Cutting our noses off to spite our faces? Just say no.

It seems like there are two perennial scheduling topics we Georgia fans love to argue about:  playing Florida every year at a neutral site in Jacksonville and playing Georgia Tech.  (You could argue the Dawgs play Tech at a home site every year.  But I digress.)

It’s no surprise to anyone who visits this blog that I favor keeping the Cocktail Party in Jacksonville, but at least in that case I understand why there is sentiment to move the game.  The argument to drop Tech from the schedule, though, has never made a lick of sense to me.

But, as often happens whenever matters of scheduling are discussed, there also were grumbles from some fans that UGA could schedule the Tigers even more frequently, if only they’d drop the annual game with Georgia Tech.

The “drop Tech, add Clemson” meme is a perennial among a contingent of UGA supporters, who long for the days of one of the annual Georgia-Clemson games, one of college football’s most storied rivalries. I quite often get emails from such fans suggesting the Dawgs no longer need the Yellow Jackets on the schedule every year.

Shortly after the Blawg published last week, discussing which Power 5 teams fans would like to see the Dawgs play (where I suggested Clemson as a favorite), I heard from UGA alum Stephen Segrest, who asked, “When would be the earliest that we could replace Tech with Clemson annually?”

Then, I heard from my old Athens/UGA classmate Dan Pelletier, noting sarcastically, “I get that we have no room on the schedule for Climpson,” despite the fact that Georgia now plays a 12-game schedule, while it used to play just 10 or 11 games when the Tigers were an annual opponent.

To make more room on the schedule for another Power 5 team, Dan repeated a slightly tongue-in-cheek suggestion I’ve heard from him before: UGA should rotate Georgia Tech, Georgia Southern and Georgia State as the end-of-season in-state opponent. 

My response to him: Never gonna happen.

But, just for the sake of discussion, I asked Dan, who happens to be a judge, to make a case for not playing Tech every year in football.

Dan’s response: “It’s hard to argue we should drop Tech, when we fill our nonconference schedule with Sobbing Sisters of the Poor and other patsies, but, here goes: Tech benefits way more from the game than we do. They have everything to gain and nothing to lose. No one expects them to win, and, if they do, it is a boon to their program.

“Drop Tech, and add Clemson or FSU, and the schedule improves dramatically. Drop Tech, add Clemson or FSU, drop one of the patsies, and rotate between Georgia Southern and Georgia State, and we still play an in-state team. The benefit of Clemson or FSU is adding a power team without adding taxing travel.”

Hey, I’m for playing Clemson more frequently as much as the next guy, but where is it written that the only way to do so is to stop playing Tech?  Why not drop one of those “Sobbing Sisters of the Poor” games against cupcake of the week instead?  (And before you go on about losing a home game every other season, remember that Georgia hasn’t lost a game in BDS this century.  Why lose that opportunity?)

Georgia Tech is a P5 opponent that Georgia has beaten at a steady 70+% clip ever since Vince Dooley showed up on campus.  In the CFP era, that’s frickin’ gold, Jerry.  Why would any rational supporter of Georgia football want to give up an advantage like that?  Beyond that, don’t think long term dominance of that sort doesn’t have a cumulative effect on the recruiting trail.  Sure, Paul Johnson has made life even easier in that regard, but is there a more obvious sales pitch to any kid considering both in state programs than “you wanna win, doncha”?

Strip all that away and what we’re left with boils down to a silly, emotional argument:  Tech benefits way more from the game than we do. They have everything to gain and nothing to lose. No one expects them to win, and, if they do, it is a boon to their program.  What exactly does that mean?  Other than allowing the denizens on StingTalk to puff out their chests for a couple of months, where’s the benefit?  It sure isn’t on the recruiting trail.  Tech has never stepped over Georgia’s dead body to claim a spot in the BCS or CFP.  All that remains is a few hurt fee-fees in a part of Georgia’s fan base.  Methinks that means there’s more to this rivalry than those folks are willing to admit.

Imagine how we’d feel if there had been a similar attitude expressed by Florida fans during the heyday of that 6-21 streak.  (Conference rivalry, I know, but identical emotions.)  You think these same folks would nod their heads and meekly agree?  Hardly.

Georgia Tech football is the proverbial gift that keeps on giving.  You don’t turn that kind of generosity down.  Especially just to lose a road game.

76 Comments

Filed under Georgia Football, Georgia Tech Football

76 responses to “Cutting our noses off to spite our faces? Just say no.

  1. Add Clemson, keep Tech. Heck, I think the SEC should add another conference game on top of that.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Saxondawg

      My opinion absolutely, precisely mirrors the Senator’s on this one–down to the part about Florida, about which I’ve come to respect the anti-Jax side, while believing on balance that’s an important tradition. The Tech game isn’t just an important tradition. It’s a huge part of our identity, like it or not. And that’s the thing. I just don’t get those who don’t “like it.” The history and tradition and downright fun of the game are unique. Why strip away things like that, the specifics that make college football so great, team by team? I recognize many Dawg fans don’t get it. I just don’t know WHY they don’t get it. Why didn’t they pick it up along the way, while following the Dawgs over the years? Do we want to drop red as our color? Tear down Sanford Stadium? The ultimate question is, which traditions define you? Which are essential? For me, outside our SEC identity, we have a unique state-based identity and it complements the conference part of who we are.

      Like

      • Russ

        I agree. I like college football precisely because of these rivalries, weird traditions, and especially the regional aspects of it. It seems to me there’s a big push to remake college football in the image of the NFL. I don’t really care for the NFL and the less the colleges mimic that, the better in my book. We play Tech precisely because we have always played them, same with Auburn. No need to apply logic, but it’s not logical. It’s passionate.

        Like

      • Ricky McDurden

        It’s the same odd condition as the folks that want to to bowl in the west endzone of Sanford in some vain attempt at increasing crowd noise, nevermind that the bridge and view of campus is a big part of what make Sanford such a wonderful venue (FWIW I think they got it right in connecting the bridge to the stadium, all but cementing the view as remaining open for my lifetime).

        Like

  2. dawgtired

    I like the idea of playing 9-conference games, GT, one P5 (get a new opponent after one home/away series – I want to play a variety of teams/conferences) and one mid-major Cinderella team.

    Like

  3. 81Dog

    I don’t GARA if we play Clemson or not. They need the recruiting exposure in GA way more than we need it in SC, though obviously Dabo seems to be doing just fine on its own. But you are right on the money about playing Tech. Why would we give up a P5 win (and since CMR, it’s even higher than a 70% win rate) every year?

    I’d rather drop a cupcake for a good game. Last year we played ND, this year we get a directional school. Blah blah blah money blah blah blah scheduling blah blah blah everyone else does it. UGA preaches toughness and competition? Play a better schedule. On the other hand, if Ohio state had played Youngstown instead of OU, they’d have made the CFP last year. So expect nothing to change.

    Like

    • Gaskilldawg

      The winning percentage against Tech since Richt came along is 82.4%.
      Our winning percentage against that power 5 team when playing on the road is 100% over that time.

      Like

      • Mayor

        Playing at BDS is really another home game for Georgia. Tech fans don’t turn out and Georgia fans, particularly those who live in Atlanta, turn out in droves for that game.

        Like

  4. Twistification

    Agreed, although by the end of that game its hard to shake off the low grade headache of watching that offense. It it literally is a grind, and all I feel is relief after we win. History, rivalry and win % aside, this is one of my least favorite games to watch, however it is still great to beat tech and watch their fans wallow in the darkness. I guess that’s fun now that I think of it…

    Like

    • Ricky McDurden

      With so much at stake health-wise this past year, I really did find myself wishing for the Chan Gailey and George O’Leary days when Tech would try to compete with our offense on the field and our recruiting efforts off of it. Don’t get me wrong, avoiding injury against them is a small price to pay for the otherwise massive benefits of what they have settled to do now but their early 2000s model at least felt more… sporting.

      Like

  5. Vidaliaway

    Why would we want to drop tech? It is our destiny to keep them bowl ineligible every year.

    Like

  6. Derek

    It’s to take away their entire reason for existence. There is no parallel in sports to them. They are a parasite. They need to get a life. Most important, they need to know they are nothing to us.

    Btw this is dumb: “Then, I heard from my old Athens/UGA classmate Dan Pelletier, noting sarcastically, “I get that we have no room on the schedule for Climpson,” despite the fact that Georgia now plays a 12-game schedule, while it used to play just 10 or 11 games when the Tigers were an annual opponent.”

    Why isn’t he pointing out that we played 6 conf and 5 non conf games in those days?

    Like

    • It’s to take away their entire reason for existence. There is no parallel in sports to them. They are a parasite. They need to get a life. Most important, they need to know they are nothing to us.

      LMAO. Like that’s something we should care about.

      By the way, beating their ass at better than seven out of every ten games is pretty good evidence of what they mean to us.

      Like

      • Derek

        7 is not nearly enough. Only 10 of 10 will do.

        Something about replacing them on the schedule and calling the new game “The Annual Fish Fry” makes me LMAO.

        Like

  7. Mary Kate Danaher

    Bill King is the worst.

    Like

  8. Elmo Lewis

    Let’s not forget Mercer

    Like

  9. David K.

    This is stupid. Clemson would have to drop the Gamecocks along with us dropping Tech. Neither is happening.

    Like

    • Otto

      Nobody really has to drop anyone, if you put it back in the 1st 2 games of the season as was tradition, further the game works for the team hosting to travel to their in state rival at the end of the season.

      I do agree that GT should not be dropped they are P5 and there is more tradition. Further we all know GT would be chanting some crap about UGA being scared.

      I don’t want to play Clemson annually, they must recruit Georgia and Florida to be a contender, why give them that platform? GT does not presently present a problem of stealing top recruits, and hasn’t presented much of a problem likely since Eisenhower.

      I do want a Clemson home/away about once a decade mixed in with other home/aways and neutral site games sprinkled in. UGA hosting the team on years where GT is at CMR Field at BDS stadium.

      Like

      • Sides

        Clemson is only 2 hours from Atlanta. I don’t think a game in Athens really changes much from a recruiting standpoint. Clemson already plays GT every other year in Atlanta and could easily schedule a first week game in the Georgia Dome (or whatever they call it) whenever they wanted…plus they are in the Peach bowl every few years.

        UGa should find a quality P5 team and open their season with them. If you win great, if you lose it doesn’t really eliminate you from a playoff spot. Clemson is a good one to play from a fan/rivalry standpoint but probably doesn’t help open new recruiting. SC has been doing this with NC schools for the past 10 years (playing in Charlotte, at NC ST, at UNC). They are historical rivals and a good recruiting area.

        Like

        • Otto

          Look at the Clemson distance between ACC championships, and when they started making it a priority to schedule SEC teams. It was roughly 15 years.

          They have played in the Dome as well as Auburn, they start a series with Tx A&M I believe this year.

          Like

          • Sides

            They have definitely committed to playing SEC schools. It is a good strategy for them. It is much easier to do when you have a soft conference schedule.

            Like

            • Otto

              ACC championship in ’91 and then 2011
              ’91 was the last of the annual UGA/Clemson Rivalry

              07 and 08 SEC teams in bowl
              08 Bama in the Dome
              10/11 Auburn Home/away
              12 Auburn in the Dome to open the season
              13/14 UGA home/away
              15 No SEC team but they play ND
              16/17 Auburn home/away
              18/19 Tx A&M home/away

              Yes FSU entered the SEC, SC moved to the SEC and improved taking more SC recruits putting more pressure on Clemson to recruit nationally. It is more now than ever for Clemson to build their brand

              Like

  10. Bright Idea

    Stupid idea. Too many reasons to keep playing Tech. This was just something to fill space for King.

    Like

  11. Wait a minute…..this is your argument this week about recruiting vs. Tech.
    “Why would any rational supporter of Georgia football want to give up an advantage like that? Beyond that, don’t think long term dominance of that sort doesn’t have a cumulative effect on the recruiting trail. Sure, Paul Johnson has made life even easier in that regard, but is there a more obvious sales pitch to any kid considering both in state programs than “you wanna win, doncha”?”

    This was your argument a couple of weeks ago when discussing the importance of G-Day recruiting and its effect on Tech:

    “First all, the two programs recruit very few of the same players. Second, they operate on very different levels when it comes to recruiting. I doubt a recruit ever gets to a point where something like that sways him”
    So which is it?

    Like

    • My point being that recruiting is not a reason to keep tech on the schedule.

      Like

    • 81Dog

      your point is valid only in the short term. Fish Fry aint gonna be there forever; heck, it’s a bit of a surprise they extended him. Think the next guy in might want to run something a little more recruit-friendly? Gailey actually had a decent year recruiting (especially by Tech standards) when he signed Morgan Burnett and that crew. So, while recruiting for 2018 may not be affected if we dump Tech, a slightly longer term view makes recruiting a valid reason to keep kicking their asses. Certainly not the only reason, or even the best reason, but a valid reason.

      Like

      • Not really. I mean, if we wanna kick somebody’s ass over recruiting, then it needs to be Clemson, not Tech. They are stealing prize recruits out of our backyard. Tech is no more than a nuisance now and in the long term. They will never, ever, ever be a football power again. Ever.

        Like

        • 81Dog

          Do, your solution to the problem of how to kick Clemson’s ass in recruiting is…… (drumroll)….. Play Clemson head to head every year, guaranteeing recruits will see them prominently discussed all summer in advance of the annual early season match-up! What’s your theory here, make recruits sick of hearing and reading about Dabo?

          Like

          • Ducking them in preference of playing a school who….drum roll…..no longer cares about football is your solution?

            Like

            • Why is Clemson/Georgia Tech a zero sum game in terms of Georgia’s scheduling?

              Like

            • 81Dog

              That doesn’t even make sense. Is English not your first language? Are you really a Tech fan who just wants to get out of a guaranteed L every year?

              You suggested recruiting was a good reason to play Clemson. I pointed out a flaw in your alleged reasoning. Your response to that was basically “oh look! A butterfly!” If you’d rather UGA play Clemson than Tech, fine. Quit pretending you have anything other than “I WANT THIS MAKE IT HAPPEN” going for you.

              Like

  12. Cvegas Dawg

    Our schedule is putrid at best. Drop a tomato can and add Clemson. You can’t drop Tech. Thats as stupid as Texas not playing Texas A&M.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. Russ

    Beating Tech never gets old. Never.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. BMan

    No reason to get rid of Tech on the schedule. We get the benefit of having a P5 on the schedule, beat them 70% of the time (and expect that to go up as long as Kirby remains), and rub salt in the wound of a prickish fan base. Not to mention, as the Senator alluded to, it’s a home game regardless of venue.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. PTC DAWG

    I just wish the game with GT had more “juice”nationally. A win by UGA over them is just expected…in reality, it means nothing in the big scheme of things. The no win situation that UGA is in with GT is a real thing.

    Like

    • DoubleDawg1318

      Ask yourself if the CFP (or whoever the post season judges are) would value a win over GT more than a win over Directional State U. That should answer why we must keep playing them.

      Like

      • PTC DAWG

        I don’t think anyone is saying that we shouldn’t play GT and play 4 lower division schools. That’s not how this works at all.

        But you watch, this fall, when we beat GT and are in possible contention for the top 4 spots, the GT game will not garner a mention.

        Like

        • 81Dog

          but if that is true, it also wont garner a mention negatively. Whatever you think of Tech, it’s a P5 program in a decent conference, and it’s a reliable W for UGA. Why would you give that up? Dump a tomato can for a decent P5 rotating opponent? I’m good with that. Trade a pretty sure W for a 50/50 game? What’s the benefit there?

          Like

          • PTC DAWG

            I’m not advocating dumping GT…not going to happen….just wish they garnered a little more respect….might happen after CPJ leaves. But they really have never been consistently ranked since the 50’s….so probably wishful thinking on my part.

            Like

      • Napoleon BonerFart

        Exactly. I can’t believe the suggestion to stop playing them every year in order to add Southern and State to the rotation was anything but trolling.

        Like

  16. DawgByte

    When it comes to discussing UGA’s OOC scheduling I don’t believe you can have a productive conversation without first defining one’s objective(s). Georgia’s SEC schedule is difficult, so with the limited number of viable options for OOC games, UGA must be strategic. Recruiting and fan interest must be two primary drivers in reviewing potential opponents.

    One of my core objectives for this program is to expand Georgia’s brand from regional to national. Scheduling programs like Austin Peay, Middle Tenn., Troy, LA Tech and even Clemson holds little interest with fans in PAC-12, Big 10 or Big 12 territory and does little to gain the attention of recruits. Expanding our brand nationally will provide greater exposure to 5 star talent in markets where it’s been difficult in the past. The greater Los Angeles county area is fertile recruiting ground and loaded with High School talent, so I’d like to see Georgia periodically schedule home-and-home’s with both the Trojans and Bruins. Due to our depth of talent I don’t see a high risk in scheduling home-and-homes with programs like Mich St., Arizona, Baylor, Cal, Wisconsin, San Diego St., Texas, Washington St., TCU and Penn St. Rational: we all saw the value of last year’s Notre Dame game and how much attention it drew to our program and fan base.

    Tradition alone is not a good enough reason to schedule a team like Clemson. I’m against renewing that rivalry, because it does little if anything to meet my core objective.

    Regarding Ga Tech – as much as I think the game is a waste of time, you have to schedule your in state rival – it’s a no brainer.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Otto

      McGarity comes from the Florida school of thought of win the SEC and you become national program. Further Georgia and Florida both have access to enough talent to be a national power by signing in state talent for the bulk of the team and a decent UGA staff has never had a problem with raiding Florida or the Carolinas for the remainder. UGA unlike UT (Tennessee) does not have to play a PAC team to recruit QBs and supplement a state who does not produce enough talent to support program expectations.

      I do agree with you on GT, and as stated above I am not for an annual Clemson game but a once a decade home/away which does often make national TV. I want a mix of the games you want USC, UCLA, ND, Michigan St, Arizona, Penn St etc. but I also like some respectable regional games such as UNC, NC St, Va Tech, UGA was headed in that general direction under Evans. I remain a bit surprised UGA has not played a regular season game with FSU in decades. It is perfect in my opinion, FSU is a recruiting rival if the 2 teams play or not, instant national TV, and an easy trip for the fans. Ticket prices for the game at FSU would be nuts with the South Georgia fans wanting a game in their backyard.

      Like

      • DawgByte

        It’s the old Chicken and egg discussion. Win and the talent will come, but you got to get the talent to win.

        Yes, there’s probably enough talent for UGA to remain a playoff contender if we lock down Georgia and continue to cherry pick guys in Florida. We don’t have the same issues as UT with our recruiting base, but by going outside of the SE, the Vols have expanded their brand recognition, which was recently highlighted in a survey this past Dec. By going outside the SE we can make our recruiting job easier by playing games in fertile Western and Mid-Western regions and increasing the awareness of our program.

        I do like the idea of playing FSU on a more regular basis. Seems like a natural fit.

        Like

        • Otto

          It may get easier on the recruiting trail but Richt did not have much of a problem getting talent (managing roster is another debate) Smart has not had a problem. The Vols brand recognition has not translated to wins. Bama has used the brand recognition to their favor but they are still very heavy with talent signed from states of SEC rivals/neighbors.

          Again I am very much in favor of 1 P5 game early in the year in addition to the current SEC slate, GT, and 2 cup cakes. I would more like to see a decade with 3 home/aways with ACC schools (Clemson, FSU, UNC, Va Tech) and 2 Big(10/12), PAC. We may differ some on who that early P5 OOC game is. Also remember they have to be willing to do the home/away some of teams do not tend to travel to the SEC.

          The biggest hurdle would be getting McGarity to give up the revenue from home games with Austin Peay, Middle Tenn. and Charleston Southern.

          Like

          • DawgByte

            I think we see the validity of each other’s points. There is another argument for Clemson I cannot overlook. Two Top 5 programs playing each other will get national interest. No doubt about it. At the end of the day we both want to win and do so with a competitive and compelling schedule.

            Like

  17. RLJ

    When I was at UGA, Clemson was the biggest rival to me. (Being from NE Georgia and having relatives in SC helped to make it so, I am sure.) I would love to see us play Clemson more often, but the pleasure of seeing Tech fans puff up and then deflate like a giant balloon is too pleasing to pass up.

    Like

  18. Thorn Dawg

    I don’t want to drop Yech, but I would like to see the game moved to the beginning of the season. I hate playing that dirty OLine the week before the SEC Championship. There’s just too much to lose, aka We have bigger fish to fry.

    Like

    • Silver Creek Dawg

      I’m good with this.

      Colorado- Colorado State is the opening game of the season. I’d be okay with opening against NATS.

      Like

      • Otto

        I am not I want them coming needing a win to go bowling, and further they don’t have the depth to go a full season. Playing last game of the year is an advantage for UGA. Further who would replace GT at the end of the year?

        Like

        • PTC DAWG

          Your last sentence, therein lies the conundrum.

          Like

          • Otto

            If it isn’t GT, it is someone like Mizzou who does not have an in state rival, or a usual basement dweller such as Wake Forest.

            GT is more likely to get TV coverage.

            Like

    • PTC DAWG

      I’ve seen others propose it, here and elsewhere….I think it is a good idea. Eat the ugly frog early.

      Like

      • Thorn Dawg

        Better yet, let’s play it at the Dome to begin one year. That way we correct our asinine Auburn/Yech conundrum.

        Like

  19. TomReagan

    Adding Clemson would create a matchup of what should be top 5 programs moving forward. Those games are a big deal, and just playing in them elevates a program. There was a time in the 80s when Georgia and Clemson took a back seat to no game in the country in terms of importance, competitiveness, and tradition combined. It never hurts to be involved in something like that.

    Like

  20. Erk's Forehead

    Play Tech forever. Beating them into perpetual submission is a beautiful thing that reminds all Georgia boys of who the real program in the state is. It’s important for little sister to always remember who her big brother is.

    Like

  21. Just Chuck (The Other One)

    Don’t talk to me about dropping Tech from the schedule until our win streak is at least 9 (10 or more, even better).
    And
    “Other than allowing the denizens on StingTalk to puff out their chests for a couple of months, where’s the benefit?”
    StingTalk’s going to StingTalk regardless of the outcome. The score just gets replaced by that nonsense about career and income options.

    Liked by 1 person

  22. HiAltDawg

    The whole don’t play tech thing makes me think of the old adage: “never stop the enemy (and those Merica hatin’ devil worshipers are the enemy) from beating themselves.” There is nothing wrong at all from beating tech dang near every year. Let them win once and y’all know if we could beat them a hunerd-zip for twelve times a year, let’s do it. If anything beating tech has historically helped us. Even when Jasper was down, the Outback Bowl took us because in their mind we won that game.

    Playing Tech benefits us because it’s during Rivalry Week and the WWL plays up the whole SEC/acc challenge thing and with a perception of an ascending acc, UGA winning this game benefits us. Especially if a committee sees UGA as the only SEC team to be its OOC Rival. This probably has more value than we realise because tech is the devil.

    Another thing: the game is physical (injuries are bad anytime against any team, just ask Jacob Eason), our guys have to keep their heads on a swivel, and the coaches get a week of “politely informing” them about assignment football. I think this could be a benefit going into SECCG. It seemed to me (an idiot fan) that our DB’s where very aggressive and physical at the edge during the win vs auburn and the tech game might have been part of that (speculation on my part and possibly inaccurate anyone more informed in football coaching, please correct me on that).

    Like

    • Milledge Hall

      I tend to agree HiAlt Dawg that playing the trade school helped the DAWGS at the Rose Bowl. Each time the dokies tried to run an option, they were stuffed!! Our defense had practiced option football all year. That idiot Herbstreit couldn’t figure our why our defense was proficient in stopping the dokie option. It’s because CKS understood the importance of trouncing the trade school!!

      Like

  23. JasonC

    The funny thing is that if you think only GT benefits from playing the game, I can’t see how you think that would be any different if you replaced it with Georgia Southern or Georgia State. Certainly, both of those 2 teams would gain more exposure from beating UGA than Tech (outside of the Tech webiverse, I mean).

    Like

  24. Tommy

    The argument for dropping Tech is just as thin as the one that ended the A&M-Texas rivalry, and every rationalization just reinforces that. I don’t care if the rivalry lacks national juice. We’ve got plenty of juice rivalries – Auburn, Florida, Tennessee, and, yes, South Carolina.

    If you ask any team if they’d take an annual OOC P5 game that they’ll win 7+ out of 10 on, where the “away” games occur within a 20-minute Marta ride of half their fans, they’ll take that all day long.

    Their fans are annoying and that offense is eye rape, but Johnson won’t be there forever.

    Like

    • PTC DAWG

      See my comment above, when CPJ leaves, it might get better.

      Like

      • Otto

        It will likely get worse before it gets better but yes, GT as a program is capable of winning their ACC Division 2-3 times a decade and thus making for a good match up for rivalry weekend.

        Like

  25. W Cobb Dawg

    Clemson’s problem is that they’ve been to the CFP, and even won a championship – and despite their success nobody cares! Nobody else wants a home & home because they know none of their fans want to visit clemson. I drove through the town once and didn’t see any reason to stop or go back.

    I’d prefer a P-5 opponent in the dome very other year. Or a home & home with Miami, Texas, or even Pitt.

    For the nostalgia crowd I say this: We’ve got this thing called air travel now. Scheduling clemson because they’ve always been within walking distance isn’t a compelling argument.

    Like

  26. CB

    Open every season with Clemson, and close it with Tech. Add a 9 game SEC schedule and that leaves one slot to schedule a Sun Belt team.

    Like

  27. AusDawg85

    If you want the MNC t-shirt, then you don’t want Clempson on the schedule. Sure, great reward if you win, and possible to overcome early loss if you lose (assuming it’s the season opener) but the CFP risk does not justify it. This is why I hate the CFP…it’s not about the identifying the “best” team and may provide some national interest but at the cost of much more interesting regional rivalries which is what built college football.

    Win the Natty, buy the hat and shirt, then beg for a Clemson series.

    Like

  28. JoshG

    I think a sizable portion of the fan base gets no joy out of beating them nearly every year. The only feeling I get is relief, and relief if there are no chop block knee injuries heading into Atlanta or bowl season.

    Like

  29. ApalachDawg

    The day UGA stops playing Tech is the day UGA no longer plays college football.

    Like

  30. Tony Barnfart

    im sort of a dump Tech guy, but the fact that I actually prefer when the game is in Atlanta probably means it should be kept. Not that student-fans are the determining factor, but there’s something to be said for getting credit for a road game at a time on the calendar (thanksgiving) when a large chunk of your students are actually closer in proximity to the “road” stadium.

    Like

  31. Bob

    We are not going to get rid of Tech and we shouldn’t. As long as the SEC continues with the 8 game schedule, keep Tech and at LEAST one other Power 5 opponent. Play Clemson a two game set and then some other team 2 games and then back to Clemson for two and then two more Power 5 games. That way we play the Tigers more often, but we are not tied down without any variety. Frankly I would prefer 11 power 5 teams and 1 exhibition sisters of the poor game.

    Like