AJC > Sports > Tech > Blog > Archives > 2007 > October > 10
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
1990’s real national champion
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
As if things weren’t going badly enough for Georgia Tech football these days, along comes an assault on the Yellow Jackets’ 1990 national championship team.
Colorado sports publicist David Plati, in his blog on the school’s athletics Web site, takes this shot at Tech: “By the way, once again, we were consensus national champions and played the nation’s toughest schedule. The other ‘champion’ came nowhere close to beating who we had to in earning its share of the crown.”
Ahem. If any team ought to put quotation marks on its claim to the 1990 title, it ought to be Colorado. Colorado went 11-1-1. Tech went 11-0-1. That “nation’s toughest schedule” included six games against teams that finished with losing records. Tech played only three games against teams that finished with losing records (though it did play a Division I-AA team, Tennessee-Chattanooga). Tech and Colorado had one common opponent: Tech 45, Nebraska 21. Colorado 27, Nebraska 12.
And Tech had to play all season with only four downs for every first down it gained. Officials gave Colorado a fifth down against Missouri, or the Buffaloes would have been 10-2-1.
Yes, Colorado deserved credit for playing nine-win Tennessee, 10-win Texas, 10-win Washington and nine-win Notre Dame. But Tech beat 10-win Clemson and won a November game at then-No. 1 Virginia. Most important of all, Tech never lost.
The coaches got it right that year when they voted Tech No. 1.
Here’s a link to Plati’s blog: http://www.cubuffs.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=3843&SPID=255&DBOEMID=600&KEY=&ATCLID=1148545
Permalink | Comments (59) | Post your comment | Categories: Football
Tech vs. Nix; what’s the story?
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
It’s weird a lot of times when a team gets ready to play a former coach, as Tech will this week when they’re at Miami, new home of offensive coordinator Patrick Nix. Sometimes, particularly if it’s a position coach, it’s no big deal. But if it’s a former coordinator, head coach, or even recruiting coordinator, it usually serves as a backstory of varying import.
I think it is quite possible the most interesting element of this matchup has already taken place, and we may not know the whole story about it. Why did Nix leave?
For my two cents, the comments from Nix and Chan Gailey in Mike Knobler’s story were fairly benign, although some read Nix’s summer comments about knowing he had to break free from Gailey was in the best interests of his career as pointed. I don’t think Chan’s response that Patrick’s comments don’t bother him were either a big deal, or completely transparent. Even if it irked the stuffing out of Gailey, what do you expect him to say?
Me, I think that was probably an accurate statement on Nix’s part, that he needed to leave to grow his career. Many had, and have, the impression that Chan’s offensive coordinator works under the head coach’s thumb. Determining the accuracy of that is no easy feat. Almost every head coach who doesn’t call plays has offensive input, although Bobby Bowden might not bother. But I’m definitely of the opinion that this impression was wide spread in the case of Nix-Gailey, and of no benefit to Nix. Ultimately, it probably didn’t help Chan and Tech, either.
I can’t help but also wonder, based on a mix of common sense and grapevine comments, if there wasn’t more to Nix’s departure. I don’t know if he was pushed, by the head coach or anyone else. I truly don’t.
Was there friction between Patrick and other coaches? Between their families? This happens in college football, for sure, but it’s difficult to document. Was it a factor here? I don’t have an answer. I’m not the only one with suspicions, though, not that anybody in the program has confirmed them.
Matt
