Can't believe no one is talking about this..

[GT1992]

What? He was recruiting with in the restrictions of the Hill and he was hired because he presented a system that could overcome (in part) those restrictions. If anything, he was able to demonstrate that the system (his offense) with better talent (Chan's last class) was a great combination as opposed to the system with restricted recruiting classes. He was told "here's how we want to do recruiting" and "we want to see better graduation numbers." He accomplished what they asked of him and they (the Hill and Peterson) are now willing to give him some leeway. öööö man, I get people not being sold on his system still, but you have to give him credit for directing the proper focus on the "student" in 'student athlete."

He had the same recruiting restrictions as Chan. He thought the system could overcome any talent difference and learned his lesson with the results of the last few years. I think he had to face this challenge to initiate changes like the recruiting office and asking for more exceptions.

 

[JacketFan77]

He had the same recruiting restrictions as Chan.

Um, no. He did not.

He thought the system could overcome any talent difference and learned his lesson with the results of the last few years. I think he had to face this challenge to initiate changes like the recruiting office and asking for more exceptions.

He was hired because his system HAD overcome a lot of talent differences. He's been asking for exceptions for a while now.

 

[GoldZ]

I agree this is a very good step, but I caution those who think the flood gates have just opened for 5 star recruits. The hill was just one of many academically related hurdles to our recruiting.

Calling the hurdles we face, ones that our competitors do not, "excuses" shows a lack of understanding of the dynamics of recruiting at GT.

So very true.

 

[GoldZ]

No more excuses as far as I'm concerned. ...

Get a clue man. The un-level playing field just went from a 45 degree tilt to a 40 degree tilt. The available pool is still very much reduced.

 

[goldmember]

Um, no. He did not.



He was hired because his system HAD overcome a lot of talent differences. He's been asking for exceptions for a while now.

Curious as to what the difference is between CPJ's restrictions and Chan's?

 

[QuadF]

Curious as to what the difference is between CPJ's restrictions and Chan's?

a passing game... heyoo!

Probably pretty hard to verify exactly what the differences were. I imagine chan had it easier until flunkgate and houston's 100lbs of weed.

 

[GT1992]

Um, no. He did not.



He was hired because his system HAD overcome a lot of talent differences. He's been asking for exceptions for a while now.

Show me where he had tighter restrictions than Chan. Flunkgate is when they tightened.

How long has he been asking for more exceptions? That's speculation, not fact. I'm sure he has, but who knows when it started?

 

[GT1992]

Um, no. He did not.



He was hired because his system HAD overcome a lot of talent differences. He's been asking for exceptions for a while now.

Show me where he had tighter restrictions than Chan. Flunkgate is when they tightened.

How long has he been asking for more exceptions? That's speculation, not fact. I'm sure he has, but who knows when it started?

I understand that his system had overcome talent deficiencies with Navy's schedule, but it is obvious now that it can't in a BCS league. I think winning early masked that fact and now he's caught on. And he didn't have a talent shortage at Southern.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Show me where he had tighter restrictions than Chan. Flunkgate is when they tightened.

How long has he been asking for more exceptions? That's speculation, not fact. I'm sure he has, but who knows when it started?

I understand that his system had overcome talent deficiencies with Navy's schedule, but it is obvious now that it can't in a BCS league. I think winning early masked that fact and now he's caught on. And he didn't have a talent shortage at Southern.

I think it really depends on the talent differential. Even with the '07 class, the '09 playing roster beat teams with more collective talent.

Now, the question remains, do we need that much talent to compete with the factories. The answer is probably yes, but not necessarily in the combinations we had in '09. In '09 we had 5 key playmakers and the rest role players. I'd say we've upped the talent level of the role players but lowered the talent level of our top 5 playmakers. Maybe we don't need as many now due to the upgraded role players. I'd say we definitely need more than we have now.

 

[TechSBP]

The number often quoted was 3 which is about the 20% figure for a class of 15-20.

It is more limiting than that. Because we don't oversign, we weren't recruiting 10 people to fill those 3-4 spots.

Now, if the coaching staff thinks someone can make it at Tech, they can recruit them.

 

[TechSBP]

All the CPJ detractors need to also recognize that CPJ earned this through his recruiting practices and getting his players to graduation. It's not just about Xs and Os, folks. I think many of us on here understand that winning and winning consistently in football at GT is a negotiation of variables that the large majority of other D1 schools do NOT have to deal with. CPJ just negotiated one of the major ones through a consistent, fair, and well executed recruiting and player management strategy. He deserves his due for that alone.

Well put.

 

[GTCrew4b]

I understand that his system had overcome talent deficiencies with Navy's schedule, but it is obvious now that it can't in a BCS league. I think winning early masked that fact and now he's caught on. And he didn't have a talent shortage at Southern.

I don't understand how you can make this statement when we've never finished lower than third (and in third only once) in conference with typically one of the hardest conference schedules year-in and year-out.

Yes we've lost to Miami and Virginia Tech consistently with CPJ for some reason, be it talent, turnovers, mental, whatever, but we've also beaten the teams that for some reason find a way to beat them.

 

[georgia_tech_swagger]

Will PJ survive long enough for this to bear fruit?

Attendance will be his biggest enemy. It cratered after the Virginia Tech game. If it doesn't recover it will cost more to keep PJ then to fire him even with the buyout.

It is an important move in the right direction. A shame it took so much heartburn to pick even low hanging fruit like this.

If PJ were more media savvy he'd use the AJC as his restrictions gripe clearing house to put fans on the case of Inviso-Bobinski and Bud.

 

[GTLiebs]

If PJ were more media savvy he'd use the AJC as his restrictions gripe clearing house to put fans on the case of Inviso-Bobinski and Bud.

First off, any coach who does that is basically saying I don't care if I get hired anymore. No school wants a coach that is going to diss the administration they work for. It's also not like fans didn't think this or something similar was going on, you think fans having a detailed description of the limits to complain about instead of vague ones would make the administration listen more?

 

[ConyersJacket]

You guys saying the handcuffs are off and no more excuses...

A de jure restriction was removed, not the de facto restriction that he can't recruit SEC illiterates because they'd flunk out in a year.

Georgia Tech's academics didn't change because of this.

PJ said in the article itself that he can't just recruit everybody now.

Having said that, it's an improvement. More freedom won't hurt and can only help. I just don't know how much.

But it's still nowhere near a level playing field. We need at least 1 communications/AFAM studies/property management type major with the same requirements as a typical liberal arts school before we are on a truly level playing field with 99% of the universities out there.

It's good news but I doubt it's massive game changer.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

We need at least 1 communications/AFAM studies/property management type major with the same requirements as a typical liberal arts school before we are on a truly level playing field with 99% of the universities out there.

They have ballroom dancing at Stanford.

 

[gte490v]

You guys saying the handcuffs are off and no more excuses...

A de jure restriction was removed, not the de facto restriction that he can't recruit SEC illiterates because they'd flunk out in a year.

Georgia Tech's academics didn't change because of this.

PJ said in the article itself that he can't just recruit everybody now.

Having said that, it's an improvement. More freedom won't hurt and can only help. I just don't know how much.

But it's still nowhere near a level playing field. We need at least 1 communications/AFAM studies/property management type major with the same requirements as a typical liberal arts school before we are on a truly level playing field with 99% of the universities out there.

It's good news but I doubt it's massive game changer.

I think this is a game changer. If we add 2-3 guys per year that are previously out of the question and 75% of them stay with the team, that's 6 to 9 additional playmakers on the roster. We had 2 on offense this year (Smelter, Godhigh). We had 2 on defense (J. Thomas, J. Attaochu). Of those, there's likely only academic exception at most. If we miss on half of those guys, we add 3 or 4 more playmakers. We start winning close games. We have better depth. We don't recruit warm bodies.

We compete for the coastal every year as-is. Give me a few more play makers out there and there's a big difference.

 

[clapper]

I think this is going to make a bigger difference at the bottom/middle of our recruiting class than at the top. While we can compete for better players at the top, we still have to get them here. But when we miss, the door stays open for some solid guys further down the list that might not ordinarily have gotten a look. Our tendency now is to take guys who are perceived to have more flaws athletically, but not academically, to fill in the gaps on our recruiting roster. Now, we consider a guy with less athletic downside, but not considered to be an NFL prospect, who may need more classroom help. We wouldn't have been able to look at him before. That's going to improve depth.

 

[GoldZ]

I think this is a game changer. If we add 2-3 guys per year that are previously out of the question and 75% of them stay with the team, that's 6 to 9 additional playmakers on the roster. We had 2 on offense this year (Smelter, Godhigh). We had 2 on defense (J. Thomas, J. Attaochu). Of those, there's likely only academic exception at most. If we miss on half of those guys, we add 3 or 4 more playmakers. We start winning close games. We have better depth. We don't recruit warm bodies.

We compete for the coastal every year as-is. Give me a few more play makers out there and there's a big difference.

Pretty much agree with this. Three more serviceable DL to help preserve our starters for the 4th qtr and we beat ugag this past year.

 

[GoldZ]

You guys saying the handcuffs are off and no more excuses...

A de jure restriction was removed, not the de facto restriction that he can't recruit SEC illiterates because they'd flunk out in a year.

Georgia Tech's academics didn't change because of this.

PJ said in the article itself that he can't just recruit everybody now.

Having said that, it's an improvement. More freedom won't hurt and can only help. I just don't know how much.

But it's still nowhere near a level playing field. We need at least 1 communications/AFAM studies/property management type major with the same requirements as a typical liberal arts school before we are on a truly level playing field with 99% of the universities out there.

It's good news but I doubt it's massive game changer.

Also pretty much agree with this, but while not a massive game changer, it will help.