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 "Collins effect "........
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="AE 87" data-source="post: 516112" data-attributes="member: 195"><p>The following is my understanding. If I am wrong at any point, please correct me by highlighting which point is in error and why.</p><p></p><p>1. GT currently does very well in APR and supporting our scholarship athletes toward an increasing graduation rate. </p><p></p><p>2. When CPJ arrived the APR was not fully (including with penalties) implemented, and the graduation rate was less than 50%.</p><p></p><p>3. During our very good years under CGO, there was a grade point requirement that allowed some SAs to take easier classes that did not necessarily advance them toward a degree.</p><p></p><p>4. Under both CGO and early CCG, we failed to live up fully to requirements, for some reason.</p><p></p><p>5. CPJ and staff have recruited as well CCG apart from 2007 class.</p><p></p><p>6. In retrospect, we don't know how well CGO classes would have done under current APR, but we know that there was a problem even under the standard at that time.</p><p></p><p>7. So, any reference to recruiting under the pre-APR era need to explain why this difference doesn't matter.</p><p></p><p>8. And, we should be up front with the value we place on winning vs supporting each SA.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AE 87, post: 516112, member: 195"] The following is my understanding. If I am wrong at any point, please correct me by highlighting which point is in error and why. 1. GT currently does very well in APR and supporting our scholarship athletes toward an increasing graduation rate. 2. When CPJ arrived the APR was not fully (including with penalties) implemented, and the graduation rate was less than 50%. 3. During our very good years under CGO, there was a grade point requirement that allowed some SAs to take easier classes that did not necessarily advance them toward a degree. 4. Under both CGO and early CCG, we failed to live up fully to requirements, for some reason. 5. CPJ and staff have recruited as well CCG apart from 2007 class. 6. In retrospect, we don't know how well CGO classes would have done under current APR, but we know that there was a problem even under the standard at that time. 7. So, any reference to recruiting under the pre-APR era need to explain why this difference doesn't matter. 8. And, we should be up front with the value we place on winning vs supporting each SA. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Who was Georgia Tech's starting QB in 2023?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
The "Collins effect "........
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