What are your New Years resolutions?
DressHerInWhiteAndGold: New Years Resolutions?
Ben: I’m actually doing the ol’ reliable of eat better, go to the gym more, lose weight. My weight has fluctuated a lot due to some personal stuff that’s going on, so I’m looking to get that more managed.
Jack: Successfully move into a new apartment and start the big projects at my new job. Wild how adulthood just never ends!
Logan: Basically Ben’s Resolution.
Chris: Gain some muscle mass, get better at running, buy more stuff from real stores instead of online.
Jake: Consistently run every morning before work. I have gone through stretches where I do it sporadically (or not at all), and it is an easy way to set a schedule and feel healthier.
gtbadcarma: Best Christmas gift you have received?
Ben: I technically was told about it long before Christmas, but my wife planned a weekend trip for us to a festival in North Georgia in January that we’re both super excited about!
Jack: Tickets to They Might Be Giants in April!
Logan: I got a new gaming chair this year, very comfortable.
Chris: My brother gave me a really nice waxed weekend bag.
Jake: Ever? Or this year? I haven’t gotten to see my parents yet, so ask me in two days. So far, I did get a nice antique map of the city my wife and I went on a honeymoon to, and my mother-in-law found a Tech football history book with reproductions of major event tickets, programs, rosters, and such, which was pretty neat content.
gtbadcarma: There is a lot of second guessing (embarrassing commentator $ec pandering imo) that has gone on about the selections by the playoff committee. There has been “blow out” wins by each conference ($ec worst loss). To me it shows you shouldn’t go more than 1 or 2 deep in a conference. Do you agree that the $ec, big 10 and ACC (Notre dame is essentially ACC) are over represented? Who would you have liked to see in the place of the teams that lost?
Ben: Getting blown out doesn’t mean they didn’t deserve the spot. Personally, I thought they got the CFP right.
Jack: I’m with you, the commentator pandering has been AWFUL. 95% of the takes and opinions I’ve seen have been turbo garbage. We asked for more teams, we got more teams. A playoff system in no way guarantees that everyone involved is equally good and can create good games. Every other playoff system we watch usually has some blowouts. When we’re limited to just four games, four blowouts are certainly possible! I would not have changed anything with these teams. I like the system they have for how it comes to humans picking teams instead of a clear, defined qualification process akin to pro sports. You have to win games, and the teams that won the most games made it in. It’s simple and far more “correct” than doing a dumb bargaining game about how a team who lost but in a theoretical game would beat a “playoff” team (which means 12 different things!).
Logan: before the change in format my thoughts had been that there wasn’t a need to expand as there were basically 4 teams that stand out above the others, some that are talented but not in the top 4, and then the field. Expanding the field means more teams get in, but that doesn’t necessarily mean more upsets or more close games. Sports aren’t always close, doesn’t mean the teams in the playoff didn’t deserve to be there; and all the teams that were selected deserved to be there. The media has always been part of the sport, heck before the BCS the national champ was just whoever the media decided was the #1 team. Because of media involvement college football has always been full of discourse and always will be, but this year I think things played out as they should have.
Chris: I wrote about what I think would be a better system earlier this year – two teams per conference max with guaranteed spots for champions. I feel like the Playoff discourse has completely lost the plot with what the whole point of a playoff system is. I think the teams chosen this year were the right teams. It’s so insanely simple: if you don’t want to get left out then don’t lose too many games.
Akshay: I am sick of playoff discourse to the point where I have declared playoff bankruptcy. If you’re not going to do this Champions League style and only allow auto-bids, then just let teams claim their own titles again. Every possible playoff committee based formula leads to some argument over the Nth and N+1th team and ample plausible deniability to include a team for viewership reasons, and going back to the computers of the BCS doesn’t solve the discourse machine problem because the humans running the computers have always messed/will always mess with the formulas.
Jake: I liked Chris’ system, and I think my armchair quarterback version of a playoff would be similar. That said, the playoff isn’t supposed to guaranteed good games, it is supposed to find out who the best team is — arguably, the blowouts are a feature, not a bug. I think the right 12 teams were chosen given the constraints of the current system, I do not think that having a 3rd place or 4th place team in a conference usually makes sense — those teams lost those games! — and I think that the home playoff environments have been incredible. My only qualm is that the next round (which would feature 4 more totally different and electric home crowds) is in neutral venues, which stinks for the fans of those top four teams. Imagine being Oregon, having to travel (potentially) to four straight games in Indianapolis, Pasadena, Dallas, and Atlanta. Airfare, hotels, and tickets for attending those is absurd (we don’t ask NFL fans to travel like that!) and I think people will quickly get sick of that kind of cost of entry. Home venues through the semis, then rotate two sets of three (for the 6 total) for the semis and final if you must include the bowls. Otherwise, a final in Pasadena with home sites before then would be my ideal outcome with the current team selection setup.
popehats: Hopes, wishes, and thoughts on the bowl game
Ben: I want to see some younger guys get in there, especially in the places we’re going to be replacing folks next year.
Jack: 1. Keep the cowbell, so, win. 2. Win by enough to where I don’t have to watch another overtime game (although the Game Above Sports Bowl had a hilarious OT sequence just now). 3. Unless we get destroyed, I don’t think we’re going to learn too much about this team. 4. The context I’m entering with is that this really is a bonus game. This season is a success no matter what happens.
Logan: it’d be really cool if we won the game.
Chris: A strong and confidence-boosting win with everyone healthy would be fantastic. Not letting Pavia gain 500 total yards against us would be a great start.
Akshay: Like Jack mentioned, there’s not really much to learn from this fixture because a good chunk of this roster will be completely different in August. Win and get home healthy.
Jake: Just win, baby.
JustLurkin: Who chooses the photo at the top of the Mailbag? Sure, Singleton was a star for the team this year, but he has bolted for “greener pastures.” One day out from our bowl game, why not feature somebody that stuck with us and will actually be suiting up for the White & Gold? Or someone who remained loyal but injury will keep him off the field? Or any player other Tech-positive image?
Ben: Tbh it’s not that serious. I have a search function that’s automatically set to search for Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets. Generally, I don’t put much thought into it other than “Is this picture already on the front page somewhere?” Especially for the Mailbag Questions post. The most thought I put into lead photos is for the How to Watch and Gamethread articles because I actually have a theme for them. It’s not a wild or crazy theme, but I’m curious if anyone has ever noticed it.
Chris: I think we might be overthinking, this is an internet blog machine.
GTSMURF: Any news on a punter being brought in? Thoughts on our punters who are returning?
Ben: Radio silence. There are three other guys who are listed as options at punter on the roster: Andrew Nelms (Freshman, averaged 31 yards per punt in high school), James Whatley (Freshman, averaged 40 yards per punt in high school), and Joshua Taylor (R-Freshman who averaged 40 yards per punt in high school). Frankly, I don’t know if any of them have gotten any better since high school, so I think we’ll still add someone.
GTSMURF: The ladies of the WBB team are playing great right now (13-0), and have a chance to be 17-0 when they travel to currently top 5 ranked ND. What can be done to engage students and fans to start filling McCamish, similar to how WVB fills up O’keefe and McCamish when they play there?
Jack: The last few games have been harsh times to get students in. They had multiple Wednesday afternoon games during last classes and finals, and then the Nebraska game was after graduation, so no students were even around. I wouldn’t stress out on this quite yet mainly because of that. In January, it will get better. I was around for a bunch of those games in 2021-22, and attendance kept increasing. FWIW, we had nearly 2,000 people at the Nebraska game, which was the best attendance since the Georgia game (2,500).
Akshay: I’m with Jack on this one. “If you build it they will come” applies here, but crucial resumé/vibes-building results have all come without students able to attend. We’ll see how attendance looks as they get into the bulk of the ACC slate.
Jake: I’ll add that I’ve already heard more from young alumni that they’re perceiving this team now, which is a good start considering the last two years were meh-to-bleak, and WBB faces all the same challenges that we talk about with FB in regards to competing with other things to do in and around Atlanta. Tech’s only two decent home games in terms of date/time and opponent have been u[sic]ga (which occurred early on before the hype started to build, and with kids potentially already starting Thanksgiving travel) and Mississippi State (which was well-timed and accessible). So I am not worried – I wouldn’t worry about crowds until the VT game on the 9th. As the energy builds, so will the crowds.
Jellopacket98: What is up with college football players basically wearing shorts? I thought they ruled that players had to cover their knee caps with pads for player safety. You got guys with pants halfway up their thighs. It looks ridiculous. And I’m not just talking kickers.
Ben: I’m going to be completely honest. I have never noticed or thought about it.
Logan: When I watch football I’m not usually looking at the players’ pants so I’m not sure. I do think the habit of not having your jersey cover your stomach is silly, but to each their own.
Chris: I feel like I’ve only noticed it with kickers/punters, so I feel like it might fall under the “that’s kind of a special situation, let em do it” way of thinking. Sorta like when kickers wear one football cleat and one kicker cleat.