2022 Recruiting

GTWannaBee said:
No. We have 3. Most have 5-8. Sure the top 15 have 9-15, but when’s the last time we ranked that high anyway?
Click to expand...
You keep using words that you obviously don't know the meaning of.

Or did you study math in a VA High School?

3 is much less than 8. It's half of 6, which is significantly less. It's about 1/8th of the players we will sign, while others are at 1/3 and plenty are over halfway.
 
GTCrew said:
You keep using words that you obviously don't know the meaning of.

Or did you study math in a VA High School?

3 is much less than 8. It's half of 6, which is significantly less. It's about 1/8th of the players we will sign, while others are at 1/3 and plenty are over halfway.
Click to expand...
So? It doesn’t matter when you get players to commit if matters who they are. Plus nothing really counts until signing day.
 
ncjacket said:
So? It doesn’t matter when you get players to commit if matters who they are. Plus nothing really counts until signing day.
Click to expand...
That's a remarkably simplistic take. Do you think we are predestined to get who we get? Everything matters, just some things more than others. For example a big time commit can snowball, and a lack of commits can allow players to delay making a decision.

Recruiting is a fascinating exercise in game theory, both for the teams and the players. It shouldn't have to be said that if we get strung along by four stars who ultimately go elsewhere, we can miss out on high three stars. Similarly if high three star athletes hold out for Alabama, they can find out in the end that the second tier schools have filled their spaces.

In my opinion, we are doing the right thing here. It is the appropriate time in the staff's tenure to aim high and risk it.
 
GTCrew said:
You keep using words that you obviously don't know the meaning of.

Or did you study math in a VA High School?

3 is much less than 8. It's half of 6, which is significantly less. It's about 1/8th of the players we will sign, while others are at 1/3 and plenty are over halfway.
Click to expand...
That’s a remarkably simplistic - and incorrect - use of much more in terms of recruiting. Sure, if we were talking about something like cars, or in your case, friends, then 8 would be much more than 3. But we’re talking recruiting here. Commits happen in waves which means one recruiting weekend and we could be up to 6-8 recruits ourselves. Either way, you’re wrong in your assessment that 3 recruits in April is out of the ordinary for Tech’s recruiting class.
 
GTCrew said:
That's a remarkably simplistic take. Do you think we are predestined to get who we get? Everything matters, just some things more than others. For example a big time commit can snowball, and a lack of commits can allow players to delay making a decision.

Recruiting is a fascinating exercise in game theory, both for the teams and the players. It shouldn't have to be said that if we get strung along by four stars who ultimately go elsewhere, we can miss out on high three stars. Similarly if high three star athletes hold out for Alabama, they can find out in the end that the second tier schools have filled their spaces.

In my opinion, we are doing the right thing here. It is the appropriate time in the staff's tenure to aim high and risk it.
Click to expand...
We’re not far off in how we look at this I think. Sure getting a top player can get things rolling but whether that happens in April or May isn’t that big of a deal IMO. If we get 2 commits this weekend which many anticipate them we’re right in the numbers you are talking about. Would I be happier if we had 8 commits from 4
star players right now? Sure. But I would rather be where we are recruiting who we are going after than having 8 commits from lower rated kids happy to latch on with someone.
 
GTWannaBee said:
That’s a remarkably simplistic - and incorrect - use of much more in terms of recruiting. Sure, if we were talking about something like cars, or in your case, friends, then 8 would be much more than 3. But we’re talking recruiting here. Commits happen in waves which means one recruiting weekend and we could be up to 6-8 recruits ourselves. Either way, you’re wrong in your assessment that 3 recruits in April is out of the ordinary for Tech’s recruiting class.
Click to expand...
I did not say it was "out of the ordinary" for GT, now did I? You comparing us to ourselves is weird considering my statement explicitly compared us to others. You are really doing a great job beating the strawman though. Kudos.
 
GTCrew said:
I did not say it was "out of the ordinary" for GT, now did I? You comparing us to ourselves is weird considering my statement explicitly compared us to others. You are really doing a great job beating the strawman though. Kudos.
Click to expand...
YOU compared our current recruiting to past recruiting when YOU said we were going for broke. That implies we weren’t going for broke before based on the current number of recruits compared to previous years. Dude, we get it. You got caught making a stupid statement that turned out to be false. Don’t try to change your argument now just to win.
 
GTCrew said:
I did not say it was "out of the ordinary" for GT, now did I? You comparing us to ourselves is weird considering my statement explicitly compared us to others. You are really doing a great job beating the strawman though. Kudos.
Click to expand...

GTWannaBee said:
YOU compared our current recruiting to past recruiting when YOU said we were going for broke. That implies we weren’t going for broke before based on the current number of recruits compared to previous years. Dude, we get it. You got caught making a stupid statement that turned out to be false. Don’t try to change your argument now just to win.
Click to expand...

You both lose. Take this douchery to PMs.
 
There is an undercurrent about GT recruiting in the last page or two that I don't really understand so I will say true things in hope that some or all are relevant to the discussion.

1. I don't think there is any question CGC did not swing for the fences his first two full recruiting classes, and I think his strategy was rational. When he took over, like it or not, our talent level across the board was abysmal. Not criticizing any particular student athlete, cuz I think they gave it their all. So the coach's need was to bring as many recruits as possible that were above the level of athlete he had (and embraced) already on the team. So in year one he got a large crop of good but not necessarily great offensive linemen, cuz they needed to get here before everyone else at the position graduated. Otherwise there was an obvious disaster on the horizon, obvious to anyone who could read a depth chart (or program roster.) Same for other positions, but not quite so dire or obvious.

2. Class one mortared over a huge number of gaps, but you cannot address them all in a single class. Class two mortared over the rest. Class three... everything became different for Class three. For one, we had the ability to stay a bonus year, and for good and bad reasons we got all the players back we wanted to keep. For another, we used the transfer portal in a masterful way to actually improve our experienced talent level before attrition replacement would have naturally done so. After the transfers, the first two classes, and player development and carryover, we have a team with a basic talent level across the board at about the high three star level, give or take.

3. During Class one and two, a "miss" that could not be replaced by a roughly "high three star" replacement would have been potentially disastrous, a hole that could have cost us for years. This is particularly true if we did not know we were getting the COVID exceptions we used to our advantage, and we could not have known about them during recruiting seasons for 2020 signees and much of 2021.

4. But for Class three (2022 for those confoozed about my nomenclature) we can swing and miss. We have good players in the pipeline at each position, and if we miss somewhere we will not have a gaping hole. True, some positions are thinner than others, but none are destitute. So we have a team that is essentially a "high three star or better" across the board, albeit some positions are still not as experienced as you would want. R/S freshman and true freshmen have the right talent, but are still freshmen and not the same as juniors or seniors, which they will eventually grow into.

5. When you are recruiting you don't say, "The players at that position are too young to help much, so I will focus my recruiting there," as you are adding even younger players. You focus your recruiting at positions of replacing older players and natural attrition, raising a position's talent level, and balancing positional numbers.

6. Now if we used the strategies of Classes one and two, which proved they could reliably work, we could continue maintenance recruiting at the same talent level, which would be pretty nice compared to the last 20 years or so, but this staff is aiming higher.

7. If we hit on more and more four stars and control our misses, we can raise our overall talent level of the team to four star over time with only five or so four star recruits a year. Eight would be safer. So we can miss some and have a talented player on the backburner.

8. Also, and this should have been more prominent in my list, establishing relationships with top recruits takes time. They have to weed out the bs and are very thoughtful where they put their commitments and their trust. It takes years. The only way to short-circuit this time element (looking at a Hill not as holy as its name) is to have dedicated and well-funded bag men. If we had pushed top players in years one or two before we established long-term relationships we would have gotten a lot of "I like you, but 'no.'" Now we have some three year relationships with these kids and we can bear fruit from it.

9. I have said the recruits we need do not care much about won-loss records, and I stand by that. What they care about is the culture they are entering and if they believe in that culture. They expect the wins to follow naturally. There are some top recruits that go for pedigree and early playing opportunities, and while we will cater to that some, most of the players we need want that winning culture, which can precede the actual wins.

10. But those players know there is more risk signing with a team that is on the verge of winning with a third year coach than going with an established program. So they mitigate this risk by being a little slower. They care about the other recruits and what they are doing. If you look at Class one, the undeclared players for GT reached a critical mass before committing. Same for Class three. We are gathering a critical mass of a core for 2022, and then we will have a flurry of commits. If Bonner and Martin and Morris and Willis are all in for GT, maybe I (the recruit) am on to something when I think GT is building something special.

11. So the cost of a non-winning record and a less-established HFC is not a drop in recruits but a slower timeline of commits. So it does not surprise me we have less commits right now than more established programs (or more bag-friendly programs). It is important if you are trying to see what is going on to see which high-ranked players with offers are still uncommitted, players we have good inroads on.

12. Right now it looks we are putting together a very nice class...

13. ...And the relationships with class four and five recruits is only deepening....
 
Last edited:
Chattanooga Jacket said:
These are the kind of players GT needs to get in the future. He’s from Atlanta, played at Stanford, and looks like a draftable QB.

www.espn.com

Davis Mills - Houston Texans Quarterback - ESPN

View the profile of Houston Texans Quarterback Davis Mills on ESPN. Get the latest news, live stats and game highlights.
www.espn.com www.espn.com
Click to expand...
Lawrence, Fields, and Mills were all top top players from the area.

None were going to consider an option team at that time.
 
GTWannaBee said:
YOU compared our current recruiting to past recruiting when YOU said we were going for broke. That implies we weren’t going for broke before based on the current number of recruits compared to previous years. Dude, we get it. You got caught making a stupid statement that turned out to be false. Don’t try to change your argument now just to win.
Click to expand...
Fail. See the long post above that very carefully explains how we are factually going for broke.
 
Techbert said:
There is an undercurrent about GT recruiting in the last page or two that I don't really understand so I will say true things in hope that some or all are relevant to the discussion.

(shortened quoted post to save space)
Click to expand...
I don’t think you’re saying anything different than most of us have been saying already - maybe differently. CGC has built relationships with the local high schools. Recruits have seen the successful recruiting classes. Now they are seeing the buzz around other recruits and other recent commits. We’re not going for broke or focusing on low-probability recruits. We simply have a better shot at landing the better recruits now and can be more selective. That being said, we currently have 341 offers out according to 247.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top