Should CPJ be the coach in 2014?

[AE 87]

It's funny how dedicated people are to defending CPJ. Our record against VT, UGA, Miami, and Clemson should make people mad but instead people are content with our mediocrity and that upsets me. We should be able to at least beat 2/4 teams every year. The way VT's program has been under Logan Thomas, we should've beaten them every year he's been playing imo. Reality under CPJ's system: if you care at all about going pro on the offense, don't go to GT. Seriously though. Why bother? NFL scouts (whatever you call them) will have to question whether or not you can play under a pro system. Why would any player in their right mind do that to themselves? You are putting an asterisk on yourself before you even play a snap in college. Under CPJ we have had 5 players on offense that I can think of to go pro? Kevin Cone, Bay Bay,Stephen Hill, Anthony Allen, and Dwyer (all of whom weren't recruited by CPJ I don't think?). Cone and Allen never even see the ball so I won't comment on that. Hill and Demaryious both had the same weakness on the scouting report. Unable to run good routes. Not a real shocker there? The only real route they ran was straight for the deep ball. That's a barrier that GT receivers have to deal with that 95% of other receivers don't. Hill seems to be working through it with professional coaches and Demaryious continued to have that problem until the best teacher/QB in the game came in and straightened his issues out. Glad they are working through it because they are both guys that had a tremendous amount of talent. Too bad their skills were underutilized during their time here.

Don't bother bringing in the fact that our academics hurt recruiting. While that may be somewhat true, smart academic schools across the country are making adjustments and doing just fine. Stanford being the main one. No reason we can't do the same?

I don't know to whom this rant is directed. As the person who most recently defended CPJ, I did so explicitly because I don't accept mediocrity and neither does he,

With CPJ as our coach we typically out perform the expectation based on talent while Richt's dwags have under performed.

As far as recruiting challenges, you don't know what you're talking about, imo. And CPJ recruited Hill and Allen

 

[GTJason]

I don't buy it. There may be 1 or 2 kids this affects us with, but the vast majority of kids that get into those schools could just as easily find a major at tech they'd consider.

It's hard to say. When I think Vandy, NW, and Stanford I think core sciences and medical school (the football players are majoring in communications, I get it.) none of which require application of the principles of Calculus or Computer science. We not only require almost every student to know calculus, but also require them to know how to use calculus. Even INTA, Management, and STAC majors are using it whether they want to admit it or not. Everyone at GT has to know how to program whether it's Java, Python, Jython (not sure if this is still used for Management,) and everyone's favorite: Matlab. Everyone likes to point to "great students" like Andrew Luck, he was an Architectural engineering major. Look that stack of garbage major up, it's a bunch of art classes with some sim city thrown in and basic architecture studio. It's watered down Civ E without the math (no structures course?!?!?) I'm not debating whether those schools are better than GT because obviously they have some selling points over us in a few areas, but if you want a degree from a good school without much work you can skate by at those places. I still try to figure out how Harvard doesn't have the top recruiting class in the nation every year D2 or not. Different priorities I suppose...

 

[ToddM]

I will try this answer.

Tech, as stated before by another poster, is now expected to compete for the ACC championship every year. Seems if some would go to the other teams websites and message boards they would understand how much better it's gotten for Tech.

Yes we do have problems to address with our success against some teams but we have no issues with others who are never mentioned by the naysayers. Do you think Clemson and NC fans have a problem with not beating us . I do t think DaBo is about to be fired and he won't be in danger even after we beat them and knock them out of a national championship again.

I think we have done pretty well against the current # 3 team in the country, Clemson. I think we have been a part of NC's downfall and Fla State fans would most likely tell you that they are very happy we are not on the schedule anymore. The reason they would say that is because our offense is a pain in the *** to prep for and they would rather not. Tell me how often do you hear a coach say they are glad they have 2 weeks to prepare for those pesky Blue Devils and their pro sets ? How about North Carolina and that high octane spread .

The point is we have a unique offense that scores points. And to tell you the absolute truth I don't care if our players go pro or not. I don't care If the 5 star goes to Ga because he will make 30 million in the pros. I will tell you this though, he will not be able to speak an articulated sentence. And when he does speak chances are that at least half of the Dawg alum are embarrassed to admit he holds a degree from The University of Gawga.

What I care about are wins and we have more in the last 5 years than we did in the previous 5, including the one against GA.

If we can get a defensive minded D. Coordinator this will be the best team since Dodd, Alexander and Heisman, so I do not defend CPJ, he pisses me off sometimes, I defend the fact that we haven't had a losing season since he has been here, which is not a compromise if you followed them through the Curry and Lewis years. The only modern GT coach that compared is/was O'Leary and he ain't here anymore.

 

[collegeballfan]

The record of Georgia Tech football for the 1970 through the 2013 seasons is 275 - 232 - 8.

After 43 years of just over .500 ball, why does anyone think Tech will suddenly play .700 ball? Bobby Ross won a mythical NC at GT and left with a record of 31-26-1. One of Ross' main complaints about GT players is that they sat around talking about classes and not football. Is this accurate?

Academics cannot be removed from the discussion, either at Georgia Tech or future opponent Alabama A&M. GT has a very limited curriculum. Opposing recruiters still hand recruits a calculus book and tell them this is a must course at GT. And, as I noted on an earlier comment, GT does not offer a major in Playground Design as one opponent does. or at one time did.

Is Johnson the answer? I have no idea. But until a proven, available, name is suggested, I will vote for Johnson.

 

[ToddM]

The record of Georgia Tech football for the 1970 through the 2013 seasons is 275 - 232 - 8.

After 43 years of just over .500 ball, why does anyone think Tech will suddenly play .700 ball? Bobby Ross won a mythical NC at GT and left with a record of 31-26-1. One of Ross' main complaints about GT players is that they sat around talking about classes and not football. Is this accurate?

Academics cannot be removed from the discussion, either at Georgia Tech or future opponent Alabama A&M. GT has a very limited curriculum. Opposing recruiters still hand recruits a calculus book and tell them this is a must course at GT. And, as I noted on an earlier comment, GT does not offer a major in Playground Design as one opponent does. or at one time did.

Is Johnson the answer? I have no idea. But until a proven, available, name is suggested, I will vote for Johnson.

And we really have no way to judge our program comparatively. I would love to see our offense ran by Saban's kids and Saban's defense. My God they would always be NC's.

To that point what would CPJ's record be at Georgia

 

[GaTechYellowJackets]

I don't know to whom this rant is directed. As the person who most recently defended CPJ, I did so explicitly because I don't accept mediocrity and neither does he,

With CPJ as our coach we typically out perform the expectation based on talent while Richt's dwags have under performed.

As far as recruiting challenges, you don't know what you're talking about, imo. And CPJ recruited Hill and Allen

The rant wasn't directed at you. I was talking to everyone. CPJ recruited and produced two NFL prospects in his 6 years (assuming he doesn't get any this year and I can't think of anyone who will?). Hill is a high talent receiver. He is one of CPJ's best recruits imo. However according to NFL scouting reports, he's underdeveloped. You may blame Stephen Hill for that, but I blame the system he played in. He can't run routes b/c he spent majority of time running straight for deep pass or blocking. I am not saying you CAN'T get recruited under CPJ's system. I am just saying it's a lot harder. This makes it a lot harder to get 4 or 5 stars on offense. As for I don't know anything about recruiting, we will see soon who on the offense gets drafted. I hope I'm wrong but I don't see many.

 

[gtdrew]

It could also be because he left early. Another year of development would not have hurt Stephen at all.

 

[GaTechYellowJackets]

It could also be because he left early. Another year of development would not have hurt Stephen at all.

I definitely agree. One more year here would have definitely helped his mechanics. I can't blame him for leaving though. He's getting professional help now and he starts for an NFL team (not to mention the $$$ he's getting paid). He's living the dream right now.

 

[GTonTop88]

The rant wasn't directed at you. I was talking to everyone. CPJ recruited and produced two NFL prospects in his 6 years (assuming he doesn't get any this year and I can't think of anyone who will?). Hill is a high talent receiver. He is one of CPJ's best recruits imo. However according to NFL scouting reports, he's underdeveloped. You may blame Stephen Hill for that, but I blame the system he played in. He can't run routes b/c he spent majority of time running straight for deep pass or blocking. I am not saying you CAN'T get recruited under CPJ's system. I am just saying it's a lot harder. This makes it a lot harder to get 4 or 5 stars on offense. As for I don't know anything about recruiting, we will see soon who on the offense gets drafted. I hope I'm wrong but I don't see many.

Idk how many will get drafted, but I do like the fact that we are goin after bigger offensive lineman. I think that it will put our offense on a whole nother level. I know we can't keep waiting around forever, but I do like having an offense that is not typically run from a preparation standpoint and should be giving us an upper hand.

 

[Bigb]

I'm just curious. Did you go to Georgia Tech?

I have two degrees from Georgia Tech and am currently a faculty member.

Were you about to lecture me on how I don't understand the culture?

 

[gtdrew]

No. Not at all. You said a bit ago about not buying the limitations on recruiting. It drives me INSANE when people who have no ides what the challenges are say they don't buy them.

 

[gtdrew]

I'd actually have a LOT of questions for you...

 

[daBuzz]

I'd actually have a LOT of questions for you...

This is a message board...share em.

 

[heeled soul]

this is off topic to the initial question but pertinent to the current convo...

i see the calculus requirement as a potential hurdle... what really is that requirement? and more importantly, what really are the other academic hurdles once on campus?
i'm not asking about admissions because i assume that if you're offered, then you can or are close to making it in academically (whatever the requirements are for athletes). i'm asking about other class requirements or the majors that GT lacks that might make recruits not want to attend GT?

just a cursory look at the academics website and it shows that there's a business school and a liberal arts school that includes society, international affairs, communications, public policy, etc. you guys even have school of music (strangely under school of architecture... and do musicians need to pass calculus, too?). ok, so it looks like you can't exactly match UNC and our famed AFAM studies (that was a joke, btw), but those look like easier or "athlete-friendly" majors...

so, what are some specific examples of recruiting limitations caused by academics?

 

[gtdrew]

Ok

This is a message board...share em.

I guess my big one would be, as a faculty member, do you have a sense of your colleagues' feelings about the current academic entry requirements for athletes? Does it matter? Do you think in the future there would be more leeway given to a perspective coach regarding "exceptions" or "Special admits?"

 

[poodleface]

i see the calculus requirement as a potential hurdle... what really is that requirement? and more importantly, what really are the other academic hurdles once on campus?

All students have to take six hours of math, whether they are liberal arts majors or not. While Tech does offer 1711 (Finite Mathematics) and 1712 (Survey of Calculus), I imagine any student who wants to keep their options open would take 1501 (Calculus I) and 1502 (Calculus II) instead. The former are only applicable to liberal arts majors and the school of business (someone correct me if I'm wrong).

In addition, all students have to take two Lab Science classes as well. The problem for anyone not majoring in those topics is that these classes have to serve as an introduction not only to the general student population but also to students who may be majoring in that particular area. There isn't an easy Chemistry versus Chemistry for Chemical Engineers. As a result, these classes are likely a bit harder than than they might be at a factory school.

There are, of course, ways to make the latter easier. I had one Lab Science to make up when I finished my undergrad and I chose an EAS (Earth, Atmospheric Sciences) class, which was much less demanding than a Physics/Chemistry class.

I'm not saying these requirements are any easier at other schools, but for the vast majority of Tech students these classes serve as a wake-up call to the expectations of college life. 1501/1502 are particularly brutal, as the instructors are primarily research faculty who do not seem to be motivated to teach introductory Calculus, so they plow through the concepts, comprehension be damned (there are exceptions, of course, but getting these instructors is often the luck of the draw).

 

[johncu]

The rant wasn't directed at you. I was talking to everyone. CPJ recruited and produced two NFL prospects in his 6 years (assuming he doesn't get any this year and I can't think of anyone who will?). Hill is a high talent receiver. He is one of CPJ's best recruits imo. However according to NFL scouting reports, he's underdeveloped. You may blame Stephen Hill for that, but I blame the system he played in. He can't run routes b/c he spent majority of time running straight for deep pass or blocking. I am not saying you CAN'T get recruited under CPJ's system. I am just saying it's a lot harder. This makes it a lot harder to get 4 or 5 stars on offense. As for I don't know anything about recruiting, we will see soon who on the offense gets drafted. I hope I'm wrong but I don't see many.

That doesn't make sense. The RS-seniors from the 2009 class are still here so you are actually judging CPJ on 1.5 classes, not 6. I think everybody would agree that the 2008 class was his worst, so I think it's absurd to draw that conclusion. I don't have time to compile them right now, but I guarantee we will have more players drafted from the subsequent classes.

 

[GaTechYellowJackets]

That doesn't make sense. The RS-seniors from the 2009 class are still here so you are actually judging CPJ on 1.5 classes, not 6. I think everybody would agree that the 2008 class was his worst, so I think it's absurd to draw that conclusion. I don't have time to compile them right now, but I guarantee we will have more players drafted from the subsequent classes.

I guess only time will tell. I hope I'm wrong.

 

[kg01]

All students have to take six hours of math, whether they are liberal arts majors or not. While Tech does offer 1711 (Finite Mathematics) and 1712 (Survey of Calculus), I imagine any student who wants to keep their options open would take 1501 (Calculus I) and 1502 (Calculus II) instead. The former are only applicable to liberal arts majors and the school of business (someone correct me if I'm wrong).

In addition, all students have to take two Lab Science classes as well. The problem for anyone not majoring in those topics is that these classes have to serve as an introduction not only to the general student population but also to students who may be majoring in that particular area. There isn't an easy Chemistry versus Chemistry for Chemical Engineers. As a result, these classes are likely a bit harder than than they might be at a factory school.

There are, of course, ways to make the latter easier. I had one Lab Science to make up when I finished my undergrad and I chose an EAS (Earth, Atmospheric Sciences) class, which was much less demanding than a Physics/Chemistry class.

I'm not saying these requirements are any easier at other schools, but for the vast majority of Tech students these classes serve as a wake-up call to the expectations of college life. 1501/1502 are particularly brutal, as the instructors are primarily research faculty who do not seem to be motivated to teach introductory Calculus, so they plow through the concepts, comprehension be damned (there are exceptions, of course, but getting these instructors is often the luck of the draw).

I'm glad you chimed in. I graduated from Tech but I couldn't figure out how to really explain through the reasons why the cirricu, ciricu, ... classes are tougher. The bolded portions are the most salient points for me. You're being kind when you say these introductory classes are a "bit" harder. They're definitely weed-out classes. I was lucky that I had an actual teacher for 1501/1502 and not some guy that was just stuck doing it.

Unfortunately my intro-Chemistry teacher was Dr. Kim who mumbled in "english" the whole time. That did not end well for me.

 

[GaTechYellowJackets]

Idk how many will get drafted, but I do like the fact that we are goin after bigger offensive lineman. I think that it will put our offense on a whole nother level. I know we can't keep waiting around forever, but I do like having an offense that is not typically run from a preparation standpoint and should be giving us an upper hand.

I fully agree. We do have an advantage in that regard. Only teams with fast linebackers and decent DE's won't be fooled. But that's only a couple of teams out of the schedule. We definitely overperform our talent. CPJ had his best years when he had good talent on the field (NFL receiver and RB and a QB that was pretty dependable). I just don't see Tech ever being a school that can recruit that kind of talent again (on offense). I am talking about 4 stars with possible chance of 5 star athletes. Example: I don't ever seeing a possible chance of a real good QB coming in and starting as a freshman (under CPJ's system). There is just too much of a learning curve. Therefore, 4 or 5 star QB's will probably never commit here under CPJ's tenure unless they grew up Tech fans their whole life. They may be a little hesitant that they won't be great at running the option because their strengths are elsewhere. Again, I hope my logic is flawed and I am wrong but I just don't see it.