With a staff of 2, as has been reported...compared to Duke with 16.....you have to have you head in the sand to think having more bodies would not help.
First, I agree that you need a recruiting staff that is "reasonable". Why do I say that?
One business I ran had 2000 employees and the Finance Dept had 50. "We need 50" they would say. Would 50 finance guys help us sell more? No. Help us deliver more value to customers? No. Overhead. Pure and simple.
We rearranged the business, changed the finance procedures and ... did it with 4. Four. I've seen similar results in other functions. Nothing is as complex as it seems to be.
Does Recruiting add value to Tech? Yes! Does Development? Yes! What does TStan think? He has said that Tech is a team that will succeed through superior Development and not superior recruiting. (Recruit 3 stars and turn them into 4/5).
The Top Talent in the USA comes from 15 metro areas (Atlanta is one). Do you need 16? Probably not. Four? Probably more than 4. But you don't need to match every program just because every other program has 50. (I think I read somewhere that the average recruit gets 200 letters a day and yet ... they still only have 3-4 schools on their "Short list" of where they want to play.)
I think we'd be FAR more productive with front end analysis on the prospects most likely to want to go to Tech and overwhelm those. You CAN do it with fewer resources if you plan for it. From what I read on virtually all of the programs, they all just copy each other.
So that's the plan. Recruit 3*'s, Develop them into 4/5*s ... and you need a reasonable size staff to do that. Comparing to Duke, which DOESN'T believe that, becomes meaningless.