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
The academic toll that nobody talks about
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="jacketup" data-source="post: 20847" data-attributes="member: 630"><p>GT signed 3 of Rivals top 8 players in Georgia for what is now the sophomore class in basketball. 2 more of those 8 were offered scholarships. So 5 of 8 were academically qualified. </p><p></p><p>If I look at 247sports top 100 football players in Georgia, we don't have a commitment in the top 60, I believe.</p><p></p><p>I just don't buy the academics argument to the extreme that so many people want to advance it. Yes, academics are a factor, but academics doesn't explain 0 for 60. Then, there are something like 5 commits from 60-75 in that list. To suggest that academics are the reason that GT is 0 fer in the top 60, but then from 60-75, kids are suddenly qualified and interested, is completely illogical.</p><p></p><p>GT and Atlanta have a LOT to sell. It's a matter of finding "customers" who are interested. A poor job of marketing the program to those "customers" has existed. Some people like Chevys, some like Fords, others like Toyotas. Find the market and sell to it. Much of the customer base will be outside of Georgia. Look at the 1990 2-deep.</p><p></p><p>The best OL in SC is going to UF to major in engineering. His father is an engineer. We offered him. Academics are not the reason that he isn't coming to GT. </p><p></p><p>Approximately 2500 kids will sign FBS scholarships this year. We can do a better job of identifying and selling the 20 or so that want what GT and Atlanta have to offer, and who will help us the most on the field. </p><p></p><p>This will stir up the jackets nest, but yes, the way the offense is presented is a negative to recruiting. Tom Osborne abandoned the TO because of recruiting. Minor changes to the offense, and calling the positions by NFL names (rather than A and B back) and making it clear that it is not the TO (because it is not) would help.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="jacketup, post: 20847, member: 630"] GT signed 3 of Rivals top 8 players in Georgia for what is now the sophomore class in basketball. 2 more of those 8 were offered scholarships. So 5 of 8 were academically qualified. If I look at 247sports top 100 football players in Georgia, we don't have a commitment in the top 60, I believe. I just don't buy the academics argument to the extreme that so many people want to advance it. Yes, academics are a factor, but academics doesn't explain 0 for 60. Then, there are something like 5 commits from 60-75 in that list. To suggest that academics are the reason that GT is 0 fer in the top 60, but then from 60-75, kids are suddenly qualified and interested, is completely illogical. GT and Atlanta have a LOT to sell. It's a matter of finding "customers" who are interested. A poor job of marketing the program to those "customers" has existed. Some people like Chevys, some like Fords, others like Toyotas. Find the market and sell to it. Much of the customer base will be outside of Georgia. Look at the 1990 2-deep. The best OL in SC is going to UF to major in engineering. His father is an engineer. We offered him. Academics are not the reason that he isn't coming to GT. Approximately 2500 kids will sign FBS scholarships this year. We can do a better job of identifying and selling the 20 or so that want what GT and Atlanta have to offer, and who will help us the most on the field. This will stir up the jackets nest, but yes, the way the offense is presented is a negative to recruiting. Tom Osborne abandoned the TO because of recruiting. Minor changes to the offense, and calling the positions by NFL names (rather than A and B back) and making it clear that it is not the TO (because it is not) would help. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Who was Georgia Tech's starting QB in 2023?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
The academic toll that nobody talks about
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