College football is now Semi-Professional football.

[Buzztheirazz]

So knowing this fact. How do we adjust?

The first thing IMO that needs to be done is to have a new major that has nothing to do with academic standing.

Dupree school of management degree in Sports conditioning/coaching/management.

We HAVE to make changes to remain competitive.

 

[Lavoisier]

Baby steps. We aren’t competing against Texas or Bama or anyone right away. We need to start beating G5 teams regularly first and then start competing with BC, UVA, and Pitt after that. I think once we get to that point we can talk about adding majors and competing with the semi-pro type programs.

 

[Tundeballer]

Expand the school significantly. You create more alumni who become fans, and that leads to family members of those alumni becoming fans. Wait about 30 years then we will have a great football program because we will have a large fan base that will fill out the stadium, donate, and hold the athletic department to a higher standard. It’s not going to happen, but that’s how you fix the program short of a mega booster coming around.

 

[SecretAgentBuzz]

I have $ome idea$ about how we can compete in thi$ new world of college football, but, unfortunately, I don't have much to contribute. When $chool$ are paying their head coach double what our entire $taff i$ paid, then that might point toward$ a good an$wer.

 

[awbuzz]

So knowing this fact. How do we adjust?

The first thing IMO that needs to be done is to have a new major that has nothing to do with academic standing.

Dupree school of management degree in Sports conditioning/coaching/management.

We HAVE to make changes to remain competitive.

Convince the Georgia Board of Regents to give that program to Georgia Tech and not UGA and will be in a much better position.

 

[slugboy]

So knowing this fact. How do we adjust?

The first thing IMO that needs to be done is to have a new major that has nothing to do with academic standing.

Dupree school of management degree in Sports conditioning/coaching/management.

We HAVE to make changes to remain competitive.

I think even the biggest football fans in the faculty and administration, even those who might want a sports management-related degree, would oppose any degree that's not academically serious.

If your point is to have a degree that fits the mission of the school, that works. If you’re looking for a fig leaf to cover somebody not studying for 3+ years, that won’t happen.

Miami and LSU can have players not study. Clemson can have a "parks and recreation" degree. That ain't Tech.

 

[kg01]

"Now" implies this is a new phenomenon, which is inaccurate.

 

[bobongo]

I think even the biggest football fans in the faculty and administration, even those who might want a sports management-related degree, would oppose any degree that's not academically serious.

I would imagine any such degree or related degree would have to concentrate on the science and technology of sports performance as well as management. Even getting that would be an up-Hill battle.

And, although it didn't stop them from creating engineering courses at UGA, it would be duplicative. They already have sport science, kinesiology, sports mgt. and such at Ugag:

Department of Kinesiology - Mary Frances Early College of Education

coe.uga.edu

 

[slugboy]

I would imagine any such degree or related degree would have to concentrate on the science and technology of sports performance as well as management. Even getting that would be an up-Hill battle.

And, although it didn't stop them from creating engineering courses at UGA, it would be duplicative. They already have sport science, kinesiology, sports mgt. and such at Ugag:

Department of Kinesiology - Mary Frances Early College of Education

coe.uga.edu

Even if we had a Parks & Rec or Criminal Justice degree, it’s only a fraction of the battle. First, you’d need multiple degrees, because even if you’re not going to class, you want a particular degree. Second, these players want there to be ladies not going to class either, so you need retail and hospitality and fashion and other degrees—in fact, you’d need more because you want more women than men with free time.

If you’re looking at the recruiting like a Miami or an FSU or an Arkansas, you’re looking at schools where the students have a ton of free time compared to Tech. In some cases, we’re talking party schools. That’s not adding a degree program—that’s changing the entire institution. That’s a MASSIVE change

 

[Vespidae]

Even if we had a Parks & Rec or Criminal Justice degree, it’s only a fraction of the battle. First, you’d need multiple degrees, because even if you’re not going to class, you want a particular degree. Second, these players want there to be ladies not going to class either, so you need retail and hospitality and fashion and other degrees—in fact, you’d need more because you want more women than men with free time.

If you’re looking at the recruiting like a Miami or an FSU or an Arkansas, you’re looking at schools where the students have a ton of free time compared to Tech. In some cases, we’re talking party schools. That’s not adding a degree program—that’s changing the entire institution. That’s a MASSIVE change

It's not academics. Yes, Clemson has Parks and Rec and Pre-Business, whatever that is. But I have plenty of starting athletes who can handle basic business.

When I have casually asked them, would you consider Tech? The answer is no. Not an elite conference (ACC), don't get a chance to play against friends, and ... not the college experience I'm looking for. Not one has said anything about academics.

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

It's not academics. Yes, Clemson has Parks and Rec and Pre-Business, whatever that is. But I have plenty of starting athletes who can handle basic business.

When I have casually asked them, would you consider Tech? The answer is no. Not an elite conference (ACC), don't get a chance to play against friends, and ... not the college experience I'm looking for. Not one has said anything about academics.

OK Vespidae, I am going to put you on the spot so don't feel like you have to answer. Other than academics and athletic ability what have been in your experience, the major differences between Auburn and Tech that you see in the players? (Not a well worded question but I am curious as to attitude, culture, that sort of thing)

 

[bobongo]

Even if we had a Parks & Rec or Criminal Justice degree, it’s only a fraction of the battle. First, you’d need multiple degrees, because even if you’re not going to class, you want a particular degree. Second, these players want there to be ladies not going to class either, so you need retail and hospitality and fashion and other degrees—in fact, you’d need more because you want more women than men with free time.

If you’re looking at the recruiting like a Miami or an FSU or an Arkansas, you’re looking at schools where the students have a ton of free time compared to Tech. In some cases, we’re talking party schools. That’s not adding a degree program—that’s changing the entire institution. That’s a MASSIVE change

And as you suggest, it isn't going to happen. That's why Tech needs to structure recruiting around what Tech has to offer - find and home in on prospects seeking stem degrees nationwide. Embrace the nerd.

 

[JacketOff]

And as you suggest, it isn't going to happen. That's why Tech needs to structure recruiting around what Tech has to offer - find and home in on prospects seeking stem degrees nationwide. Embrace the nerd.

Even if you go all in on that approach you’re still competing against the likes of Stanford, Michigan, Texas, USC, Purdue, Texas A&M, and UCLA. Tech’s only advantage out of that group is being the only one geographically in the south.

And there’s still football powerhouses that offer formidable STEM degrees. They may not hold the elite status like GT and some of the others in the group listed above, but they’ll definitely hold water in the real world. Georgia Tech isn’t the only school in the country where someone with high academic goals can play Power 5 football.

 

[Vespidae]

OK Vespidae, I am going to put you on the spot so don't feel like you have to answer. Other than academics and athletic ability what have been in your experience, the major differences between Auburn and Tech that you see in the players? (Not a well worded question but I am curious as to attitude, culture, that sort of thing)

Here's my limited take.

There are two type of players who want to play. Those that want to play against friends (that's a lot of them) and those that want a path to the NFL (which is not as many as you think).

This area (Alabama, West Georgia, North Florida) .. these kids have been playing in high school games against each other for 10+ years. They all know each other. Some go to Auburn, some to Alabama (although that's changing as most kids who play for Bama today come from Texas) or some go to Florida. They enjoy the competition against lifelong peers.

Kids here cannot relate to playing Boston College. Or North Carolina. Or Wake Forest. They just don't give a ****.

Are the SA's stupid? No. I have a number of starting athletes who are at the top of the class. So dispel the notion that they are idiots.

Better quality athletes want to compete against other quality athletes.

I'm not sure I answered your question, but feel free to ask.

 

[bobongo]

Even if you go all in on that approach you’re still competing against the likes of Stanford, Michigan, Texas, USC, Purdue, Texas A&M, and UCLA. Tech’s only advantage out of that group is being the only one geographically in the south.

And there’s still football powerhouses that offer formidable STEM degrees. They may not hold the elite status like GT and some of the others in the group listed above, but they’ll definitely hold water in the real world. Georgia Tech isn’t the only school in the country where someone with high academic goals can play Power 5 football.

Good points, but I still think Tech needs to go after serious student/athletes nationwide who want stem degrees. It needs to focus on what it has to offer and where it excels. There are a number of fields of study where a degree from Tech is more prestigious than any of these P-5 schools, though they are fine institutions of higher learning. I don't know what we would have to lose by doing this.

 

[JacketOff]

Good points, but I still think Tech needs to go after serious student/athletes nationwide who want stem degrees. It needs to focus on what it has to offer and where it excels. There are a number of fields of study where a degree from Tech is more prestigious than any of these P-5 schools, though they are fine institutions of higher learning. I don't know what we would have to lose by doing this.

We would risk spreading our already very thin resources even thinner, with no guarantee of better results. I believe there are plenty of athletes within driving distance of ATL with high academic aspirations who would want to come to GT. There are also plenty who probably don’t care at all about the academic prestige but just want the opportunity to play.

All of that to say there is plenty of available talent for GT to take without having to go on a nationwide search for a few athletes who fit into a “mold.” It’s possible to get talent here, Collins has done it, but his miserable on field results have made it impossible to sustain.

We could absolutely reach into different parts of the country and grab kids who want the GT degree. A lot of GT’s best athletes have been from New York, California, Texas, New Jersey, and all over the place. But if your sole recruiting focus is on a nationwide search and you strike out on your top prospects, then you put yourself in a much worse position. And as I said before, there are a lot of schools with much better football status who can compete with, and in some cases have higher status degrees than what GT can offer.

 

[UgaBlows]

So knowing this fact. How do we adjust?

The first thing IMO that needs to be done is to have a new major that has nothing to do with academic standing.

Dupree school of management degree in Sports conditioning/coaching/management.

We HAVE to make changes to remain competitive.

We don’t, we don’t belong in this sh!tshow

 

[Vespidae]

Good points, but I still think Tech needs to go after serious student/athletes nationwide who want stem degrees. It needs to focus on what it has to offer and where it excels. There are a number of fields of study where a degree from Tech is more prestigious than any of these P-5 schools, though they are fine institutions of higher learning. I don't know what we would have to lose by doing this.

When Tennessee won the natty in 98, it wasn't because they recruited in Tennessee. Philip Fulmer had the foresight to open a recruiting office in Southern California when USC was on probation.

Most of these kids don't care what they study. A path to something better is all that is required.

I do think Tech needs a more sophisticated view to recruiting than what everyone else does. Is it STEM? I doubt it. Look at the top recruiting areas of the country ... there aren't that many.

 

[JacketOff]

When Tennessee won the natty in 98, it wasn't because they recruited in Tennessee. Philip Fulmer had the foresight to open a recruiting office in Southern California when USC was on probation.

Most of these kids don't care what they study. A path to something better is all that is required.

I do think Tech needs a more sophisticated view to recruiting than what everyone else does. Is it STEM? I doubt it. Look at the top recruiting areas of the country ... there aren't that many.

I’m not so sure that’s true… in fact the 1998 Tennessee team had exactly zero players from California.

1998 Football Roster - University of Tennessee Athletics

The official 1998 Football Roster for the University of Tennessee Volunteers

utsports.com

At a glance it looks like about 50% were from Tennessee, and about 90% were from Tennessee or the bordering states (GA, NC, SC, AL, MS, KY, AR, VA). And the remaining 10% were mostly from southern states: FL, MS, TX, OK.

Tennessee’s current roster has way more players who aren’t originally from Tennessee (most of them are from Georgia.) They have kids from California, Jersey, Arizona, etc. now, and they didn’t back then. I’d be willing to wager they were able to keep way more of the best in state talent at home in 1998 than they do now. In 2022 ZERO of the top 10 recruits from Tennessee went to Tennessee. Vandy and Tennessee both only had 1 each of the top 20 players from the state. Compare that to 2007 when they had 4 of the top 10 in-state players and 10 of the top 20.

I don’t think having a national recruiting base is all that important. I think it’s way more important to land the best players from your own state, and the surrounding areas. Plus, doing it that way makes it easier to grow fan support and inroads with local communities who are more likely to get involved with the program.

 

[Vespidae]

I’m not so sure that’s true… in fact the 1998 Tennessee team had exactly zero players from California.

1998 Football Roster - University of Tennessee Athletics

The official 1998 Football Roster for the University of Tennessee Volunteers

utsports.com

At a glance it looks like about 50% were from Tennessee, and about 90% were from Tennessee or the bordering states (GA, NC, SC, AL, MS, KY, AR, VA). And the remaining 10% were mostly from southern states: FL, MS, TX, OK.

Tennessee’s current roster has way more players who aren’t originally from Tennessee (most of them are from Georgia.) They have kids from California, Jersey, Arizona, etc. now, and they didn’t back then. I’d be willing to wager they were able to keep way more of the best in state talent at home in 1998 than they do now. In 2022 ZERO of the top 10 recruits from Tennessee went to Tennessee. Vandy and Tennessee both only had 1 each of the top 20 players from the state. Compare that to 2007 when they had 4 of the top 10 in-state players and 10 of the top 20.

I don’t think having a national recruiting base is all that important. I think it’s way more important to land the best players from your own state, and the surrounding areas. Plus, doing it that way makes it easier to grow fan support and inroads with local communities who are more likely to get involved with the program.

Tennessee doesn’t have a strong high school program. It’s nowhere close to what GA, FLA, TX or CA has.

I do agree that scheme matters a lot. I would far rather recruit heavily in GA than try to do so nationally. It is super expensive to do so.