Recruiting

[MeatWrench]

Do we do all of that? Really? All of it? Do we do it well? Or just ok? Or do we do some of it? And maybe some of what we do, we don't do really all that well. (Minitab?)

Results are a function of the Approach used and the thoroughness of its Deployment. (That's the old quality guy in me.) Do we really evaluate 2000 kids a year? Host 500 unofficial visits? Does Coach Paul really have 250,000 Twitter followers? (He actually has 38.5K and posts irregularly.)

I don't work for the GTAA so maybe they do, as you say, do all of this. I would bet my house though, that they don't do it as well as they should. Why be concerned?

First, everyone and his brother is recruiting in GA, SC, AL, and FL these days. So the talent is being woo'd far more than ever before. It's a seller's market.

Second, our academic standards mean we have a lower yield from the git go. I read a report from another AD at an academic school similar to Tech that said at most, 20% of the kids graduating high school and playing football would be prospects at his school. So nationally, what is the pool we are going to pull from? What's our success rate?

Third, we have a national reputation. Our alumni base is all over the country. I've heard that we want to go more "national" but not sure if we are ... or if we are ... are we doing it at the level we need to be?

In the end, it's all about feedback and improvement. A recruiting process again, reminds me a lot of a sales process ... so there's a pool, a process, a pitch, people, prospects and technology. Something could be working better, but it's not clear to me where the gaps are ... because we don't talk about the inputs or the process ... we usually just see it in the Results.

Again ... good input and I appreciate your thoughts. Probably best to just leave it up the new AD and Coach Paul to figure out. (Which begs the question ... Why wouldn't GTAA have a Director of Continuous Improvement to evaluate and help fix these gaps? The revenue is certainly there to support it. Just a closing thought.)

Didn't intend to suggest we do any of it. Just the opposite, in fact. What I saw in your comment was that a program like ND with lots of national clout still pours TONS of effort into recruiting (The list you provided was fascinating) and I don't think we have the budget or manpower to come close if we tried. And that's even on top of not having anything close to the national pull of ND at our backs.

The kicker to me is that big name programs can out recruit us to the moon and back and still be between pedestrian and bad for consecutive years under the wrong coach. Texas, Michigan, USCw, ND, Tenn, UF, Miami have all had bizarre periods of floundering given the way they draw talent. Still, newer programs to the national scene like Oregon, more recently UDub, can jump up with the right coach and old powers like Penn St sometimes seem to die off without one.

CFB/fandom is a unpredictable and fickle thing rooted in the behaviors of late teens/early twenties who are unpredictable and fickle in their own rite. I hope UGAg is the next one to learn that lesson and learn it the hard way.

Long story short, its hard to win and it is what it is.

Go Jackets.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

Yahoo Rivals Current 2017 ACC Recruiting Rankings based on athletic "quality" of prospects being recruited to your school! Clemson is at #1 with 3.86 and GT is at #4 with an Avg of 3.15...

1. Clemson
2. FSU
3. Miami
4. GT
5. UNC
6. VT
7. NC State
8. Duke
9. PITT
10. UVA
11. Wake Forest
12. Louisville
13. CUSE
14. BC

Go to this link and then click on AVG...
https://n.rivals.com/team_rankings/2017/acc

Thanks for the good news. Didn't know Rivals had us with three four stars.