The "Collins effect "........

[ibeattetris]

FWIW I’m pretty certain Duke has a staff of twenty or a little more. Maybe where I read that was wrong but I think it’s true. Who knows about duhU. I think their private school setup helps them hide how much they spend.

I’m not advocating we have to outspend everyone. I’m just saying we have to be in the same ballpark. What we did with a staff of 2 shows we can still operate and function. But how much better could we do with just a staff of 12? Seems obvious to me the improvement would be significant.

From CPJ's lips Duke has the third biggest staff in the ACC. That doesn't necessarily mean "recruiting staff" but Duke is not the same bottom dweller they were in 2000 and before.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

From CPJ's lips Duke has the third biggest staff in the ACC. That doesn't necessarily mean "recruiting staff" but Duke is not the same bottom dweller they were in 2000 and before.

Agree. Most of the credit for that goes to coach Cut. As much as I dislike him he’s damn good. I suspect a significant portion also goes to funding increases. One place we still beat Duke’s *** is game day experience. Their football fans are putrid. Inversely proportional to their b-ball fans. So if we can mirror what they did with funding.....

 

[takethepoints]

If that's the case, should you be more worried about CGC or TStan? CGC didn't hire himself, so if TStan couldn't see past the "salesman" and got sold a bunch of goods...well, maybe GT may have a bigger problem overall than who the football coach is.

This can happen to any organization. I agree that I sure do hope TStan immediately discounted a lot of the first 10 minutes of the interview and got down to brass tacks quickly.

 

[takethepoints]

Few thoughts. First for coaches their professional lives are much more public than your typical business leader. As such there is a track record that TStan could review fairly easily. Second it appears much of the Temple staff will be joining Collins in Atlanta so I think that pretty much negates or at least minimizes the idea that he is some kind of control freak who won’t let his assistants do their work. I get the concern but do think this is a different kind of hire that those yo7 have been involved in.

1. The person I'm writing about was a college president. Public exposure is about equal at that level.

2. "Second it appears much of the Temple staff will be joining Collins in Atlanta so I think that pretty much negates or at least minimizes the idea that he is some kind of control freak who won’t let his assistants do their work." Unless, of course, that's the reason he brought them along. If they are the kind of subordinates I'm talking about they would be glad to move.

But … I don't think - or, at least, hope - that Coach isn't one of these. I mentioned it solely on my own experience; some of what he says makes me nervous. As I said, however, a lot of new leadership is enthusiastic and there's nothing necessarily wrong with that. What we see on the field will tell the tale.

 

[iceeater1969]

Conditional offers...primarily based on transcripts. Got it? Who let the dwags out?

There's recruiting and then there is sending a letter .
The top guys get recruited.
We send a letter and only follow u

From CPJ's lips Duke has the third biggest staff in the ACC. That doesn't necessarily mean "recruiting staff" but Duke is not the same bottom dweller they were in 2000 and before.

Coach K

 

[okiemon]

That’s because you are delusional
Tic

Could be. And I’ve deluded myself into thinking I know anything about football.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JacketGirl]

'13 matches '09 in disappointment for me. Should have won both of them.

Agreed. 13 was awful to sit through.

 

[AE 87]

1. The person I'm writing about was a college president. Public exposure is about equal at that level.

2. "Second it appears much of the Temple staff will be joining Collins in Atlanta so I think that pretty much negates or at least minimizes the idea that he is some kind of control freak who won’t let his assistants do their work." Unless, of course, that's the reason he brought them along. If they are the kind of subordinates I'm talking about they would be glad to move.

But … I don't think - or, at least, hope - that Coach isn't one of these. I mentioned it solely on my own experience; some of what he says makes me nervous. As I said, however, a lot of new leadership is enthusiastic and there's nothing necessarily wrong with that. What we see on the field will tell the tale.

I think there may be a certain amount of diversity in professional experience needed to appreciate your post.

I hope that the red flags we're seeing are just wrong. If we see a new OC who's not from Temple, I'll feel better.

Either way, I'm rooting for CGC to take GT to great heights.

 

[ncjacket79]

1. The person I'm writing about was a college president. Public exposure is about equal at that level.

2. "Second it appears much of the Temple staff will be joining Collins in Atlanta so I think that pretty much negates or at least minimizes the idea that he is some kind of control freak who won’t let his assistants do their work." Unless, of course, that's the reason he brought them along. If they are the kind of subordinates I'm talking about they would be glad to move.

But … I don't think - or, at least, hope - that Coach isn't one of these. I mentioned it solely on my own experience; some of what he says makes me nervous. As I said, however, a lot of new leadership is enthusiastic and there's nothing necessarily wrong with that. What we see on the field will tell the tale.

1. i don't think so man. i worked at a major university through 2 changes 9f Presidents, nobody knew much of anything about who was in the running or the new person before they were hired. Coaches are so in the news that everyone know everything about them if they are at major programs.

 

[AlphaBuzz]

Well CPJ did offer 26 of the top 39 Recruits in GA for the 2019 Class, that is a .666 ratio, that does extrapolate to 66 of the Top100 players in Ga being academic qualifiers for GT

If GA HSs put out those numbers of academic qualifiers most yrs., please explain why CPJ didn't recruit better

I think my logic is pretty fair, start explainin'

The explanation is pretty simple and you hit it early in your original post; limited majors. It is obvious where you fall on the CPJ fan scale, but he was very clear about this in an interview he had with Schultz a couple of years ago. His comment was that the academics can be overcome (your 66% offer rate above), but if you don't have a major that the kid wants, he's not coming. There are a lot of good football players who have the grades and character to get in GT, but we don't have the major they want.

By definition, these are the kind of kids we want at GT. Smart, talented players who are highly motivated both in the classroom and on the field. They have an eye on the 40 year plan and what they want, but we don't offer that path or degree. That didn't change for CPJ and it won't change for CGC. It will be a challenge for every coach we have. GT has some 45 majors; uGa, Clemson, Miami, Auburn, uNc, etc. all have north of 200 options.

This stuff isn't going to change and it will matter to every coach. It isn't as simple as changing to a new coach and we will suddenly have kids lining up. While many perceived CPJ negatively wrt recruiting, his players (and their parents) loved him and he has done the same as his predecessors in rankings. A new enthusiasm and a focus on prep for the next level will help, but until we have more degree options we will be limited in who wants to come here regardless of the system we run.

 

[Boaty1]

Consistently winning the coastal, never losing to Duke, and beating uga 50% does in fact seem to be the bar many demand to meet. That would put us at a very high level, top 20 territory consistently. If not an elite level pretty darn close.

And not likely to happen if we don’t at least match our peers in backing / funding / spending.

The explanation is pretty simple and you hit it early in your original post; limited majors. It is obvious where you fall on the CPJ fan scale, but he was very clear about this in an interview he had with Schultz a couple of years ago. His comment was that the academics can be overcome (your 66% offer rate above), but if you don't have a major that the kid wants, he's not coming. There are a lot of good football players who have the grades and character to get in GT, but we don't have the major they want.

By definition, these are the kind of kids we want at GT. Smart, talented players who are highly motivated both in the classroom and on the field. They have an eye on the 40 year plan and what they want, but we don't offer that path or degree. That didn't change for CPJ and it won't change for CGC. It will be a challenge for every coach we have. GT has some 45 majors; uGa, Clemson, Miami, Auburn, uNc, etc. all have north of 200 options.

This stuff isn't going to change and it will matter to every coach. It isn't as simple as changing to a new coach and we will suddenly have kids lining up. While many perceived CPJ negatively wrt recruiting, his players (and their parents) loved him and he has done the same as his predecessors in rankings. A new enthusiasm and a focus on prep for the next level will help, but until we have more degree options we will be limited in who wants to come here regardless of the system we run.

A ton of group think in this post that is simply not supported by fact. To start with the curriculum angle is overplayed as a reason for our recruiting struggles. Past coaches such as O’Leary overcame them with the almost the exact same curriculum challenge. We know by his success that this can and has been overcome.

When you say Johnson matched his predecessors in recruiting rankings what you really mean is he matched Gailey. And if you take away Gailey’s 07 class that is correct. But that ignores the fact that Gailey was a notoriously poor recruiter who took a ton of heat for the significant drop in recruiting compared to O’Leary. Ross and even Lewis had some really solid classes prior to O’Leary. While GT does face some unique challenges, the curriculum angle is significantly overblown when it is used to explain Johnson’s poor recruiting because other coaches have overcome this exact challenge better than Johnson was able to.

I know many are tired of hearing these arguments, but I don’t think we as a fanbase should buy into these negative stereotypes that when studied closely are based in nothing more than half truths.

 

[Towaliga]

A ton of group think in this post that is simply not supported by fact. To start with the curriculum angle is overplayed as a reason for our recruiting struggles. Past coaches such as O’Leary overcame them with the almost the exact same curriculum challenge. We know by his success that this can and has been overcome.

When you say Johnson matched his predecessors in recruiting rankings what you really mean is he matched Gailey. And if you take away Gailey’s 07 class that is correct. But that ignores the fact that Gailey was a notoriously poor recruiter who took a ton of heat for the significant drop in recruiting compared to O’Leary. Ross and even Lewis had some really solid classes prior to O’Leary. While GT does face some unique challenges, the curriculum angle is significantly overblown when it is used to explain Johnson’s poor recruiting because other coaches have overcome this exact challenge better than Johnson was able to.

I know many are tired of hearing these arguments, but I don’t think we as a fanbase should buy into these negative stereotypes that when studied closely are based in nothing more than half truths.

One thing you haven’t taken into consideration is the number of academic exceptions that CPJ was allowed to have after the issues that had previously occurred. The last numbers I heard were from 2014 or ‘15, and we had 4 on the team. That same year, u(sic)ga had over 70, so they obviously could recruit AND SIGN players GT wanted but couldn’t sign. GOL’s and CCG’s were significantly higher than 4.

 

[LibertyTurns]

I hope sometime very soon, we get over the CPJ/TO debate every time someone brings up something positive about our new coach hire .... sheesh !!

Good luck. People regularly invoke coaches all the way back to Bobby Dodd. You’d think the way we’re bickering the next door neighbor just got a new yellow refrigerator and their own dedicated phone line.

 

[Animal02]

A ton of group think in this post that is simply not supported by fact. To start with the curriculum angle is overplayed as a reason for our recruiting struggles. Past coaches such as O’Leary overcame them with the almost the exact same curriculum challenge. We know by his success that this can and has been overcome.

When you say Johnson matched his predecessors in recruiting rankings what you really mean is he matched Gailey. And if you take away Gailey’s 07 class that is correct. But that ignores the fact that Gailey was a notoriously poor recruiter who took a ton of heat for the significant drop in recruiting compared to O’Leary. Ross and even Lewis had some really solid classes prior to O’Leary. While GT does face some unique challenges, the curriculum angle is significantly overblown when it is used to explain Johnson’s poor recruiting because other coaches have overcome this exact challenge better than Johnson was able to.

I know many are tired of hearing these arguments, but I don’t think we as a fanbase should buy into these negative stereotypes that when studied closely are based in nothing more than half truths.

And you ignore, as always the fact that the $$$$ available,compared to the rest of the world, dropped like a rock under CPJ, but that doesn't fit the narrative you keep trying to sell

 

[Boaty1]

And you ignore, as always the fact that the $$$$ available,compared to the rest of the world, dropped like a rock under CPJ, but that doesn't fit the narrative you keep trying to sell

Not at all. This post was addressing the issue of how much a limited curriculum affects our recruiting efforts. My point is that this challenge is not something that has changed over time unlike the money issue you are correctly identifying.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

A ton of group think in this post that is simply not supported by fact. To start with the curriculum angle is overplayed as a reason for our recruiting struggles. Past coaches such as O’Leary overcame them with the almost the exact same curriculum challenge. We know by his success that this can and has been overcome.

When you say Johnson matched his predecessors in recruiting rankings what you really mean is he matched Gailey. And if you take away Gailey’s 07 class that is correct. But that ignores the fact that Gailey was a notoriously poor recruiter who took a ton of heat for the significant drop in recruiting compared to O’Leary. Ross and even Lewis had some really solid classes prior to O’Leary. While GT does face some unique challenges, the curriculum angle is significantly overblown when it is used to explain Johnson’s poor recruiting because other coaches have overcome this exact challenge better than Johnson was able to.

I know many are tired of hearing these arguments, but I don’t think we as a fanbase should buy into these negative stereotypes that when studied closely are based in nothing more than half truths.

Yadda yadda yadda. Same ole from you and others like you. It's time to put a new CD in the player.

 

[AlphaBuzz]

A ton of group think in this post that is simply not supported by fact. To start with the curriculum angle is overplayed as a reason for our recruiting struggles. Past coaches such as O’Leary overcame them with the almost the exact same curriculum challenge. We know by his success that this can and has been overcome.

When you say Johnson matched his predecessors in recruiting rankings what you really mean is he matched Gailey. And if you take away Gailey’s 07 class that is correct. But that ignores the fact that Gailey was a notoriously poor recruiter who took a ton of heat for the significant drop in recruiting compared to O’Leary. Ross and even Lewis had some really solid classes prior to O’Leary. While GT does face some unique challenges, the curriculum angle is significantly overblown when it is used to explain Johnson’s poor recruiting because other coaches have overcome this exact challenge better than Johnson was able to.

I know many are tired of hearing these arguments, but I don’t think we as a fanbase should buy into these negative stereotypes that when studied closely are based in nothing more than half truths.

APR didn't exist in those days. All the player had to do was keep his GPA over a 2.0 and he was eligible until he used his 4 years. We had guys who used their eligibility up and were no where close to graduating; not what we want from our student athletes but it was real. How many of the stars from O'Leary's classes actually got degrees?

Today, a kid has to pick a major and actually make progress towards his degree in order to stay eligible. Back when Ross, BL and O'Leary were here, the kid had to pass the easiest classes in the entire school for 4 years and then he was done whether he got a degree or not. Some good players came through thinking they were NFL bound and were good players, but today's world is different than it was back in early Chan days and back.

It doesn't feed some narratives on here, but it's real.

 

[Boaty1]

Yadda yadda yadda. Same ole from you and others like you. It's time to put a new CD in the player.

Good deal. I feel the same about many of the excuses I hear on a consistent basis from many on this board in particular. Quit buying into nonsense about the program we both claim to support and I won't have to refute it.

 

[Madison Grant]

Almost every Tech fan knows the academic factors we're up against. Tougher school. No lib arts majors. We all know, except for maybe someone who JUST started following the team. So why do they need to be brought up ad nauseum as excuses why we CAN'T achieve better consistency as a winning program? I thought Tech was a place that taught you to suck it up and quit making excuses? Fewer academic exceptions than UGAg doesn't mean we are forced to pick from a pool of recruits 3 standard deviations above the mean for academic qualifications. While we get poached by higher profile academic schools like Notre Dame and Stanford, we've been poaching UCF, Western Kentucky and Louisiana-Lafayette for players. Let's be real. Those schools aren't bastions of the student-athlete ideal. And before any of you get upset saying "He's crossed the red line, boys! He's criticizing players", I know nothing about the individual academic qualifications of those recruits and don't profess to. The point is we aren't confined to competing with Harvard and Yale only for recruits. Or even Vanderbilt and Northwestern, for that matter. And all our players are great, great, great, no matter their recruiting rankings. Happy?

 

[Towaliga]

Good deal. I feel the same about many of the excuses I hear on a consistent basis from many on this board in particular. Quit buying into nonsense about the program we both claim to support and I won't have to refute it.

I noticed that you are choosing to ignore the posts on this same page regarding academic exceptions and APR. Is there something relevant to those points that us nonsensical people are unaware of that you are privy to that makes those points moot, or are you choosing to ignore them because they don’t fit your narrative? Please enlighten us.