CPJ on Aycock

SMoney

Dodd-Like
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
3,055
I cannot completely capture what he said word for word, but the way he put it certainly makes you feel at ease...

He basically said that the way he works, when you give your word, you give your word. Goes for a coach and a recruit. And when a recruit gives a coach a commitment, he expects that to be the end of that commit looking around. He encourages you not to commit until you are entirely ready to end it with everyone else. He does not believe in "soft verbals", and did one of his, "aw shucks, I don't even know what that is supposed to mean" type comments.

He said they recruited Aycock all year and was someone they really wanted. When he sat down with CPJ and told him he wanted to come to GT, Aycock knew what that meant. We went out of our way for him, including to keep his commitment silent (he didnt go into reasoning). He said he would have had no problem, and would have kept recruiting him up until signing day, if Aycock had sat down with him and said, "you know coach, I have these other schools I still want to take a look at, so I'll have to let you know once I've evaluated all my options". That is not how the conversation went though, so he expected him to keep his word. Aycock said he wanted to be at GT.

He said Aycock took some bad advice in deciding to take the visit to Auburn, but basically Aycock knew what that meant. If CPJ bent the rules for Aycock by letting him visit elsewhere and still commit here, it would make him look like he didnt stick to his word. So, they had no choice but to pull the ship. He doesn't hold it against him, and he said he wishes him nothing but the best and that he'll be a great player wherever he ends up. He also doesn't hold anything against Auburn either - made some comment about if another guy asks your girlfriend out and she ends up going out with him, you can't blame the other guy - it's all on the girlfriend.

Regarding stealing recruits from other programs - basically said that if other schools don't have a similar understanding with their recruits, it's their problem. He has no problem taking a recruit from elsewhere. If the other programs want to let their commits shop around, then that's a choice they make. But once someone gives their word to CPJ, they are expected to stick by it. And if you don't, there won't be hard feelings for you or the other school, but you won't be coming to GT to play football.

I think CPJ did the right thing. And we'll be better in the longrun for it. He did not seem as if he pressured Aycock in any way - recruits can take their time if they want, but once you give your word, you better stick to it.

*for anyone else that was watching, feel free to add to my comments or correct me if I misspoke.
 
I was watching and you summed it up very nicely.

I also fully support CPJ on this. If his rule is once you commit, you commit and you cannot take anymore visits, then that is the rule. And, it cannot be broken for any player.
 
Sounds good to me. I wasn't there but that's pretty much what I expected to hear.

Thanks, SMoney.
 
That sounds great, I am just having difficulty reconciling the DA situation with the Stephen Hill situation.

Was the entire difference between the two only that Stephen Hill did not visit UGA?
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the summary! My employer is pretty anal about bandwidth usage so I can't watch the stream...:mad:
 
That sounds great, I am just having difficulty reconciling the DA situation with the Stephen Hill situation.

Was the entire difference between the two only that Stephen Hill did not visit Auburn?

I'll assume you mean uga, and that is my personal thought as well. Hill may have waivered, but he never made a visit.
 
Stephen Hill never visited anywhere else. That's the issue, I guess. Uncertainty is one thing, but blatantly doing something that you know is breaking your word is different. Hill is the former; Aycock is the latter.
 
Aycock could be out of any ships. Auburn pulled his ship for the stud RB recruit from UT. At least that is what someone reported on another board. That would suck for Aycock. His brother needs to be taken out back and have his ass kicked for interfering like a ****ing idiot and ruining Dontae's future.
 
I'm not sure I agree with the way this has been handled. I understand its CPJ's policy and Aycock was fully aware of this when he took the visit. That being said, expecting a 17-18 year old kid to make a life changing decision without waffling from time to time is asking a little much IMO.

The other problem I can see is will this policy be administered fairly. If a 5 star-top-notch-next-Tim-Tebow recruit takes a visit and then comes back to GT and says he'd really like to stay with us, we're going to tell him to take a hike? I honestly would hope not.

I love CPJ and I'll continue to support him but this is just a bit too heavy handed for me. I hope it doesn't hurt us in the long run.
 
Was the entire difference between the two only that Stephen Hill did not visit Auburn?

You mean Georgia? Yeah, best as I understand it.
 
So here's a question ..


..if Aycock got his scholarship yanked at Auburn too, would we accept him as a walk on for a year?
 
You mean Georgia? Yeah, best as I understand it.


Sorry, I did mean UGA.

I guess I see how this plays out. CPJ needed to draw a line somewhere. I commend him for doing so, and I would assume that even if the next Tim Tebow were to do the same kind of wavering, he would stick to his line.

My only thing is where he drew the line seems kind of arbitrary. I am glad we got Stephen Hill, but (as I understand the facts, so correct me if I am wrong) calling UGA's Garner on Monday for paperwork and then providing fodder for a story about how he wasn't sure about his commitment and how he could commit to UGA w/o visiting, those facts seem just as bad as an official visit to Auburn by DA.
 
Does he not still have an offer with Louisville?

The quote that CPJ said that really stood out to me is something along the lines of "it's what we tell all of our commitments." 1-star or 5-star, if you commit to Tech, you commit to Tech. If you aren't sure, wait until you are.
 
So here's a question ..


..if Aycock got his scholarship yanked at Auburn too, would we accept him as a walk on for a year?

Aycock is listed as a Auburn commit as a 3 star RB, but has not signed yet.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, I did mean UGA.

I guess I see how this plays out. CPJ needed to draw a line somewhere. I commend him for doing so, and I would assume that even if the next Tim Tebow were to do the same kind of wavering, he would stick to his line.

My only thing is where he drew the line seems kind of arbitrary. I am glad we got Stephen Hill, but (as I understand the facts, so correct me if I am wrong) calling UGA's Garner on Monday for paperwork and then providing fodder for a story about how he wasn't sure about his commitment and how he could commit to UGA w/o visiting, those facts seem just as bad as an official visit to Auburn by DA.

It's not entirely that CPJ drew an arbitrary line. Based off of his words it seems like he would rather have a recruit wait to give verbal commitment until they are really sure rather than get that verbal early and still have him looking around. I think with the Stephen Hill thing, Hill was being recruit by UGA and wouldn't of had doubts if not for Georgia's actions, whereas Aycock went to Auburn of his own choice. I think that is also a big difference.
 
Sorry, I did mean UGA.

I guess I see how this plays out. CPJ needed to draw a line somewhere. I commend him for doing so, and I would assume that even if the next Tim Tebow were to do the same kind of wavering, he would stick to his line.

My only thing is where he drew the line seems kind of arbitrary. I am glad we got Stephen Hill, but (as I understand the facts, so correct me if I am wrong) calling UGA's Garner on Monday for paperwork and then providing fodder for a story about how he wasn't sure about his commitment and how he could commit to UGA w/o visiting, those facts seem just as bad as an official visit to Auburn by DA.

You know I agree with you on this one... How is visiting the school any different from calling them up asking for papers? Especially if you talk to the media about it... The optimist in me thinks that the AJC cockgobblers* helped facilitate all of this by trying to make more out of the story than there really was.


*by cockgobblers I mean the types who write articles titled "Georgia did to GT what GT did to them in recruiting"
 
We did not drop Aycock for getting a scholarship offer from Auburn (which is my understanding that he received before his visit) - we dropped him for the visit. Other schools will continue to recruit, as in Stephen Hill and others. However, I think that CPJ would have pulled the plug on Hill as well IF he took the visit to UGA. Guarantee that Hill knew it as well and factored into the fact that he did not take the visit.

It's a big decision for these kids, and sometimes you have doubts. That's not unusual. But to act on those doubts and go check somewhere else out to see if it's a better fit is where the issue with CPJ lies I believe. Don't tell him you want to be at GT before you are ready to do so, and when you finally do tell him, stick to it.
 
I think CPJ did the right thing on Aycock. If you tell hime he can't visit and he does, you have to follow through and pull the offer.

I do question if this is the right strategy for recruiting under the rules as they now exist. Verbals are non-binding. LOI's are binding.

That said, I am sure that CPJ will evaluate whether or not his approach works. Who knows how many we may have lost if he told them he was OK with them contininuing to take visits after giving us a verbal? He can alwaya change his approach if needed.
 
Back
Top