High school coaches impressed by Collins...

Madison Grant

Madison Grant

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,276
slugboy said:
I don’t think that’s what anyone is saying. Who is saying that they would lower their admission standards to compete with an Auburn or an Oklahoma State?

A poster was saying that we’re taking Stanford’s academic rejects. Based on their curriculum, they should have at least as much admission flexibility as we do. We may exercise it for some recruits that they don’t, but I think it’s more of a matter that they’re recruiting stronger classes and don’t feel the need to make as many exceptions.

Hopefully, we get to the same state soon.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Slugboy, that was DIRECTLY stated by at least one poster, and I quoted his/her post and challenged it previously. Multiple others have chimed in with the 'private institution' argument, insinuating the same- that because they are private they are doing things in terms of admissions that Tech can't get away with. Yes, we should be proud of our student athlete academics, but 1) stop using it as a crutch to say we can't recruit any better and 2) stop feeling the need to act like 'woe is me, it's just tougher at Tech than anywhere else because of these d*mn academic restrictions we have'. Techster nailed it with the Stanford differences from us, but as I've said before, we can learn from their model of success because of our similarities IN A BROADER SENSE. It's nonsense to talk about being UGAg or Bama. It's also pretty much nonsense to talk about being Notre Dame because of the alumni and fan base they have. However, Stanford is an example of a school that was hampered for years in football because of their tough academic standards that found a way. We are not a service academy.
 
Last edited:

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,146
Yes, there's a tendency among fans to think that what an 18 year old quality football player with visions of the NFL dancing in his head says about his choices are gospel. I take it as read that a lot of the excuses given for one choice or the other boil down to academic rigor.

This is understandable. Nobody in their right mind will opt for more work if it can be avoided and the results for #1 are about the same. Combine that with the persistent lack of forward thinking among 18 year olds and you have a fertile ground for what the shrinks call "motivated reasoning"; i.e. thinking tied to a set of restricted inputs that conform with internal preferences that have little to do with the goal the argument is aimed at justifying. This is one reason why, besides QBs who want to be in a spread and RBs who want to be "featured", I don't think there is likely to be a massive tranch of football players who are straining at the bit to go to Tech and were held back by the TO. You don't want your college experience to be a grind and you want to concentrate on football. What's your choice: Biz ad or LMC at Tech or Parks and Recreation at Clemson? If your parents are paying attention and constantly reminding you that a) you are not a God, b) theres a life after football, and c) education counts, then Tech has a chance and has often succeeded. If not, well … it's trainer at Planet Fitness city.

I think Coach realizes this scenario and that is why he is so intent on playing up the value of a Tech education and saying "We'll prepare you for the NFL". One line is for the parents and the other helps undermine the arguments the kid is making to himself. We'll see if this strategy succeeds soon enough.
 
dressedcheeseside

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,243
knoxjacket said:
Every recruit talks about academics. Doesn’t matter if they are going to Bama or Harvard. They also all believe they are going to make the NFL.

Quit with the hero worship.
Click to expand...
Yes they all talk about it but not in the same way. For a lot of kids, they are the only member of their family to ever go to college. For our kids, they talk about being set for life if football doesn’t work out. You can tell they’ve been sold on the forty year plan and that it really means something to them. With the factory kids it’s pretty apparent it’s window dressing.

If you want to go on telling yourself that our kids are the same as all the rest go ahead. Academics is a big selling point in our recruiting pitch, not so much with the factories. It has to be, if the kids aren’t interested in academics, they’re never going to make it through.
 
knoxjacket

knoxjacket

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
855
dressedcheeseside said:
Yes they all talk about it but not in the same way. For a lot of kids, they are the only member of their family to ever go to college. For our kids, they talk about being set for life if football doesn’t work out. You can tell they’ve been sold on the forty year plan and that it really means something to them. With the factory kids it’s pretty apparent it’s window dressing.

If you want to go on telling yourself that our kids are the same as all the rest go ahead. Academics is a big selling point in our recruiting pitch, not so much with the factories. It has to be, if the kids aren’t interested in academics, they’re never going to make it through.
Click to expand...

1) We recruit the same kids and settle for the ones we can get.
2) https://gtswarm.com/posts/414108/
 

Animal02

Banned
Messages
6,269
Location
Southeastern Michigan
Madison Grant said:
Slugboy, that was DIRECTLY stated by at least one poster, and I quoted his/her post and challenged it previously. Multiple others have chimed in with the 'private institution' argument, insinuating the same- that because they are private they are doing things in terms of admissions that Tech can't get away with. Yes, we should be proud of our student athlete academics, but 1) stop using it as a crutch to say we can't recruit any better and 2) stop feeling the need to act like 'woe is me, it's just tougher at Tech than anywhere else because of these d*mn academic restrictions we have'. Techster nailed it with the Stanford differences from us, but as I've said before, we can learn from their model of success because of our similarities IN A BROADER SENSE. It's nonsense to talk about being UGAg or Bama. It's also pretty much nonsense to talk about being Notre Dame because of the alumni and fan base they have. However, Stanford is an example of a school that was hampered for years in football because of their tough academic standards that found a way. We are not a service academy.
Click to expand...
We are far closer to a service academy than we are to a Stanford.
 
Top