CPJ On Current Transfers - Fair Article?

[Whiskey_Clear]

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"?

Look.......your being reasonable.....just stop it.

 

[LongforDodd]

I had no problem with his overall message but the word "entitled" in the context of youth these days is generally used pejoratively. I wished he had phrased that idea in a different way.

 

[TechPhi97]

It's not just the football team. I skated through high school without really trying, and my first quarter at Tech was a rude awakening. As in something like a 2.7 GPA. My only "A" was in marching band (grade based on attendance). It took a full year for me to get my schtuff together and start making good grades again. I went from being one of the best in HS to being little better than average at Tech until I figured out the connection between effort and results. If you never make that connection, I guess a transfer seems like a good idea.

Yep, when you're good at something young you think you're great; it takes failure to get some perspective. 1/3 of my pledge class at Georgia Tech left school for one reason or another; didn't want to put in the work for the GT degree, didn't like the school, didn't want to be an engineer any more. I don't think that means that we were "weak" or whatever, it just means that young people change their minds. I had a similar story to you (2.4 GPA after first year) and my decision was easy - buckle down. Partly so I would stop embarrassing myself, and partly because I knew I needed to get a job.

These kids are transferring because it's not working for them. They don't like the school, don't think they're getting enough playing time, or just want to be closer to home. They have a skill that means they are in demand, and if they use it to get what they want then more power to them.

The world is full of people who change their situation because it doesn't meet their needs. In the corporate world, there seems to be an expectation of loyalty from companies but then they can let you go at any time. So "sticking it out" or "being committed" can just dig you a big, fat hole. I don't think it's entitled to try and find the best situation for you. Life's too short to be unhappy.

 

[Dustman]

I had no problem with his overall message but the word "entitled" in the context of youth these days is generally used pejoratively. I wished he had phrased that idea in a different way.

Which IMO is exactly why the headline was
Paul Johnson on transfer trend: ‘Kids have such a sense of entitlement’
And not:
“It’s just changed,” he said. “I think that it’s not so much the kids. It’s just society in general.”

These were off the cuff remarks after a football practice.

In somewhat related news I saw a story today where freshmen headed to their first finals at GT got a pep rally along the way. (It's just changed...)

 

[jeffgt14]

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.

The smart ones who actually follow college football as a whole and not just whatever SEC game is on I think knew it was a mistake. I think at the time they thought it may be a decent move because they brought in Kiffin who I don't think was necessarily a bad hire. Kiffin just screwed them royally after 1 year.

I know a few LSU fans who are pissed about them firing Les Miles especially in the middle of the season with no real plan in place (mainly afraid that Ed Orgeron would end up getting the job and were rooting for them to lose the rest of their games because of it). I actually like the hire of Orgeron though. Obviously it's only because the other 2 guys rejected them but everything I see in him shows that he has the passion to do a good job there. I like guys like that and hope he succeeds. Butch Jones is just a scumbag and I hope he fails miserably.

 

[Old South Stands]

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....

In the words of jerry, Go Jackets!

I enjoyed reading both your posts... Your generation is interesting and often misunderstood, and the economic & societal challenges you face these days are nothing short of monumental. I'm very thankful I didn't have to grow up in your era. As far as not being able to get into Tech, you're quite right that many of us couldn't get in if we had to apply today. Georgia Tech was once a school that served regional and national needs; today it's an institution of major international import. Was talking recently with a Millennial friend who's finishing up med school (he got his undergraduate degree at Tech)... an incredibly smart guy in the top 5% of his med school class, and he said he wouldn't be able to get into Tech today if he were coming out of high school now. As for me, I got in largely as a legacy and barely survived to graduation. My dad got his undergraduate and masters at Tech and donated regularly to the alumni association. Those sorts of things once carried a lot of weight on the Hill. If he hadn't gone to Tech, the only way I'd have gotten on campus was to buy a ticket to a football game. Going into the military before college might have helped, too.

What's unusual about your generation is that many among the top percent are incredible achievers who can hold their own against (or out-compete) just about anybody from any generation. Yet there's empirical evidence to suggest that it's also the least knowledgable and capable generation as a whole, despite the promises of technology inside and outside the classroom. Not your generation's fault, but partly the fault of an educational system that's cheated young students for decades, robbing them of creativity, basic math and reading skills, and critical-thinking skills. This process was well underway at least since the early '70s, adversely affecting us Gen-Xers as well.

The educational needs of a sovereign nation like post-Sputnik America were quite different from the needs of today's globalist society, which requires fewer and fewer knowledgeable and well-rounded citizens; just an elite core. In recent years, there's been an over-emphasis on computers and technology in the classroom in lieu of books, memorization, and time-tested learning off the blackboard. According to news reports, many of the top Silicon-Valley CEOs and engineers won't let their kids near the technology they've created, stating that it's addictive and has negative effects on brain development and cognitive ability! It's a dirty secret that's not spoken out loud to the general public very often.

On the whole, it can probably be said that the Boomers are the best-educated generation top to bottom, perhaps in history. They're perhaps the most literate overall, and they've also inherited a lot of improvisational and problem-solving skills passed down from their fathers and grandfathers (no multiple-choice tests in those days). The Boomers are the generation that designed and built many of the technologies that in turn enabled the technologies we depend upon today. Whereas Boomers did a lot of home experiments as kids using household products and items from the hardware store, I grew up with science kits that contained everything you needed to solve the problems, instructions included. While trying to find a suitable electronics science kit for my young nephew, I was surprised to see that they'd been significantly dumbed down from the time I was a kid.

A recent test was conducted to find out which generation coped best with everyday technology. One of the problems was to return an incorrectly shipped item from a fictitious online retailer and have them ship the correct item, using the retailer's web site. Of the four generational cohorts tested, the Baby Boomers scored the best, followed by the Gen X-ers, then by the Millennials, and finally the WW2/Silent generation. Though having grown up with ubiquitous technology, the Millennials as a group didn't possess the reading comprehension skills or reasoning abilities to solve the problems, while the oldest generation understood the problems but had difficulties managing the technology side. The groups that fared best were those who were educated without technology but learned to use it later on in the workplace. Don't know how all this bodes for the future... Not very good to have an elite few who are extraordinarily capable, yet large masses of those who lack skills and intellectual curiosity.

 

[stech81]

I drink water out of a garden hose as a kid . I was the Channel Changer for my dad. If I got hurt at practice or in a game the coach would say you are ok get back in there .
All I know is that makes me old and no better than anyone else .
And we beat uga and I'm still happy.

 

[Sideways]

I enjoyed reading both your posts... Your generation is interesting and often misunderstood, and the economic & societal challenges you face these days are nothing short of monumental. I'm very thankful I didn't have to grow up in your era. As far as not being able to get into Tech, you're quite right that many of us couldn't get in if we had to apply today. Georgia Tech was once a school that served regional and national needs; today it's an institution of major international import. Was talking recently with a Millennial friend who's finishing up med school (he got his undergraduate degree at Tech)... an incredibly smart guy in the top 5% of his med school class, and he said he wouldn't be able to get into Tech today if he were coming out of high school now. As for me, I got in largely as a legacy and barely survived to graduation. My dad got his undergraduate and masters at Tech and donated regularly to the alumni association. Those sorts of things once carried a lot of weight on the Hill. If he hadn't gone to Tech, the only way I'd have gotten on campus was to buy a ticket to a football game. Going into the military before college might have helped, too.

What's unusual about your generation is that many among the top percent are incredible achievers who can hold their own against (or out-compete) just about anybody from any generation. Yet there's empirical evidence to suggest that it's also the least knowledgable and capable generation as a whole, despite the promises of technology inside and outside the classroom. Not your generation's fault, but partly the fault of an educational system that's cheated young students for decades, robbing them of creativity, basic math and reading skills, and critical-thinking skills. This process was well underway at least since the early '70s, adversely affecting us Gen-Xers as well.

The educational needs of a sovereign nation like post-Sputnik America were quite different from the needs of today's globalist society, which requires fewer and fewer knowledgeable and well-rounded citizens; just an elite core. In recent years, there's been an over-emphasis on computers and technology in the classroom in lieu of books, memorization, and time-tested learning off the blackboard. According to news reports, many of the top Silicon-Valley CEOs and engineers won't let their kids near the technology they've created, stating that it's addictive and has negative effects on brain development and cognitive ability! It's a dirty secret that's not spoken out loud to the general public very often.

On the whole, it can probably be said that the Boomers are the best-educated generation top to bottom, perhaps in history. They're perhaps the most literate overall, and they've also inherited a lot of improvisational and problem-solving skills passed down from their fathers and grandfathers (no multiple-choice tests in those days). The Boomers are the generation that designed and built many of the technologies that in turn enabled the technologies we depend upon today. Whereas Boomers did a lot of home experiments as kids using household products and items from the hardware store, I grew up with science kits that contained everything you needed to solve the problems, instructions included. While trying to find a suitable electronics science kit for my young nephew, I was surprised to see that they'd been significantly dumbed down from the time I was a kid.

A recent test was conducted to find out which generation coped best with everyday technology. One of the problems was to return an incorrectly shipped item from a fictitious online retailer and have them ship the correct item, using the retailer's web site. Of the four generational cohorts tested, the Baby Boomers scored the best, followed by the Gen X-ers, then by the Millennials, and finally the WW2/Silent generation. Though having grown up with ubiquitous technology, the Millennials as a group didn't possess the reading comprehension skills or reasoning abilities to solve the problems, while the oldest generation understood the problems but had difficulties managing the technology side. The groups that fared best were those who were educated without technology but learned to use it later on in the workplace. Don't know how all this bodes for the future... Not very good to have an elite few who are extraordinarily capable, yet large masses of those who lack skills and intellectual curiosity.

This is very interesting. I am a Boomer. I know a boy in our church who graduated with honors at Tech in Computer Science. He is an incredibly bright young man. I got him to buy my latest computer and set it up for me. He did it all including negotiating with the store. He is a typical Tech geek but is well grounded in what it takes to be successful. He was a TA for a year at Tech while getting his master's degree. He told me that many freshmen at Tech undergo culture shock upon arrival. The work load and the time demands are far beyond their experience. They either adjust as he candidly admits he had to, or they have to "explore other options" as he put it. What he says is almost word for word what my brother in law thought way back in the day. My brother in law graduated from Tech in 1970 with a degree in electrical engineering. Some things never really change.

 

[SidewalkJacket]

I enjoyed reading both your posts... Your generation is interesting and often misunderstood, and the economic & societal challenges you face these days are nothing short of monumental. I'm very thankful I didn't have to grow up in your era. As far as not being able to get into Tech, you're quite right that many of us couldn't get in if we had to apply today. Georgia Tech was once a school that served regional and national needs; today it's an institution of major international import. Was talking recently with a Millennial friend who's finishing up med school (he got his undergraduate degree at Tech)... an incredibly smart guy in the top 5% of his med school class, and he said he wouldn't be able to get into Tech today if he were coming out of high school now. As for me, I got in largely as a legacy and barely survived to graduation. My dad got his undergraduate and masters at Tech and donated regularly to the alumni association. Those sorts of things once carried a lot of weight on the Hill. If he hadn't gone to Tech, the only way I'd have gotten on campus was to buy a ticket to a football game. Going into the military before college might have helped, too.

What's unusual about your generation is that many among the top percent are incredible achievers who can hold their own against (or out-compete) just about anybody from any generation. Yet there's empirical evidence to suggest that it's also the least knowledgable and capable generation as a whole, despite the promises of technology inside and outside the classroom. Not your generation's fault, but partly the fault of an educational system that's cheated young students for decades, robbing them of creativity, basic math and reading skills, and critical-thinking skills. This process was well underway at least since the early '70s, adversely affecting us Gen-Xers as well.

The educational needs of a sovereign nation like post-Sputnik America were quite different from the needs of today's globalist society, which requires fewer and fewer knowledgeable and well-rounded citizens; just an elite core. In recent years, there's been an over-emphasis on computers and technology in the classroom in lieu of books, memorization, and time-tested learning off the blackboard. According to news reports, many of the top Silicon-Valley CEOs and engineers won't let their kids near the technology they've created, stating that it's addictive and has negative effects on brain development and cognitive ability! It's a dirty secret that's not spoken out loud to the general public very often.

On the whole, it can probably be said that the Boomers are the best-educated generation top to bottom, perhaps in history. They're perhaps the most literate overall, and they've also inherited a lot of improvisational and problem-solving skills passed down from their fathers and grandfathers (no multiple-choice tests in those days). The Boomers are the generation that designed and built many of the technologies that in turn enabled the technologies we depend upon today. Whereas Boomers did a lot of home experiments as kids using household products and items from the hardware store, I grew up with science kits that contained everything you needed to solve the problems, instructions included. While trying to find a suitable electronics science kit for my young nephew, I was surprised to see that they'd been significantly dumbed down from the time I was a kid.

A recent test was conducted to find out which generation coped best with everyday technology. One of the problems was to return an incorrectly shipped item from a fictitious online retailer and have them ship the correct item, using the retailer's web site. Of the four generational cohorts tested, the Baby Boomers scored the best, followed by the Gen X-ers, then by the Millennials, and finally the WW2/Silent generation. Though having grown up with ubiquitous technology, the Millennials as a group didn't possess the reading comprehension skills or reasoning abilities to solve the problems, while the oldest generation understood the problems but had difficulties managing the technology side. The groups that fared best were those who were educated without technology but learned to use it later on in the workplace. Don't know how all this bodes for the future... Not very good to have an elite few who are extraordinarily capable, yet large masses of those who lack skills and intellectual curiosity.

Good read. Felt like a social science journal article. Very interesting analysis.

 

[eetech]

I'm not a fan of people being paid millions off the backs of kids working for crumbs complaining about the kids's entitlement.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

The smart ones who actually follow college football as a whole and not just whatever SEC game is on I think knew it was a mistake. I think at the time they thought it may be a decent move because they brought in Kiffin who I don't think was necessarily a bad hire. Kiffin just screwed them royally after 1 year.

I know a few LSU fans who are pissed about them firing Les Miles especially in the middle of the season with no real plan in place (mainly afraid that Ed Orgeron would end up getting the job and were rooting for them to lose the rest of their games because of it). I actually like the hire of Orgeron though. Obviously it's only because the other 2 guys rejected them but everything I see in him shows that he has the passion to do a good job there. I like guys like that and hope he succeeds. Butch Jones is just a scumbag and I hope he fails miserably.

Thanks for the opening to something I've been thinking about.

Aren't coaches acting more "entitled" today than 20-30 years ago? They certainly get paid a lot more and seem more mobile.

If so, it gets back to one of CPJ's talking points. It's that society has changed. If so, the change is not necessarily a difference in generations.

 

[awbuzz]

I'm not a fan of people being paid millions off the backs of kids working for crumbs complaining about the kids's entitlement.

... I hope you weren't buying Nike products 15 years ago...

 

[MWBATL]

It's that society has changed. If so, the change is not necessarily a difference in generations.

This. This times 1,000,000.

One only need to look at our media today to see the same issues...instant news analysis that is paper thin in depth but repeated every 30 minutes....life by headlines instead of depth of thinking and analysis.....trends towards instant gratification instead of doing what is best long term.....

These things are NOT specific to a generation, folks who are alive today of every generation demonstrate these trends. And such things have always existed in human nature. Society today has merely shifted, just a bit actually, towards these tendencies. I strongly suspect it is being driven by the trend towards impersonalization...our technology, our entertainment, our lives in general are less devoted to personal interaction and more to solitude with technological interactions. I grew up visiting Grandma's house every Sunday, where we would spend the entire afternoon sitting around and, you know, talking to each other. No TV. No distractions, just family getting together. Nowadays, I can't even get my kids to call on the telephone...they'd rather text and email...just another example of the general trend in society we are seeing. Older folks show the same trends, by doing things like allowing themselves to waste away with obesity instead of sensibly taking care of their bodies.

It's not just the kids or this generation. It is society as a whole. We are trending towards becoming Solaria.

 

[4shotB]

Thanks for the opening to something I've been thinking about.

Aren't coaches acting more "entitled" today than 20-30 years ago? They certainly get paid a lot more and seem more mobile.

If so, it gets back to one of CPJ's talking points. It's that society has changed. If so, the change is not necessarily a difference in generations.

Coaches are more mobile these days...as you and others say, it's by necessity ( a response to changes) and has been thrust upon them somewhat. Look at Richt at Uga or Les Miles at LSU. Outside of the brief Herschel period at Uga, I would say that Richt did as much over there as Vince Dooley. However, VD is considered a Uga icon* and Richt was run out of town. Even Bowden was dumped at FSU. Years (decades) ago, these guys would have coached at their respective schools until retirement. Then they would have built statues of them. Frank Beamer may be the last of the 'coach for life" types that we will ever see. outside of maybe a few guys in the lower divisions who are coaching outside the spotlight of national scrutiny.

* pun intended

 

[GTNavyNuke]

Coaches are more mobile these days...as you and others say, it's by necessity ( a response to changes) and has been thrust upon them somewhat. Look at Richt at Uga or Les Miles at LSU. Outside of the brief Herschel period at Uga, I would say that Richt did as much over there as Vince Dooley. However, VD is considered a Uga icon* and Richt was run out of town. Even Bowden was dumped at FSU. Years (decades) ago, these guys would have coached at their respective schools until retirement. Then they would have built statues of them. Frank Beamer may be the last of the 'coach for life" types that we will ever see. outside of maybe a few guys in the lower divisions who are coaching outside the spotlight of national scrutiny.

* pun intended

Kids are more mobile today. Gone are the days of rewarding loyalty at the vast majority of the companies. Now it's the short term profits for the entitled few who are fortunate enough to own appreciable amounts of the equity in those companies.

The best choice is probably starting your own company or being in a very small company. And that requires mobility.

 

[AE 87]

Thanks for the opening to something I've been thinking about.

Aren't coaches acting more "entitled" today than 20-30 years ago? They certainly get paid a lot more and seem more mobile.

If so, it gets back to one of CPJ's talking points. It's that society has changed. If so, the change is not necessarily a difference in generations.

I don't know about coaches being "more 'entitled' today." I think coaches recognize that their shelf life is very limited in an unrealistically entitlement culture.

If you're not a top 10 team every year, then you hear clamoring for a coaching change. Fwiw, CPJ has consistently said that if GTAA thinks that they can find better, then they should buy him out.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

What......u trying to imply that.........fans......feel entitled?