New Old Guy
Jolly Good Fellow
- Messages
- 319
Well yeah. It’s just assumptions. Along with FBI wiretaps.
LeBarrie suspended indefinitely?
- Thread starter YlJacket
- Start date
Well yeah. It’s just assumptions. Along with FBI wiretaps.
Jumpman
Ramblin' Wreck
- Messages
- 518
And Federal indictments & arrests.
mstranahan
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,561
Interesting topic and clearly one that gets people riled up. I'll try to add my $.02 without fanning the flames.
I believe it is a fairly established fact that all P5 universities (and most D1, non P5) admit athletes who would ever gain admission if they were not athletes. That isn't dishonest or illegal or anything like that. It's just a fact.
Second, on any team (especially football with huge roster), there are kids with great academic credentials and some with less stellar portfolios. The average will always pull up the lower performers, so it is a relatively meaningless statistic. I believe they should publish the mean, median, standard deviation, min and max if they really want to talk about the academic credentials on the team. (I mean everyone, not just GT)
That said, if the football team's SAT is ~1080 and the general student body is ~1450, it is obvious, de facto, that Tech admits a great number of football players who would never get in as non-athletes. (I don't have the stats for basketball and baseball, but they are harder to look at statistically since the CLT doesn't apply to small populations.
Just to be clear (I don't want @Peacone36 or @Jumpman to kill me on this!), I am not saying Tech is doing anything wrong or dishonest. I'm not saying they pay players. Nothing of the sort. I don't think they do, and I have no evidence that would point in that direction. I'm just saying that in this general regard, Tech admissions is in the same place as every other school
I believe it is a fairly established fact that all P5 universities (and most D1, non P5) admit athletes who would ever gain admission if they were not athletes. That isn't dishonest or illegal or anything like that. It's just a fact.
Second, on any team (especially football with huge roster), there are kids with great academic credentials and some with less stellar portfolios. The average will always pull up the lower performers, so it is a relatively meaningless statistic. I believe they should publish the mean, median, standard deviation, min and max if they really want to talk about the academic credentials on the team. (I mean everyone, not just GT)
That said, if the football team's SAT is ~1080 and the general student body is ~1450, it is obvious, de facto, that Tech admits a great number of football players who would never get in as non-athletes. (I don't have the stats for basketball and baseball, but they are harder to look at statistically since the CLT doesn't apply to small populations.
Just to be clear (I don't want @Peacone36 or @Jumpman to kill me on this!), I am not saying Tech is doing anything wrong or dishonest. I'm not saying they pay players. Nothing of the sort. I don't think they do, and I have no evidence that would point in that direction. I'm just saying that in this general regard, Tech admissions is in the same place as every other school
Every program is allowed “exceptions” by their administrations. that’s no secret. Some programs still have higher standards within those exceptions.
That’s a far cry from bags of cash. I’ll be honest, I didn’t read some of the posts in this thread. After you get over about 400 words I just keep on cruising. So if this post misses the point I apologize. <——ha
That’s a far cry from bags of cash. I’ll be honest, I didn’t read some of the posts in this thread. After you get over about 400 words I just keep on cruising. So if this post misses the point I apologize. <——ha
- Messages
- 15,708
I think where your head is at is the right direction, but it's kind of half baked. We are not like everyone else, but why are we not like everyone else? Are we falling behind (probably yes) because we're not like everyone else? How are we not like everyone else and where are the opportunities to level the playing field?
The excuses still exist, but it's because there doesn't seem to be a lever to push things over the edge towards getting us level.
We make the academics excuse, but it might be true to a degree that some GT student athletes across all sports are exceptions, it doesn't mean they're unintelligent. Also, if engineering is not feasible and the college of management wants fewer & fewer of our athletes in their curriculum (I've been told that to my face re: football & hoops), there are a few Ivan Allen majors (HTS & LMC) that are not only way more manageable, but still provide a degree of value. We won't be able to hide kids at GT, but there are definitely majors that are very manageable and provide rthe flexibility to explore areas of interest, especially with the academic support system GTAA provides.
I don't know if I've gone in depth here about my pay players thoughts, but I absolutely think players should be able to get paid. That doesn't necessarily mean by GT or the GTAA. It absolutely means that if anyone wants to pay a player for goods (game used jerseys, autographs, etc.) & services (endorsing the local Chevy dealer or something), then have at it. Do I think we'll get crushed by the boosters of some other schools? Yes I do. Does it weed out all of the shady **** because it's now all legal and out there for people to see? Yes I do. Does it put the onus on the GT fan community, whether alumni or sidewalk fans, to pour in the money needed to keep the programs competing at a high level? Yes it does.
The reasons Josh & Tadric are sitting are a crock to begin with and purely a function of outdated NCAA rules. If they dumped out of this antiquated notion of amateurism in the first place, at least we'd have an idea of what we need to chase after and how we can arm ourselves to compete.
RonJohn
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 4,995
GT does admit athletes that probably wouldn't get in based solely on academic metrics. Those who are asked are held to the same academic standards as our students. When the school changed the policy to allow CPJ more exceptions, they said in effect that if the team's academics suffered, that they would restrict then again. In 2003, Vince Dooley pushed to get UGA to admit athletes with as low as a 400 on their SAT. Once a student gets into UGA, there are academic tracts they can be put into that will allow them to skate through even if they can't complete actual college level course work. At GT the are not. UGA does have good academic tracts, but they also have basket weaving type tracts.
I don't think we are discussing the same things. I do know that some athletes are given preferential admissions treatment. However, I firmly believe that those athletes are treated the same by their professors as other students. If the coaches don't believe that the athletes can keep up with the academic work, they don't recruit them. Once the athletes are on campus, the school holds the athletic department responsible for the academic performance of those athletes. Those are the things that I am saying are different at GT.
Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk
684Bee
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,643
What I've said isn't just about basketball and these latest incidents.
We've long pointed the finger at "others" for having what we perceive as dumb jocks and thought of ourselves as above and apart from that.
I've seen enough from our own players to know we aren't squeaky clean in this regard.
Again, I'm not talking about paying players. I'm taking about thinking that, because we take less "exceptions", that somehow makes us better. That's stupid. You are either in or out. Being half-in and wearing that as a badge of honor is just foolish.
Jumpman
Ramblin' Wreck
- Messages
- 518
Do yourself a favor and stop now.
684Bee
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,643
Bruce Wayne
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,870
How many players would qualify at Louisville without exceptions? Probably most of them, Louisville is borderline open admissions with over 70% acceptance rate. What does this claim of mine prove as regards cheating? Nothing.
How many students would be admitted to Harvard without being a legacy? Does their 30 percent legacy rate prove anything. Nope.
Tech has an acceptance rate of 26%. Duke's is 13%, Stanford is around 5%.
- Messages
- 11,497
Universities also admit students with artistic or musical or other achievements that don't show up in their GPA or their test scores. They look for students with outstanding achievements, and athletics can be one of those achievements. There are a lot of factors that admission offices take into account as part of building a big, diverse, and interesting student body. Athletics is different to a degree (and to a larger degree at some other schools), but there are good reasons to do it outside of just the urging of the athletic association.
RonJohn
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 4,995
Admitting athletes who wouldn't gain admission based solely on academics is very different than putting them in laughably weak academic tracts, or in class that don't meet, or getting professors to push them through. All of the athletes at GT are required to complete actual rigorous classwork. That is different than at a lot of schools.
Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk
YlJacket
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 3,260
The better example for Harvard is athletics. About 10% of most Ivy League Schools are athletes who came in on essentially exceptions from the standard admissions process.
ramblinjacket
Ramblin' Wreck
- Messages
- 802
Life is not as binary as you seem to want it to be. What I have always believed is GT has better odds. On average better students and on average better student athletes then by far most universities. On average those coming out do better than those from most other universities.
Yes there are deadbeats, druggies, thieves and criminals of all sorts. When you look at a large enough population you will always find problems. However odds are better ,when dealing with a GT student or student athlete, that you are dealing with a good and smart person.
Your attempt to create equivalence when it doesn’t exist is what gets the reactions that apparently you keep running into.
jeffgt14
We don't quite suck as much anymore.
- Messages
- 5,879
- Location
- Mt Juliet, TN
WTF are we even talking about now?
MWBATL
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 6,533
Geez, some GT fans sure seem like they want to throw GT under the bus even when there is no discernible reason to do so <shrugs>
I continue to be amazed (and shocked) at how people are SO quick to jump to conclusions on the internet and judge other people. smdh
I continue to be amazed (and shocked) at how people are SO quick to jump to conclusions on the internet and judge other people. smdh
lv20gt
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 5,580
We've had 3 players and an assistant coach suspended. Even if you don't agree, if you can't discern the reason some people have reacted the way that they have then that's on you.
jacketup
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,551
Tech's out of state acceptance rate is closer to Duke's 13% than 26%
Tech doesn't give much, if any, credit for being a legacy, and admissions will tell you so.
These facts don't contribute to the conversation, but a lot of Tech alums who were admitted 6 or more years ago don't have a clear understanding of how Tech has changed. I do only because my legacy son with a 730 math SAT and a 4.0 adjusted GPA from a very good high school (and an A in B/C calculus), but out of state, did not get in. A 730 math SAT alone would have gotten you in not so many years ago.
Carry on. (I am in favor of athletic exceptions, by the way. That's a skill set that should be taken into consideration)
lv20gt
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 5,580
FWIW, that was the case even 6 years ago. I had almost exactly what you are talking about, little more SAT little less GPA and a 5 on the BC test, and was instate and got rejected in 2009.
jacob
Banned
- Messages
- 377
Who cares!!!!