- Messages
- 4,631
We all agree (I think) that GT is a very unique place and faces some barriers that other schools do not in terms of recruiting. With that being said, when I reflect over the GT teams of the last 15 -20 years or so I notice that we are always very good on one side of the ball. With GOL and CPJ, it has been on offense. With CCG, we were good to excellent on D most of the time. (There are outliers to the above but I think the general premise holds).
Why do you think that is the case? If it were merely recruiting limitations it seems like we would be average or worse across both units. Is that a reasonable assumption?
Possible causes: coaches funnel better athletes to the unit of their liking/preference. Coaching philosophies inhibit recruiting on other side of ball (we hear - whether true or not - about the 3O. Any other possibilities? I post this because, despite, our recruiting limitations, we have fielded some excellent offensive and defensive units over the last 20 years. Just never at the same time. Why does this happen?
Why do you think that is the case? If it were merely recruiting limitations it seems like we would be average or worse across both units. Is that a reasonable assumption?
Possible causes: coaches funnel better athletes to the unit of their liking/preference. Coaching philosophies inhibit recruiting on other side of ball (we hear - whether true or not - about the 3O. Any other possibilities? I post this because, despite, our recruiting limitations, we have fielded some excellent offensive and defensive units over the last 20 years. Just never at the same time. Why does this happen?
