaching and/or inadequate QB play?
Click to expand...


:lol:


I'm surprised no one has come in with the whole "strength of schedule is weaker now than then" argument.
 
Chart cost per win based on the coach's salary. Ideally, it would be the cost of the entire coaching staff, but I'm not sure that data is readily available. If you do that, CCG is kicking CPJ's arse because he averaged about the same # of wins for about half the cost. Not that I'm a CCG fan because I'm not...but just saying. :pop:
 
Here's an interesting look at strength of schedule over the years.

From: http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/rankings/2001-2010_decade_team_rankings.php


Decade - Rank
1941-1950 - 20
1951-1960 - 16
1961-1970 - 21
1971-1980 - 42
1981-1990 - 38
1991-2000 - 39
2001-2010 - 25

So, it looks like our current schedule strengths are higher than at any time since Dodd. And, they are more or less the same as the Dodd era.

EDIT: Corrected the rankings to reflect the strength of schedule per that website.
 
Last edited:
coit said:
  • Longest streak of 6 wins or better ever.
Click to expand...

What does this even mean? We won 31 straight under Bobby Dodd.

EDIT: You mean on a per-season basis. Who cares though? We played 14 games last year and only won 7.
 
bwolff said:
And take out lower division teams as stated above.
Click to expand...


You take out the lower division teams as stated above. Be sure to take the equilvalent teams out of every year as well. Or, maybe read the whole thread?
 
coit said:
Here's an interesting look at strength of schedule over the years.

From: http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/rankings/2001-2010_decade_team_rankings.php


Decade - Rank
1941-1950 - 9
1951-1960 - 5
1961-1970 - 19
1971-1980 - 35
1981-1990 - 32
1991-2000 - 39
2001-2010 - 22

So, it looks like our current schedule strengths are higher than at any time since Dodd.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but your link doesn't go to a page of 'schedule strength' rankings, but overall program rankings over various time periods.
 
daBuzz said:
Chart cost per win based on the coach's salary. Ideally, it would be the cost of the entire coaching staff, but I'm not sure that data is readily available. If you do that, CCG is kicking CPJ's arse because he averaged about the same # of wins for about half the cost. Not that I'm a CCG fan because I'm not...but just saying. :pop:
Click to expand...

I hear a lot of people complaining about the poor ROI that CPJ is giving us... but why do we fans care about that? So the AA has a $1 mil less to spend on something else... so what?
 
18in32 said:
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but your link doesn't go to a page of 'schedule strength' rankings, but overall program rankings over various time periods.
Click to expand...

I must've copied the wrong link. The data I was working from was sorted by schedule strength. Let me check that.
 
Just being picky here, but:

coit said:
As for FCS opponents, according to this link, we have played at least one FCS school in most years.

In the early 50s, Dodd was playing two weak teams out of 10 (such as Davidson and Tulane) so I think it is fair to leave the ones in the modern era in, especially since we have a lost to a few of the weak teams we have scheduled.
Click to expand...

Tulane was in the SEC. They happened to be (usually) weak, but they were not from a lower division. Think Duke.
 
The M-Train said:
EDIT: You mean on a per-season basis. Who cares though? We played 14 games last year and only won 7.
Click to expand...


Still 6 or more. We never won 5 regular season and made it to a bowl game, so consider it 6 or more in the regular season.
 
coit said:
You take out the lower division teams as stated above. Be sure to take the equilvalent teams out of every year as well. Or, maybe read the whole thread?
Click to expand...

People won't be satisfied until the data shows what they want it to. May as well add in the acceptance rate of incoming Tech students to see how getting into Tech has changed over the years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top