Then why haven't we???
Wait, why haven't we what? Dabbled in the 1-and-dones? Uhm, como se dice 'Brain Gregory's not a good coach'?
Then why haven't we???
Please don't!!! However we have folks throwing darts, I mean fellas... we have people on this thread thinking GT will get 8 to 10M per year from Nike, UA or Adidas...
While I understand the value of switching from RA to Nike, Adidas, or UA, that will not solve the equation, we need to recruit players who want to do school, which puts us behind UNC, Duke, Kansas every year!! Doesn't mean we can't overcome the poor CBG years, but it does mean that we need more than just Nike, Adidas, or UA to overcome the CBG years!!
BINGO!!!!!!!!!!Wait, why haven't we what? Dabbled in the 1-and-dones? Uhm, como se dice 'Brain Gregory's not a good coach'?
One addendum I believe, under apr it matters if guys leave in good standing. Bball rolls over two semesters, so back in the day one and dones would only care about staying eligible in fall and then stop going to class in spring semester. But now coaches have to plea with those kids to finish spring semester.You're having a different discussion though. No one is saying, if we fix the uniforms, that's all we need to do.
And furthermore, IMHO the academic hurdles you allude to aren't as daunting in bball as they are in fball. I think we can dabble in the 1-and-doners without going full-Kentucky or w/e.
Please don't!!! However we have folks throwing darts, I mean fellas... we have people on this thread thinking GT will get 8 to 10M per year from Nike, UA or Adidas...
While I understand the value of switching from RA to Nike, Adidas, or UA, that will not solve the equation, we need to recruit players who want to do school, which puts us behind UNC, Duke, Kansas every year!! Doesn't mean we can't overcome the poor CBG years, but it does mean that we need more than just Nike, Adidas, or UA to overcome the CBG years!!
First others on this board have said way more than 5-7M...Hey I said 5-7 and I don't know if anyone else said anything more... not having Russell will help. It's not the epitome of being good, it's just taking away one of our flaws. I'm not sure how old you are, but Russell is kind of embarrassing to 18-30ish year olds. I wouldn't get caught in public wearing Russell gear, okay maybe to the gym, but even then idk. Maybe I'm vain for 25, but so are 18-22 year olds. If not having Russell helps us land 3-4 more solid recruits in football and 1-2 more good recruit in basketball it will make a huge difference, and I can easily see that much impact.
First others on this board have said way more than 5-7M...
Second I do agree with your point about RA, however I am not so sure we will get 3 to 4 more recruits to commit because of the new deal. I do think kids will not be able to use the excuse when eliminateing GT "they with RA, I wanna play at a school with a swoosh".... They will have to say another reason.
One addendum I believe, under apr it matters if guys leave in good standing. Bball rolls over two semesters, so back in the day one and dones would only care about staying eligible in fall and then stop going to class in spring semester. But now coaches have to plea with those kids to finish spring semester.
Switching from Russell doesn't solve all of our problems, but it takes away one of our weaknesses. Every school has positives and negatives, but you don't need to add to that by being the only P5 school that has a contract with a company that has no play in college basketball recruiting. I think if GT's coaches had their way they would likely want Nike - as they are the deepest of the 3 shoe companies in the AAU scene. But they will be happy with anything that is not Russell.
I agree, would not spend a dime on anything russell. Wouldnt wana be seen in it eitherHey I said 5-7 and I don't know if anyone else said anything more... not having Russell will help. It's not the epitome of being good, it's just taking away one of our flaws. I'm not sure how old you are, but Russell is kind of embarrassing to 18-30ish year olds. I wouldn't get caught in public wearing Russell gear, okay maybe to the gym, but even then idk. Maybe I'm vain for 25, but so are 18-22 year olds. If not having Russell helps us land 3-4 more solid recruits in football and 1-2 more good recruit in basketball it will make a huge difference, and I can easily see that much impact.
80 percent of the nation's top 10 players, (8 out of 10) in any given year, are already tied to an agent before they ever even step on a college campus because agents are often deeply connected to some of the top summer programs..
Switching from Russell doesn't solve all of our problems, but it takes away one of our weaknesses. Every school has positives and negatives, but you don't need to add to that by being the only P5 school that has a contract with a company that has no play in college basketball recruiting. I think if GT's coaches had their way they would likely want Nike - as they are the deepest of the 3 shoe companies in the AAU scene. But they will be happy with anything that is not Russell.
So I think Georgia Tech is not trying to recruit a top ten player who is tied to an agent as that player would probably not want to show up to class.... Thus switching to Nike/UA/Adidas will not help us with what this article is talking about anyway...
However by switching from RA to Nike/UA/Adidas it will take away a negative that students who commit to GT have to listen to.