Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
So who leaves? Attrition.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="MidtownJacket" data-source="post: 575318" data-attributes="member: 959"><p>Oh boy, so this is an interesting discussion from a philosophical position, so let me try to respond in detail back to the posters referenced below. For one thing, I am NOT anti CGC or his new staff. I am a GT Fan, and want the Institute to act in a responsible fashion to maximize outcomes in everything we do. Academics, Athletics, Community Service, Research, Marketing the list goes on. I continue to dontate (as I have since Freshman year), wear GT stuff 80% of the time and am an ambassador for the program in both my personal and professional life. I buy the hype and am excited about the direction Geoff is charting for us.</p><p></p><p>I also think there is a larger mission in College Athletics than winning games. I don't think it is naive or sanctimonious or foolhardy to want to be more than just an athletic factory. I also believe fairly deeply in the responsibility we all have to better ourselves, our families and our communities. I happen to believe the mission of GT aligns well with that thought. As such I have responded briefly below to try to continue this conversation in a thoughtful and respectful way. There isn't a scoreboard here and I am truly interested in understanding your perspectives as well as sharing my own. I appreciate that we can have conversations that aren't about winning or being right but are instead about growth and understanding how the larger body of fans and alumni prioritize and value the different parts of Ga Tech.</p><p>----</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No. This is implicitly different. If we start with the base assumption that the kids who come to play athletics at Ga Tech come from a disproportionately lower income bracket than the traditional student at GT then we can't make the assumption made by lv20gt above. We sell hard on the message that coming to GT offers a chance to earn an education from an elite school. We often go into areas to recruit a student who requires financial and academic assistance to finish a degree here. There is real good in that, exploitative as it may be, and I believe in the idea of progress and service. Sport is a way for people to pull themselves up and reach beyond the means of their communities and families to improve themselves. This is an important mission of public schools and I can not say enough about the necessity of this process.</p><p></p><p>I am 100% onboard with saying the kids aren't guaranteed playing time, in fact I think it is morally incumbent upon the staff to be transparent with kids about where they project. However, I have made the argument before and continue to feel this way, that the players are not employees and should not view college athletics as a proxy for minor league teams. If I make that argument, then I believe the logic follows that we should be committed to giving them a 4 year ride with access to the tutoring and study hall promised when they sign on with us for as long as they remain in good standing with the team. In some ways the medicals other programs give are to me (in the most equitable sense) more appropriate than a choice to not renew a one year scholarship.</p><p></p><p>That isn't how you treat people, as expendable assets. Some people do manage and behave that way but I find it lacking in taste and foresight and do not want to associate with that approach. </p><p>----</p><p></p><p></p><p>The coaches didn't, but the representatives of the Institute did, which trumps coaching. This is the Georgia Institute of Technology and sports exist at the pleasure of and directly for the positive contribution to the school's mission.</p><p>----</p><p></p><p>Agreed, but I think most people would say that if a kid gets hurt while playing for us, we should give them a medical and allow them to continue their education here. To me it is no different. We had a dramatic scheme change on O and have literally played hot potato with D Schemes the last 6 years. If a kid was recruited to do something no longer valued by this staff that isn't on them. It is on us. I know we are limited to 85 slots, and I value the importance each kid can have on the program, but I believe we need to find a way to free that slot up while continuing to honor the commitment we made for them to get their education if we want that to be a part of our brand and definition. I think it is vitally important that it remain a part of who we are in our, as AD TStan says, DNA.</p><p>-------------------------------------------------</p><p></p><p>I know I don't speak as a representative for anyone other than myself, so appreciate you all taking the time to engage with me and share your perspectives, as well as help me check my own and see how I feel about these elements.</p><p></p><p>Mods, sorry if I clogged up the thread by injecting this conversation into the question of who is leaving, but I saw it as part and parcel to that topic.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MidtownJacket, post: 575318, member: 959"] Oh boy, so this is an interesting discussion from a philosophical position, so let me try to respond in detail back to the posters referenced below. For one thing, I am NOT anti CGC or his new staff. I am a GT Fan, and want the Institute to act in a responsible fashion to maximize outcomes in everything we do. Academics, Athletics, Community Service, Research, Marketing the list goes on. I continue to dontate (as I have since Freshman year), wear GT stuff 80% of the time and am an ambassador for the program in both my personal and professional life. I buy the hype and am excited about the direction Geoff is charting for us. I also think there is a larger mission in College Athletics than winning games. I don't think it is naive or sanctimonious or foolhardy to want to be more than just an athletic factory. I also believe fairly deeply in the responsibility we all have to better ourselves, our families and our communities. I happen to believe the mission of GT aligns well with that thought. As such I have responded briefly below to try to continue this conversation in a thoughtful and respectful way. There isn't a scoreboard here and I am truly interested in understanding your perspectives as well as sharing my own. I appreciate that we can have conversations that aren't about winning or being right but are instead about growth and understanding how the larger body of fans and alumni prioritize and value the different parts of Ga Tech. ---- No. This is implicitly different. If we start with the base assumption that the kids who come to play athletics at Ga Tech come from a disproportionately lower income bracket than the traditional student at GT then we can't make the assumption made by lv20gt above. We sell hard on the message that coming to GT offers a chance to earn an education from an elite school. We often go into areas to recruit a student who requires financial and academic assistance to finish a degree here. There is real good in that, exploitative as it may be, and I believe in the idea of progress and service. Sport is a way for people to pull themselves up and reach beyond the means of their communities and families to improve themselves. This is an important mission of public schools and I can not say enough about the necessity of this process. I am 100% onboard with saying the kids aren't guaranteed playing time, in fact I think it is morally incumbent upon the staff to be transparent with kids about where they project. However, I have made the argument before and continue to feel this way, that the players are not employees and should not view college athletics as a proxy for minor league teams. If I make that argument, then I believe the logic follows that we should be committed to giving them a 4 year ride with access to the tutoring and study hall promised when they sign on with us for as long as they remain in good standing with the team. In some ways the medicals other programs give are to me (in the most equitable sense) more appropriate than a choice to not renew a one year scholarship. That isn't how you treat people, as expendable assets. Some people do manage and behave that way but I find it lacking in taste and foresight and do not want to associate with that approach. ---- The coaches didn't, but the representatives of the Institute did, which trumps coaching. This is the Georgia Institute of Technology and sports exist at the pleasure of and directly for the positive contribution to the school's mission. ---- Agreed, but I think most people would say that if a kid gets hurt while playing for us, we should give them a medical and allow them to continue their education here. To me it is no different. We had a dramatic scheme change on O and have literally played hot potato with D Schemes the last 6 years. If a kid was recruited to do something no longer valued by this staff that isn't on them. It is on us. I know we are limited to 85 slots, and I value the importance each kid can have on the program, but I believe we need to find a way to free that slot up while continuing to honor the commitment we made for them to get their education if we want that to be a part of our brand and definition. I think it is vitally important that it remain a part of who we are in our, as AD TStan says, DNA. ------------------------------------------------- I know I don't speak as a representative for anyone other than myself, so appreciate you all taking the time to engage with me and share your perspectives, as well as help me check my own and see how I feel about these elements. Mods, sorry if I clogged up the thread by injecting this conversation into the question of who is leaving, but I saw it as part and parcel to that topic. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
How many points did Georgia Tech score against Cumberland in 1916?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
So who leaves? Attrition.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top