Reason for recruits to come to GT.

[tech_wreck47]

I know we have talked about GT being more than just football, but it's a 40 yr plan. Here's something kids need to see, and I wonder how much it would change their mind if at all, since they all think they will be in that small %.

 

[JacketFromUGA]

To be fair thats more math than a lot of my students are willing to sit through. They'll just take the "yea but not me I'm special" route... (these are kids who don't even play football just about life in general)

 

[JorgeJonas]

I think it's tough to recruit by telling a kid that he's not gonna play professionally. All of them think they're good enough, and telling them they aren't, while honest, probably isn't a sound strategy. I don't want to say we should resign ourselves to the idea that we will never get better players, but the fact is that unless something structural changes, the likelihood is that we will have to be more creative in both our approach to recruiting and the tactics we deploy in games (and probably practice, too).

I also lay a good portion of the blame at the collective feet of our fans. Even if they never play on Sundays, it's understandable for them to want to play in a fun atmosphere on Saturdays. We don't deliver that, and that's our fault.

 

[a5ehren]

Also, your/you're in the first sentence. smh

 

[DrJacket]

Also, your/you're in the first sentence. smh

And there's a "wont" rather than a "won't" toward the end. Ouch.

Still, the point is made strongly there.

 

[JacketFromUGA]

And there's a "wont" rather than a "won't" toward the end. Ouch.

Still, the point is made strongly there.

Just needed to run it by an editor first.

As Boomer will tell you them math folks don't have time to worry bout no spellings.

 

[steebu]

Um, wasn't this a poster at UGA? I think I saw this before somewhere; the bottom looks cut off here but you can still see the "Bulldogs" part.

It would also explain the horrible spelling and grammar.

 

[GTpdm]

Um, wasn't this a poster at UGA? I think I saw this before somewhere; the bottom looks cut off here but you can still see the "Bulldogs" part.

It would also explain the horrible spelling and grammar.

Then again--knowing that it was a uGA poster would make you wonder why it had any polysyllabic words...

 

[4shotB]

I think it's tough to recruit by telling a kid that he's not gonna play professionally. All of them think they're good enough, and telling them they aren't, while honest, probably isn't a sound strategy. I don't want to say we should resign ourselves to the idea that we will never get better players, but the fact is that unless something structural changes, the likelihood is that we will have to be more creative in both our approach to recruiting and the tactics we deploy in games (and probably practice, too).

I also lay a good portion of the blame at the collective feet of our fans. Even if they never play on Sundays, it's understandable for them to want to play in a fun atmosphere on Saturdays. We don't deliver that, and that's our fault.

Interesting post. A couple of observations. I teach HS...ALL kids today are unrealistic in their expectations. Examples...we will have a jr. offensive tackle who is 6'1' and 230 lbs. and runs the 40 in 7.15 seconds. He will get one of those mass form letters that any kid who plays nowadays gets from schools like FSU or Alabama or Toledo and he will be convinced that he is getting recruited. It's more likely that you or I will become a millionaire by playing Powerball. Or the little girl who has horses who is convinced that she is going to be a vet...yet she is making a very low C in geometry and a B in her biology class. Kids today are lead to believe that they are amazing...it has its pros and cons I suppose.

As far as the "fun atmosphere" and blaming it on our fans...that is a very chicken and egg type question. I am not convinced that the fans are entirely to blame here. I do think the typical GT grad is more discerning in how they spend their discretionary dollars than people who attended elsewhere.

OTOH, I have a cousin who is just a few years older than I, a graduate of Tulane, and has made more money in his lifetime than probably the rest of us here on this board put together...and he has never seen his alma mater play FB in nearly 4 decades. He could afford to rent the entire town of NO for a weekend if he wanted to. Bottom line, the school has done nothing to attract his discretionary dollar. Smart people are more attached to their money than dumb ones apparently.

 

[GlennW]

Do you want to know why the Lottery is so successful; why people keep spending their money when their odds of winning are so very small? Because they think THEY'LL be the one who'll get THE winning ticket and all those millions.

The pitch the Football Factories are making to the top recruits (and they're buying it IN SPITE OF THE ODDS) is because THEIR school gives them a "better chance" at making the Pros than other schools. They just don't understand there are STILL a finite number of slots available in the pros to go around, and they are reserved for the best of the best from a span of SEVERAL years, meaning they're potentially competing with All-Pros or Rookies just drafted ahead of them if they even get a shot at the League... Finally, looking back at the Super Bowl between the Seahawks and Patriots, there were more 2 and 3 Star recruits playing than 4 and 5 Star recruits, so even these "top" recruits aren't guaranteed to be Pro material.

 

[alagold]

It would be interesting to have insight in how our program actually approaches and then recruits guys. Can it be improved? How?
This is a VITAL part of program.

 

[tech_wreck47]

Then again--knowing that it was a uGA poster would make you wonder why it had any polysyllabic words...

Makes me wonder why any recruit would go there if they wanted to actually be set up for life after football, and college. Seems like it would hurt them, unless the are telling kids they will be going to one of the top schools lol.

 

[ChasonBaller]

It would be easy to get recruits lol. Just let them stay in a penthouse with unlimited room service(what teenager doesn't love food), show them everything to do in the ATL and finish the tour at Magic City. Make sure you have the LOI with them so they can sign it there while lost in the moment. BOOM top 5 class every year.

 

[Frenchise]

It's like why Italians don't wear seatbelts.

 

[Skeptic]

I think it's tough to recruit by telling a kid that he's not gonna play professionally. All of them think they're good enough, and telling them they aren't, while honest, probably isn't a sound strategy. I don't want to say we should resign ourselves to the idea that we will never get better players, but the fact is that unless something structural changes, the likelihood is that we will have to be more creative in both our approach to recruiting and the tactics we deploy in games (and probably practice, too).

I also lay a good portion of the blame at the collective feet of our fans. Even if they never play on Sundays, it's understandable for them to want to play in a fun atmosphere on Saturdays. We don't deliver that, and that's our fault.

I don't know that it would be "resigning ourselves" to not getting better players -- and I assume you mean by that 4-5 stars the factories routinely stack up -- as much as accepting the reality of it. We haven't, and we won't. Has nothing to do with Tech's academic reputation or standing, things nobody would challenge. But it is math and science and technology and calculus and physics and ... most elite HS players even when good students not only don't like that stuff, they hate that stuff. Worse, that stuff scares 'em. There is nothing wrong with that at all. A whole bunch of very successful people, I would venture the majority of our community, business and political leaders, don't understand it, and never bothered with it. There are a lot of roads to success in life.

But yes, blame rests with the fans who demand NC caliber teams anyway. Occasionally, as in '14, Tech can get awfully close to the brass ring. But if it is to be an elite technical, science and engineering school while offering a very limited "other" curriculum for players, (Clemson is a good engineering school with a vast liberal arts curriculum, and is stacking up 4 and 5-stars as a result), well then, we are what we have. And that's pretty good. Some years the good will become great. Changing schemes, coaches, strategies, etc., will note wash out a line of it, as Omar might have said. (Wonder if he was a football fan when he penned that? I just went back and read it and doggone if it does not describe GT football.)

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Do you want to know why the Lottery is so successful; why people keep spending their money when their odds of winning are so very small? Because they think THEY'LL be the one who'll get THE winning ticket and all those millions.

The pitch the Football Factories are making to the top recruits (and they're buying it IN SPITE OF THE ODDS) is because THEIR school gives them a "better chance" at making the Pros than other schools. They just don't understand there are STILL a finite number of slots available in the pros to go around, and they are reserved for the best of the best from a span of SEVERAL years, meaning they're potentially competing with All-Pros or Rookies just drafted ahead of them if they even get a shot at the League... Finally, looking back at the Super Bowl between the Seahawks and Patriots, there were more 2 and 3 Star recruits playing than 4 and 5 Star recruits, so even these "top" recruits aren't guaranteed to be Pro material.

I think the factory pitch is this:
Come here and you get:
a) a bunch of hot girls (true)
b) a good chance to win a college championship (questionable)
c) little to no academic pressure (true)
d) throngs of adoring fans (true)
e) high quality coaching and skill development (true)
f) ticket to the NFL (big time lie, playing college football just about anywhere gets you that same chance/exposure.)
g) a college education (another big lie. Most of these kids never go on to work in similar fields as other college graduates.)

 

[GTHOSCHTON]

I feel sure they do this but a study on what job and salary 5 years after garnering a college degree would be interesting.........

 

[JorgeJonas]

I don't know that it would be "resigning ourselves" to not getting better players -- and I assume you mean by that 4-5 stars the factories routinely stack up -- as much as accepting the reality of it. We haven't, and we won't. Has nothing to do with Tech's academic reputation or standing, things nobody would challenge. But it is math and science and technology and calculus and physics and ... most elite HS players even when good students not only don't like that stuff, they hate that stuff. Worse, that stuff scares 'em. There is nothing wrong with that at all. A whole bunch of very successful people, I would venture the majority of our community, business and political leaders, don't understand it, and never bothered with it. There are a lot of roads to success in life.

But yes, blame rests with the fans who demand NC caliber teams anyway. Occasionally, as in '14, Tech can get awfully close to the brass ring. But if it is to be an elite technical, science and engineering school while offering a very limited "other" curriculum for players, (Clemson is a good engineering school with a vast liberal arts curriculum, and is stacking up 4 and 5-stars as a result), well then, we are what we have. And that's pretty good. Some years the good will become great. Changing schemes, coaches, strategies, etc., will note wash out a line of it, as Omar might have said. (Wonder if he was a football fan when he penned that? I just went back and read it and doggone if it does not describe GT football.)

Agreed 100%. I guess that's what I was getting at when I mentioned structural changes. I tire of people saying academics aren't an excuse, then point to Notre Dame or Stanford. Well, it might be instructive to review what their players are majoring in. Then, of course, we get the line about how all our athletes are Management majors (which is largely true). What is left unsaid, though, is that the management school at Tech is a top 20 program nationally, to say nothing of the fact that I believe kids should have some say in what they study. If a kid wants to study physical education, or American History, or British Lit, they can't come to Tech. So, even if we could get them into the school, and even if they could stay in school, we won't get them. That necessarily limits the recruiting pool from which we draw. It doesn't mean we can't win, and win consistently, but the margin for error is significantly smaller. Unless or until the school expands its offerings, I do believe you're right - we need to learn to live with the likelihood that we probably won't be recruiting (and to the extent one believes recruiting influences winning, that's kinda important) at the same level as many of our opponents (it also neglects to mention that we are surrounded by eight factory schools within about 250 miles of our campus, something neither Stanford nor Notre Dame experience).

 

[steebu]

I think the factory pitch is this:
Come here and you get:
a) a bunch of hot girls (true)
b) a good chance to win a college championship (questionable)
c) little to no academic pressure (true)
d) throngs of adoring fans (true)
e) high quality coaching and skill development (true)
f) ticket to the NFL (big time lie, playing college football just about anywhere gets you that same chance/exposure.)
g) a college education (another big lie. Most of these kids never go on to work in similar fields as other college graduates.)

Part of point D is also playing in front of tens of thousands of fans in a giant stadium with TV and lights and whatnot. If you're a 5-star kid from a town where you play in front of 800 people and you visit Ohio State when they've got 110,000 people in there ... it'll blow you away. It's hard to compete against that when some kids can be so impressionable.

PJ pointed out that the last school to win a national championship with a stadium that didn't hold at least 70,000 people was ...

It's not a level playing field and it's getting worse.

 

[MWBATL]

PJ pointed out that the last school to win a national championship with a stadium that didn't hold at least 70,000 people was ...

It's not a level playing field and it's getting worse.

Wow, that prompted me to go look it up. The correct answer is technically....GT back in 1990. The only others close were Miami (FL) (75,000 plus) back in 2001, then before that it was Washington (70,138) in 1991.

Just wow.