Recruiting or coaching

g0lftime

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,035
It's a lot cheaper to replace some assistants than to buy out our HC with so many years left. They are the guys that do the actual coaching and game plans. That's where TStan can step in. Hate to see guys families uprooted but that is the current reality in coaching.
 

wvGT11

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,353
A good coach can coach up. Remember when CPJ famously said, not bad for a bunch of 1-2 star recruits.

Now the Collins, we have seen the recreuting effort, but haven't seen the full potential of coaching
 
GoldZ

GoldZ

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
931
stech81 said:
Yes I know you have to do both, but is it better to have a bunch of 4 star players out of high school that aren't coached up. Or is it better to have a bunch of 3 stars players that are coached up?

I'm not talking about CGC but in general . Hell look at FSU a bunch of 4 and 5 star players that suck. Now look at WF a bunch of 3 star players that win.

I don't go to any practices so I don't have any idea which coaches we have that coach players up . If CGC feels that he needs to make any changes after this year ( which I don't see happening) the only one that I would not want to lose is Coach Choice , that does not mean there are not others who may be doing a good job.

And I will say that after the game with Pitt CGC did sound more like a coach and less like a cheerleader. And as bad as on OL looked I didn't know how bad our injuries were at that position.
Click to expand...
stech81, I think Coach Bryant answered your question pretty well with wtte: Coach Dodd could take yours and beat his or take his and beat yours. Nuff said.
 
bobongo

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,739
stech81 said:
Yes I know you have to do both, but is it better to have a bunch of 4 star players out of high school that aren't coached up. Or is it better to have a bunch of 3 stars players that are coached up?

I'm not talking about CGC but in general . Hell look at FSU a bunch of 4 and 5 star players that suck. Now look at WF a bunch of 3 star players that win.

I don't go to any practices so I don't have any idea which coaches we have that coach players up . If CGC feels that he needs to make any changes after this year ( which I don't see happening) the only one that I would not want to lose is Coach Choice , that does not mean there are not others who may be doing a good job.

And I will say that after the game with Pitt CGC did sound more like a coach and less like a cheerleader. And as bad as on OL looked I didn't know how bad our injuries were at that position.
Click to expand...
To answer your question, I think it's better by far to have three-star players coached up than four-star guys poorly coached.
 
Jmonty71

Jmonty71

Banned
Messages
2,156
Going to the OP.... I think it's coaching.... I call it the Mark Ritch syndrome.. You get the talent, but have poor, in game, coaching abilities. I really have not seen the things I've been wanting to the last few years. Mistakes made, due to poor planning... How many time management errors have you seen? Too many....to answer.
 
Js-showman

Js-showman

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
340
ibeattetris said:
It would have been interesting if the acting athletic director would have given CPJ the recruiting staff he asked for for years.

CPJ wasn't a good recruiter, but the man had 2 recruiting staff for the majority of his tenure while his competitors were in the 10-20 range. It is not surprising that we were being out recruited. TStan began trying to rectify things, but it was pretty late, and we have seen now what Collins is capable of with both the "want to" and the resources TStan has helped provide.
Click to expand...
^This
Admin support is a big part of the problem at Tech. Tech focuses more on the top 10 US News and World Report public university list (which we are on consistently) than having a top 10 athletic program.
 

Gtswifty81

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
435
It’s always both. Poor coaching can take a talented team and produce poor results. Good coaching can elevate lesser talent especially when you have an experienced team. It’s hard to be consistently great without talent because other coaches will figure out your schemes and their more talented players will prevail. There aren’t a bunch of teams with lesser talent that have consistently competed in the top 10 or 15. There are teams like UGA unfortunately who have been consistently good across multiple coaches due to their talent. We will argue that they haven’t lived up to their talent level but they’ve been top 10 half the time over the last 20 years.
 
Vespidae

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,342
Location
Auburn, AL
Js-showman said:
^This
Admin support is a big part of the problem at Tech. Tech focuses more on the top 10 US News and World Report public university list (which we are on consistently) than having a top 10 athletic program.
Click to expand...
If you look at how the President of GT is compensated, NONE of the metrics are about athletics. And haven’t been. Ever.
 
Sheboygan

Sheboygan

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,121
Location
Oostburg Wis. ( It's DUTCH !)
I am in the 70/30 camp. Coaching is critical, particularly in games with relatively evenly matched teams. CGC and staff have not consistently passed the eye test indicating they have coached as well as their opponent before and during each game so far, IMO. They appear to be doing a somewhat better job this year, but they also have better, more experienced talent. I think in the longer run we will end up with Richt 2.0 at Tech with CGC. Pretty good, but will it satisfy the fanbase ?
 
Wreck07

Wreck07

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
11
It is always both, but it is not an even split, nor is the same thing needed at all schools. At a place like Tech, we will have inconsistent recruiting classes. That is just the way it goes. And we will never be consistently a top 25 recruiting power.

Our emphasis should be on coaching. And it has been, until the past three years. By the end of Paul, it was clear that the recruiting piece was so lacking that no amount of coaching could solve the issues. Friedgen, Jon Tenuta. These dudes maximized. Used odd schemes that weren't necessary at a top 15 recruiting power, but we needed them. Great position coaches matter. Buzz did wonders with our receivers.
 
Northeast Stinger

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
11,153
swarmer said:
CPJ would have been more interesting if he would have invested in recruiting and found coaches like CTC and CMC that could go recruit high end guys. Instead, he just kept his buddies around (which is detriment to many coaches, not just PJ) and hired a bunch of washed up old D Coordinators.
Click to expand...
I wish someone would give evidence that CPJ did not work on recruiting. I see that posted periodically and then quoted as fact.

All I know about his recruiting is from outside observation. CPJ said about recruiting that it was like shaving -“if you didn’t work on it every day, you looked like a bum.” I also saw him lobby for more recruiting resources on more than one occasion. Then there was his ability to find players that were overlooked like 2 star Shaq Mason. He also constantly did battle with the negative recruiting tactics of other schools that the media was happy to amplify at volume 11.

CPJ had a lot of obstacles thrown in the way of his recruiting but I never saw anything publicly that suggested he didn’t care about it or think it was important.
 

MountainBuzzMan

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,757
Location
South Forsyth
swarmer said:
CPJ would have been more interesting if he would have invested in recruiting and found coaches like CTC and CMC that could go recruit high end guys. Instead, he just kept his buddies around (which is detriment to many coaches, not just PJ) and hired a bunch of washed up old D Coordinators.
Click to expand...
That was a clear results of the lack of funding he got. It would have been really interesting if the big donors had stepped up when he was there to give him similiar resources that the CGC is getting instead of trying to starve him out. Not arguing with you more agreeing with you
 
Vespidae

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,342
Location
Auburn, AL
Northeast Stinger said:
I wish someone would give evidence that CPJ did not work on recruiting. I see that posted periodically and then quoted as fact.

All I know about his recruiting is from outside observation. CPJ said about recruiting that it was like shaving -“if you didn’t work on it every day, you looked like a bum.” I also saw him lobby for more recruiting resources on more than one occasion. Then there was his ability to find players that were overlooked like 2 star Shaq Mason. He also constantly did battle with the negative recruiting tactics of other schools that the media was happy to amplify at volume 11.

CPJ had a lot of obstacles thrown in the way of his recruiting but I never saw anything publicly that suggested he didn’t care about it or think it was important.
Click to expand...
CPJ once reacted to a question about recruiting along the lines of "Heck yes, we focus on recruiting." But ... there's a difference between recruiting and being good at recruiting.

When Lou Holtz took over at Notre Dame, they had one person responsible for recruiting. One. Times have changed.

My guess (and it is only a guess) is that CPJ had great success at Navy and didn't really have to recruit. And he brought that mentality to Tech. I recall a number of times when he quipped that he loved noon games because he could get home early and spend time with the family. And that's fine. As long as you know your competitor is boarding a flight to work on a recruit.

I like CPJ as a coach. But he was deficient in other areas of the game (for a variety of reasons, some out of his control) ... I still wonder where Tech would be if we had gone really ALL IN on the TO ... but we didn't. We were the guy trying to get the girl while pulling out as often as we could as the heartbeats rose.
 
Vespidae

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,342
Location
Auburn, AL
MountainBuzzMan said:
That was a clear results of the lack of funding he got. It would have been really interesting if the big donors had stepped up when he was there to give him similiar resources that the CGC is getting instead of trying to starve him out. Not arguing with you more agreeing with you
Click to expand...
I totally get it. I remember being in the AD suite when the Big Guns were joking "When are we going to be done with this ****?" while Tech was running up the board and winning the game. The Money Guys HATED the TO even when Tech won.
 
Top