Why does GT suck at recruiting?

PhysicsJacket

PhysicsJacket

Varsity Lurker
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
6
I'm not saying we don't attract good players but we don't get many spectacular players at all (it seems like we get them one or 2 at a time). Our coaching staff does a great job of getting mediocre players to achieve their full potential but imagine how good we would be if we recruited like UGAy.
 
1) No Girls

2) No recent success

3) ACC

4) Small fan base

5) Hard Admissions

6) Hard Majors

7) No Girls
 
We have a very good class going. We have four great lineman that can run our system. Also two quarterbacks that are very good. Hopefully three with aycock! If they graded the players to fit our system both of qb's and all of the lineman would be ranked higher.
 
Have you seen urban meyers daughter? I would got to college just to have a chance to see her.
 
1) Smaller fanbase, lower attendance numbers than bigger name programs
2) Narrower curriculum-- not everyone wants to get into math/science
3) (related to #2) Tougher academics-- not saying we don't get mediocre students in for being athletes, but they can't hide in some goof off major and play around at school as much as at the SEC factories
4) We're not in the SEC, and, like it or not, that conference's rep helps them with some elite players

Obviously, we have our advantages too.
 
PhysicsJacket said:
I'm not saying we don't attract good players but we don't get many spectacular players at all (it seems like we get them one or 2 at a time). Our coaching staff does a great job of getting mediocre players to achieve their full potential but imagine how good we would be if we recruited like UGAy.
Click to expand...

Really?...or would we then be the one with 12 players arrested this year?

There is a reason our incoming football players year in and year out have the highest GPA and SAT score of any public school in the BCS conferences.

I like where we fall in recruiting just fine. We are on course academically and athletically...starting with 2007.
 
We are never going to recruit with the schools that can put "NFL students" into Leisure Studies or General Studies degree programs. That is fine with me.

However, we have a very solid recruiting class coming together this year. The players fit the system extremely well - especially the offensive linemen - and we landed a few fine prospects on D (JC Lanier, Sweeting, Watts, and Cross come to mind). We also landed a big time WR in Stephen Hill, and Moore is good as well. And all of these prospects came here after the new staff had only been recruiting them for 1 year. Next year promises to be much better.

Also, I don't know what you're getting at with the "we only bring spectacular players in 1 or 2 at a time" argument. Last I checked, I would consider Burnett, Morgan, Dwyer, Nesbitt and Jones spectacular players (Claytor, I think, will reach that level soon, IMO). That's 5 spectacular players in one class. (More of quibble with exact numbers - I agree with your statement in general)

Also, the type of player we recruit has a lot to do with them reaching their full potential. They are generally good character, hard-working guys with a drive to succeed, in both academics and athletics. Those type of people, I would argue, have a far greater chance of maximizing their potential than someone who is of questionable character, relies on talent to get by, and does not have a drive to succeed in all facets of life. Yes, maybe the potential for the second type is higher, but the actual threshold that they reach may, in fact, be lower.
 
NatiJacket said:
1) No Girls

2) No recent success

3) ACC

4) Small fan base

5) Hard Admissions

6) Hard Majors

7) No Girls
Click to expand...

But we have boys. And if you aren't so VERY particular, options of boys and/or girls automatically doubles your chances of getting a date. I'm sure PJ is clever enough to point this out to our young recruits.

BTW, who does this "sucking" to which you refer?

love,
ArchiTECH
 
When I say "spectacular" I mean like a Heisman trophy is not out of the question or first team all-american.

And I agree that "suck" is a strong word but I look at the upcoming recruits for GT and compare them to our neighbors in athens and it is ridiculous how many great players they bring in.

I generally agree with all statements though.

I also notice that we are very confined to our region in recruiting compared to bigger schools.
 
But I would definitely rather have a smart hard working good player than a great future inmate any day.
 
I don't think we suck at recruiting.

Dwyer's class was awesome, and the one we're putting together right now is pretty darn good too.

We don't get the players Georgia gets, but with discipline, we won't need, nor would we want, the players that Georgia gets. They can go to jail while ours go to class.
 
why does GT suck at having good fans?

please dont give my major a bad name with such a poorly phrased question!
 
PhysicsJacket said:
I'm not saying we don't attract good players but we don't get many spectacular players at all (it seems like we get them one or 2 at a time). Our coaching staff does a great job of getting mediocre players to achieve their full potential but imagine how good we would be if we recruited like UGAy.
Click to expand...
Well, we actually get our recruits in school. The only way to get a top rated class is to recruit guys who would flunk out by Thanksgiving of their freshman year.
 
beej67 said:
I don't think we suck at recruiting.

Dwyer's class was awesome, and the one we're putting together right now is pretty darn good too.

We don't get the players Georgia gets, but with discipline, we won't need, nor would we want, the players that Georgia gets. They can go to jail while ours go to class.
Click to expand...

This year's class looks real good. Except for Dwyer's class, the best in a decade perhaps.
 
aeromech said:
We'll probably never be able to recruit athletes like this young man:

http://www.ajc.com/sports/content/s...cruit/entries/2009/01/12/rb_washaun_eale.html

Personally, I'm good with that. Some of the top players we miss out on; are noteworthy products of our government school system, bless their hearts.
Click to expand...

i was a product of our government school system and graduated with the highest gpa of my graduating class in the college of science at gt. its what you do with it, ive seen many kids from private schools fail out
 
BuzzCzar said:
i was a product of our government school system and graduated with the highest gpa of my graduating class in the college of science at gt. its what you do with it, ive seen many kids from private schools fail out
Click to expand...

Have you seen many kids graduate from private schools who couldn't score 820 on the SAT? That was my point. Maybe Hargrave, or whatever that finishing school UGA uses is called; but I think the Leonard Popes of this world are predominately products of government school systems.
 
aeromech said:
Have you seen many kids graduate from private schools who couldn't score 820 on the SAT? That was my point. Maybe Hargrave, or whatever that finishing school UGA uses is called; but I think the Leonard Popes of this world are predominately products of government school systems.
Click to expand...

when i taught in a privat high school here in atlanta there were students who would get passed with Ds that should have made Fs. as far as their SAT scores, i dont know. i think that that probably takes not just lazy kids that arent naturally scholastically gifted bur also the added factors of non-caring parents who cant afford anyone else to care either

i dont think it has much to do with the schools, underneath the pretty lockers and chairs
 
I think the Leonard Popes of this world are predominately products of government school systems.
Click to expand...

That's because they're poor.
 
beej67 said:
That's because they're poor.
Click to expand...

Which is sadly a bigger determinant than public vs private.

There can be excellent public schools in terrible inner-city districts. The difference is how much parents support their kids and create an environment conducive to learning. This is harder to do if poor, and really hard to do if you are a single parent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top