We've been here before; Again, Part 2

Using academics is a cop out. There's a little difference but it's not that much in who we are recruiting.
 
EastJacket said:
Using academics is a cop out. There's a little difference but it's not that much.
Click to expand...


????? Did you go to the Institute? A little difference?

I went to both schools (yes, I attended UGAG for a short time). There is NO comparison to the pain and difficulty at Tech....none....recruiting to our school is VERY difficult.
 
BarrelORum said:
The Board of Regents is run by a GT grad now. Look it up.
Click to expand...

You and I both know that is a democracy not dictatorship so despite who runs it the voting faction is still dominated by Uga. Hence why they have engineering today. Regardless even if we get new degrees that is a long term putt vs something we can start now. Of course it's a good idea. I am just looking at the least restrictive route. No argument from me on this one. I want some level of on field results.
 
33jacket said:
Lost to UGA again right?

Student section a joke right?

Fans full of red and a joke right?

You guys ever look and wonder whats happened of the past decade to make our record one of the worst stints, if not the worst in the history of the rival?

Here are the facts

- in 2002, flunkgate happened. The admin ratcheted back what type of athlete Tech could accept. We still accept players well below the tech standard, but well above what we did in the 90s. Result. 1-9.

- No coach, no system, can compete with UGA with our standards today. Is PJ perfect, no, is he not doing as good as he could in some areas, yes, but the fact is our standards today are so high out of fear, APR reqs, and elitism we are doomed.

- Oleary got in thugs. I roomed next to em. They were UGA types. They smoked pot in their dorms. Two are in jail now and felons. One was on crack. A famous player had more prostitutes than heidi fleiss. But....

- We won 3 straight. We competed. UGA also had talent, but was not as well coached.

- Then 11 failed out, Oleary guys but after he left.

- We remember the 3 straight, we don't really remember the failed out.

- Your degree, wasn't lessoned during oleary's era, pre failouts or post failouts. Note to you, if you think that GT is clean you are a fail. We changed in the past 10 years. We ratcheted down the program. We need to go back to the older days. We don't need thugs. I am not saying that. We can recruit good kids to compete. Reference 2007. But we need a total school commitment to do it. Today it is not there.

- We already let below avg standards in, why not go the whole way and let kids in to compete? You can't be gray in this world. Be black or white but stuck in the middle pretending to be a football school, and pretending to be an academic school does nothing. Either have a serious program and feed it, or don't, but don't act like you do.

- Because they need to stay in school say you? Ha says I. We give them the ööööing tests. I know. I am good friends with the head of the academic advisors. Its not an issue. In 2007 Chan told the admin he can't compete. We got 12 exceptions. One was Nesbitt. He stayed 4 years. No problem with keeping Bebe in. Its a hoggwash excuse. We can keep these kids in school.

- Does tech want to fix this? Do we want to make it a rival again? We have to let in a Notch above NCAA requirements. We can compete. We have. We have scaled back. We already let kids in who couldn't get in on their own, so I don't want to hear it devalues this or that. It doesn't. We already do it. We can find a bunch of good kids to compete, below today's line, but still able to make it through.

At what point, after a decade of being inept, will folks stand up and demand some change? Another 10 years?

the fact is the fail of tech for the last decade is a systemic failure of leadership, conservatism, elitism, and a faction of voices that is convinced we can be MIT Mond-Frid and VT on saturday. We can't. If we truly want to fix this, we have to have systemic program changes, allow more 'exceptions' to compete, and move fwd. I am not talking about creating fake degrees. I am talking about letting in what we did in 2007 more often, or going back to the 1990's standards, and ensuring they get the support and rigor to get through school. Its really simple folks, simple to fix. However, as dismayed as I am about today, I am more frustrated that we will continue to pretend, stuck in the gray area, and 10 more years will go by where we win 1. Maybe 2. Lets hope soon, enough is enough and the school commits to fielding a more competitive team through allowing recruits that today would be below the line, yet still above NCAA mins.
Click to expand...

This! Couldn't agree more. If you disagree, that's cool, everyone is entitled to their opinion but you can't bitch after losses to football schools. The playing field is tilted, all you have to do is look at the difference in talent!!!!
 
AlabamaBuzz said:
????? Did you go to the Institute? A little difference?

I went to both schools (yes, I attended UGAG for a short time). There is NO comparison to the pain and difficulty at Tech....none....recruiting to our school is VERY difficult.
Click to expand...

LOL. Little difference in recruiting and who we are admitting; say we have 5 guys we are looking at, UGA would admit all 5, we might only do it for 3 of them. I'm a coach who has had kids recruited by GT, I've been around it enough. I know what the grades were like, I've seen the other schools requirements. It's not that much different getting them in school; now once their in they gotta work their butts off, if they don't wanna do that then they aren't coming to GT.

We act like all those guys on UGA's team wouldn't get admitted to GT, and that's BS. Some wouldn't but enough would to make us compete, we just aren't recruiting good enough.
 
Tl;dr. Same song different verse

Goin to win trivia any-goddamn way- cuz we are forever smarter
 
Maybe they should add more varieties to the business administration majors? Something like "sports management" could be attractive? There's another major that I thought would be good for the school overall, but I can't recall. Physiology maybe?

But I don't want to add stuff like "housekeeping" or "park management".
 
PTCJacket said:
Maybe they should add more varieties to the business administration majors? Something like "sports management" could be attractive? There's another major that I thought would be good for the school overall, but I can't recall. Physiology maybe?
Click to expand...

If we can do agreed it would be good for everyone not just athletes. If not we need to let in 4 for every ugas five not the 2 it is today.
 
33jacket said:
but if the board of regents resists this, which they have in the past, our only solution WE can control is allowing in the SA's per the standard of 2007 and 1997.

This is my point.
Click to expand...

33, I disagree with you on this one. We tell the BOR that they either approve the additional fields of study or we never play uga again. If the ACC expands to 9 conference games we also have the perfect timing to go with that the the leverage we have. It's time to play poker with the BOR who have been shafting GT for years.
 
EastJacket said:
LOL. Little difference in recruiting and who we are admitting; say we have 5 guys we are looking at, UGA would admit all 5, we might only do it for 3 of them. I'm a coach who has had kids recruited by GT, I've been around it enough. I know what the grades were like, I've seen the other schools requirements. It's not that much different getting them in school; now once their in they gotta work their butts off, if they don't wanna do that then they aren't coming to GT.

We act like all those guys on UGA's team wouldn't get admitted to GT, and that's BS. Some wouldn't but enough would to make us compete, we just aren't recruiting good enough.
Click to expand...


I don't act like that. I act like it is hard to convince most of these young guys to come to tech where they will have to work harder to succeed in the classroom as well as deal with the ratio and a lack of academic program variety.
 
I want a major or two added. A carefully crafted major that fits inline with what we are about but isn't so rigorous on the engineering side. We can still keep the guidelines high for admittance we just have more opportunities to put these kids through. Lowering the standards does nothing for me. Guys like Kenny Anderson, Stephon Marbury, and Reuben Houston are good examples as to why that bites you in the ass. They are forever poch marks on GT's standards.

There used to be talk of GA State and GT merging. It was shot down real quick because UGA football would have been severely threatened.
 
AlabamaBuzz said:
I don't act like that. I act like it is hard to convince most of these young guys to come to tech where they will have to work harder to succeed in the classroom as well as deal with the ratio and a lack of academic program variety.
Click to expand...


I agree with that. But that's recruiting and closing the deal. We can get the athletes we need, just need to do a better job of it.

Sure a little change adding maybe sports management and journalism might be good and I'd be all for that. It doesn't de-value anything. Hell maybe add education, that would be great, a lot of kids want to teach and coach. Education program would solve the ratio problem.
 
BarrelORum said:
Guys like Kenny Anderson, Stephon Marbury, and Reuben Houston are good examples as to why that bites you in the ass..
Click to expand...
Just weed them out quickly. Having good players does not equal suffering public shame. Did any one else notice a UGAg player on the field today who already had 3 different one game suspensions?
 
BarrelORum said:
I want a major or two added. A carefully crafted major that fits inline with what we are about but isn't so rigorous on the engineering side. We can still keep the guidelines high for admittance we just have more opportunities to put these kids through. Lowering the standards does nothing for me. Guys like Kenny Anderson, Stephon Marbury, and Reuben Houston are good examples as to why that bites you in the ass. They are forever poch marks on GT's standards.

There used to be talk of GA State and GT merging. It was shot down real quick because UGA football would have been severely threatened.
Click to expand...

Houston was a good student and not a marginal acceptance. For every Marbury I can name alot more marginal acceptances who did good and were great examples like bebe Nesbitt Claytor etc. point is bad eggs do happen regardless and I don't think it necessarily has to do with a 950 sat or 1050.
 
GT needs more major opportunities and they need to be variations on existing degrees that directly compete with what UGA or Ga State offers.
 
EastJacket said:
I agree with that. But that's recruiting and closing the deal. We can get the athletes we need, just need to do a better job of it.

Sure a little change adding maybe sports management and journalism might be good and I'd be all for that. It doesn't de-value anything. Hell maybe add education, that would be great, a lot of kids want to teach and coach. Education program would solve the ratio problem.
Click to expand...



We agree. The only thing I would add is that GT needs to recruit nationwide....just focusing on the south and GA is not enough for our special circumstances, at least until we can add some other majors, IMO>
 
I also wonder what the other parts of Tech would think about adding more degrees. Would the engineering departments be pissed that money is being spent on new majors instead of a new AE building and try to block it? Do they even have a say or is it all top down?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top