lv20gt
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 5,588
That’s not what he was talking about though. He asked for statistics that say we should be better than what we are.
And what statistic says we shouldn't be better than we are?
That’s not what he was talking about though. He asked for statistics that say we should be better than what we are.
1) Historically we haven’t been better than what we’ve been under CPJ for the most part.And what statistic says we shouldn't be better than we are?
I've got PLENTY of stats to tell you CPJ
Where did he say we won't ever be as good as them? He said we won't win an arms race with them, which I would struggle to come up with any relevant argument to refute that. My interpretation of his overall point is that GT's commitment of overall resources to football is different than Clemsons', and it is. IMHO, he's been fighting to narrow that difference since he's been here. And by the way, GT's undergrad enrollment, where it counts when comparing available student support, is about 17% smaller than Clemson. I'll give it you that I wouldn't categorize that as way less, but we are smaller when talking about kids on campus available for a football Saturday.Can't believe nobody heard him say how we have way less students than Clemson and that's a reason why we wont ever be as good as them. This guy just doesn't get it
Can't believe nobody heard him say how we have way less students than Clemson and that's a reason why we wont ever be as good as them. This guy just doesn't get it
Add to that, that there is a lot less entertainment options to do in Clemson on a game day (any day really) than than in Atlanta.Where did he say we won't ever be as good as them? He said we won't win an arms race with them, which I would struggle to come up with any relevant argument to refute that. My interpretation of his overall point is that GT's commitment of overall resources to football is different than Clemsons', and it is. IMHO, he's been fighting to narrow that difference since he's been here. And by the way, GT's undergrad enrollment, where it counts when comparing available student support, is about 17% smaller than Clemson. I'll give it you that I wouldn't categorize that as way less, but we are smaller when talking about kids on campus available for a football Saturday.
Agree, I’ve been saying I think we will have a really good season and possibly like 2014. After hearing CPJ it makes me feel even more confident in this.Instead of focusing on the Clemson comparison, y'all need to read the transcript. CPJ seems optimistic about the backs and the OL. That's RARE.
He's talking about facilities and attracting recruits outside of any academics. Clemson has like water slides and all this crazy stuff that really stands out to kids, especially those that have solid football future and aren't too concerned about a degree.Kinda sad to hear CPJ misspeak about the size of Georgia Tech compared to Clemson. We have just as many students as Clemson. So we've still got alot of potential to fill. As always Paul is downgrading his own place
Um we have just as many if not more students. That's why he doesn't get itMore students leads to more alumni, which, in turn, leads to more demand for a quality football product, then more support, then more pressure on school Administration, then bigger athletic budgets, then more money spent on facilities, staff, recruiting, then better infield results. Maybe he does get it.
Clemson has undergrad enrollment that is 20 percent higher than Georgia Tech.Um we have just as many if not more students. That's why he doesn't get it
I saw somewhere that we've got 3000 more studentsClemson has undergrad enrollment that is 20 percent higher than Georgia Tech.
Actually they've got only around 3000 more students so whatever not a huge difference. That shouldn't be used by anybody as an excuseWhile GT has about 5,000 more students overall, Clemson has about 4,000 more undergraduates. IMHO, the undergraduate population is what one needs to look at when it comes to student support of the sports programs.
What you really need to look at is what percentage of their students actually give a darn about football compared to ours. After doing that, they outnumber us big time.Actually they've got only around 3000 more students so whatever not a huge difference. That shouldn't be used by anybody as an excuse
Even then, most of their students grew up in the states and know about football. I’d like to know how many students at GT have never heard or watched a game compared to Clemson. We are talking about two totally different type of students for the most part.I saw somewhere that we've got 3000 more students
Pretty much what I said below. I just said it WAY betterWhat you really need to look at is what percentage of their students actually give a darn about football compared to ours. After doing that, they outnumber us big time.