AJC cruitin article

GoldZ

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
930
idk if those numbers are accurate but at the end of the day i don’t know why a sizable amount of people in here seem to totally disregard the possibility that we make exceptions for our athletes and they are not held to the same standard as the typical student bodyareaccurate
The numbers are accurate.
 

jacketup

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,551
This is exactly right. If the kid took and passed the necessary course work in HS, they can get him in. Tech has tended to not take thugs, which doesn't seem to inhibit other schools.

The difference in Tech, and say Clemson, is that they all have to go to class and do some work. But the "have to try to fail" comment is accurate. UNC is not the only place where players were getting credit w/o work, but UNC cared enough to try to fix it. Clemson etc--I'm not sure that they don't turn a blind eye. Some kids would rather go somewhere where they don't have to go to class or do any work, but that's the main difference in Tech and other schools.

Tech now has BS degrees in liberal arts. If your perspective of Tech academics is pre-2000, then your perspective is wrong. It's still hard to make A's, but it's much much harder for a student to flunk out. And maybe survey of calculus is harder than college algebra, but most BA programs require 2 years of foreign language. A lot of us would find survey of calculus to be easier.
 

GoldZ

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
930
This is exactly right. If the kid took and passed the necessary course work in HS, they can get him in. Tech has tended to not take thugs, which doesn't seem to inhibit other schools.

The difference in Tech, and say Clemson, is that they all have to go to class and do some work. But the "have to try to fail" comment is accurate. UNC is not the only place where players were getting credit w/o work, but UNC cared enough to try to fix it. Clemson etc--I'm not sure that they don't turn a blind eye.

Tech now has BS degrees in liberal arts. If your perspective of Tech academics is pre-2000, then your perspective is wrong. It's still hard to make A's, but it's much much harder for a student to flunk out. And maybe survey of calculus is harder than college algebra, but most BA programs require 2 years of foreign language. A lot of us would find survey of calculus to be easier.
BS vs BA = a difference, especially for a lot of major college football players.
 

jacketup

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,551
Ken based his article primarily on the comments and feedback he solicited from a small selection of metro-area high school football coaches.

He did not conduct a more thorough, detailed study of how the GT football recruiting program has actually operated over the past several years.

Now that is what I would be most interested in!
You mean the ajc wasn't objective in their reporting? Shocking.
 

SteamWhistle

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,436
Location
Rome, GA
I’d be really curious to see if you took all of the 2023 recruits in the state Georgia, only the 4 star and 5 star guys, which is like 40 guys depending on what service you look at - how many of them have the academic chops to make passing grades at GT? Half? Less than half?

And I’m not saying they gotta make all A’s, but if they take advantage of tutoring and hustle, they can remain academically eligible while playing football.
I always thought We had the same standards to get in as everyone else in Football it’s just trusting whether or not they could stay eligible
 

684Bee

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,659
Why are you so mad? If you coming out of school with 6 figure debt, that’s not Cardale or any other SA fault. Maybe you and others should’ve been utilizing those tutors so you could’ve been a superior student, so you could’ve received more scholarship money to cover your expenses.
So you’re one that takes an opposing viewpoint as someone being mad or “hatin”? If so, I can’t do much with that. No one’s mad here. He said what he said. “I ain’t here to play school”, and there’s truth in that. We just shuffle these guys through with worthless degrees because they can run fast or jump high. With the way things are now, with NIL and transfer portal, we might as well cut out this silly middle step of charade of “amateur” college football. It’s a minor league system that the pros don’t have to pay for.
 

croberts

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
874
I put zero weight in this article. 500+ public high schools and 250 private schools in the state. We focus on the top 100 players and a hand full of under the radar guys.
Of the top 100, several are at the same school (Westlake and Grayson are good examples) and 600 schools that have no Div 1 senior prospects.
Very similar story line said about PJ.
 

Steverc

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
336
Just about all members of our football team are "special admits". This means they were not required to meet the minimum academic standards for admission. My daughter used to tutor football players when she was at Tech. Their motto was, "D's get degrees". I sometimes think about the kid at the inner city school that was able to resist all the social distractions and graduate HS with straight A's just to have his seat in a GT classroom taken by someone who got in merely because they can run fast or bounce a round rubber ball.
 

jojatk

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,612
So you’re one that takes an opposing viewpoint as someone being mad or “hatin”? If so, I can’t do much with that. No one’s mad here. He said what he said. “I ain’t here to play school”, and there’s truth in that. We just shuffle these guys through with worthless degrees because they can run fast or jump high. With the way things are now, with NIL and transfer portal, we might as well cut out this silly middle step of charade of “amateur” college football. It’s a minor league system that the pros don’t have to pay for.
Well you do kinda sound mad about it. Just telling you how it reads, not telling you how you feel.

You’re also generalizing a lot. Just like everyone else there are some athletes who are more and some who are less dedicated to academics than others. While at GT I tutored a few athletes and was a TA in a lab class that had one of our starters on the team. He was a pretty good player and also was a well regarded recruit. All of those guys were actually on the field and they all put effort into the classes for which I either tutored them or was their TA. Is that representative of every student athlete? Of course not. But to paint all gifted athletes with the same brush is incorrect. And absolutely I agree that there are plenty of gifted athletes who DO fit your description so I’m not saying all are dedicated to their studies. Just that more are putting in work you seem to be saying they aren’t.
 

travgt01

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
558
Location
Buckhead
I put zero weight in this article. 500+ public high schools and 250 private schools in the state. We focus on the top 100 players and a hand full of under the radar guys.
Of the top 100, several are at the same school (Westlake and Grayson are good examples) and 600 schools that have no Div 1 senior prospects.
Very similar story line said about PJ.
Not exactly how you build a relationship with schools and coaches. There’s maybe 20 hs that have a high d1 prospect every year. Probably 15 in metro Atlanta. It doesn’t take much to visit the ones that don’t once or twice a year. They will eventually have some d1 prospects too.
 

GTL

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
255
Still waiting on someone to let me know what what’s the difference for Techs admission standards vs rest of the NCAA and i’m not trying to be an *** i really would like to know
Dunno about rest of the NCAA, but entrance requirements are the same for all state schools. The differences are exceptions and staying eligible.
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,137
I think I get what you are driving at. It's discouraging though to cut corners AND still not be succesful. That's the worst of both worlds in my mind. It's that awful middle ground that is unpalatible (imo).

A brief response. I agree with you. In cases where formulas are involved, I let the kids have notes or else the formulas are on the board. At first, they are astonished and think the class will therefore be easy. But after the first test, they understand that having the formulas and working the problems are two different things. As a student, I diliked course like anatomy or history that relied heavily on memorization of facts. Sorry for the off topic.
I always used study guides, but seldom used open book tests. Study guides make sense since, you know, what you ask them to study is what you want them to know and think about. I did use open book and "use your own work" tests in my research methods class and, boy, did the kids hate those. Largely because I didn't accept either sloppy work or mistakes in programming. "So, you would make them do an exam again?" Yes, then I'd grade it.

Now back to the program …
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,137
Tech now has BS degrees in liberal arts. If your perspective of Tech academics is pre-2000, then your perspective is wrong. It's still hard to make A's, but it's much much harder for a student to flunk out.
Problem = nobody would recognize Tech's "liberal arts" degrees as such. The reason is that Tach doesn't have legit departments in most liberal arts and commensurate professional programs. This drives me crazy. It would be easy to expand the present faculties to have actual departments in, say, most of the social sciences and in humanities. Then Tech could offer degrees that the grads wouldn't have to explain, carefully, to an employer. It would also make Tech a more familiar place to land for Georgia students. In short, Tech should be more like Purdue or (you can check) MIT.

I've gone over the reasons for this in other posts. It would help recruiting, sure, but that's not the main reason it should be done.
 
Top