Can the NCAA really crack down on LOW

I mean, you aren't really suggesting that we can get 25 football players a year who can compete at the D-1 level who also score 1200 on the old scale SATs are you? If that's what you're looking for, we should drop to D-1AA right now. Forget top 25, we'll be Duke.

But my other question is that you don't really thing that only kids with 1200s can graduate from Tech do you? Because that'a patently not true.
Click to expand...

What I beleve is that our recruiting team has basically failed Tech in the past, in terms of getting the brightest SAs. The fact that we are Tech is sufficient enough reason for a smart SA to enroll in our programs. Our university name and heritage alone should sell Tech and we should be able to recruit 25 smart SAs a year who can compete at the D-1 level. What I believe is that our past recruiting has been less than marginal. Remember, I'm not one that is demanding MNCs every year.

I'm not suggesting that only kids with >1200s can graduate from Tech. We have the School of Management that manages to get most of our SAs through the 4 year program. Additionally, there are other programs, like Public Policy and International Affairs, that some SAs might choose. I don't remember too many SAs enrolling in the Science or Engineering side of the house, which would normally require the 1200 SAT-type, hard-core science-oriented student to even survive that curriculum. It would take an absolute superstar SA to obtain a EE degree and still letter in football.
 
Still don't get it I guess. We have a minimum now for football of something like 950 based on what's been reported, with a sliding scale based on grades. If you or I applied with a 950 and 4+ GPA we wouldn't be accepted even if we were applying for Mgt or something other than Engineering. In fact, I don't know that admission standards are different depending on majors, although I would think math requirements might be. So what are you asking for then? 1000, 1100?
 
So what are you asking for then? 1000, 1100?
Click to expand...

NC: I'd personally ask for whatever the entrance requirements are for the particular school they anticipate entering into. I just have tremendous difficulty in believing that out of the entire country, Tech can't find 25 SAs per year that are academically qualified to handle our programs. Back to my original comment, I think our recruiting personnel have failed miserably in the past. Our reputation and degree should sell itself and I'm not personally in favor of looking the other way to admit SAs that will never be capable of handling the academic workload.

Since grade inflation is such a problem in Georgia high schools, I'm not in favor of eliminating the emphasis on SAT scores for entrance requirements. I've seen too many students from some of the best high schools in Georgia (Walton, Pope, Lassiter) have difficulty with classes at Tech. I can just imagine how students from outside of the Atlanta and adjacent suburb areas would have great difficulty competing at the level of Tech academics.
 
First, I don't think we admit kids who can't do the work. I would challenge you on that opinion because I don't think you can back it up.

Second, I think you're dreaming if you think Tech can find 25 kids who are a) good enough to play D-1, b) smart enough to be admitted without making any exceptions and would get in if they had to compete with the rest of the kids applying to Tech, and c) want to come to Tech.

I mean, both Stanford and Duke are considered better than Tech academically plus they have the benefit of a wider range of majors to choose from. Neither of them can find 25 kids who meet your standards. Why would you think Tech can? Sorry, but I think you're expectations are totally unreasonable.
 
I mean, both Stanford and Duke are considered better than Tech academically plus they have the benefit of a wider range of majors to choose from. Neither of them can find 25 kids who meet your standards. Why would you think Tech can? Sorry, but I think you're expectations are totally unreasonable.
Click to expand...
Stanford and Duke? In Engineering (our primary, staple product), only Stanford rates higher, i.e., #2 vs. #4 for Tech. Duke ranks very highly in medicine and with our collaberative joint BioMed programs with Emory, I'd say we are hot on their heels in terms of future research. Guess we're in good company at the top, huh? ;)

Overall, I would rather be compared to these schools, based on academics, rather than on athletics. Like I said before, I'm personally supportive of the GT sports programs regardless of the year-end record. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one, in a gentlemans' manner. Given what Tech has to offer, you'll never convince me that we can't find 25 bright SAs a year that can handle the admission requirements, one course in Calculus, and the School of Management curriculum to matriculate. Most everyone knows that a large number of Tech students, including SAs, actually take that Calculus course in the summer at a different, easier campus, and then transfer it back to Tech to fulfill the degree requirements. I've personally known a number of students that worked the system in this manner to get their more intensive Math and Physics requirements satisfied and avoid the massacre by taking it at Tech.

I still think that our GT recruiting scouts have not made sufficient in-roads into the Georgia high schools in order to take advantage of acquiring the smarter SAs that see the merit of a Tech degree. I believe that more of the problems lie here than with the fact that the SAs do not, in reality, exist.
 
You're right, we're going to just have to agree to disagree. You're vision for Tech athletics is great, just not reasonable. The better athletes don't have the grades to make it here. We're doing a good job now of identifying those who can do both given our current standards for admitting athletes. If you want to change that so that SAs get no advantage, we're dead.
 
Buzz Bomb,

From your comments, I doubt you've followed recruiting to any considerable extent. The athletes who meet your standards are VERY few and far between. Less than one percent of high school make DI-A and much less actually become productive starters at a competitive BCS school. 25 may seem like a small number, but it's 25 out of a very select pool. Darryl Richard is the only productive Tech S-A I can think of that meets your standard (I'm pretty sure Calvin scored in the 1200s on his SATs).

We also DO "find 25 bright SAs a year" that can make it through management. With the tutoring resources available to SAs, they don't need the same admissions requirements that the student body does. It's one of the reasons athletes should indeed be given "special" treatment.
 
Buzz Bomb, no offense but you are completely removed from reality on this if you think you can build anything resembling a competetive div 1a football team with the same admission standards as the regular student body. Not at GT or anywhere. It doesn't even work this way in the Ivy League.

What you're describing most closely resembles div 3 non scholarship athletics. We may have a handful of players on the team at any time that would have gotten in without special consideration.
 
Last edited:
Buzz Bomb, no offense but you are completely removed from reality on this if you think you can build anything resembling a competetive div 1a football team with the same admission standards as the regular student body.
Click to expand...

Sorry for the late response guys. Been busy at work.

Query me this Gold. It appears that Paul Johnson is doing a relatively good job building a program at Navy. Navy slaughtered Duke and Stanford last season. They almost beat our ACC Boston College in a Bowl game. Navy recruits top notch SAs, as you don't get into a service academy without good academic credentials. At least I'm not aware of them lowering their standards just to populate their football team. With good coaching, Navy appears to be building a substantive program with these academically qualified SAs. How is it that Navy can succeed with their recruiting approach and GT can't?

Additionally, it's going to be very interesting to see how our lower admission standard SAs can compete with the higher admission standard Army SAs this Fall.
 
Buzz Bomb said:
Additionally, it's going to be very interesting to see how our lower admission standard SAs can compete with the higher admission standard Army SAs this Fall.
Click to expand...

Seeing as how Army sucks to begin with and they no longer have CBR, I'm not too worried about it.
 
Of course it's been something like 35 years since Navy has beaten Notre Dame, which also tells us something about their ability to compete.

Navy has done a nice job with their program. But I believe they do give some leeway for football players in admissions. Navy is also not an example of the kind of football program we want at Tech. Yes, they beat Duke and Stanford, but in Duke's case so did Richmond. And yes, they gave BC a scare, but one game doesn't make a team. The fact is Navy plays a weak schedule, commensurate with the talent they have. They would get killed if they played Tech's schedule.
 
Buzz Bomb said:
They almost beat our ACC Boston College in a Bowl game. Navy recruits top notch SAs, as you don't get into a service academy without good academic credentials. At least I'm not aware of them lowering their standards just to populate their football team. With good coaching, Navy appears to be building a substantive program with these academically qualified SAs. How is it that Navy can succeed with their recruiting approach and GT can't?

Additionally, it's going to be very interesting to see how our lower admission standard SAs can compete with the higher admission standard Army SAs this Fall.
Click to expand...

Dude, don't just spew your opinion here. Can you back it up with facts? How do we know Navy hasn't liberalized their jock standards? I ain't buying that they haven't without some evidence to the contrary. Don't get me wrong, I love the underdogs and the teams populated with players with high academic standards, but how do I know that Johnson hasn't pushed to recruit better athletes to compete better?
 
Dude, don't just spew your opinion here.
Click to expand...

Some of you folks seem to react very negatively to alternative opinions. I'll yield since you seem to already know it all. You've very effectively made your point that our SAs are of sufficiently lower academic caliber and that's the best that we'll ever be able to acquire in order to populate our football program. I'm not going to argue with you about it, but neither will I buy into your philosophy.

Just FYI, the service academies are indeed very selective in terms of who they admit and football simply isn't their highest priority. Afterall, the Navy sends some of their best onto Nuke Power and Naval Aviator schools, which are not trivial programs to complete. I seriously doubt that an academically challenged candidate could actually complete the program. I also doubt that Johnson has much influence over the admissions process at the academy, contrary to your assertion.
 
Last edited:
Of course it's been something like 35 years since Navy has beaten Notre Dame, which also tells us something about their ability to compete.
Click to expand...

NC: Contrary to the opinions of Tech fans on some GT boards (not necessarily this one), I think ND has a pretty decent program and Weis is a fairly decent HC. After all, this past year they were Top 25 and they beat Tech. So, Navy wasn't the only team that fell to the Irish. We also lost a game that I thought we should have won against them.
 
With the tutoring resources available to SAs, they don't need the same admissions requirements that the student body does.
Click to expand...

Florida: All the tutoring in the world didn't seem to salvage our prime QB in his Senior year. If an SA is just here for football, and places little emphasis on academics, it will eventually catch up with the university. I'd be really suprised if Tech welcomed the type of negative publicity that we receive when SAs, that are marginal students, become academically ineligible.
 
This is kind of off the topic, but today on ESPN they were talking about the draft...... The analyst was talking about the TE Patrick ? who had transferred from Duke to Delaware for his last year. He said his development really improved after he transferred to a better football program with better coaching. Hope Ted wasn't watching; he might sue. Ha!
 
You're missing the point buzzbomb. No one has suggested we recruit players who are unable to do the work at Tech. What we're saying is that you have to allow athletes with lower academic profiles than normal students in if you want a successful academic program. That doesn't mean someone with a 750 SAT and 1.8 GPA. But is does mean that athletes shouldnt' have to have a 1280 and a 4.2 either. There is a happy medium where the kids can succeed on the field and in the classroom.

The point about ND is simply this. We are bemoaning our current losing streak to ugag. You're touting Navy, a school with a 35 year losing streak to ND. Most would suggest that ND and ugag are pretty comparable. So youi're suggesting losing 35 years in a row to ugag is okay? Because that's about the leve of Navy's football program.
 
Buzz Bomb said:
Florida: All the tutoring in the world didn't seem to salvage our prime QB in his Senior year. If an SA is just here for football, and places little emphasis on academics, it will eventually catch up with the university. I'd be really suprised if Tech welcomed the type of negative publicity that we receive when SAs, that are marginal students, become academically ineligible.
Click to expand...

Actually, Reggie won his appeal on the bad grade that put him on probation. Even if that didn't happen, Reggie and KScott went on probation specifically because the staff gives less oversight to seniors. They got through more of Tech than many of the other one third that leave (look to your left, look to your right...).
 
Are Reggie and Kenny in school this semester then? Don't know if Kenny had a way back.

BTW, don't know if anyone has posted this but the Alumni Assoc directory lists Reuben Houston as having graduated in 2005 with degree in Mgt, so I guess he did get through that fall quarter.

Some had questioned if he really graduated despite the fact that he participated in the graduation ceremony. What is Reuben doing these days?
 
ramblinwise1 said:
Are Reggie and Kenny in school this semester then? Don't know if Kenny had a way back.

BTW, don't know if anyone has posted this but the Alumni Assoc directory lists Reuben Houston as having graduated in 2005 with degree in Mgt, so I guess he did get through that fall quarter.

Some had questioned if he really graduated despite the fact that he participated in the graduation ceremony. What is Reuben doing these days?
Click to expand...

Think he's still with TB.
http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1109433
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top