January 21, 2004

We also heard from the Journal-Constitution writers and the talk radio pinheads all season that Georgia's defense was so tough and so awesome that its players had a definite "swagger" about them. That's a little hard to understand when you consider that Tech not only gained 401 yards against the chihuahuas but that A. J. Suggs, who wouldn't be considered a top-tier quarterback at any level, burned Georgia's secondary for two long touchdown passes. LSU didn't seem to be bothered very much by all that "swagger" in the SEC championship game. If Georgias players did a little more defending and a little less swaggering, maybe they wouldn't have given up so many yards.

From LSU's victory it was a natural progression to Tech's stomping of Tulsa in the Humanitarian Bowl, which finally put the big ups to what was definitely an up-and-down season. Granted, it was a bowl game that kicked off in Boise at 10 a.m. in 20-degree weather, but a win is a win is a win. Since I was one of many who predicted that 2003 would mark the end of Tech's streak of bowl games and winning seasons, I'll gladly take it.

Now, let's get to some of your questions...

17. Was Tech doomed when Reggie Ball was removed from the Georgia game in favor of A. J. Suggs?

1. Suggs certainly brought back vivid memories for Tech fans by inexplicably throwing two interceptions directly into the hands of Georgia DBs, but fairness compels me to point out that Tech also scored more points against Georgia with Suggs at quarterback (14) than they did with Ball (3). In the Humanitarian Bowl, Tech scored 10 points in the first half with Ball at quarterback. In just over one quarter of play in the second half, the Jackets scored 28 points with Suggs handling the quarterback chores. The final statistics for the season, in fact, show that Suggs had a higher pass efficiency rating (136.3) than Ball (102.7). There's a question for Tech fans to ponder during the off-season: did Gailey make a mistake by promoting Ball over Suggs for the starting quarterback job? I'm not sure I want to hear the answer to that one.

   Here's another statistical oddity: Ball and David Greene of Georgia both had the same number of TD passes during the regular season (10) and interceptions (11). And yet, Ball was a true freshman still learning his team's offensive playbook this year while Greene was supposedly a "Heisman Trophy candidate."

1. We've had this discussion in this column before, but it bears repeating: college football recruiting is a crapshoot. The players who come out of high school with the highest ratings by recruiting gurus will sometimes fall flat on their faces. The guys who aren't "Parade All-Americans" will often end up having more productive careers. Many fans never seem to figure this out, so a couple of examples might be helpful. A few years back, Florida State signed a running back named Marquette Smith who was not only a Parade All-American but was named the high school offensive player of the year by USA Today. I can't think of another player who was ever more highly rated by the so-called recruiting experts. And yet, he never made the starting lineup at FSU and wound up transferring to Alabama-Birmingham. At about the same time, Georgia Tech recruited a skinny kid out of Coweta County named Keith Brooking who wasn't on any of the high school All-American teams and certainly wasn't a five-star prospect with any of the recruiting services. Last I heard, he was still playing in the NFL and was good enough to be selected for a couple of Pro Bowls.

   Since we don't even know who is actually going to sign with Tech until February, your question might be a little premature. Tech already has a commitment from a Chamblee linebacker named Travis Chambers who was named Georgia's defensive player of the year in his classification by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Maybe he'll live up to that reputation while he's at Tech and but what if he doesn't? Tech is also recruiting a running back out of Buford named Darius Walker and a wide receiver from Sandy Creek named Calvin Johnson and we can't know if they'll live up to their high school reputations when they're playing at the college level.

   How would I rate Tech's football recruiting this year? I won't be able to give you an answer until three or four years from now.

1. I don't know if George is going to be happy there - I understand there are a lot of "flappers" at Central Florida. But, hey, if he can divert some in-state talent to Central Florida and keep it away from Florida State, then more power to him. You have to wonder, though, whether George is really as intelligent a coach as he claims to be - one of the first personnel decisions he made at Central Florida was to hire UNC defensive coordinator Dave Huxtable as his linebackers coach. This is the same Huxtable who did such a horrible job as O'Leary's defensive coordinator in 1996 that O'Leary ran him off and hired Randy Edsall to replace him. This is the same Huxtable whose defense at North Carolina was so wretched this year that it ranked 117th out of 117 Division I-A schools. What does Huxtable have to do before coaches wise up and quit hiring him? Have sex with an underaged male cheerleader?

   It is also worth noting that O'Leary quit at Tech because he felt he was too good a coach to be working at a place like the Flats. So where is he two years later? Recovering from a heart attack while getting ready to coach at a school that has no football tradition in a less prestigious conference for a salary about $600,000 less than he was making at Tech. I don't think that would qualify as even a lateral move in anyone's career.

   Odd, too, that in the space of three days in December, three Tech guys got head coaching jobs: Bobby Ross at Army, George O'Leary at Central Florida and Ted Roof at Duke. I wonder what Ray Goff and Jim Donnan are doing.

1. It would be very hypocritical of me (and about half the guys I know who post on the Hive message board) to ever criticize someone for drinking excessively and making a pass at a topless dancer at some strip joint, so I refuse to do that. Actually, Price did a credible job when he was at Washington State and probably will be a good choice for a downtrodden program like UTEP. His hiring should also help improve the local economy in El Paso - I understand that Hooters and the Cheetah III are already making plans to expand their operations in that city.

1. At the risk of sounding disloyal to the home team, no. In fact, I would argue that any team with six losses that also gets trounced by Duke especially doesn't deserve a bowl bid. But, at I noted earlier, even a win in an undeserved bowl game is better than no win at all. The extension of bowl bids to all of those six-game losers kept some teams out that truly deserved to be there: Northern Illinois (went 10-2 and beat a team that did get a bowl bid, Maryland), Connecticut (went 9-3 and put up more points against Wake Forest than Florida State did), Toledo (went 8-4 with a victory over Pittsburgh), and Marshall (went 8-4 with a win over Big 12 champ Kansas State). Doesn't hardly seem fair to me. oin together in a nationwide conference where they would all be on a more level playing field.

1. Division I football looks vastly different today than it did 10 years ago because of all the conference reshufflings. It will look just as different 10 years from now. Over the course of the next decake, I think the smaller, private colleges with more demanding academic requirements will be forced to drop down from the Division I-A level because they simply won't be able to remain competitive against the larger land-grant universities. You could well see these smaller schools join together in a nationwide conference where they would all be on a more level playing field.

   Vanderbilt has just taken a significant step towards de-emphasizing what was already a struggling football program. I can't imagine the other SEC schools will tolerate their presence for more than another season or two. Vandy doesn't have a chance in hell of ever playing in a bowl game, so why allow them to continue taking a share of bowl revenues away from conference schools that are putting more emphasis on the sport? Vanderbilt will probably be allowed to remain in the SEC as a basketball member, but they will be told to move to another conference for football purposes (in much the same way that the Big East has schools like St. John's and Georgetown that compete in basketball but not in football).

   Here in the ACC, I think that Wake Forest and Duke will similarly be dropped from the football lineup (while continuing to compete in ACC basketball). Wake has the smallest enrollment of any Division I-A school and as the tobacco industry continues to decline, the money it gets from its alumni base will drop. At Duke, it's clear that Mike Krzyzewski is calling the shots and will never allow the schools authorities to devote the financial resources that would be necessary to upgrade the football program to be competitive at the Division I level.

   Ten years from now, I believe we'll have a new conference, possibly competing at the I-AA level that will be made up of schools like Army, Navy, Vanderbilt, Duke, Wake Forest, Tulane, Rice, Northwestern and Stanford that have higher academic standards than most Division I-A programs or don't have the financial resources to compete with the Nebraskas and the Oklahomas.

   If that happens, the big question will be whether Georgia Tech joins that new football conference of academic elites.

   Tech has faced the prospect before of a downgrade of the football program. In the late 1980s, when Bobby Ross went 5-20 in his first 25 games as head coach, there was a lot of talk that the Jackets should consider dropping to the Division I-AA level. Will it happen again?

   There are several compelling reasons to be pessimistic about this. The ACC will become a much stronger conference with the addition of Miami, Virginia Tech and Boston College (and for those SEC fans who sneer at Boston Colleges football credentials, I would remind them that an SEC team coached by a guy named Richt was spanked by BC in the Music City bowl two years ago). Tech's football team has been floating at the .500 level for the last three seasons. In the expanded ACC, Tech could easily become a program that struggles to win three or four games every year.

   Is Chan Gailey a good enough coach that he can keep the program at least competitive with the influx of those new schools? I'm still not convinced he is, even though I give him all the credit for patching together a team that at least finished with a winning record.

   The biggest reason to feel discouraged about the school's future is this: Tech spent umpteen million dollars to expand and upgrade Bobby Dodd Stadium/Grant Field. It is much improved over what it was and in the Tech-Georgia game, it was filled with more people wearing red than with people wearing gold. Basically, Dave Braine spent a bossload of money to expand the stadium so that more Georgia fans could attend the Tech-Georgia game. When I saw that spectacle of Georgia fans outnumbering Tech attendees, I said to myself, "What's the use?"

   Another reason to be discouraged about Tech's future is the media bias of the newspapers and broadcast outlets in Atlanta and across the state. It is basically all Bulldogs, all the time. Anyone who reads the Journal-Constitution is already aware of that shameless bunch of media whores who roll over and spread their legs every day for the Georgia coaching staff (I'm referring to Mark Bradley, Mark Schlabach, Tony Barnhart and the rest of those brown-nosers). Tech fans have to understand that these bootlickers, especially Bradley, are going to kiss up to the Georgia program at every opportunity. As an example, just look at the crap that Bradley wrote after the Tech-Georgia game. Tech running back Chris Woods gained 64 yards in 14 rushing attempts against Georgia - the exact same numbers that Georgia's Kregg Lumpkin put up against Tech. I would argue that Wood's performance was much more impressive than Lumpkin's because Woods was running the ball against a much stronger defense - remember, this was the Georgia team whose defensive starters had all that "swagger" in their game. And yet, in his column about the game, Bradley wrote that Lumpkin would be a Heisman Trophy candidate two years from now, and didn't bother to mention Woods even though Woods outplayed Lumpkin.

   The situation is just as bad with the sports radio stations in Atlanta - on 680 TheDawg you've got Buck Belue and John Kincaid taking constant cheap shots at Tech, and on 790 TheZone, which is supposedly Tech's home station for its game broadcasts, the on-air personalities spend more time interviewing Mark Richt and David Greene than they do talking about Tech's teams. I do not understand how Dave Braine can award the rights to broadcast Tech's games to a radio station that consisently gives more air time (and makes more favorable comments) about his school's biggest in-state rival. It just makes no sense - it's suicidal.

   High school athletes are bombarded by this pro-Georgia coverage, and it has to have a cumulative effect in the chihuahua's favor. It's hard for Tech recruiters to make a case for their program when every hack sportswriter and radio jock in Atlanta is firmly in Mark Richt's hip-pocket (and jockstrap). I don't see how Tech will ever be able to overcome this rampant media bias.

   That's how I see the future of college football, at least for the next 10 years. I don't see it as a very optimistic future for Georgia Tech.

1. Let's break it down by position (although we don't know, at this point, which freshman will have an impact next year)

   Offensive line: There will be at least three of five starters returning next year now that Nat Dorsey has declared for the NFL draft. With Leon Robinson also returning, that's really like having four starters back. The question here is, who replaces Hugh Reilly at center? The offensive line was very inconsistent this season and some observers put the blame on Dorsey (who seemed to have a bad case of senioritis during his junior year). With Dorsey gone, the O-line may be improved through the "addition by subtraction" way of thinking.

   Wide receiver: The departure of Jonathan "Fred" Smith leaves a gaping hole at this position, as Smith not only had 75 receptions but was the only true playmaker Tech had. There is ample opportunity here for a freshman (Calvin Johnson?) to make an impact, or for a player already on the roster (Damarius Bilbo?) to step up and make a name for himself.

   Running back: I kept complaining throughout the season that Tech had no breakaway speed at this position, but I may have to reconsider that after watching P. J. Daniels speed past Tulsa's linebackers and secondary for 307 yards. Come to think of it, Daniels also ripped off a 47-yard scoring run against FSU, a team whose defenders aren't exactly slow. Maybe he's just faster than he looks or maybe I'm drinking too much Jack Daniels again. You do have to admit that Daniels, whatever his level of speed, produced a lot of yards for the Jackets. Can anyone think of another walkon who ever gained more than 1,000 yards rushing for an ACC school? Daniels will be back, along with Chris Woods (who had an impressive game against Georgia) and Ace Eziemefe. Quuestions to be answered: Will Rashaun Grant supply more speed at this position? Will Tech be able to sign Darius Walker?

   Quarterback: Reggie Ball will return and, despite his meltdown in the Georgia game, I think you can pencil him in as the starter for next season. Will he improve from year to year as Joe Hamilton did? Will Patrick Carter push Ball for the starting position?

   Kicker/punter: David Jordan should be an adequate replacement for Dan Burnett at placekicker. The crisis is at punter, where neither Hal Higgins nor Andy Thomson showed any consistency. I would suggest that Chan Gailey needs to burn a scholarship on someone who can punt the ball without shanking it every time.

   Defensive line: Some Hivesters are happy that D-line coach Glenn Spencer went to Duke, but I'm not sure why they feel that way. It seemed to me that this part of the defense over-achieved greatly this season before being worn down in the November stretch by a lack of depth. I think Spencer got every ounce of production he could out of Travis Parker, Brad Brezina, Mansfield Wrotto, Eric Henderson and Gerris Wilkinson. All of them will be back next year, although Wilkinson likely will move to linebacker. Joe Anoai can replace Wilkinson at defensive end, but where will the backups come from? Adamm Oliver? Omar Billy? Tech could go into another season with a very thin defensive line.

   Linebacker: Tech, alas, loses three of the very finest to ever play this position in Key Fox, Daryl Smith and Ather Brown. At this point, it looks like next year's starters will be Tugboat Anyansi, Gerris Wilkinson and KaMichael Hall. They may not be as talented as the guys they are replacing, but I think they can get the job done. The Jackets will also have Chris Reis back to play in nickel and dime coverages as a kind of roving linebacker. I like the way this kid hits.

   Defensive backfield: Some people are encouraged by the fact that three of the four starters at defensive back will be returning, with Kenny Scott or Dennis Davis stepping up to replace Jonathan Cox at the fourth spot. I am discouraged by the fact that with these same guys in the defensive backfield, Tech finished 65th (out of 117 Division I-A schools) in pass defense. Tech allowed opponents to complete more than 60 percent of their passes for 223.5 yards a game.

   We can only hope a year's experience will enable them to improve on that. I will give Dawan Landry and James Butler credit for their run support - they were stellar at that aspect of their game. I just wish they were a little better at defending the deep pass routes.

   For next year, I see a Tech team that will still have trouble putting points on the board (the Jackets ranked 90th out of 117 teams in scoring offense) and will again have to use smoke-and-mirrors to disguise a lack of depth on defense. Add to that the upgrade in ACC competition, and I see a team that might win four games at most. Of course, thats how many I thought they would win this season and they surprised me. Maybe they'll surprise me again.