Are we better off?

[GT1992]

I'm with this. CPJ didn't just forget how to coach offense. He's pretty much had a top 20 offense since he got here. We are definitely tops in the ACC over that period.

The problem is not the coaching people.

The problem, believe it or not, is us. If we drew 70k a game a lot of our perceived problems would disappear. It would be much easier to recruit. Negative comments wouldn't mean nearly as much. The atmosphere would be better and we'd get a lot more money in. The problem, imo, is the "fans" who don't go to every game.

His coaching of offense isn't the biggest problem by far. His inattention to defense, special teams, and recruiting are. We're not going to draw 70k given that we aren't the big state school, aren't in the SEC, and don't have an extremely large alumni base.

 

[Legal Jacket]

His coaching of offense isn't the biggest problem by far. His inattention to defense, special teams, and recruiting are. We're not going to draw 70k given that we aren't the big state school, aren't in the SEC, and don't have an extremely large alumni base.

Assuming we have a stadium big enough, we would draw 70k if we put a high quality team on the field every year - in a city of 6 million, we would only need to get 1/12 people in the city to a single game to do that. If the game day atmosphere was better (read more energetic fans) that would be pretty easy. There are certainly a lot of people with allegiance to other schools, but not everyone has an allegiance to uga.

I don't know if inattention is the problem or if it comes from something else. Defense I think he outsources it a little too much. Recruiting I think a lot of issues come from who we are - that said we should and can be doing better.

 

[Bogey]

Assuming we have a stadium big enough, we would draw 70k if we put a high quality team on the field every year - in a city of 6 million, we would only need to get 1/12 people in the city to a single game to do that. If the game day atmosphere was better (read more energetic fans) that would be pretty easy. There are certainly a lot of people with allegiance to other schools, but not everyone has an allegiance to uga.

I don't know if inattention is the problem or if it comes from something else. Defense I think he outsources it a little too much. Recruiting I think a lot of issues come from who we are - that said we should and can be doing better.

You are overlooking the fans whose allegiance belong to the Falcons. You are dreaming, we ain't ever going to draw 70,000 fans.

 

[GTJackets530]

Assuming we have a stadium big enough, we would draw 70k if we put a high quality team on the field every year - in a city of 6 million, we would only need to get 1/12 people in the city to a single game to do that. If the game day atmosphere was better (read more energetic fans) that would be pretty easy.

GT will never consistently draw anywhere near 70k, even assuming stadium expansion, unless we had a great home schedule every season (would basically require leaving the ACC), we won 10 games each year, and were consistently in the race for a national championship. Do that for 2-3 years and sustain it, and maybe we could reach that number. Otherwise, not going to happen.

A more "energetic" game day atmosphere is not going to get the general non-GT/UGA grad Atlanta resident to come watch an above-average GT play Boston College, Duke, UNC, UVA, etc.

 

[midatlantech]

100% agree with "but nd has comparable academics and recruiting the great players does nothing to "hurt" the value of their degrees."

Notre Dame is ranked #17 and we are #36. Yes, our engineering programs are harder, but come on, our academics are comparable to ND. I had many friends at Tech who did not get admitted to ND.

And ND is not the only quality academic school that does this. Look at all the schools ranked higher than us:

Stanford #6
Duke #8 (basketball admits)
Notre Dame #17
Georgetown #21 (allen iverson)
UC Berkeley #21
USC #24
UCLA #24
Michigan #29
UNC #31

and close behind:
Wisconsin #41
Miami #44
Texas #46

I'd argue that Miami athletics is the only program that comes close to lessening their degrees.

Until Tech gets over itself we are always going to have to live to a higher standard. I think when the Tech faithful gets over the whole "we are a great school and we dont want to tarnish.... ,, in other words, total bs, then maybe we would put the pressure on long enough to do something. Instead we are asked to support average and we do, which amazingly is the exact opposite of what Tech teaches.

 

[stingem103]

Until Tech gets over itself we are always going to have to live to a higher standard. I think when the Tech faithful gets over the whole "we are a great school and we dont want to tarnish.... ,, in other words, total bs, then maybe we would put the pressure on long enough to do something. Instead we are asked to support average and we do, which amazingly is the exact opposite of what Tech teaches.

This is dead on. Creating new majors and allowing more borderline football players admission will not make GT degrees worth less. Having a good football team brings your school more recognition and notoriety. Don't put GT on a pedestal. Its a great school, but it is far from the only one in the nation that plays big boy football.

 

[Legal Jacket]

GT will never consistently draw anywhere near 70k, even assuming stadium expansion, unless we had a great home schedule every season (would basically require leaving the ACC), we won 10 games each year, and were consistently in the race for a national championship. Do that for 2-3 years and sustain it, and maybe we could reach that number. Otherwise, not going to happen.

A more "energetic" game day atmosphere is not going to get the general non-GT/UGA grad Atlanta resident to come watch an above-average GT play Boston College, Duke, UNC, UVA, etc.

We are in agreement on what it would take to draw that many. My point was that we aren't going to have a big boy program until that happens. As long as we draw 40k apathetic fans per game, we aren't going to be a major player or get major recruits.

 

[TechFan85]

Tailgating and going to games at GT sucks. There. Thats it. Call it unique, but its unique like that chubby chick with a big forehead you banged when you were drunk.

 

[GT1992]

This is dead on. Creating new majors and allowing more borderline football players admission will not make GT degrees worth less. Having a good football team brings your school more recognition and notoriety. Don't put GT on a pedestal. Its a great school, but it is far from the only one in the nation that plays big boy football.

I love how you guys have these grandiose ideas with no foot in reality. What majors can we add that would fit the current structure, football players would want, and the Board of Regents would approve?

What would more exceptions result in? More flunking out. That would accomplish a lot.

 

[andrew]

This is dead on. Creating new majors and allowing more borderline football players admission will not make GT degrees worth less. Having a good football team brings your school more recognition and notoriety. Don't put GT on a pedestal. Its a great school, but it is far from the only one in the nation that plays big boy football.

What schools that are as good as or better than Georgia Tech play "big boy football"? And don't give me Stanford, because we've been better than them the past ten years.

 

[TechinItEasy]

What schools that are as good as or better than Georgia Tech play "big boy football"? And don't give me Stanford, because we've been better than them the past ten years.

Well when you exclude the best example...I'll give you that were better than them historically.

Other schools that come to mind would be ND and Michigan. But I think Tech is better academically and both those schools use special admits a lot more than Tech.

 

[andrew]

Well when you exclude the best example...I'll give you that were better than them historically.

Other schools that come to mind would be ND and Michigan. But I think Tech is better academically and both those schools use special admits a lot more than Tech.

Historically? Past ten years is hardly "historically". You can't just use three years to measure a program's worth if it's severely at odds with their prior performance.

The fact that they were better than us the past three years doesn't change the fact that we were better than them for a long time before that. If they keep this up another year or two that would be different, so we'll see.

 

[stingem103]

I love how you guys have these grandiose ideas with no foot in reality. What majors can we add that would fit the current structure, football players would want, and the Board of Regents would approve?

What would more exceptions result in? More flunking out. That would accomplish a lot.

We have a liberal arts college. Add some more majors in this school with science or technology aspects. STAC, HTS, Inta, and Pubp are already examples of majors in this vein. Having these unique majors that bridge the gap between science and liberal arts would be good for Tech in many ways outside of just appealing to possible student athletes. The liberal arts school was created in 1990 to help make Tech more diverse, and this is kind of a logical next step.

Additionally, I think a Sports Management program would work wonders if you added that to the school of business. Heck, even a certificate program in that would probably help big time.

 

[goldmember]

But ND has comparable academics and recruiting the great players does nothing to "hurt" the value of their degrees. I know a few Tech grads who think lowering academic standards for our SA's will hurt their degrees and water down our academics. I dont get it. I am a Tech grad, but I dont believe letting in better players will hurt the value of my degree. You either want to play big boy football or you dont.

I know some people that feel that way and its completely stupid because we ALREADY significanlty 'lower our academic standards'. We just don't lower them enough to be competetive but the revenue producing athletes in general are not anywhere near the same level as the regular students academically. If that's gonna hurt their degree then it should of already been hurt.

 

[MTrain]

What schools that are as good as or better than Georgia Tech play "big boy football"? And don't give me Stanford, because we've been better than them the past ten years.

Usc, UCLA, cal, bc

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[eaglejacket98]

What schools that are as good as or better than Georgia Tech play "big boy football"? And don't give me Stanford, because we've been better than them the past ten years.

Michigan.

Slightly lower:
UM
Texas
Penn State

Even lower:
Florida
OSU

 

[GT1992]

We have a liberal arts college. Add some more majors in this school with science or technology aspects. STAC, HTS, Inta, and Pubp are already examples of majors in this vein. Having these unique majors that bridge the gap between science and liberal arts would be good for Tech in many ways outside of just appealing to possible student athletes. The liberal arts school was created in 1990 to help make Tech more diverse, and this is kind of a logical next step.

Additionally, I think a Sports Management program would work wonders if you added that to the school of business. Heck, even a certificate program in that would probably help big time.

That's fine, but the football only players are looking for Parks and Rec that doesn't require a calculus course. Even a Sports Management program would require calculus, so the Saban's of the world could still use that against us. We're in a crappy ACC, we won't win the vast majority of those recruiting battles regardless of our majors. And if we keep our academic standards, those players will still flunk out. Look at UNC, with all the majors they have, they had to resort to a complete BS one to keep Julius Peppers eligible and in reality, that wasn't enough.

The problem is the culture of a lot of the premier athletes. When I was teaching middle school, I had a sixth grader who was taller than his classmates tell me he didn't need school. That's the mentality you are going against and you have to completely dumb down a curriculum to keep them eligible.

 

[stingem103]

That's fine, but the football only players are looking for Parks and Rec that doesn't require a calculus course. Even a Sports Management program would require calculus, so the Saban's of the world could still use that against us. We're in a crappy ACC, we won't win the vast majority of those recruiting battles regardless of our majors. And if we keep our academic standards, those players will still flunk out. Look at UNC, with all the majors they have, they had to resort to a complete BS one to keep Julius Peppers eligible and in reality, that wasn't enough.

The problem is the culture of a lot of the premier athletes. When I was teaching middle school, I had a sixth grader who was taller than his classmates tell me he didn't need school. That's the mentality you are going against and you have to completely dumb down a curriculum to keep them eligible.

I agree with you 100 percent on the culture problem. BTW now you don't have to take regular calculus for every major at Tech. You can take a survey to calculus (1712) class and then finish up your math requirements with finite mathematics (1711) for MGMT and most of the Ivan Allen majors.

 

[GT1992]

I agree with you 100 percent on the culture problem. BTW now you don't have to take regular calculus for every major at Tech. You can take a survey to calculus (1712) class and then finish up your math requirements with finite mathematics (1711) for MGMT and most of the Ivan Allen majors.

Even Survey of Calculus will scare off the weak students. If we just renamed it Survey of Math, it would help. In high school in the 80's, a future Georgia player who was a senior cheated off of me as a sophmore in Algebra II. There was no way in hell he could have passed any type of math class. I tried to help him, but he was way too far behind and only taking Algebra II because he had to. I ran into him in the early 90's and he was dealing drugs.