Georgia Tech’s Inability to Land In-State Talent is Becoming Problematic

[1979jacket]

I've been watching Ga Tech football for over 40 years. We have never been able to recruit like other SEC schools. Academics are part of that, we are not the state school is part of it, but I believe the biggest problem is lack of academic choices from not being a university. I believe we should make some "football" degrees to help level the playing field but at the end of the day we will never be able to offer the degree options of universities. The key to Tech recruiting is push the education we have to offer, hard work by assistants, and most importantly finding the 2 and 3 star athletes that are better than their rating. I actually felt Gailey was quit good at that and that recently Johnson is doing better either by luck or better evaluation - don't know. More money for facilities and staff would also help.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I've been watching Ga Tech football for over 40 years. We have never been able to recruit like other SEC schools. Academics are part of that, we are not the state school is part of it, but I believe the biggest problem is lack of academic choices from not being a university. I believe we should make some "football" degrees to help level the playing field but at the end of the day we will never be able to offer the degree options of universities. The key to Tech recruiting is push the education we have to offer, hard work by assistants, and most importantly finding the 2 and 3 star athletes that are better than their rating. I actually felt Gailey was quit good at that and that recently Johnson is doing better either by luck or better evaluation - don't know. More money for facilities and staff would also help.

I couldn't disagree more. If we broaden the number of degrees, then we're becoming a football factory like everyone else. Our one biggest brand identifier in the state, the southeast, and nationally is our academic rigor. If we allow kids to essentially major in football, then we start to chip away at that. Now Stanford has a very good academic reputation, and they allow all kinds of worthless majors for their football players, but I think you can't just assume that we could navigate those waters effectively. Nor would I want to, but that's my opinion. I'd rather be an underdog every year and have a reputation of a place that's actually trying to deliver an education.

 

[kg01]

I couldn't disagree more. If we broaden the number of degrees, then we're becoming a football factory like everyone else. Our one biggest brand identifier in the state, the southeast, and nationally is our academic rigor. If we allow kids to essentially major in football, then we start to chip away at that. Now Stanford has a very good academic reputation, and they allow all kinds of worthless majors for their football players, but I think you can't just assume that we could navigate those waters effectively. Nor would I want to, but that's my opinion. I'd rather be an underdog every year and have a reputation of a place that's actually trying to deliver an education.

I agree for the most part. I wouldn't mind seeing some different majors offered but not for the purpose of letting dudes major in eligibility. I'd like to see us expand what we offer but keep our academic standards high.

Stanford being a private school makes a big difference between us and them .. actually, forget I said that. The only discussion more tired/over-done than the 'GT can't get 5-stars' thing is the 'GT vs Stanford' discussion.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I couldn't disagree more. If we broaden the number of degrees, then we're becoming a football factory like everyone else. Our one biggest brand identifier in the state, the southeast, and nationally is our academic rigor. If we allow kids to essentially major in football, then we start to chip away at that. Now Stanford has a very good academic reputation, and they allow all kinds of worthless majors for their football players, but I think you can't just assume that we could navigate those waters effectively. Nor would I want to, but that's my opinion. I'd rather be an underdog every year and have a reputation of a place that's actually trying to deliver an education.

When I was in school, there were classes with nicknames like "rocks for jocks" (Earth Science) and even majors, "socks for jocks" (Textile Engineering.)

 

[Ibeeballin]

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. You guys remember the recruiting strategy of "putting a fence around the state of GA". There were numerous threads about why we don't cast a wider net. So I'm not sure we really know what we want.

 

[Ibeeballin]

I agree for the most part. I wouldn't mind seeing some different majors offered but not for the purpose of letting dudes major in eligibility. I'd like to see us expand what we offer but keep our academic standards high.

Stanford being a private school makes a big difference between us and them .. actually, forget I said that. The only discussion more tired/over-done than the 'GT can't get 5-stars' thing is the 'GT vs Stanford' discussion.

This argument has reached the media level and it is infuriating that people don't understand that, other than Cal, we are the only consistently winning P5 public school. I'm so tired of hearing if ND, Stanford, and now Duke can consistently recruit 4* why can't Tech??

 

[kg01]

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. You guys remember the recruiting strategy of "putting a fence around the state of GA". There were numerous threads about why we don't cast a wider net. So I'm not sure we really know what we want.

That's a great point. Many said that our best recruiting was when we scoured the academies and private schools up in the northeast.

Just win man. Why do we care how? We gotta stop paying attention to these tired articles.

 

[AE 87]

Biggest problem is we like to create & make excuses. We have no leadership saying what we want and should expect.

Anyone know what the goals are for GT football (except making the players take a math course)? GO'L stated he wanted to be a top 20 program.

We want to drive across the county without a map or should say GPS. How often does the AD expect to beat ugag in football, BB, and baseball. Is being competitive in the Coastal the only goal? (If so, I can understand why they would keep it quite because that will bankrupt the GTAA)

We make too many excuses. Their are MANY players who can succeed at GT and we do not do a good enough job of recruiting them,and selling them.

"Just do it," "Just win," and "Just be a top 20 program" are not strategies but goals.

Once you establish your goals, your strategies for reaching those goals must account for circumstances.

If you insist on labelling any discussion of circumstances as "excuse making," then you are treating the goal as if it were a strategy.

It's like a coach calling the play from the sideline, "Score a TD," and then complaining about missed blocks. When the players respond that they didn't know who to block without a specific play, he says, "Stop making excuses."

 

[kg01]

This argument has reached the media level and it is infuriating that people don't understand that, other than Cal, we are the only consistently winning P5 public school. I'm so tired of hearing if ND, Stanford, and now Duke can consistently recruit 4* why can't Tech??

I can answer that. It's 'cause, if them schools wanna admit a {whatever the non-offensive word for retard is}, they can.

 

[alentrekin]

“(Stanford) accommodates athletes in the manner that they accommodate students with disabilities,” said Donald Barr, who teaches a course titled “Social Class, Race, Ethnicity, Health,” which was highlighted by resource center advisers.

http://www.stanforddaily.com/2011/03/09/1046687/ (old but relevant)

A guy I played baseball against was given a baseball scholarship for his first year, then an academic scholarship after his grades were above 3.0. They had a way of making that happens: pass/fail decisions could be made very late in the semester, and the grade doesn't show up as long as you take the class again the next semester. Wonders for APR and GPA based scholarship eligibility.

 

[GTFLETCH]

This article is a shame... We took more Out of state players before Coach Ted Roof got here.... Also CTR and CMP have opened up LA.... Most of our team comes (80 to 90 percent) from GA! Then the 90% of the Out of state players come from the Carolinas, FLA, BAMA, Tenn or LA.... We use to get a few from DC/NE... Coach Ron West was hire to help with National recruiting and he has done a nice job.... But make no mistake about it, Tech has a ton of players from Georgia. We are a not a factory so we are not looking for factory kids... This article should have never been written... You cannot and should not ever compare Georgia Tech to the like of a factory school ever!!!!!

Current 2017 Team
From Georgia (57)
T. Marshall
B. Swilling
K. Benson
X. Gantt
JJ Green
O. Jarrett
C. Lynch
D. Mills
Q. Searcy
C. Turner
B. Bennett
A. Bussoletti
J Camp
S Dolphous
J. Hawkins-Anderson
A. Messick
Q Spear
B. Stewart
W. Bryan
K. Cooper
S. Devine
C. Hunt
B. Ivemeyer
C. Lagod
A. Marshall
B. Morgan
S. Morgan
M. Pruit
T. Smith
D. Brooks
K. Freeman
B. Glanton
C. Martin
A. Saint-Amour
T. Vernon
J White
N. Williams
L. Austin
Law. Austin
J. Cole
M. Davis
AJ Gray
C. Griffin
A. Kerr
J Selembo
J. Brashear
T. Cooksey
D. Curry
C. Dandaneau
Tre Jackson
J. Macrina
A. Mallard
Z Mathews
S Davis
L Patelles
S. Underwood
C Wilson

Next
Florida (7 players)
Tennessee (5 Players)
Alabama (4 players)

In-coming 2017 Scholarship class - (23 from Georgia if you count Schooly and PWO)
Georgia (12)
C. Alston
J Askew
T. Carpenter
C Clark
K Dawson
J Henderson
B. King
T Oliver
Z. Quinney
TD Roof
A Showell
D. Williams
Next
S. Carolina (3 players)
Tennessee (3 Players)
Florida & LA (2 players each)

In-coming 2017 PWO class
Georgia (11)
W Thomas
O Brannon
H Gibbs
J Tukes
Z Ashley
J Blancato
L Byrne
C Conway
W Lay
B Bradfield
J Coco


Georgia Tech has also kept some kids in state (29 that CTR and team has kept in state)
PJ Davis almost went to Temple
K. Freeman had offers from Arkansas, Vandy, Clemson, West Virginia, Miami, Louisville, Kentucky, and Northwestern
Austin Twins, Each had their own offers, but Tech offered them to play together
A Saint-Armour had offers from Tenn, Minn, Mich State, Stanford and Iowa
AJ Gray had offers from UNC & Marshall
Tyler Cooksey, had offers from Boston College, Tennessee, Texas A&M, Clemson, Miss ST, Louisville, Iowa
B. Glanton had offers to Wake Forest, Cincy, Indiana
K. Benson had offers from Duke & UNC
D. Curry had offers from Iowa St and UVA
T. Marshall had offers from Duke & Cincy
X. Gantt had offers from Ohio St, Miami, Miss St, Wake Forest
Jair Anderson had offers from UGA, Tenn, Louisville, Cincy and Army
D. Mills had offers from Auburn, Arkansas, FSU, Kentucky, South Carolina
C. Martin offers from Boston College and Kentucky
J. Cole offers from Boston College, Kansas St, Nebraska, Iowa, Wake Forest, Cuse
S. Dolphus from Florida, Purdue, Louisville, Miss St, Cincy, UVA, Wake Forest
A. Kerr flipped from Central Michigan to GT on Signing day eve...
J. Henderson longtime Tennessee commit flipped to Georgia Tech
J Askew offers from Auburn, West Virginia, FSU, Nebraska, Ole Miss, Texas A&M
C. Alston offers from Mich St, Purdue, Kentucky, Boston College, Notre Dame, USC
D. Williams offers from Duke, Purdue, UNC, Cincy, Indiana
TD Roof offers from East Carolina, Indiana, USF, UCF
Z. Quinney offers from Miss St, UNC, Wake, Duke, Cincy
A. Showell 0ffers from West Virginia, Rutgers, Minnesota, Kansas St, Wake
B. King flipped from Old Dominion to sign with Georgia Tech
C. Clark flipped from Tulane
K. Dawson offers from West Virginia, Purdue, Kentucky, Cincy
T. Carpenter flipped from UCF
T. Oliver offers from Army, Air Force, Troy

 

[forensicbuzz]

I couldn't disagree more. If we broaden the number of degrees, then we're becoming a football factory like everyone else. Our one biggest brand identifier in the state, the southeast, and nationally is our academic rigor. If we allow kids to essentially major in football, then we start to chip away at that. Now Stanford has a very good academic reputation, and they allow all kinds of worthless majors for their football players, but I think you can't just assume that we could navigate those waters effectively. Nor would I want to, but that's my opinion. I'd rather be an underdog every year and have a reputation of a place that's actually trying to deliver an education.

Cal is a better comparison for us than Stanford. Stanford is private, while Cal is public. Cal is equally prestigious. Both are ranked ahead of us in Engineering.

 

[RonJohn]

I didn't read the article because I refuse to go to that website. When I would go to that website, the only things I ever saw were:

• The biggest problem with GT sports is the uniform.
• The biggest problem with GT sports is that fans don't exclusively wear Pantone 874. If anyone goes to a football game in any other color, or any other slight variation of shade, they should be barred from the game.
• The biggest problem with GT sports is that the teams don't recruit outside of Georgia(Or don't land recruits from Georgia)(Or don't make the top XX of some website's list of top recruits)(Or don't try for recruits who can't handle academics)(Or whatever other often conflicting complaint they can make up about recruiting)

I guess I have turned into a curmudgeon, but I try not to pay attention to people whining. I have ignored about thirty people on this form, and in my opinion the forum is much better for it. I am all for discussing different opinions, but if grown men express their opinions in the same manner as my ten year old, I have no interest.

 

[YJMD]

I've got a different take. I think this really starts with improving our brand in the world of potential athletes. Kids talk about academics, family, etc. etc. and end up making decisions that seem to betray all of this. Rarely is someone able to look at such a decision as a logical one. We'll get some kids over the hump with logic, but we won't get them to that point unless they know what we represent and what we represent matches who they want to be.

This is a good Ted talk:

The data that supports your projected image is less important than the image you project in the first place. His big refrain is "People don't care about what you do they care about why you do it", and generally I agree.

If you go to Georgia high schools and ask football players about Tech, they may even be quite knowledgeable about our academic reputation, but it's not likely to match their own picture of themselves. Hopefully close enough to think "it would be cool if I did that", but we tend to hook the kids whose family environment pushes their own self-image educationally as ahead of their peers rather than valuing an education overall. When they think of a GT football player, it's probably disconnected from their image of a GT student and likely inferior to their image of a UGA football player. Like it or not, UGA has a stranglehold in exposing kids to a model of a good football player. We are exposed to this disparity constantly by reading the paper or listening to radio or watching TV. It's not a direct bias, but to those outside our sphere we are mostly just another football team +/- a slew of negative stereotypes.

I don't think the solution, though, is to try to compete with UGA directly for that mantle. We need to focus on projecting an image of what we represent that they don't. We need to find cohesion between athlete and student and expose kids to models of student-athletes that match their aspirations. We do need to be more aggressive in outreach to area schools, etc., but with a different image. With the kid who bucks the trend, who recognizes there's something out there different from the status quo and it just might be better, to value family and honor and tradition, etc. And, given our educational focus, we ought to be able to intertwine an advantage in Technology in accessible ways. Not cool stuff that they can appreciate from afar. But cool stuff they use or can see themselves using.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Cal is a better comparison for us than Stanford. Stanford is private, while Cal is public. Cal is equally prestigious. Both are ranked ahead of us in Engineering.

Right, I just brought up Stanford because its the worthless school a lot of people bring up to say that Tech should be able to recruit like. And I mean 'worthless school' because 90% of their football players major in worthless crap we don't offer and shouldn't ever offer. Hell, like half the team lists their major as 'Undeclared'. Other degree paths include garbage like Communication and Media Studies. There is Stanford-the-main-school, and then there is Stanford-for-the-football-team that is probably worse quality than a rural community college.

 

[WreckinGT]

Im not really sure I would call our recruiting problematic after a really good 9-4 season, and two years removed from an 11-3 Orange Bowl winning season. If our recruiting is that awful then CPJ must be the greatest game day coach of all time.

 

[GTRX7]

According to ESPN, we have had nine 4* recruits between 2013 and 2016. Of those nine, a full five of them (five!) never played a single meaningful snap (Autry, Leggett, Ratliff, Philpott, and Woods). Notably, Custis didn't either, but was only a 3* on ESPN.

Not sure exactly what that means.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

According to ESPN, we have had nine 4* recruits between 2013 and 2016. Of those nine, a full five of them (five!) never played a single meaningful snap (Autry, Leggett, Ratliff, Philpott, and Woods). Notably, Custis didn't either, but was only a 3* on ESPN.

Not sure exactly what that means.

Its not that different from Alabama. Over the last decade, Georgia Tech sent about the same percentage of 4*+ recruits to the NFL that Alabama did. Now Alabama sends a lot more, because they have a lot more. But there are a ton of them who never set foot on the field. We sent 2 out of 2 this year (100%) in Francis Kallon and Justin Thomas. Hopefully they'll both make the final roster to keep those percentages up.

 

[alentrekin]

Im not really sure I would call our recruiting problematic after a really good 9-4 season, and two years removed from an 11-3 Orange Bowl winning season. If our recruiting is that awful then CPJ must be the greatest game day coach of all time.

TBH, he is really good. But I think he recruits well to his system.

And this article is pure clickbait.

 

[cuttysark]

GT is a cross between what the best of the Ivy league and Military Academies Offer that happens to be the ONLY school of that type competing in a Power 5 Conference. The prediction of academic success has to be priority one otherwise a scholarship is wasted no matter how talented a player is coming out of HS. Travis Custus wanted to be a Yellow Jacket but unfortunately he wasn't prepared coming out of HS for the academic rigors of the Institute. It's unfortunate that effort failed but that is the reality of academic standards. He would have been a great player for GT.

What needs to be embraced is that currently GT is viewed as "Princeton Basketball" back in their heyday under Coach Pete Carillo when they went into the NCAA March Madness Tournament each year and NOBODY EVER wanted to play against them. They upset UCLA one year and every Coach hated to be in the same bracket with them.

That's how CPJ has the Yellow Jackets poised as a football team headed into every season. Nobody wants to play against us regardless of the number of 4 and 5 star kids they have on their rosters. CPJ has put together some great teams and looking forward to another one in 2017.