CPJ On Current Transfers - Fair Article?

[GTJoeBrew]

Will not break done all your errors......but you missed by a mile on #3. The costs have not skyrocketed because of underfunded pensions and healthcare....in fact my wife, a tenured full professor at the U of Mich., gets no pension.....it is a 401k like most of the rest of the world......she also pays a good chunk of the health care plan. The reasons for the cost increase can be traced back to the feds. The cost of compliance and the growth of the administrative level of staff, over expansion from the "free money" from the feds in the past are just a couple of the factors.

Amen! The entitlements are the problem.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Try this: Johnson left for presumably better opportunities. The players leave for better opportunities. Period. So why do we whine and complain about a perceived lack of commitment, accountability, world without end, amen? He got more money. They want playing time, and they are going to make a much bigger sacrifice than a coach: for no reason at all except to bind them to their first, 18-year-old, choice, they lose a year of eligibility. And the 50-year-old coach rolls on, looking for the next score. Sounds somewhat like baseballs old reserve clause:: play for me at my salary or don't play at all, ever again. Let's do away with that, or make the coaches sit out a year, unpaid. Seems simple enough to me.

There are some similarities, but it's far from apples to apples. For one, kids come join a program and immediately they are in a position battle with 5 or 6 other guys. Right away, they must earn everything that comes next. If they were lied to or sold a bill of goods in recruiting, then that's partly on them for swallowing it. The only thing they are entitled to by way of past accomplishment is the opportunity to compete for a job. Many of these guys don't realize that fully or just plain don't like it. Some transfer out if they see an easier row to hoe somewhere else. I think that's what people mean by entitlement.

That said, not everyone that transfers out is in this boat. There are plenty of guys who do it for legitimate reasons and coach said as much. I have no idea which boat MM is in. I appreciate the fact that he didn't quit midway through the season or coast through the end of the season after he made up his mind. I like that he bowed out before bowl practice started, too. All that says class act, to me.

 

[JacketFromUGA]

AND WE'RE BACK.

 

[Skeptic]

Will not break done all your errors......but you missed by a mile on #3. The costs have not skyrocketed because of underfunded pensions and healthcare....in fact my wife, a tenured full professor at the U of Mich., gets no pension.....it is a 401k like most of the rest of the world......she also pays a good chunk of the health care plan. The reasons for the cost increase can be traced back to the feds. The cost of compliance and the growth of the administrative level of staff, over expansion from the "free money" from the feds in the past are just a couple of the factors.

I have a son who is a college professor. Over the years he has come to appreciate college sports. Why? The games have a score and there is accountability at the end, you can see the results, and the coaches who perform get paid for it. In academia it is all subjective and merit has almost nothing to do with it. Then the administrators who contribute nothing to the education of your child get paid a lot more than those who actually educate.

 

[RLR]

I apologize for derailing this thread & wish I didn't post what I did last night. My intent was not to offend or scapegoat, but to stand up for my generation. We get bashed all the time, and what i often read isn't reflective of my experience.

No trying to start a debate, but to clean up a few lingering ambiguities:

@DrJacket I have no respect for Vad Lee. And I agree with you – Paul Johnson is as honest and as straight a shooter as they come. Sometimes I think this works against GT’s program, but I sure as hell respect CPJ for being an honest man. . . even if I disagree with him re: the nature of my generation.

@18in32 is correct about the nature of law school. In that way, my post was misleading. I can’t complain about the money I’m making now. To be clear though, I knew the nature of the legal profession before I went to law school. I worked for a top firm for several years. Where everyone saw a declining labor market, I saw inefficient firm structure and the opportunity to disrupt. Also, I didn’t go to law school for the money. A finance + CS skill-set was in demand, even during the great recession. I just thought my talents were better spent on developing things like applications for the blockchain than doing quant trading.

@Animal02 – you misunderstood my point. I’m not referring to the entitlements granted to university professors. I was referring to the state funding per student. There’s nearly a 1:1 correlation beginning during W’s first-term with a decline in state funding for higher education & an increase in state spending on long-term entitlement-related obligations. Also, while this is difficult to do, we have to consider the social and public benefit that some of these admin costs bring. GT has had a huge positive effect on Atlanta. This was made possible by a lot of research & PPP projects. These activities require professional administrative support that doesn’t come cheap. You raise valid points, but, like my comment, they need context. That said, I’ll withdraw complaint #3. I can’t really complain about the cost of my education. I’m the first person in my family to get a college degree & I got 2 of them from GT & a law degree from an over-ranked, over-priced private institution. I relied on student loans b/c I didn’t have a dollar to my name, but I was able to pay them off before I was 30. Thank you, America for giving me that opportunity.

@Skeptic – I spent a year working with a university to revamp its tenure program & consulting with universities nationwide…based on what I learned, you’re spot on. Lol ironically merit factors are what universities use to deny tenure to specific units (if anyone is a med school prof on tenure track, start looking for options now).

In the words of jerry, Go Jackets!

 

[DrJacket]

@DrJacket I have no respect for Vad Lee. And I agree with you – Paul Johnson is as honest and as straight a shooter as they come. Sometimes I think this works against GT’s program, but I sure as hell respect CPJ for being an honest man. . . even if I disagree with him re: the nature of my generation.
QUOTE]

I'm sure I didn't name a player.

 

[jeffgt14]

I see a common theme among all generations in this very thread alone but it's not polite to say.

I don't really have a problem with anything CPJ said in his interview and even if you start picking quotes like like KS did, if a kid doesn't come here because of those quotes he's probably not gonna like CPJ if he did come here.

 

[Dustman]

Try this: Johnson left for presumably better opportunities. The players leave for better opportunities. Period. So why do we whine and complain about a perceived lack of commitment, accountability, world without end, amen? He got more money. They want playing time, and they are going to make a much bigger sacrifice than a coach: for no reason at all except to bind them to their first, 18-year-old, choice, they lose a year of eligibility. And the 50-year-old coach rolls on, looking for the next score. Sounds somewhat like baseballs old reserve clause:: play for me at my salary or don't play at all, ever again. Let's do away with that, or make the coaches sit out a year, unpaid. Seems simple enough to me.

If he had left us for Auburn after one or two years then I would agree with you, but he did not. I can't speak to his transition from GSU but he created a legacy at Navy and the players he left behind seemed to do just fine. I get your point with coaches that have one or two good seasons and then take the money and run, but you seem to be calling out CPJ unfairly for being a hypocrite. And back to the point of the OP, was this a fair article by the AJC? After listening to the complete interview and re-reading the article I say no it wasn't.

 

[Skeptic]

If he had left us for Auburn after one or two years then I would agree with you, but he did not. I can't speak to his transition from GSU but he created a legacy at Navy and the players he left behind seemed to do just fine. I get your point with coaches that have one or two good seasons and then take the money and run, but you seem to be calling out CPJ unfairly for being a hypocrite. And back to the point of the OP, was this a fair article by the AJC? After listening to the complete interview and re-reading the article I say no it wasn't.

Well, as to the last point: I don't have a problem with it. It seemed even handed to me, but I have always granted wide latitude. Often I don't like it, but we all survive such unpleasantness, and actually I don't have to read it. As we can see on the board, a lot of us disagree with a lot of us. As to the hypocrite point, it is this: I am not singling out Johnson or any one coach. They go where the money is and did before Heisman. With rare exception we all do. I just never sniffed they lacked commitment or, in the phrase intended to fall like an anvil from the clouds, disloyal and did not keep his word. That is the hypocrisy: one set of rules for the monied coaches high hurdling to greater riches, and another for the athlete who perhaps wants fame but mostly wants playing time, has but four years to get it and thus will lose 25% of his eligibility. If coaches and the NCAA were serious and sincere about supporting the "student athlete" --a phrase proudly promulgated by NCAA propagandists many years ago -- they would acknowledge that an 18-year-old can make a mistake, and in many cases get talked into a mistake by the same coach, and level the field. If one wants out, let him go. If a pound of flesh is absolutely demanded, then give him all his eligibility but make him sit out a year first, and he can't transfer again with playing time. Tell me: what would be wrong with that? It is that they would lose control of the labor pool. It's wrong.

 

[GTRX7]

Just to raise one point, specifically with respect to college football and basketball athletes, I think it is less about changing kids in this generation as it is about changing circumstances around the kids. With exponentially increasing recruiting budgets, elite camps, extravagant campus visits, scouts, ballooning pro contracts, and social media, I think these kids get raised to believe that they are undeniably, unique stars that have earned respect and deserve to be catered to and pampered. Given the entourage surrounding these kids (many without a strong home life), it is no surprise these particular kids feel entitled and frustrated when told they are just another team player that is going to be forced to compete for and earn their spot. I think that was part of CPJ's point as well.

 

[GTRX7]

Well, as to the last point: I don't have a problem with it. It seemed even handed to me, but I have always granted wide latitude. Often I don't like it, but we all survive such unpleasantness, and actually I don't have to read it. As we can see on the board, a lot of us disagree with a lot of us. As to the hypocrite point, it is this: I am not singling out Johnson or any one coach. They go where the money is and did before Heisman. With rare exception we all do. I just never sniffed they lacked commitment or, in the phrase intended to fall like an anvil from the clouds, disloyal and did not keep his word. That is the hypocrisy: one set of rules for the monied coaches high hurdling to greater riches, and another for the athlete who perhaps wants fame but mostly wants playing time, has but four years to get it and thus will lose 25% of his eligibility. If coaches and the NCAA were serious and sincere about supporting the "student athlete" --a phrase proudly promulgated by NCAA propagandists many years ago -- they would acknowledge that an 18-year-old can make a mistake, and in many cases get talked into a mistake by the same coach, and level the field. If one wants out, let him go. If a pound of flesh is absolutely demanded, then give him all his eligibility but make him sit out a year first, and he can't transfer again with playing time. Tell me: what would be wrong with that? It is that they would lose control of the labor pool. It's wrong.

I don't think kids should lose eligibility due to transferring (even if forced to sit out a year), nor do I believe that coaches should be able to control where a kid can transfer to. I am glad we have changed our policy on that and was happy to hear CPJ say he would not restrict these kids in any way. Selfishly, I hate transfers because it stinks for me as a fan, but that is selfish. Athletes should not be limited in transferring any more than any other student.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Agree for most part with @GTRX7

The concern to be vigilant against is that zero transfer restrictions will open the door to programs recruiting scholarship athletes away from one another. U think recruiting and cheating is slimey at the HS recruiting level? Their is great potential to really go down an ugly rabbit hole here.

I think u have to make them sit out a year unless they transfer down to FCS. Let them keep eligibility though.

 

[Animal02]

I have a son who is a college professor. Over the years he has come to appreciate college sports. Why? The games have a score and there is accountability at the end, you can see the results, and the coaches who perform get paid for it. In academia it is all subjective and merit has almost nothing to do with it. Then the administrators who contribute nothing to the education of your child get paid a lot more than those who actually educate.

My wife constantly complains about the continual addition of more more administrative positions, while they can not hire more instructional staff and decrease the classes offered and increase the number of students in a class. THey have more "VPs" and "coordinators" that contribute nothing to the education of students.

 

[Skeptic]

My wife constantly complains about the continual addition of more more administrative positions, while they can not hire more instructional staff and decrease the classes offered and increase the number of students in a class. THey have more "VPs" and "coordinators" that contribute nothing to the education of students.

My son's department had the phones removed from their cubbyhole offices. To save money. I did not make that up. Betcha they get dinged on reviews for not being available to students and parents,. (The latter actually being a good thing probably.)

 

[CuseJacket]

I'm try to bring this thread back on the rails.

The coaches won't say it but they play a big part in this entitlement culture especially when they're on the recruiting trail. Not going to find many straight shooters like CPJ. There are plenty of kids who have been "sold a dream" of how great everything is about said school and how the opportunity is there for them play day 1 or get the first carry if they signed ala Richt.

'The culture is a disaster:' Jones, Vols trending the wrong way

Multiple people close to the program thought it went back to promises made during the recruiting process, an enablement of players who were already entitled due to high school hype. There was no de-recruitment, in other words.

“Certain guys had more of a voice than they deserve,” a source close to the team said. “Certain guys would become team captains even though they didn’t earn it. When that happens, it dissolves trust the rest of the team has in you.”

And more if you read on.

 

[jacketup]

If he had left us for Auburn after one or two years then I would agree with you, but he did not. I can't speak to his transition from GSU but he created a legacy at Navy and the players he left behind seemed to do just fine. I get your point with coaches that have one or two good seasons and then take the money and run, but you seem to be calling out CPJ unfairly for being a hypocrite. And back to the point of the OP, was this a fair article by the AJC? After listening to the complete interview and re-reading the article I say no it wasn't.

Auburn was not a better opportunity than GT in Paul Johnson's case, and he was smart enough to realize it. It's probably not a better opportunity for most coaches, but most college football coaches are listening to their agents. In general, coaches are not the brightest bunch, they just happen to find a niche that works for them....for a few years at least, until they are fired.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Talk about entitlement mentality...that is the Tenn fan base. I told Tenn fans they were making a colossal mistake firing Fulmer. They didn't believe it. Some shockingly still don't.

As for Auburn job being < Tech job. Most non Tech fans would argue that.

 

[DrJacket]

It occurred to me to say this, if only for my sanity.

Here (in this thread) as well as others, and in media "comments" online-- we're seeing what I believe is mostly reasonable discussion. Speculation about players' circumstances....wish we knew more....don't have any ill will toward them....sorts of discussion. Good. As it should be.

However, the occasional conspiracy theorist speaks up. They attempt to point out that this is "a lot" of players transferring. Speculating that there must be something wrong at the program level.

Seems to me that we ought to wait and let time do what time does. That is, let time sort this out for us and see if we really end up with all that many more than normal of the players moving along. See how many more (if any) transfer. And, even if they do-- is this year maybe just an outlier within a program that isn't used to having many players transfer.

We've got to pick a tune. Often, the same people are lamenting the "small" recruiting classes and wish that we could sign more players and higher quality. The reason we historically have small classes is because of the low rate of transfers relative to other programs.

Suddenly, we've had a little more brisk activity than we're used to. Best I can tell, every one of these kids' situations are different. Why don't we let a little time pass and see how this year fits into the broader context before we launch all the amateur investigations into "what's wrong"?

 

[OldJacketFan]

It occurred to me to say this, if only for my sanity.

Here (in this thread) as well as others, and in media "comments" online-- we're seeing what I believe is mostly reasonable discussion. Speculation about players' circumstances....wish we knew more....don't have any ill will toward them....sorts of discussion. Good. As it should be.

However, the occasional conspiracy theorist speaks up. They attempt to point out that this is "a lot" of players transferring. Speculating that there must be something wrong at the program level.

Seems to me that we ought to wait and let time do what time does. That is, let time sort this out for us and see if we really end up with all that many more than normal of the players moving along. See how many more (if any) transfer. And, even if they do-- is this year maybe just an outlier within a program that isn't used to having many players transfer.

We've got to pick a tune. Often, the same people are lamenting the "small" recruiting classes and wish that we could sign more players and higher quality. The reason we historically have small classes is because of the low rate of transfers relative to other programs.

Suddenly, we've had a little more brisk activity than we're used to. Best I can tell, every one of these kids' situations are different. Why don't we let a little time pass and see how this year fits into the broader context before we launch all the amateur investigations into "what's wrong"?

What???? You mean actually use a sane approach??? Hell "we" can't do that, that wouldn't fit with the conspiracy narratives floating around! Besides "we" hate CPJ and EVERYBODY knows he can't attract/keep talent running that HS offense!

 

[bke1984]

Talk about entitlement mentality...that is the Tenn fan base. I told Tenn fans they were making a colossal mistake firing Fulmer. They didn't believe it. Some shockingly still don't.

Those folks up in Athens may have made the same mistake as Tennessee...