HC Candidate/Rumors/Info Thread

[Vespidae]

That would probably be true of any star classification. It's simple - we need recruiting and development. Does this mean we should pass on a 5-star, or what?

In a world of unlimited resources, no ... you pursue everyone, worldwide. The best player, period.

But we don't live in that world. We live in a world of finite resources, aka budgets. So you have to make trade-offs. And trade-offs mean we should be pursuing the best athlete who can succeed at Tech. That's a very different criteria.

Do you spend 80% of your budget on 30 players, of which 10 might make it? (Mind you, every other P5 is also pursing these same ones. So the return on investment is incredibly low.)
Or do you spend 80% of your budget identifying those players, those schools, those positions that have historically done well at Tech?

My money is on the statistics and the odds. Not the hype.

 

[Vespidae]

That and the smug, uninformed attitude that keeps the GT fanbase so small.

I'm sorry. I am not uninformed. I provided real statistics. I prefer to make decisions on likely outcomes ... not hope and certainly not hype. But if that's you, go for it.

 

[DvilleJacket]

That and the smug, uninformed attitude that keeps the GT fanbase so small.

Makes it hard to gain sidewalk fans because of this.

 

[kg01]

I'm sorry. I am not uninformed. I provided real statistics. I prefer to make decisions on likely outcomes ... not hope and certainly not hype. But if that's you, go for it.

Statistically, no one from my high school had a chance to even sniff getting into or through Tech.

I gave the double-birds to all the eggsperts who "knew" I'd never make it through.

 

[kg01]

Makes it hard to gain sidewalk fans because of this.

Those guys thrive on the exclusivity. It feeds their egos.

 

[Techster]

Guy's got success written all over him.

Prime Prep Academy.

 

[Vespidae]

Statistically, no one from my high school had a chance to even sniff getting into or through Tech.

I gave the double-birds to all the eggsperts who "knew" I'd never make it through.

Congratulations on your anecdotal evidence. Now, try to build a D1 program. Anecdotes don't work too well.

 

[kg01]

Prime Prep Academy.

Hey, who among us hasn't started a charter school that falls apart famously?

 

[kg01]

Congratulations on your anecdotal evidence. Now, try to build a D1 program. Anecdotes don't work too well.

I certainly won't do it by writing people off as 'anecdotal'....

 

[Vespidae]

I certainly won't do it by writing people off as 'anecdotal'....

Just defining the obvious facts. You yourself stated you were an exception and not a general outcome for your school. By definition, that is anecdotal evidence.

 

[SidewalkJacket]

The last time an NCAA study was done, Tech had the highest SAT scores in the country at 1065. That's athletes. Not the general student population. Jackson State's average for the student body is less than that. Which suggests that athletes would be even lower.

That ain't the football team, brother. That's all the GT student/athletes. GT football can get whoever they want admitted, for the most part. Retaining their eligibility might be another story. But you can step down off that high horse.

 

[kg01]

Just defining the obvious facts. You yourself stated you were an exception and not a general outcome for your school. By definition, that is anecdotal evidence.

I'm thinking we can both agree GT has been doing it your way the past few decades, which has given us plenty o' evidence that it doesn't work.

 

[Vespidae]

That ain't the football team, brother. That's all the GT student/athletes. GT football can get whoever they want admitted, for the most part. Retaining their eligibility might be another story. But you can step down off that high horse.

It's not a high horse for me. And while "can" get whoever they want, they need Hill approval for special admits.

 

[Vespidae]

I'm thinking we can both agree GT has been doing it your way the past few decades, which has given us plenty o' evidence that it doesn't work.

And what way is that, exactly? Tech hasn't done it "my way" since 1992.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

This is somewhat dated, but useful:

"In the last 10 years, a mere 287 players have emerged from high school as five-star recruits — the best of the best. That’s fewer than 30 players per season regardless of position.

By our best judgments, just 97 of those have lived up to the hype and become a star equal to expectations. That’s just 33.8 percent, or barely more than one in three."

Development is far more important than recruiting.

Before you make too much hay with this stat, what would be useful is to know the metrics behind it. Is it only 33% who live up to 5* performance? What percentage of the 2/3rds remaining only fall to 4* performance? 3*? 2*? What percentage of those that do not live up to the hype are due to injury? Are those percentages uniform across the star rankings? Do only 33% of 4*s live up to the hype? Same with 3*s?

While development is indeed far more important than recruiting, you are far more likely to get an acceptable level (high 3*) of production out of highly rated recruits than out of 2* and low 3* recruits. We can all name the exceptions, but we can do that because they are the exceptions. Unless you run a scheme similar to CPJs 3O where you are recruiting entirely different body types that other factories aren't even pursuing, you need to be at least a minor player in recruiting battles to remain relevant in modern P5 football.

 

[Sheboygan]

More opinions about Deion at Tech

Deion Sanders Would Turn Georgia Tech into Real Contenders | FOX Sports Radio

Tuesday on 2 Pros and a Cup of Joe, Deion Sanders is rumored to be in the running for the head coaching job at Georgia Tech. Jonas Knox, Brady Quinn and LaVar Arrington believe the move makes all the sense in the world and would shake up the college football landscape.

foxsportsradio.iheart.com

 

[Vespidae]

While development is indeed far more important than recruiting, you are far more likely to get an acceptable level (high 3*) of production out of highly rated recruits than out of 2* and low 3* recruits.

I totally agree with this. 2 stars are not generally recruited to P5 programs, so that's easy. The sweet spot for Tech has always been a healthy number of mid/high 3 stars and a few, occasional, 4 stars. If you simply look at the pool of recruits each year, this is true for most P5 programs other than the Top 10 or so programs.

 

[RamblinRed]

I'll give you some idea from a former GT asst coach - this goes back to the early 2000's and my belief is that this has not changed for the better since then.

This coach said they would have a database of HS sophomores that they would be interested in. After they would receive their first official transcripts (usually toward the end of their Jr year) they would generally have to delete 50% of the recruits in their database.

FWIW, this same coach told me it was seldom the test scores that would be an issue with recruiting a prospect. But once that got to see an actual transcript they could see 2 things in black and white that is not always well reported before then - what their actual GPA is, and what classes they have actually taken. A prospect can have a high GPA, but it can potentially be with alot of classes that are not going to be looked on favorably in terms of making it through GT. The coaches were not just concerned about getting young men into GT, they were concerned about whether they would be able to handle the coursework once they got here. And ultimately if you end up spending alot of time on a recruit who ends up leaving school within a year or two that is largely wasted time and resources.

GT football is allowed a certain number of exceptions each year, but it is hardly the whole team, and the coaching staff has to make a decision whether they think a recruit will be willing to do the work to stay eligible once here. If they believe they will then that is someone they are likely to recruit. If they have concerns over how much effort they may be willing to put forth academically it will negatively impact how hard the staff is likely to pursue that recruit. And that is a recruit by recruit decision.

How many other schools do you think are deleting 50% of their potential pool of recruits before their Sr yr of HS?

 

[RamblinRed]

FWIW, I don't really have any big preference for our next HC. I just want someone that can build a program that develops the players to their potential and is good on gameday.
It that's Deion - Great. If that Chadwell, great. If it is someone else, great.
I'm going to support whoever they hire because once the hire is made that guy is 'my guy' and I want to see the program to do well.

 

[Vespidae]

I'll give you some idea from a former GT asst coach - this goes back to the early 2000's and my belief is that this has not changed for the better since then.

This coach said they would have a database of HS sophomores that they would be interested in. After they would receive their first official transcripts (usually toward the end of their Jr year) they would generally have to delete 50% of the recruits in their database.

FWIW, this same coach told me it was seldom the test scores that would be an issue with recruiting a prospect. But once that got to see an actual transcript they could see 2 things in black and white that is not always well reported before then - what their actual GPA is, and what classes they have actually taken. A prospect can have a high GPA, but it can potentially be with alot of classes that are not going to be looked on favorably in terms of making it through GT. The coaches were not just concerned about getting young men into GT, they were concerned about whether they would be able to handle the coursework once they got here. And ultimately if you end up spending alot of time on a recruit who ends up leaving school within a year or two that is largely wasted time and resources.

GT football is allowed a certain number of exceptions each year, but it is hardly the whole team, and the coaching staff has to make a decision whether they think a recruit will be willing to do the work to stay eligible once here. If they believe they will then that is someone they are likely to recruit. If they have concerns over how much effort they may be willing to put forth academically it will negatively impact how hard the staff is likely to pursue that recruit. And that is a recruit by recruit decision.

How many other schools do you think are deleting 50% of their potential pool of recruits before their Sr yr of HS?

Exactly. It is all about how much effort and investment do you make on someone who may not yield a return (by playing).