Why the Georgia Bulldogs Will Reclaim the State Championship from the Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets in 2009
by T Kyle King on Jun 21, 2009 4:17 PM EDT
in Football
Email
PrintThat 34-14 thing may have been one of Pepper’s few errors since he came rolling back to the old campus campaigning like a circus ringmaster. A Georgia Bulldog is no elephant, but he never forgets when it comes to something like Tech. . . . It was gloating time. . . . The Technicians and ilk wallowed in it. They rollicked and rolled slogans off their tongues all winter. Georgians were spitting mad. They went home and spent the winter smarting, like wounded bears in caves.
Furman Bisher
The Atlanta Journal
November 28, 1975
Being a loyal denizen of Bulldog Nation, I am no friend to Furman Bisher. That said, optimistic Georgia fans are attempting to temper their confidence, so I suppose I should reciprocate by making some effort to curb my unremitting pessimism . . . hence, the Bisher quotation above, a juxtaposition which I now will endeavor to explain.
Not long after last autumn’s season-sinking debacle against the Yellow Jackets, I compared Paul Johnson to Pepper Rodgers. The analogy seemed to me then, and seems to me now, apt.
It’s not hard to see the parallels. Coach Rodgers, like Coach Johnson, arrived at the Flats with prior head coaching experience at two previous stops and installed an option offense. In their respective first seasons (1974 and 2008), each took a Yellow Jacket squad to Athens on a cold, wet, miserable day and hung an embarrassingly high point total on the Bulldogs between the hedges.
It’s high time we took that analogy to its logical conclusion.
As Bisher noted in the Atlanta papers just before the 1975 clash between the two teams, the insufferable attitude of the Ramblin’ Wreck faithful after the establishment of a one-game winning streak under a first-year head coach served only to fire up the Red and Black, making them more determined than ever to reassert what any even remotely unbiased observer recognizes is Georgia’s natural dominance over Georgia Tech. If you’re like me, you’ve been on the receiving end of quite a bit more crap from the Georgia Tech faithful in the last seven months than you ever dished out in their direction in the preceding seven years.
In 1975, in the season finale at Grant Field, Vince Dooley pulled his starters at the end of the third quarter . . . after the ‘Dawgs had built up a 42-0 advantage on the Engineers.
I’m not saying it’ll be quite that lopsided in Bobby Dodd Stadium next November, but, the more I think about it, the more convinced I am that Bisher, who was right then, is right now, as well, and for the same reason.
I hope one in a row was fun for y’all, nerds. I know winning’s a rarity for you, so you don’t quite know how to handle it when it happens, but try not to be quite so obnoxious about it next time. Payback is coming, and there’s a saying about payback with which you ought to be familiar, since payback is what you’ve been of ours for 33 of the last 45 years.
Go ‘Dawgs! . . . the male ones, anyway.
46 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Lol
Oh young one,
You sure do have a lot to learn about Paul Johnson.
I have a feeling you’ll pick up a few things this November.
Thanks for proving my point . . .
. . . and also for perpetuating your endless obsession with us by continuing the “George P. Burdell” myth established to honor the Red and Black’s first starting quarterback, George Butler.
In the meantime, lose the condescending attitude or go someplace else.
By the way . . . nice job against L.S.U. You sure have come a long way from five losses every year to only four, haven’t you?
Go 'Dawgs!
Just sticking to the facts
Not trying to get personal here, just trying to have a fair debate.
It seems your argument for why UGA will win next year boils down to:
1. GT once had a coach that beat UGA in his first year, then they lost after that.
2. Now UGA will take Tech seriously.
3. LSU torched Tech.
Regarding #1, one GT coach’s record 30-something years ago doesn’t have any impact one way or another to the current times.
As for #2, there probably is something to that.
With #3, one LSU DE was a first round draft pick and another DT was drafted. GT’s QB was recently quoted saying the LSU D-line was the strongest and fastest they faced by far. It is certainly possible with UGA’s recruiting that the talent is there, but it wasn’t last year and it will take some work to get a D-Line that matches UGA’s. But GT fell apart on special teams in the Peach Bowl. The offense and defense may have been sub-par, but they shouldn’t have been torpedoed. Special teams lost it. I think LSU’s coaches had a lot of tricks up their sleeves. In the UGA/GT game, the special teams probably were both poor, but a wash. (Two missed two-point conversions against GT; the kickoff fumble in the third, two kickoffs going out of bounds against UGA.) So you can’t really say, “Ha, LSU smoked GT, now we will too!” I guarantee that if there was anything scheme-wise, the GT coaches have also studied it and have planned adjustments.
Looking at the other side, here are factual reasons why GT fans can be excited:
1. GT is bringing almost everyone back on offense and all but the D-line on defense. The D-line and special teams are indeed our concerns this year. What does UGA need to replace? The #1 pick at quaterback, another first rounder, a second rounder, two third round picks and a 6th rounder. Again, with the recruiting classes UGA has, its possible to get a similar amount of talent (whether it is concentrated among a few potential high picks or spread out among a larger number of above average but not elite players.) However, everything would have to go UGA’s way.
2. GT was in its first year running this offense. They’re going to get better. Already reports are out that players are more comfortable than even at the end of last year. Yes, UGA will be seeing it for the second time, but what would be better: to be practicing it every week for a second year, or to see it again for one more week run by a practice squad. Maybe you might take a few extra days during the preseason to prepare for it, but still. I’ll take practicing it the whole season vs. seeing it live in one game and against the scout team for a week and a half.
3. GT is adding the run and shoot part of the offense. Many forget that at Hawaii and even GSU, PJ’s offense had a viable passing threat. If I remember correctly, at least one of his QBs was a highly rated passer. At Navy, he didn’t have the offensive line to protect the passer (my understanding is they had weight limits at the Academy) so the passing game was extremely limited due to poor protection. Likewise last year, the offensive line had the most trouble adjusting the the scheme. It seems that PJ concentrated on installing the running game because time was limited and because he didn’t have the types of players needed (or they didn’t pick it up fast enough) on the line. With another year of practice and recruiting that is bound to get better. As many have surmised it can’t get worse.
4. Overconfidence of GT’s foes. I’ve heard many fans say, “oh, now that we’ve seen it once, we’ll adjust and beat it. Plus we can see how VT/UNC/LSU beat it.” I don’t expect other team’s coaches to think the same. As PJ has said (paraphrasing) they had 25 years of film on the offense, how much is one more year going to help? Of course if there is anything VT/UNC/LSU did scheme-wise, GT’s coaches are going to adjust/add wrinkles. He’s probably seen most of these things before and already knows the adjustments to make. (Like I think he did at the UGA/GT halftime last year.) Plus last year won’t have the passing game that this year should have.
5. GT always takes UGA seriously.
6. It’s at home for GT.
So it boils down to:
GT beat UGA last year. Maybe some of that was emotion. But even if that was a factor:
- UGA has a lot of talent to replace while GT has most starters returning.
- GT’s offense will be more comfortable with the system while defenses will still have less time to study/practice it than GT has to get better at it.
- GT’s offense will be more varied with a better passing threat.
- GT can study film and adjust just as much as opposing defenses can.
- GT gets the game at home.
All of that points to a lot of factors UGA has to overcome and I for one don’t think “taking GT seriously again” is enough.
First of all, thanks for trying to have a civilized discussion
Home field advantage is meaningless. For years, Georgia Tech wouldn’t allow aerial shots of the game when Georgia played in Atlanta because it was obvious how many Bulldog fans were present. Since 1965, Georgia is 15-7 against Georgia Tech in Athens and 17-5 against Georgia Tech in Atlanta. Mark Richt has a higher winning percentage on the road than at home. Grant Field simply isn’t a factor.
Variations of option-based offenses are making a comeback in college football, necessitating that all defensive coordinators adjust to them. One of the changes between 1974 and 1975 was a shift in Erk Russell’s defense from the Oklahoma “50” to the Split 60, with a shift from four down linemen on the defensive front to two down linemen. Coach Russell (who, by the way, was the man responsible for moving Paul Johnson to the offensive side of the ball) said this made his defense weaker against the power-I but stronger against the veer and the wishbone. We’re not just talking about adjusting to one option-based team; Florida, Auburn, and Georgia Tech all will run some variation of that scheme. When your three biggest rivals run some variation of it, you get serious about stopping it.
Finally, there is this distinction between 1974 and 2008: Georgia Tech beat the hell out of Georgia in 1974, outscoring the Bulldogs 34-14 when facing the worst Georgia defense ever. Georgia’s 2009 offense will have had an entire season to come together as a unit by the time “clean old-fashioned hate” rolls around in November.
On the other hand, this fact remains a fact: Georgia Tech beat the worst Georgia defense in many years by three points in 2008. Had the Bulldogs made even one second-half stop, Georgia would have won the game. Georgia Tech may be better in 2009, but there is no margin for error on the Yellow Jackets’ part.
Once again, though, I thank you for putting forth the effort to participate in a civilized discussion. Nice job.
Go 'Dawgs!
by T Kyle King on Jun 21, 2009 11:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Fair point about home field. I was only counting on the game not having a home field advantage in Athens for the dogs. I’m a realist and unfortunately, Bobby Dodd stadium isn’t much of a home field advantage for the Tech/UGA game. I didn’t look back (as you did) to see it pretty much doesn’t matter one way or another.
Interesting point about your biggest rivals all going to an option/spread offense. But many think Tech’s is different. To the naysayers, that means Tech’s can be more easily figured out for some reason, maybe because it is more run oriented or the QB is under center, etc. But you seem to think it is similar enough that the preparation for the shotgun/more pass oriented spread offenses will carry over against Tech’s. As for me, I’m drinking the PJ kool-aid… I think he’s amazing at recognizing how a defense is playing against him and adjusting (at half-time or even between series) to exploit the defense’s approach. I think he (or any exceptional coach) could do that regardless of the system, but obviously he feels this offense is good at finding mismatches and is easy to adjust to find different mismatches. I think that’s why the system works so well for him.
Finally, you mention the margin of error is slim for GT since the win was only by a field goal. But you forgot my strongest points:
- GT has a lot of talent returning, while UGA has a lot to replace. There’s at least some room for error there, depending on how well the new starters for UGA perform.
- GT will be more comfortable with its offense. I know you said that because your biggest rivals are running similar offenses (although many would say Tech’s is different) I still think that 18 weeks and 10 games at full speed is better than 3 or even 5 or 6 weeks against a practice squad and 2 prior games.
So I’d say there is room for error.
Interesting Points but...
UGA really only lost 4 guys- Stafford, Moreno, MoMass, Danelle Ellerbe. Granted they were some of the best players on the team but they are replaceable and especially by the time the LAST game of the regular season rolls around. While GT has most of its starters returning, they are replacing an entire defensive line that was vital in stopping the run. I think the new replacements for the Tech defensive line will be serviceable but its hard to match the output of last year.
While were on the subject of defense, you won the game last year but you allowed over 500 yards offense with those senior defensive lineman. While Matthew Stafford who threw 407 of those yards is gone but it’s not as if Deion Sanders is playing cover corner for the Jackets now is it? Another thing, I believe AJ Green on the field had a more profound effect on Matthew Stafford’s improved Junior season than people are giving him credit for. So why can’t he help out Joe Cox just the same?
Your point about Tech’s offense implement the pass is duely noted but I am not sure that is a good thing. The Jackets and Paul Johnson have a nitch which is running the option almost all the time. They are overpowering when they are prodominantly running the ball. When they try to mix it up like say against LSU, you are going to get your tail handed to you everytime. Why would you want to ruin a good thing? So by all means Georgia Tech, pass away. Pass as much as you want. I just think its bad idea.
Tech getting the bye week to study more film or more importantly to get healthy for the game is noted. Then again, you had 5 weeks to prepare for LSU and they still beat you like you stole something.
GT gets the game at home- This point is also duely noted but you people are not exactly good at taking advantage of home field advantage in this series atleast in the past 20 years. In a game were tickets are so easy to get I am not sure if this is a real factor.
IF Georgia is healthy unlike last year and is playing well coming into the Tech game, I fully expect Georgia to defeat Tech.
by cousinwalter on Jun 22, 2009 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions
D-Line is a concern and there is some talent to replace. However, many (even last year) said sophomore Derrick Morgan was the most talented guy on the D-line. The other backups were rotated in frequently so hopefully there is good talent, but it is a concern.
On the other hand, Tech’s secondary is a definite strength. Actually, I do believe Safety Morgan Burnett has as much talent as anyone at the position. And I think the corners are very talented and run two deep as well.
Tech was banged up as well last year. Nesbitt was playing through injuries, the o-linemen were half backups, Dwyer had a nagging injury, our senior starting corner was out, etc. Actually, I thought last year the media was making a big deal about how beat up we were but not saying enough about the dogs injuries even though they were significant too. I’m surprised you didn’t pick up on Tech’s status considering I thought it was over-mentioned.
I think Morgan Burnett (specifically) is a definite strength but other than that its nothing to scream about (but not bad either).
I have heard much about Morgan but also a great deal about red-shirt freshman TJ Barnes(6-7,345) . These guys have great potential but Tech’s 2008 defensive line was one of the best in the nation, so I would think it would take a natural step back.
Tech had injuries last year but I figured since the line was sooooo young with the exception of Senior Andrew Gardner, I didn’t think it was that big of a deal. Plus, the entire team was learning a new system so does class year really matter? Gardner was just as much a freshman as the rest of them. By the time the Tech-Georgia game rolled around these kids knew what they were doing.
Georgia’s problem was more about depth in both numbers and experience. The DL had similiar problems and as result had not stop the run all season. Last year’s Georgia Tech victory over Georgia for me was a forgone conclusion. I DO NOT anticipate the same result this year.
As result of line shuffling the Georgia offensive and defensive line too should be much more experienced this season. IF (this is a big IF) both are healthy, I don’t care who is playing QB or running back, the Jackets are going down.
by cousinwalter on Jun 22, 2009 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions
I was at the game in 1974
It was the most miserable I have ever been at a game. It was raining pretty hard and it was just above freezing (it would have been better if it were snowing – the rain just soaked you to the bone). We just could not stop Tech in 1974, just like the third quarter of 2008. The weather conditions were terrible, the score was awful, and there were obnoxious Tech fans in our section.
The redemption came the next year when I was a freshman at UGA. The 1975 game had so many big plays, but none bigger than Tech’s Bucky Shamburger breaking loose for an apparently long TD run, only to be caught from behind and stripped of the ball by a hungry UGA defense.
The problem for us in 2009 is that we have no players that are capable of running down Dwyer and Jones.
Honestly
It seems to me that, at least in the minds of the team & staff, winning the Florida game is more important than the Tech game. Georgia Tech is Georgia Tech, but losing one out of the last eight is hardly enough to rile up our team and fan base enough to do Tech what UF did to us last year.
Florida is the presumptive national champion, Florida is our divisional rival, Florida has been dominant over us longer than we have been over Tech. I’m a younger fan, and I don’t claim that my perspective is any more relevant than that of people who have followed the program for decades. But personally, I’d rather our team and staff focus all their emotional and physical energy on torpedoing Florida’s championship run this Halloween. If ‘08 was Meyer’s “revenge” for ‘07, then ’09 needs to be Richt’s “revenge” for ’08 (if we win in Jax this year, I think Richt-Meyer becomes the most intense “coaching rivalry” in the country).
Maybe at the end of the season Richt and the players will take some umbrage at last season’s debacle and make a statement at Bobby Dodd. I would sure appreciate it. But as far as I can tell, if anything like that is going to happen, it’s going to happen in Jacksonville.
Leaving insightful football commentary and analysis to other people since 2006.
Fair point, but a slight correction
Georgia has been as dominant over Georgia Tech as Florida has been over Georgia.
From 1990 to 2008, the Gators were 16-3 over the Bulldogs. Florida enjoyed winning streaks of seven (1990-1996) and six (1998-2003) games during that stretch.
From 1991 to 2008, the Bulldogs were 14-4 over the Yellow Jackets, with three of Georgia Tech’s four wins coming in years in which the Engineers were fielding multiple academically ineligible athletes and two of Georgia Tech’s four wins coming in games in which clearly blown officiating calls decided games which would have gone the other way had instant replay then been in place. Georgia enjoyed two seven-game winning streaks (1991-1997 and 2001-2007) during that stretch.
We’ve owned them the way the Gators have owned us . . . which is another reason for thinking the Ramblin’ Wreck isn’t about to change the dynamic of the series. If 37-17 and 42-30 didn’t cause a shift in momentum, why would 45-42?
Go 'Dawgs!
Interesting way to count.
From everything I’ve read, GT’s academically ineligible athlete issue was caused by an administrator failing to file a form that basically said a routine course substitution (something like Bio 101 instead of Chem 101) could count toward a degree. This sort of change was routinely granted. GT got railroaded because it counted on the NCAA to show mercy on a first time offender that didn’t lawyer up (until the appeal).
In any case I’m not sure you want to go back and revise the records of the series based on wins that occurred with athletes rumored to be involved in NCAA probation issues.
Regarding blown calls, that’s a two way street. It’s pointless to debate the calls in each game in detail—I could likely re-watch and cite almost as many or more calls to dispute in the given games. But there were GT loses in recent years that had some egregious blown calls that would have meant a touchdown wouldn’t have happened and even where the complexion of the game changed. Again, what’s done is done, so I’m not arguing that, but I don’t think it is a fair point for you to make either.
You're underselling Georgia Tech's culpability considerably
It wasn’t an administrator failing to file a form; it was the complete absence of oversight (or even the existence of a compliance officer) over a period of at least seven years. (I say “at least seven” because that’s the period covered by the N.C.A.A. investigation. There’s no particular reason to think the problem didn’t go back even farther.) Multiple athletes who were not academically eligible took the field over a period of several years, including Joe Hamilton, without whom the Yellow Jackets would not have won many of those games. This may have been due to incompetence rather than malfeasance, but, at best, no one in the Georgia Tech program was minding the store for a very long time.
Obviously, there are erroneous calls in every game, but rarely will you see them made as badly and as decisively as in the 1998 and 1999 Georgia-Georgia Tech games. In the former, Joe Hamilton clearly fumbled in bounds late in the game. Had the Yellow Jackets not improperly retained possession, they would not have kicked the game-winning field goal.
Jasper Sanks’s phantom fumble was even worse. Not only was Sanks clearly down, but, once the ball came out, a Georgia Tech player picked up the ball in the end zone, a Georgia player grabbed him before he took the ball out, and then the whistle blew. A ball can’t be both a live ball and a dead ball at the same time; it isn’t Schroedinger’s cat. Either Sanks was down, and Georgia has the ball inside the five, or it was a fumble, in which case the play should have continued and Georgia would have had a safety. Either way, the question is whether Georgia’s margin of victory is two, three, or seven points; the refs blew the call so egregiously that they were suspended for the following week’s S.E.C. championship game. I don’t believe any debatable calls against Georgia Tech even remotely rose to that level of undeniable error.
Go 'Dawgs!
by T Kyle King on Jun 22, 2009 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions
Watch out
Here comes the “but Reggie Ball was down in 2006 when Tony Taylor picked up the ball and scored a TD” complaints.
http://hobnailboot.wordpress.com/
Thanks for the correction
I personally hope the situations are analogous — Florida: Georgia :: Georgia : Georgia Tech and all. But I just don’t see that much of a intense drive to beat them this year. Even from the fans, what I’ve sense around here, was that the Florida loss was the one that really killed and the Tech loss was, after Alabama and Florida, just another kick while we were down.
I hope we beat Tech next year. But I think it would take another loss to really turn the attention their way. As long as the existence of a powerful Florida automatically disqualifies us form participation in the SEC and Nat’l Champ games (in public perception and in reality), the Tech rivalry is bound to be number 2.
Leaving insightful football commentary and analysis to other people since 2006.
I'm not sure whose point this argues
But David Hale has a quite timely blog post for us.
Leaving insightful football commentary and analysis to other people since 2006.
Replying to myself again . . .
Marc Weiszer has a similar article here. According to him, the picture attached to the above Hale link is actually a poster hung around Butts-Mehre (this wasn’t made explicit in his post). Direct link here .
This makes me all kinds of happy. Hopefully a few Bulldogs have the same feelings re: taking clippings off the hedges that Kyle does.
Leaving insightful football commentary and analysis to other people since 2006.
I hope so
Florida is much more important for many reasons, including the ones you mentioned.
The most important reason is because they are an SEC rival. The Tech game is important in a pride sense, but in a football sense, it’s always the 9th-most important game on the schedule.
by Hobnail_Boot on Jun 22, 2009 9:21 AM EDT up reply actions
It was bound to happen
UGA can’t win them all, just most all of them! Poor 3rd quarter play, zero tackling and a kicker who gave Tech the ball at their 40 three times will usually lead to a loss. Things will be back to normal come December. Go Dawgs.
"Crime cannot be tolerated. Criminals thrive on the indulgence of society's understanding
Agreed and...
If it was up to me, I’d rather have lost to Tech last year than in say 2007 when we had all the momentum going into bowl season. The 2008 campaign was disappointing on many levels and considering that the SECCG and NC were out of the picture, I’d rather lose to GT when nothing was really on the line.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m tired of seeing 45-42. But to T Kyle’s point, I don’t remember seeing 51-7 paraded around the state and shoved in Tech fan’s faces after the 2002 UGA drubbing of the Techies. Just like Vandy, in the Richt era we generally beat GT. Last year was a fluke and we couldn’t get a good grip (pun intended) on their trick/mathematical offense. Paul Johnson seems to be a solid coach, but I expect us to right the ship this year.
Excellent article.
Although I’m not totally sure about the comparison of Rodgers to Johnson, who seems more like an all-around tough guy compared to Pepper, who played under the kinder, gentler influence of Coach Dodd. Its too early to say Tech football and the rivalry with UGA are back, but my perception is that GT found a good one (why Nebraska didn’t go after him I’ll always wonder). I find it interesting that there are multiple large rivalries on the UGA schedule (UF, UT, Auburn) that in so many ways outshine the Tech rivalry. Same goes for old Clemson rivalry of 20 years or so ago during Ford/Dooley days. Thus it is easy for a relative outsider like myself to claim that Georgia really does not care that much about rivalry with GT. But its worth noting that the last coach to lose three in a row to the Engineers was summarily dismissed. As desperately as Dawgs want to drop Florida down a notch or three, IMO they consider victory over Tech as one of their birthrights. I think Dogs will be baying for Tech blood this year.
Good point . . .
. . . and, to underscore your argument, it’s actually the case that the last two Georgia coaches to lose three straight to Georgia Tech were fired: Jim Donnan (1998-‘99-2000) and Johnny Griffith (1961-’62-’63). The results of those coaching changes, of course, were the hirings of Mark Richt and Vince Dooley.
The last Georgia coach to lose as many as three in a row to Georgia Tech and survive was Wally Butts, who was facing Bobby Dodd’s Yellow Jackets at that point. Coach Butts had already delivered conference titles and major bowl wins by then, so he was insulated . . . but there was plenty of grumbling in the ’50s.
Go 'Dawgs!
Ah, that's good stuff
Man, I love a rivalry. And say what you will about about one win in 8, or 4 in 18 blah blah blah – if you’re stilling bellyaching seven months later, it’s a rivalry.
And I appreciate the gratuitous shots about ineligible players and blown calls (thanks again, Jasper). Nothing makes this Tech fan smile more than Dawgs whining about the ’99 game.
‘Cause you know what? In the end, nothing matters but the last game. If Georgia wins again in ’09, and historically speaking they likely will, the universe will feel like it’s back on its axis, and you can go back to your smug superiority “one out of 9 blah blah blah.” But until then, no argument you can possibly make can come close to this one word:
Scoreboard.
(hoping you saw the good-natured, clean old-fashioned hate in this post)
I've said it before and I'll say it again...
…it’s really only a rivalry if you enjoy beating a team more than you hate losing to them. For me, and several other Georgia fans under the age of 30, Tech doesn’t meet that standard. Sure we hate losing to them with a passion, but beating them has become our birthright. It’s like the Vandy game. Sure you want to win, because it would suck to lose to a team you’ve grown so accustomed to beating, but at the end of the day beating them results in nothing more than another ‘W’ in the win column when you were expecting one. It’s not really anything to hang your hat on. By following this criteria, the only two teams who I really consider rivals of Georgia’s are Auburn and Florida. I’m not saying that all Dawg fans share this sentiment, but several of my vintage do.
Sic 'em Dawgs
by ClassicCityDawg on Jun 22, 2009 8:22 PM EDT reply actions
It remains true that
a Georgia man only thinks about Tech when UGA loses to them, and a Tech man thinks about Georgia every day of his life.
It is also true that virtually no one actually likes Tech; they just hate Georgia.
I would like for my alma mater’s team to go ahead and avenge the 2008 game. Then, the Tech people can go back in their holes, and I can go back to ignoring them again.
I still enjoy beating Tech every year, so in my mind the rivalry is alive and kicking. Vandy isn’t a rivalry because Vandy fans don’t care. Vandy fans are more likely to root for UT than they are to root for Vandy. Vandy does not even care about Vandy! My cousin graduated from Vandy and remained a member of the bulldog nation the entire time he was in Nashville. Its that kind of school. Also, Vandy fans don’t constantly remind me of their starting salary on message boards.
by cousinwalter on Jun 22, 2009 10:32 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree somewhat but...
When you have to deal with such a horrible fanbase who is so used to losing, that they have no idea how to act when they win, you really want to beat the hell out of them every year. They barely win by 3 points and you hear things like “blowout” and “ass-kicking” and “beat-down.” Even the idiot AJC reporters use those terms.
It’s really pathetic.
To try to summarize....
1) For all the talk about Tech’s mediocrity under Gailey, the Dirt Daubers have actually reestablished themselves as a consistent winning program. And they now clearly have a good coach. We Dawg fans should stipulate that, and try to get used to this game mattering again—though obviously less to us than to them, for lots of reasons, including their lack of intense rivalries in the ACC (with the possible exception of Clemson), as opposed to our many issues with Florida, Auburn, Tennessee and even SC.
2) Yes, Tech may actually be better this year, and yes, Georgia should be better prepared, and yes, there will be a revenge factor. The decisive issue will probably be whether we avoid injuries, and also whether some of our very talented young players all over the roster start emerging by the end of the year. The overall talent gap is pretty large, so if everything is equal, we should win handily. If not, who knows?
3) Maybe this is unfair, but Joe W. seems to be an unusually civil and rational Tech fan, which should make him welcome here when it’s relevant. But part of what motivated the Mayor to do this post is that yes, Tech fans by and large have vastly over-hyped last year’s win, and moreover, many love to get into the arrogant “you’re gonna work for us anyway” and anachronistic redneck smears that make Duke and Virginia fans so hated in their states. There’s a reason you don’t see many Georgia Tech banners around the state that goes beyond the school’s long-standing interest in enrolling a lot of out-of-state preppies.
4) Having said all this, there’s plenty of room for both schools, plenty of talent for both football teams, and plenty of reason to bring back the old-fashioned “hate” but keep it clean.
Personally, I went to high school in Lockheed Country many years ago, where you could barely stir the engineers with a stick, so the game will always matter to me. And I’ll be very happy if we start another long winning streak in ’09, and even happier if Tech dominates the ACC and loses to us every year.
donkeydawg, you hit the nail on the head with point #3
This is why I hate Georgia Tech with every burning rage that exists in my body. The ridiculous chants of “at least I went to the school”/“I make this much more than you”/“rednecks”/“you’re going to work for me one day” crap plus the vast belief that the results of a single 3 point win are enough to reverse 40 years of history. I hail from Augusta where I’ve seen more than my fair share of what Techies call “Wal Mart fans” sporting Tech gear. I’m 3 years into my career and ‘gasp’, there are Tech graduates that work under my supervision.
The final thing that makes me want to puke anytime I see a Tech fan is this incessant arrogance carried due to the 3 point win that happened last year over the worst defense in Athens in nearly 20 years. They are convinced that Paul Johnson is the second coming of Bobby Dodd. Just as Kyle has alluded to, I’ve never experienced this much trash talking/chest pumping after any win over Georgia in my lifetime (and that includes the 3 straight losses from 98-00) as I have from the 3 point win last year.
Kyle hates Auburn. I hate Tech, with a passion.
http://hobnailboot.wordpress.com/
And, just to sum up...
… I hate Florida.
(Sorry, seemed appropriate to interject it here.)
by vineyarddawg on Jun 23, 2009 11:37 PM EDT up reply actions
likewise
Likewise Tech fans get sick of being called/implied “nerds” and so on. Furthermore we have a lot of (well-deserved I think) pride in the school’s academics, which from my experiences/observations are minimally (if at all) compromised for our student athletes. Of course we’re going to point to those factors when other school’s student athlete’s have a 3+ GPA or better and their publicly posted resumes are filled with grammatical errors. (As just one example.)
Back to the football games, Tech fans are excited because last year should have been a rebuilding year for us. SI had us at around #80 in last year’s pre-season rankings. UGA was widely #1. Even before just before the Tech-UGA game we were 7 point (or more—my memory is foggy) underdogs. So yes, it was only a 3 point win. But I’ve written in detail in my other posts why GT fans think we’ll win again and more decisively. There have been some good, rational counterarguments to some of those points, but in my mind:
-UGA still has a lot of talent to replace while GT has only the D-line as a similar concern.
-Although UGA will see two other spread option teams (that are more pass-centric and shotgun based) 3-5 weeks to prepare against a scout team and 2 games isn’t the same as practicing it constantly and playing it every week.
But do you not find those claims silly and absurd?
You seem reasonable so that’s why I ask. I can’t stand it when a Tech fan decides that you have to have attended the school to be a true fan and that it gets used as a way to belittle UGA fans because presumably most of them did not attend the University. I don’t know why this sticks in my craw, but it just aggravates me and it presents this pompous attitude that Tech is superior than UGA when they are both fine institutions in their own rights. Maybe it only annoys me because I am an alum of UGA with two degrees and I would like to think that I’m fairly successful in life. Basically whenever I hear some Tech fan spouting off with that asinine statement I casually ask what is their favorite sports team. Upon reply, I ask them if they went to the University of “insert pro sports team”. That usually shuts them up real quick.
I’ve got no problem with Tech fans being excited. They should be. But the pompousness and the bravado I can do without. I find it hard to respect a fanbase that would rather see Georgia lose than their own team win.
http://hobnailboot.wordpress.com/
Yeah, one of the internal Tech fan discussions is that we need to be more inclusive and welcoming to people who didn’t attend.
OTOH, maybe I can shed some light on the pompous attitude for you. We all hate Tech in some ways when we’re there. Its tough academically and many are convinced the administration of other departments (parking, housing, etc.) are out to get you. Those may be issues elsewhere, but the academics amplify those issues. Sure, people can be successful regardless of what school they went to. And Tech folks need to be more polite (myself included probably) about how we talk about the pride in our academics. But the fact is Tech is nationally ranked in many (maybe even most) of its programs. I truly think I’ve seen UGA ranked in the top 20 for partying, pretty girls, don’t need to study, etc. more often than I’ve seen their academic programs in the top 20. (And in a couple of those cases, I’ve seen some criticism of the analysis.)
Regarding the pompousness and bravado, keep in mind you outnumber us by about 4 to 1. And since many Tech alums go out of state, in Georgia that is even larger. And because UGA has more non-alum fans, it is even larger. So if you’re catching flak from a few Tech people, they’ve been getting it from 5x, 6x maybe even 8x or 10x as much. (And don’t think that UGA fans are better behaved/don’t brag as much. I’d disagree. But even adjusting 10-20% or even 50% for that, the average Tech fan is taking more flak than you.) Further, as I’m sure you’re aware, its been several years since we’ve been able to brag about a win in football. If the shoe was on the other foot, I’d bet most would let out a few cracks.
Joe W, you seem like a reasonable fellow . . .
. . . but some of what you’re buying into is B.S., and 25-year-old B.S. at that.
First of all, Georgia and Georgia Tech are difficult to compare as academic institutions because of the nature of what each does. Georgia is the flagship institution of the state offering a broad-based liberal arts curriculum across multiple disciplines; Georgia Tech was created as a “hands on” (rather than M.I.T.-style theoretical) technical institution (hence “North Avenue Trade School,” which is an historical reality rather than an insult) designed to concentrate on fairly narrow fields of study. One school’s great strength is breadth; the other’s is depth.
Furthermore, approximately 36,000 students are enrolled at Georgia and approximately 12,000 are enrolled at Georgia Tech. (I apologize if those figures are slightly out of date, but, if they’re a little off, they’re not so off as to affect the point seriously.) You simply cannot compare institutions of such divergent sizes. The only fair comparison would be between the top one-third of Georgia students and the entire Georgia Tech student body. The differences in academic standards between the two are fairly small, and most assuredly are more than made up for by the bottom two-thirds of Georgia’s enrollment bringing down the average.
Most of us will grant that Georgia Tech is as good an academic institution overall as it is credited with being; most Georgia Tech fans seem to be living a quarter-century in the past, taking jabs at Georgia’s academic standards which were absurd even then, but which are the stuff of sheer fantasy today, when Georgia is increasingly difficult to get into and increasingly prestigious across a variety of fields.
A Georgia business school, journalism school, law school, pharmacy school, or veterinary school graduate is every bit as well educated in his area as a Georgia Tech graduate in an engineering discipline. Using “top 20” rankings is more than a bit misleading; Florida State doesn’t rank in the top 20 in total victories among college football teams because the Seminoles started playing football much later than any number of lesser programs. How many law schools are there in the country? How many aerospace engineering programs are there? I suspect there are far more of the former than the latter, so “top 20” comparisons aren’t just mathematically inexact, they’re silly. Trust me, I came out of the Joseph Henry Lumpkin School of Law as a hell of a, hell of a, hell of a lawyer, every bit as much so as any engineer who ever came out of Georgia Tech.
Do you seriously think that a school that has produced 21 Rhodes Scholars (six since 1996) is a weak academic institution? Do you seriously think that Joe Hamilton satisfied anything resembling stringent academic standards?
Try these numbers on for size: Georgia leads all Southern schools with 47 total football academic award recipients; Georgia Tech ranks fifth, with 27. Georgia has produced 13 N.C.A.A. post-graduate scholars in football and 52 in all sports; both marks rank first regionally and the latter ranks fifth nationally. Georgia Tech has produced seven post-graduate scholars in football and fewer than 13 (outside the top ten regionally) in all sports. Georgia and Georgia Tech are virtually tied for academic all-American football players (18 for Georgia Tech, 17 for Georgia), with Georgia producing a Top Six Award winner (Terry Hoage in 1984) and two Top Eight Award winners (Matt and Jon Stinchcomb in 1992 and 2002, respectively). Georgia has produced eleven National Football Foundation post-graduate scholars (first among Southern schools); Georgia Tech has produced fewer than three and is outside the top 15 regionally.
Finally, although all fan bases have their share of yahoos, I can honestly say that I have taken more crap from Georgia Tech fans over one win in the last seven months than I have dished out to Georgia Tech fans over seven wins in the preceding seven years. Even South Carolina fans don’t do the ridiculous level of crowing over a single three-point victory that Yellow Jacket fans do. I personally could dial up my individual obnoxiousness quotient tenfold and I wouldn’t be dishing out more than I’ve had to take from an in-state rival fan base that has such a disproportionate fixation on my alma mater that its entire tradition seems to be much more about hating us than about liking their own school.
Finally, as a Christian, I find the answer to the question, “What’s the good word?” (and the corresponding line from the Georgia Tech fight song) to be offensive beyond the power of words to describe. I don’t know whether you sing along with that despicable anthem—-I give you credit enough to assume that you do not—-but anyone who verbalizes his desire to see me burn in eternal damnation merely because I am true to my school has no business talking about anyone else’s obnoxiousness . . . none.
Go 'Dawgs!
We love The “North Avenue Trade School” nickname. (At least I do.) I think its taken as a humorous, ironic joke.
Anyway, so you’re saying if the top 1/3 of UGA students are comparable to Tech’s? I guess I could go along with that. Then you’re adding that the top 20 rankings aren’t a good analysis because there are far fewer engineering programs. That’s a fair point.. But even going along with that… I was being generous with the Top 20. In most of those lists I see Tech as top 10 or sometimes top 5 and occasionally #1 or #2 (and for the record AE is one of those.) Meanwhile I see UGA’s programs near the bottom of the top 50 if at all. And you’re right, they are inexact. But while fair arguments could be made with #9 is just as good as #6, unless the methodology is very weak it is hard to say #28 is as good as #4.
I don’t follow your top 20 FSU wins argument applying to the top 20 programs, however. It isn’t like the rankings of academic programs are based primarily on how many CEOs or CTOs or published authors or astronauts or full partner lawyers the program has produced all-time. Yes, if a program did produce many of them in recent years it would add to that program’s academic or professional prestige, but it isn’t a primary factor. A better analogy would be a ranking of the top 20 football programs of the past decade. In that case, FSU has had a few down years recently so it may or may not be there anymore. But take VT for example (as much as I hate to say it). They are clearly one of the top 20 programs of the last decade, even though their program doesn’t have nearly the most wins and wasn’t anywhere near a top 20 program until 12+ years ago.
Next you get into a bunch of very respectable numbers. But you fail to recognize the inherent difficulty of Tech’s classes. I’ve had more than just a couple of people drop out of Tech and continue on at UGA (among other places, to be fair) and say everything else was easy compared to Tech. Likewise I know of some who did their undergrad at Tech and a graduate degree at UGA (or vice versa) and they’ve all admitted Tech was much harder. So it’s no surprise to me that Georgia can have more football academic award winners, etc. Based on what those who have been to both schools have said to me, I believe it is far easier to get a 3.0 or 3.5 at UGA.
Before I miss your point about Joe Hamilton: I think that he (like any minor celebrity) would have a little bit of an easier time. But there are no easy majors at Tech that I know of (the management program that many athletes take was recently ranked #22 in the country, IIRC). And I believe it is rare that we have profs looking the other way as in Auburn’s psychology department among others I’m sure. So while I don’t think his experience was similar to mine, I think he did meet the academic standards.
As for yahoos, how about a teacher that forced a grade schooler to sit in the corner because he wouldn’t wear his Tech shirt inside out? How about another grade school teacher deciding that the class would put together care baskets decked out with UGA stuff and not allowing for alternatives until parents got involved. Those stick out in my mind because young kids were demeaned. I know when I worked in Atlanta it was dished more than I gave.
Regarding “What’s the good word?” I personally don’t like to literally cuss, though I will say things like “gosh darn it to heck.” But even the real chant isn’t meant literally. No one wants someone else to burn just because of that person’s school. And I think many of your fans add a “to hell with georgia tech” in some of your chants. But we probably don’t want this to get into a religious debate as well as everything else
The point of the Florida State analogy . . .
. . . was that percentages are a better measure than literal numbers.
If there are ten universities that offer major X and there are 100 universities that offer major Y, the school that ranks fourth for its X program is in the same percentile as the school that ranks 40th for its Y program. They are equivalent feats. The school with the No. 4 Y program has a much better Y program than the school with the No. 4 X program has an X program.
Again, I give Georgia Tech credit for being a quality educational institution. I don’t know why Georgia Tech people are so intent upon demeaning the academics of the flagship institution of the university system of which they are a part. The admissions standards in Athens keep getting tougher for some reason; prominent scholarships are going to University of Georgia graduates for some reason; U.S. Supreme Court clerkships are going to University of Georgia law graduates for some reason.
A neutral observer would have to conclude that the University of Georgia must be a pretty darned good educational institution, even if you can point to other institutions that are good, as well. (By the way, if you really think the University of Georgia is such a breeze academically, why are you taking your time to try to have an intelligent discussion with a two-time University of Georgia graduate? If you really believe your position, shouldn’t you dismiss me as an idiot and go on your merry way? I’m glad you haven’t done those things, mind you, but, for the sake of intellectual consistency, shouldn’t you?)
As for the chant, anyone who says it—-in either direction—-is, in fact, saying “to Hell with [insert opposing school].” Anyone who says that and says he doesn’t mean eternal damnation by it has a theology as poor as his manners. While you are right that many Georgia fans do this, as well, there is a big difference between having it as an actual line in your fight song (which, by the way, encourages teaching the phrase to young children) and having a handful of fans who sing the lyrics differently from the way they were written. (Moreover, Georgia fans under the age of 60 don’t sing about Georgia Tech when we’re not playing Georgia Tech; those who change “G-E-O-R-G-I-A” to something religiously irresponsible change the last three syllables regularly; e.g., “Spur-ri-er,” “Ten-nes-see,” “Flo-ri-da,” “Geor-gia Tech.” If you’ve only heard it the one way, it’s because you’ve only been around Georgia fans when the Bulldogs were playing the Yellow Jackets.)
Go 'Dawgs!
by T Kyle King on Jun 24, 2009 11:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Minus the theological debate
Kyle, you’ve made my point for me. I just don’t understand the Tech mentality of the need to incessantly bash the academics at UGA. It’s not like we’re a bunch of slack-jawed yokels. I only make this point because after high school I was accepted for enrollment at both Tech and UGA, but I chose UGA because I wanted to pursue a career in public accounting and UGA has a top 15 program.
Apparently I was good enough to get into their school, but since I went elsewhere my education is devalued in their eyes. That’s the thing I don’t get. As I said to Joe W. earlier, I find it difficult to respect a fanbase that would rather see its biggest rival lose than to have its own team win (whether that be on the football field or the world of academia). They would rather cut us down as the joke program and “easy” school than praise their own academics and let that speak for itself.
http://hobnailboot.wordpress.com/
Good point
There’s also a little bit of Heismanpundit-style fact-twisting going on here, even if inadvertently.
When Tennessee demolished Cal in Knoxville but struggled with Air Force, the argument was that S.E.C. teams got up for good West Coast teams but looked very mortal against less impressive foes from Pac-10 country. In other words, when an S.E.C. team beats a Pac-10 team, it’s proof of how good the Pac-10 team was.
The same goes for this argument. We’re told that Georgia Tech athletes meet tougher academic standards, and, when I show that Georgia athletes are achieving at a higher level, I’m told that this is because Georgia is such an easy school. In other words, the fact that Georgia Tech athletes aren’t accomplishing as much in the classroom as Georgia athletes proves how much smarter Georgia Tech athletes are.
The Georgia Institute of Technology is a prestigious academic institution that produces well-educated graduates in their fields while making certain concessions on its standards in order to admit promising athletes. Exactly the same thing can be said about the University of Georgia. Why anyone would feel the need to boost one by running down the other in this way is beyond me. I’ve never once walked out of a football stadium and said, “Yeah, but our school is better than their school,” even though, most of the time, it’s true.
We’re there to settle a football game. This isn’t the math meet from the end of “Mean Girls,” although, evidently, the calling-someone-else-stupid-doesn’t-make-you-smarter epiphany Lindsay Lohan has in that scene was lost on the Georgia Tech faithful.
Go 'Dawgs!
I’m not trying to say UGA isn’t a good school and doesn’t have good students. But Tech is different. You even started your points about the academics by saying that you’d have to take the top 1/3 of UGA students to draw a fair comparison.
And whether you’re in that top 1/3 (you probably are) or not, that doesn’t mean a fair debate isn’t worthwhile. ALL the UGA (and Tech for that matter) folks I’m sure have something unique and interesting to offer, regardless of how well they score on a math test, how well they can write a story, how many people they manage, etc.
Theologically, I’m probably the opposite of fundamentalist (I mean that truly in the most respectful and theological way—the term has gotten a negative connotation recently and I struggled to find a better term, but I’m not sure Evangelical is the word I’m looking for.) I don’t think it is fair to say that people who say “To hell with ____” and doesn’t mean eternal damnation has poor theology. They/we simply don’t have the same Theology as your seem to have. I personally know several people who got a Master’s in Divinity from Emory’s Candler who proudly sing our fight song.
Well said, Joe W
There are some points upon which we will have to agree to disagree, obviously, but you state your points clearly and reasonably, for which I am obliged.
Win or lose, I hope you’ll be around these parts in the fall. Nice job.
Go 'Dawgs!
by T Kyle King on Jun 25, 2009 10:34 AM EDT up reply actions
I know a fair number of people who went to Tech (including my paternal grandfather, a maternal uncle and great-uncle, a first cousin, and both brothers). Tech hazes academically, no question. The administration and faculty pride themselves on the “rigor” of the curriculum and express that pride in thoroughly demeaning ways. There are engineering programs in the country with better national reputations that do not participate in the soul-crushing crap that goes on at GTU (I like the term North Avenue Trade School, but once in a while I like to throw a “GTU” out there because it has a more desired effect on them). I think it’s no surprise, therefore, that those that are subjected to this hazing develop a sense of superiority for having survived it. The sad part is, an engineering education as valuable as or more valuable than that obtained on the Flats is available elsewhere with much less hammering from the faculty. I know engineers from Stanford, Cal Tech, and MIT who think the Georgia Tech experience is ridiculous.
But having survived that kind of abuse does not mean one is better or better educated than someone who didn’t have to endure it. I was fortunate enough to have full-ride academic scholarship offers from UGA, Tech, Emory, and UNC. I was smart enough to choose UGA. (Eliminating Tech was easy, since I aimed to be educated and not trained; my vocational training came in post-graduate study. At the risk of alienating some of my own kind, it was this same aim that eliminated UGA’s business school from consideration.)
Hatred of UGA might as well be required coursework over there. It is a deeply ingrained feature of student life and has been for many generations. It was once that way at UGA. When my parents were in school, after every single football game all season long, the cheerleaders led the students in a cheer of “Wreck Tech”. Of course, this was during the drought, so things were pretty well focused. Shortly thereafter, Tech left the SEC to embark on its mission of being the Notre Dame of the South athletically and began to lose to Georgia at what must have been an alarming pace to fans and alumni at the time. And the Falcons came to town and gave football fans who didn’t go to Tech somewhere else to go. UGA, meanwhile, in addition to winning, had continuing SEC fish to fry. A rivalry of Clean, Old-Fashioned Hate festered on one side but not on the other.
My brother had an interesting experience. Growing up in LaGrange, GA, in the ‘60s and ’70s, the son of UGA grads, he was a Georgia fan. Because of geography and the times, we were far out-numbered by Auburn and Bama fans. There may have been more UGA fans than Tech fans, but it wasn’t all that noticeable. He moved into Smith Hall in the fall of 1978. Two years later, the entire state of Georgia and, most noticeably, metro Atlanta, became overwhelmingly comprised of rabid Georgia fans. Whatever hatred that was already being taught became instantly worse, appealing to the same “they’re out to get us” mentality that was already well under way in the classroom.
As a Georgia citizen and as someone who loves his family (even them), I am very proud of what a fine institution Georgia Tech is. But I hate Tech. I really hate Tech. Like Kyle, I hate Auburn, but I really, really hate Tech. And I’ve gotten more crap from Tech friends, family, and acquaintances since November than I’ve dished out in my entire lifetime. It’s not even close. I got barrages of cute emails from guys with whom I had never, ever discussed any sport at any time. So yeah, I hate ’em.
And, for the record, the last line of our “alternate” fight song is “And to hell with Georgia Tech”. I don’t care who’s on the schedule that week.
Well said
There are literally two members of my church who had not spoken to me during the entire course of my family’s membership there who went out of their way to speak to me after last year’s game. Both are Georgia Tech fans. Both managed to go several years without uttering so much as a single word to me. Both initiated a first conversation with me by making derogatory remarks about Georgia in the wake of Georgia Tech’s victory between the hedges. I had never said anything to either of them, or to any other Yellow Jacket fans with whom I worship, during the Bulldogs’ lengthy winning streak.
When receiving Holy Communion last fall, I was handed one of the elements by a Georgia Tech fan who took the time to make a derogatory remark about Georgia before handing me the bread and saying, “The body of Jesus Christ, which was broken for you.”
I take my team affiliation and my college football rivalries more seriously than most, but that level of fixation is just off the chart. Any Georgia Tech fans who claim they’re just dishing out what they’ve taken really need to take a long look at what they’ve been dishing out these last seven months. It isn’t just unseemly, it’s disturbing and sad.
I hate Auburn, but I’m a Georgia fan because I love Georgia. My affection for my alma mater outshines my disdain for any of our rivals . . . heck, my affection for my alma mater outshines my disdain for all of our rivals combined. I can’t imagine what it must be like to hate your rival more than you love your own school. It makes me feel clean, old-fashioned pity for them.
Go 'Dawgs!
by T Kyle King on Jun 26, 2009 11:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Dawg Sports
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
