In the grand scheme, can Tech afford NOT to fire Paul Hewitt?
Is Paul Hewitt pointing to the NCAA tournament -- or the exit? (AJC photo by Hyosub Shin)
My longstanding belief has been that Georgia Tech cannot afford to fire Paul Hewitt because it doesn’t have $7 million in ready cash. But recent events have subjected that belief to recalibration, and now the issue, at least in this feeble mind, has become: Can Tech afford not to fire him?
Dan Radakovich has been supportive of the coach whose oppressive contract this athletic director inherited. (Quick recap: Hewitt’s contract has an automatic six-year rollover that calls for a full buyout if he’s fired at any time.) But D-Rad isn’t stupid, nor is he blind. He has to see that interest in Tech basketball is at a low not seen since the few folks who deigned to grace Alexander Memorial Coliseum in the final days of Dwane Morrison wore bags on their heads.
Bobby Cremins arrived from Appalachian State in 1981, and soon Tech was winning the ACC tournament and even reaching the Final Four. It got bad again in the late ’90s — Cremins’ teams missed the Big Dance six of his final seven seasons — and he announced his resignation in February 2000. Four years later, Hewitt took Tech to the national championship game.
It has, sad to say, been downhill since. Tech finished with a losing record three times in four seasons. When it made a run to the ACC title game last spring and won its first NCAA game since 2005, the team didn’t exactly become the talk of the town. And now most Atlantans seem to have forgotten Tech even has a team.
For a home game against Georgia, Tech drew 6,725 to a gym that seats 9,191. For North Carolina the crowd was 8,125, but a photo of the highest-priced courtside seating area showed almost an equal split between Tech gold and Carolina blue. For Tuesday’s game against Virginia Tech, the announced attendance was 5,794.
Loading ...This mounting apathy comes at a perilous time. In April, Tech will begin a $45 million renovation of Alexander. Next year’s Jackets will play 10 games at Philips Arena and the rest in the Arena at Gwinnett. How many among a diminishing number of Tech patrons will be willing to make the trek to unfamiliar buildings? And how, if interest doesn’t pick up by November 2012, will it be to unveil a refurbished coliseum that few care to visit?
Granted, $7 million is a lot of money, but Radakovich must weigh that outlay against the price of standing pat. Down the road, how much more than $7 million would it cost Tech to keep an unpopular coach whose teams can’t be said to have overachieved since the golden run of 2004? At what point must an AD, hat in hand, call on donors and ask, “Can you spare a million to help us make a fresh start?”
There is, however, a fairly massive complication: The season isn’t yet over. Tech started horribly, losing non-conference games to Kennesaw State, which is 5-15; to Siena, which is 7-12, and to Charlotte, which is 9-10. Even after winning three of its past four games, Tech has an RPI of 136, second-worst among ACC teams. That said …
Tech is playing better. Its victory over Virginia Tech on Tuesday broke a trend. The Jackets had lost five of the past six against the Hokies, but on this night Iman Shumpert fashioned a triple double and overpowered the estimable Malcolm Delaney and, in a total departure, Hewitt outcoached Seth Greenberg.
Eleven regular-season games remain. Given the softness of its schedule and the weakness of the ACC, it’s not inconceivable that Georgia Tech, which is 10-9, could enter the ACC tournament 17-13 and 9-7 in league play. Would that be enough to save Hewitt? And now the bigger question: If you’re a Tech fan, are you rooting for a furious finish if it means keeping this coach?
Flash back to Nov. 24, 2007: Tech played Georgia in football. The Jackets were 7-4 and it was clear Chan Gailey’s time as coach was near its end. But what if Gailey, who was 0-5 against the hated Bulldogs, had beaten Georgia that day? Would Radakovich have fired a man who’d finally done what his constituency demanded?
Nobody will ever know the answer. Georgia won 31-17. Chan was canned two days later. Two years later Paul Johnson won the ACC title with Gailey’s players. In the grand scheme, that last loss to Georgia was worth it. In the grand scheme, one more losing hoops season might be the best thing for Tech.
By Mark Bradley
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
273 comments Add your comment
Georgia Tech’s in no-win situation if it wants to fire Hewitt | Beyond the Arc
January 27th, 2011
7:00 am
[...] The Atlanta Journal-Constitution columnist made the case yesterday that Tech can’t afford to keep coach Paul Hewitt, even if it does cost the school $7 million in severance pay. The reason? Mediocrity is killing the program, and at the worst possible time. [...]
C C
January 27th, 2011
7:05 am
Jackets2010-11: We all of a right to our opinions, and I certainly like this team’s players and heart lately, but I couldn’t disagree more about your comparisons and statements about how people feel about coaches.
Sure people got frustrated with Cremins at times, and things went downhill at the end, but GT fans certainly did not dislike him, never hated him. Not like they feel about Hewitt now. You just can’t compare the two situations. (Hate Cremins?!? We named the freaking’ COURT after him!!! What are you smoking?!?
As awesome as 2004 was, we just barely won several of those tourney games, and assistant coaches and Jarrett Jack’s leadership made PH look like a better coach than he was. Too bad we found that out after the Most Ridiculous Contract Extension of All Time (TM).
Also I completely disagree about “many don’t like our baseball coach either” and “the only coach Techsters like is Machelle Joseph but give it a few years. We’ll hate her too before u know it.” What’s the basis of that? What are you trying to say? Hate very much?
Michelle J and her players have been consistently good and played with heart. Why are you suggesting GT fans would turn on her? She’s PROVEN she’s a solid coach. Baseball hasn’t done as well in the tournament sometimes but everyone I know likes going to games and has nothing bad to say about the coach at all. Been a very good to great program just about every year. Sure there might be a weird play or decision once in a while, but that happens even with good managers.
Also Friedgen wasn’t consistently disliked by the fans at Maryland, the way Hewitt has been the last few years. He had a couple of bad years but responded with a good year this year. With Hewitt, even with last year’s talent and making the NCAA we underachieved, were horribly coached AGAIN, and fans really wanted to get rid of Hewitt. With Friedgen it was largely politcal/adminstration issues with him. If you asked the fans this year they would’ve been happy to keep him. Totally different situation.
Also you’ve made comments about how hard it is to win on the road. But EVERY coach has to deal with that. And Hewitt has consistently been the worst in the entire conference over the last several years. You can argue with opinions but not with that statistic.
Yes, this team does look to be improving and I actually have been a lot more enthusiastic seeing the last few home games. I still want them to win but have lost all hope in Hewitt. Until PROVEN otherwise by real results, we still suck on the road in the ACC…and the horrible UGA, KSU, and other bad losses this year still count. I’d like to see us make a run, I like these players, and I certainly will keep cheering for them. But that doesn’t change the fact that we can and should get a better coach. Period.
JB
January 27th, 2011
7:37 am
The article made me think of the Football situation in Athens. not the money part, but the part about Cremins. Cremins came to Tech and tore it up for a few years, and then just went to hell in a hand basket. Sound familiar? Mark Richt is the Dawgs Cremins!
ga_tech_92
January 27th, 2011
7:45 am
TheAntiMe – The main problem with what your suggesting is that the contract NEVER expires. You must fire him and pay him for the (always remaining) six years. There is no time you can fire him without paying him for 6 years. It never expires. It is a lifetime contract signed by an idiot who doesn’t work at GT anymore. So…the question remains…is it cheaper to pay about 7 mil today?…or is it cheaper to pay 1.something mil per year for a few more years, lose the fanbase even more, and THEN pay him 7 mil? Sounds like 7 mil today is a lot cheaper than 7 mil plus more mil’s plus damage to the program. Obviously we have the money, or we wouldn’t be spending it on a new building. The choice is made daily to not make GROUNDHOG DAY stop.
And here we are again…waking up and it’s still Groundhog Dayl
JB
January 27th, 2011
7:54 am
I, As a Dawg fan, hung on ever game with Cremins and lethal three….. Good stuff.
ga_tech_92
January 27th, 2011
7:59 am
JB – Lethal Weapon Three was good fun. I was lucky enough to be in school during those years, plus the (co)NC in football.
RambleOn84
January 27th, 2011
8:11 am
I look around at the good teams around the country and I see a common theme: most of them have at least one lights-out shooter.
At Tech we have not had one since Anthony Morrow and before that Marvin Lewis.
I understand that you need good athletes to play the game, but it seems as if all we have are athletes. No pure shooters to be found.
Sure, sometimes a guy gets hot, but we need guys who can consistently shoot 40-50% from behind the arc.
Hewitt doesn’t bring those guys in nearly enough, and you have to have them to win.
Just sayin…everyone talks about not developing a point guard, and I agree, but I think the lack of a sharpshooter is just as important.
I have always liked Hewitt and I want for him (and Tech of course) to succeed. But enough is enough. The way we have played recently only highlights the ridiculous early season losses.
This team is WAY too talented to lose to some of those teams…
RambleOn84
January 27th, 2011
8:12 am
I look around at the good teams around the country and I see a common theme: most of them have at least one lights-out shooter.
At Tech we have not had one since Anthony Morrow and before that Marvin Lewis.
RambleOn84
January 27th, 2011
8:12 am
Sure, sometimes a guy gets hot, but we need guys who can consistently shoot 40-50% from behind the arc.
Hewitt doesn’t bring those guys in nearly enough, and you have to have them to win.
Just sayin…everyone talks about not developing a point guard, and I agree, but I think the lack of a sharpshooter is just as important.
I have always liked Hewitt and I want for him (and Tech of course) to succeed. But enough is enough. The way we have played recently only highlights the ridiculous early season losses.
This team is WAY too talented to lose to some of those teams…
RambleOn84
January 27th, 2011
8:13 am
I look around at the good teams around the country and I see a common theme: most of them have at least one lights-out shooter.
At Tech we have not had one since Anthony Morrow and before that Marvin Lewis.
I understand that you need good athletes to play the game, but it seems as if all we have are athletes. No pure shooters to be found.
Sure, sometimes a guy gets hot, but we need guys who can consistently shoot 40-50% from behind the arc.
Hewitt doesn’t bring those guys in nearly enough, and you have to have them to win.
Just sayin…everyone talks about not developing a point guard, and I agree, but I think the lack of a sharpshooter is just as important.
I have always liked Hewitt and I want for him (and Tech of course) to succeed. But enough is enough. The way we have played recently only highlights the ridiculous early season losses.
RambleOn84
January 27th, 2011
8:13 am
Hewitt doesn’t bring those guys in nearly enough, and you have to have them to win.
Just sayin…everyone talks about not developing a point guard, and I agree, but I think the lack of a sharpshooter is just as important.
I have always liked Hewitt and I want for him (and Tech of course) to succeed. But enough is enough. The way we have played recently only highlights the ridiculous early season losses.
RambleOn84
January 27th, 2011
8:15 am
I have always liked Hewitt and I want for him (and Tech of course) to succeed. But enough is enough. The way we have played recently only highlights the ridiculous early season losses.
This team is WAY too talented to lose to some of those teams…
RambleOn84
January 27th, 2011
8:16 am
Sure, sometimes a guy gets hot, but we need guys who can consistently shoot 40-50% from behind the arc.
Hewitt doesn’t bring those guys in nearly enough, and you have to have them to win.
Just sayin…everyone talks about not developing a point guard, and I agree, but I think the lack of a sharpshooter is just as important.
This team is WAY too talented to lose to some of those teams…
Marvin Mangrum
January 27th, 2011
8:19 am
Been a fan since the 60s, watched most of coaches great wins, but it is obvious that he knows not what he is doing. #1, I would fire a Tech coach, who has a drop out rate higher than 25 %, I would not let Jesus play for me one year, or two years. And that should be a NCAA rule, you play 4 years or you go pro on your own. NC and Duke, most of them play 2 years, right? Thats your problem. 17-13, hockey, never happen, assuming the other team shows up.
Tech Man
January 27th, 2011
8:38 am
When Hewitt signed the most insane contract in sports history Tech was doomed. We’ve got him fort the rest of his life. Thanks Dave Braine. He should be arrested for committing a criminal act. No one gets a contract like that. Not even Vince Lombardi if he was still alive and in his prime.
gt
January 27th, 2011
8:42 am
Jackets2010-11 is right we did run Bobby out of town. The sea had changed in college basketball, with kids allowed to skip college and go straight to the pros. Bobby played, still does, a small number of players, some years just 6, and they stayed for four years in the Price, Sally era. Old Dean Smith would bring in four or five a year at Chapel Hill because of the program he had there, Bobby would concentrate on one guy, and with his charm and recruiting ability that one guy was his. In the NBA during that era Bobby’s alumni were as good as anybody’s in the country. Duke had always had good college players that were not that good in the pros. Coach K knew how to recruit what worked at Duke and were just a hair under the NBA radar. Before the no college pro entered the picture Bobby was every bit the match for Smith and K, but as his players stop coming to Tech, going directly to the pros like Garnett or going out in one year, the one’s at Duke stayed for 4 years. They ended up being like 18 year olds being held back with 12 year olds to play with. Smith had numbers and used a lot of his bench, Duke had student athletes that came to Duke for more than basketball. Bobby has one and done attitudes, he was having to rerecruit his own players every year, begging them to stay, then go find a super star point guard to replace the one that left. I am so glad Bobby didn’t quit coaching at that low point. He is now back where is all began, the Southern Conference with a team that probably could beat this Tech team and looking good for a NCAA bid this year. We did the right thing letting Bobby go, the laws of basketball economics were working against us and looked like they would never change. Instead of hiring a coach like the ones they have at Duke or Carolina that seem to have a system to weather this change we hired the opposite. We hired two coaches in that era very similar in demeanor, Gailey and Hewitt. Both were very removed 9 to 5ers. It was almost like we had resigned ourselves to be a dull athletic program in personality and results. Dan Radakovich unlike his predecessor showed guts and imagination in hiring Johnson. Think about it, bringing that offense to Tech was one of the gutsy moves of this decade anywhere. Now that we got an AD that doesn’t just mail it in lets take his handcuffs off and let him fix this basketball program. Somebody is going to hire Radakovich away pretty soon and if we don’t fix this now we may be stuck with another 9 to 5 stiff to fix this later, which we have seen how that works.
JB
January 27th, 2011
8:44 am
Did Braine have the authority to give a contract like that? Didn’t the President or Athletic Board have to sign off on it?Just Curious.
81Dog
January 27th, 2011
8:44 am
A few years ago, Tech’s goal was to hire a football coach who could do for their football program what Hewett had done for their basketball program. Hmmm. Early success? Check. Losing record against UGA? Check. Losing record this season after being considered a top 25 team? Check. One or two more bad recruiting classes from being completely irrelevant? Check.
Kudos to Radokovich. His plan is really shaping up nicely. Now all he needs to do is lock down PJ with a perpetual rollover before someone like Elon or Newberry comes along to steal him, and the D Rad Plan for Football will be fully in place!
82Dawg
January 27th, 2011
8:46 am
JB.. he would have to get any contract approved with the board…
RambleOn84
January 27th, 2011
8:54 am
Wishful thinking, “81Dog.”
I love how so many Dog fans keep trying to make Johnson look like a failure just because your own coach is a bumbling idiot. I guess it’s true that misery loves company.
JB
January 27th, 2011
9:00 am
You would think there would be language in Hewitt’s contract to get him fired with a less pay out….like sucking at his job….
Larry
January 27th, 2011
9:03 am
Trim the fat on the 45 million renovation to a new budget of 38 million. There’s your 7 million…problem solved!
JB
January 27th, 2011
9:17 am
Larry………….Every Tech grad knows what ” Value Engineering” Means. Great idea.
Use Chan's Can on Paul Hewitt
January 27th, 2011
9:43 am
A lot is blamed on Braine, but Tech has legal counsel that should have been screaming about the craziness of the contract. Were they?
Are they still working for Tech?
Did the Tech president buy-in?
It was probably Braine’s and Pails dumb idea, but Braine has bosses, too.
RambleOn84
January 27th, 2011
9:55 am
I totally agree…though Braine is a Class A Jackass for offering the contract, there were plenty of others to be held accountable for this fiasco.
For the record I like Hewitt and hope he can turn it around; however, NO ONE deserves a lifetime contract under any circumstances.
JR
January 27th, 2011
10:13 am
The new coliseum involves a bond issue for $45 million. Seems to me that GT should add the $7 million buyout to it and make it for $52 million and start fresh with a new coliseum and a new coach.
Lifetime contract?
January 27th, 2011
10:16 am
People currently with lifetime contracts:
Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XV)
John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan, Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsberg
Paul Hewitt
Basketball coaches without lifetime contracts:
Mike Krzyzewski, Phil Jackson, Tom Izzo, Jim Calhoun, Jim Boeheim, Roy Williams, Billy Donovan…..
Aero Jacket
January 27th, 2011
10:18 am
Was Dave Brainless able to offer Hewitt his lifetime contract on his signature alone, or do such contracts also require the GT president to sign off on it? In other words, is the departed Wayne Clough also responsible for this contract fiasco? And what Tech lawyers or legal firm reviewed this contract? They should also be held responsible for not looking after the best interests of the institute.
To answer Mark’s original question: Yes, I’ve been worried that a few fluke wins will be enough to postpone the inevitable need to replace Hewitt with someone who can coach and win. I’ve been a huge fan since 1984 and was at every home game for the 5 years I was at Tech (often sitting next to Mark on press row), but this year I am one of those empty seats.
Smarty Pants
January 27th, 2011
10:19 am
Based on what I glean from this blog Ga schools suck at both bb and fb . Only tech bb had a winning season in 2009/2010; UGa had loosing season. Both fb teams had loosing seasons in 2010/11; both bb teams will struggle to make 64-team NCAA tourney.
The Anti-BuzzDraft
January 27th, 2011
10:20 am
Face the facts guys, from some of your comments here your problem is with CPH making more money than you. If you haven’t noticed the coach and the team went to the ACCT Championship game and the 2nd round of the NCAAs last year. This year is still be played. The selection committee selects teams on the current year not on what they did 3 or 4 years ago. We see you miserable “fans” trying to get others to not go to the games. Your simple mind thinks that everyone is filled with hate like you. Wrong! This team is turning a corner and you will miss this in person. For people who hate CPH and the team so much you guys always know when we lose a game but never when we win. I see you hating from the West Coast “Honest Abe” you know who you are.
Jacket Dad
January 27th, 2011
10:52 am
It’s time for Hewitt to go. (way past time) He is killing what was once a BB program that was respected and envied. Now, they are simply too painful to watch (win or lose).
Even if it results in some tough transition years, I want a team that lays it all on the court every game, that knows and plays fundamentals, that plays as a team, and that has heart.
Some of the current guys have some of these characteristics, but due to inept coaching and leadership, they never mesh or appear together.
GT BB needs new blood and a new attitude and that will never happen with Hewitt around.
Old Rat
January 27th, 2011
10:55 am
Not sure which is the chicken and which is the egg. I can get almost every Tech BB game on TV. This may reduce game attendance. It was embarrassing to see the number of empty seats during the VA Tech game. Empty seats reduce the excitement to the television audience AND MAY REDUCE FUTURE COVERAGE. Recruits love to know they will be seen on TV.
Vicious circle which has negative results.
Has everyone accepted that he is going to get the 7 million unless he violates his contract or resigns. If he stays the coach for the next 30 years, he still has the severance coming if and when he is forced out.
TomB
January 27th, 2011
11:15 am
Alright, everyone comparing Hewitt to Cremins is totally clueless. First, Cremins took over a program that was a joke in college basketball especially for one in the mighty ACC conference.GT was winless in the ACC conference when Cremins took over compiling a 4-23 record before his arrival.
What did he do? In four years, he won the ACC championship( something Hewitt’s still trying to figure out), and his team reached the elite eight in the NCAA. Cremins went on to win 3 ACC championships and was 3x the ACC coach of the year. How do you measure the success of a college coach? I believe it is winning in conference and how far you take your teams in the NCAA tournament. Not just making the tournament, but taking your team to as many sweet sixteens and farther as possible. 3 sweet sixteens, 1 final four, 1 elite eight, along with 3 ACC championships under Cremins. You just can’t compare the two.
Why did Cremins retire and leave the tremendous job he did at Tech? Because his ACC winning percentage over his final five seasons was 41 percent(33-47) with 1 NCAA tournament appearance. By comparison, Hewitt has a ACC winning percentage of 35 percent over his past five years. Outside of the final four run in 2004, Hewitt has never reached the sweet sixteen of the NCAA tournament at GT.
So, everyone comparing these two coaches please give it a rest. There is no comparison, and based on his ACC winning percentage, and lack of sweet sixteen appearances, Hewitt is gone. Bye Bye.
Hewitt's agenda = Hewitt
January 27th, 2011
11:19 am
Ed Nelson (remember him?) saw the writing on the wall. He was ACC Rookie of the year (the ninth to be so honored at GT). But as Hewitt got more comfortable in his seat as Head coach in 2001 and 2002, Nelson was seeing less and less playing time. There were rumors, of course, that it had something to do with his pale skin … only rumors. Nelson transferred to U-Conn in the summer of 2003 and, although he had to ride the pine for a year (NCAA rules), he was part of the U-Conn team that beat GT in the Championship game in 2004. I’d sure like to ask Nelson what it was about Hewitt and/or the situation at GT that caused him to transfer …
The Anti-BuzzDraft
January 27th, 2011
11:26 am
See above for the racist nonsense. You do realize that Hewitt recruited Nelson, Luke, Dan Miller, & Nate Hicks along with other “pale” players. Keep your hate on the Hive. We aren’t buying it here CindyJacket.
TomB
January 27th, 2011
11:32 am
Oh, give it a rest Hewitt’s agenda = Hewitt. Did Luke Schenschers’ pale skin keep him from playing? I hate it when people show their true colors on here. Why is Daniel Miller playing according to your rationale? Granted no one screams about diversity here, but don’t you think you’re reaching?
yearofthedawg
January 27th, 2011
12:00 pm
I just wish the Milton kid had picked UGA…
TomB
January 27th, 2011
12:40 pm
I don’t believe Bradley was hating on Hewitt here. I’m sure he’s unconvinced of Hewitts’ greatness since his record speaks for itself. I believe Bradley went to the game the other night and witnessed the sparsity of the crowd and reached the reasonable conclusion that Hewitt had lost his fan base. If you know anything about Tech basketball over the years, then you know the fans have always shown up. I cannot remember a time when conference games at Tech were not sold out or at least around 90 percent capacity. So, I’m sure he asked himself a reasonable question. How can Tech afford this? New coliseum on the way, huge debts concerns and now a half full coliseum.
The Anti-BuzzDraft
January 27th, 2011
12:56 pm
Tom, Bark Madley takes shots at Hewitt every chance he gets. He only shows up to games when they are getting blown out at the half. Bark’s peers consider him a joke and an ass.
TomB
January 27th, 2011
2:56 pm
The Anti-BuzzDraft: Hewitt in many ways has been has been his own worst enemy; specifically, when he is responding to criticism, whether it be Bradley at the AJC or some other media. Many coaches will lay the blame with themselves first, before they make excuses and lash out at the media. Bradley certainly isn’t picking on Hewitt for personal reasons. If so, then he really has a beef with Richt over at UGA. And, you never hear Richt crying and blaming the media. I’m just saying this hasn’t helped Hewitts’ cause.
You're an idiot
January 27th, 2011
3:14 pm
Mark Bradley,
You’re an idiot. You came to the game predetermined to write a negative article regardless of the outcome. The team is obviously playing better than they did in the preseason and you just have a personal vendetta against Paul Hewitt. The team is 3-3 and gave UNC there only loss in conference play. It’s obvious that the team is not that talented yet they’re still winning games. Give credit where credit is due. Mark Fox who has 2 pros and is supposed to have a top 25 team is 3-3 in the SEC which is worse than the ACC by far this year and you’re not calling for his head. Give me a break. Go get a job for the UGA paper and stop pretending like you’re not biased.
I agree
January 27th, 2011
3:16 pm
I agree with you’re an idiot. Mark has been doing this for years and is either being told to do this by the editor of the paper or the editor is looking the other way. I understand that you want to write stories to make people read the paper but how can you write foolishness about a coach after his team wins 3 out of the last 4 games. You’re a terrible writer and I don’t know why the AJC hasn’t fired you. Do you have a rollover contract. You’re not very good.
TomB
January 27th, 2011
3:34 pm
You’re an idiot: I agree that you are an idiot. If you go back to the 2004 run and before, Bradley praised Hewitt in many of his columns. Facts are funny things though. How many ACC coaches have kept their jobs while winning 35 percent of their conference games which just happens to be Hewitts’ winning percentage over the past five seasons. Take away Hewitt’s 2004 run and tell me how many sweet sixteen appearances he has had at Tech? Has a Hewitt coached Tech team won even a single ACC CHAMPIONSHIP during his ten years at Tech? We even measure the success of coaches at smaller schools by how far they take their teams in the tournament. Hewitt has one sweet sixteen appearance; 2004 when his team made the final four.I will make the argument that 2004 is the only reason he’s still coaching at Tech. Lets at least be honest here: Any other ACC coach with this record would already have been canned.
chuck allison
January 27th, 2011
3:48 pm
Some beautiful day Tech will dismiss Paul Hewitt. The birds will be singing, the church bells ringing, and fun will come back to Alexander Memorial Stadium. Hewitt has been disloyal to Tech and only followed his own warped agenda. When he leaves, I hope to never see or read of him again. And I wish him well in his new environment somewhere else.
TomB
January 27th, 2011
4:13 pm
Some beautiful day in March 2011, Chuck. Best of luck to him.
Funny thing… one day you’re coaching little Sienna college and then the big boys come calling. You’re making over a million dollars a year with a dream contract coaching in one of the best conferences in college basketball. Big job, big pay and high expectations, but man you’ve reached the top. You accomplish all this and then one day you tell everyone you don’t read the AJC anymore because one sports writer wrote something you didn’t like. Blah, blah, blah. Wha!, Wha!. I just don’t get it, and I expect more from my coach and so should Georgia Tech.
ncjacket
January 27th, 2011
6:01 pm
The best option is for us to get hot, make the NCAAs and have a decent run, and for Hewitt to become a “hot” coach again and have someone hire him away. I can dream right?
The Anti-BuzzDraft
January 27th, 2011
6:37 pm
NC as a Tech man and fan you should always want the team to do well. I’ve read your posts on the Hive and on Craptalk, you have some common sense. Don’t fall for the propaganda machine of Cindy, Acworth, and Lord of the Ring in Tampa. The team is playing well, TOs are way down, inbounds plays have led to scores, FTs are up! They are defending AMC with a passion even with the smaller crowds. They haven’t given up but the few that speak like they are the majority have given up. They speak about the product and about the ACC record of past years. The NCAA selection committee only uses records from the current year. BTW Bark you still suck.
TomB
January 27th, 2011
6:59 pm
The Anti-BuzzDraft: Have you ever asked yourself why the fans have turned against Hewitt? Do you honestly want to know or will you keep defending the indefensible. I’ve been a Tech fan for a long time having season tickets for many many years. There is a reason why the coliseum is only half full for ACC conference games; its never happened before even the final years under Cremins. Believe what you want, but the facts are the facts.
Hewitts’ overall ACC conference winning percentage is 42 percent,and only 35 percent over the past five seasons.Heck, he’s never even finished higher than third in the conference and that was just one season, 2004. Even last year with one of the most talented teams of recent memory, they finished 7th in the conference. No ACC championships in ten years and no sweet sixteen appearances outside the final four year in 2004. Take away the 2004 season and Hewitt would have been long gone.
I can’t believe you keep bringing up their play this season. Did you not see the Kennesaw St game?
TomB
January 27th, 2011
7:02 pm
Inbound plays have led to scores… that was funny The Anti-BuzzDraft.
TomB
January 27th, 2011
7:08 pm
Oops, forgot to mention Hewitts 31-86 road record at GT. Pathetic.