Georgis Tech Football Dominance

gnats67 said:
I disagree with the attitude that TECH can never be great again in athletics cuz this and that rules restrictions academics bullshit argument. Honestly I don't understand the argument. How doe s that not make us better? Isn't that a management issue? Yes, it is. That's why what CBK is doing is so exciting it's because he KNOWS what Tech is and he knows how hard you have to fight for what you know is right and good. It's not easy. In the land of the SEC? In the messed up ACC? It's not easy but you never quit. You fight.
Click to expand...
Key, the players, and all of us here can fight all we want, but we won’t win at a high level without 4-5 star players. And 4-5 star players aren’t willing to do academics anymore because every other southern school has created athlete friendly majors while GT has not. The proof is in the recruiting. Do we have any 4 stars committed for any class? 2024? 2025? 2026? Sure, we can get back to a 7-8 win program under Key in the weak ACC but that’s it. Key is a GT guy so I appreciate his efforts. But if he has success over a period of a few years he won’t stay because he’ll eventually want to work for a school that will allow him to compete on a level playing field. And again, what these other schools are doing is “right and good” based on what they are trying to achieve. Just because GT has refused to change doesn’t mean we are the only school doing it “right”. We are actually doing it wrong based on todays standards and it’s why we are nationally perceived as an athletic joke right now. No bowl game, no March Madness, and no post season baseball. But sure, let’s keep fighting hard with 3 stars lining up against 4 and 5 stars. It’s been working great over the past 30 years.
 
Yes, the game has changed. However, I don't enter into "ends justifies the means" thinking. I cannot make myself idolize HS and college players like I did when I was 9-10 years old. Therefore, I cannot think of the new era of college athletics as "good and right," but that's just me... none of you have to think that way.

I am compelled to consider their whole lives and what the dog and pony show that HS/College FB has become is doing to these young men. For most HS seniors, paying football at, and attending/graduating from a school like GA Tech is a *hugely* positive life decision. I consider it very strange that we don't have more of those guys lining up to play at GA Tech. It shows how bereft of true values HS/college football has become.

Just my $.02 worth.
 
OptionJacket said:
Key, the players, and all of us here can fight all we want, but we won’t win at a high level without 4-5 star players. And 4-5 star players aren’t willing to do academics anymore because every other southern school has created athlete friendly majors while GT has not. The proof is in the recruiting. Do we have any 4 stars committed for any class? 2024? 2025? 2026? Sure, we can get back to a 7-8 win program under Key in the weak ACC but that’s it. Key is a GT guy so I appreciate his efforts. But if he has success over a period of a few years he won’t stay because he’ll eventually want to work for a school that will allow him to compete on a level playing field. And again, what these other schools are doing is “right and good” based on what they are trying to achieve. Just because GT has refused to change doesn’t mean we are the only school doing it “right”. We are actually doing it wrong based on todays standards and it’s why we are nationally perceived as an athletic joke right now. No bowl game, no March Madness, and no post season baseball. But sure, let’s keep fighting hard with 3 stars lining up against 4 and 5 stars. It’s been working great over the past 30 years.
Click to expand...
Fock. Get help dude. That's some depressive öööö. You have zero hope? There's nothing around the corner? Holy öööö.
 
QuadF said:
It's hard to explain to the BOR or alumni that we need a useless major to hide 200 athletes so we can compete in football - it seems to rather betray the purpose of being a school.
Click to expand...

OptionJacket said:
Key, the players, and all of us here can fight all we want, but we won’t win at a high level without 4-5 star players. And 4-5 star players aren’t willing to do academics anymore because every other southern school has created athlete friendly majors while GT has not.
Click to expand...
Until we get over the idea that we should decide what an elite-level college-age football player should care about (i.e. likely NFL-bound players "should" care about college degrees), we will be mediocre. As @OptionJacket said, if we don't recruit better, we won't win more. What does it take to recruit better? Reduce the education barrier/burden on the player - there are a bunch of ways to that, which is actually a separate conversation I believe.

Two final thoughts and I will hopefully leave this topic for a while- (1) this reduction of the burden of the actual college classes for football players will have almost no impact on the education of all the other students at Tech or the Institute's general academic standing, and (2) if you are against reducing the educational barrier/burden on athletes based on larger principles, of course that is alright, but please acknowledge the cost (consistent winning) and stop trying to wish that cost away and simply hope we will get a different result doing the same things.
 
covingtonjacket said:
Until we get over the idea that we should decide what an elite-level college-age football player should care about (i.e. likely NFL-bound players "should" care about college degrees), we will be mediocre. As @OptionJacket said, if we don't recruit better, we won't win more. What does it take to recruit better? Reduce the education barrier/burden on the player - there are a bunch of ways to that, which is actually a separate conversation I believe.

Two final thoughts and I will hopefully leave this topic for a while- (1) this reduction of the burden of the actual college classes for football players will have almost no impact on the education of all the other students at Tech or the Institute's general academic standing, and (2) if you are against reducing the educational barrier/burden on athletes based on larger principles, of course that is alright, but please acknowledge the cost (consistent winning) and stop trying to wish that cost away and simply hope we will get a different result doing the same things.
Click to expand...
First, unless you add specific athlete degrees, you cannot reduce the academic load on a student athlete w/o compromising a curriculum for all students in that curriculum. I don’t believe you can add a curriculum just for SAs. The BOR would have to approve that. Fat chance.

Second, GA Tech is in the business of academic preparation, not competitive athletics. We are an institution of higher education, not a sports franchise. We do competitive athletics as extra-curricular. It is the tail. Academics is the dog.
 
stinger78 said:
First, unless you add specific athlete degrees, you cannot reduce the academic load on a student athlete w/o compromising a curriculum for all students in that curriculum. I don’t believe you can add a curriculum just for SAs. The BOR would have to approve that. Fat chance.

Second, GA Tech is in the business of academic preparation, not competitive athletics. We are an institution of higher education, not a sports franchise. We do competitive athletics as extra-curricular. It is the tail. Academics is the dog.
Click to expand...
Re: your first point, I disagree. There are many schools higher than us in the rankings that have just what you described. Not in terms of actually restricting certain degrees/classes to athletes (can't do that, obviously), but in easier classes/degrees.

Second, you are right about the tail vs. the dog, but fixing the tail doesn't hurt the dog and we here on ST do care about the tail in addition to the dog. I have no problem with your general take on things and we would agree on most things if we sat down I bet, I just no longer expect to win very many games vs. good teams when the people in charge share your outlook. My wish is for us to do everything we can to win as long as it's legal and does not hurt the Institute. IMO, that includes some easing of the burdens on elite athletes in aggressive (at least compared to ourselves) ways. We may simply disagree. I am fine with that.
 
covingtonjacket said:
Re: your first point, I disagree. There are many schools higher than us in the rankings that have just what you described. Not in terms of actually restricting certain degrees/classes to athletes (can't do that, obviously), but in easier classes/degrees.

Second, you are right about the tail vs. the dog, but fixing the tail doesn't hurt the dog and we here on ST do care about the tail in addition to the dog. I have no problem with your general take on things and we would agree on most things if we sat down I bet, I just no longer expect to win very many games vs. good teams when the people in charge share your outlook. My wish is for us to do everything we can to win as long as it's legal and does not hurt the Institute. IMO, that includes some easing of the burdens on elite athletes in aggressive (at least compared to ourselves) ways. We may simply disagree. I am fine with that.
Click to expand...

We're a small school that is generally very focused on the hard sciences but also has a strong business school. You're going to struggle to reconcile a curriculum that is rigorous and science based with one that is easier just so we can hide athletes there. As @stinger78 said, we're going to struggle to get those approved by a BoR that's historically more oriented towards helping UGA because 1. those new degrees won't fit the school's academic mission and 2. because they don't care about our athletics program.

Like I said in my post most of this "issue" is hogwash anyway as we already have the ivan allen college and it's a complete joke - it's open to all students who want to spend their time not learning useful things. We don't need to waste money or other resources on additional places to hide athletes.
 
covingtonjacket said:
Re: your first point, I disagree. There are many schools higher than us in the rankings that have just what you described. Not in terms of actually restricting certain degrees/classes to athletes (can't do that, obviously), but in easier classes/degrees.
Click to expand...
You cannot create athlete-only degree programs, they have to be open to the general student population. Likewise, you cannot create minors or courses in any curriculum specifically for athletes only. They have to be open to all students in that major. In short, you cannot just create a joke major, minor, or courses for athletes only. So, if you created those, they would be open to all students as appropriate to their major and minor. That will indeed lessen the rigor and status of the university. Maybe just a bit, but it does.

Now creating easier majors can be done, but with BOR approval. They are charged with making sure that new majors are appropriate for the institution proposing the addition, and that they won't create a redundant expenditure of scarce state education dollars. This is why UGA gets all the bennies of these decisions - their educational mandate is far, far broader than ours, so almost anything fits their charter. Plus, the BOR is mostly a bunch of dyed in the wool dawg fans.

It just is what it is - we need to stop debating it. As was said above, the BOR gave Tech the "liberal studies" programs about 20 years or so ago. They are easier the high-tech programs, schools of general sciences, computing, and design, and the nationally recognized business school we now have. Those are our majors for athletes. They are not easy compared to what our competition offers, but they are easier than what else Tech has to offer.
 
stinger78 said:
First, unless you add specific athlete degrees, you cannot reduce the academic load on a student athlete w/o compromising a curriculum for all students in that curriculum. I don’t believe you can add a curriculum just for SAs. The BOR would have to approve that. Fat chance.

Second, GA Tech is in the business of academic preparation, not competitive athletics. We are an institution of higher education, not a sports franchise. We do competitive athletics as extra-curricular. It is the tail. Academics is the dog.
Click to expand...
Come on. Every school, except us, has majors that everyone, including future employers, know are worthless. If a real student chooses to go to a school to get the same degree that a bunch of 4-5 star football/basketball players get then they’ll also be back living in their childhood home at age 26.

And your 2nd paragraph is just outdated thinking and the reason Bobby Dodd is half full most Saturdays and turns to shades of orange or red. I use to think like you and beat the same drum of “GT is doing it the right way” and I also had my personal stringent definition of what college “should be”. But then I actually listened and saw what every other school has done regarding sports and realized sports are a MAJOR factor at colleges. It isn‘t the tail wagging the dog at all. Let me ask you this - if GT dropped its football program and its CS major or Mechanical Engineering major on the same day which one would be reported on the news? What events bring the most people to campus? If you Google “Georgia Tech news” how many pages until you find something not sports related?

Listen, we are mediocre at sports because GT has chosen to be mediocre at sports. I fully understand and accept this which is why I can calmly sit in my own stadium and get barked at every other year. What I don’t accept is everyone blaming “others” who have created a balance and figured a way to be successful at both. I’ll continue to do what most GT fans do - I’ll root for GT and then I’ll adopt a team that actually has a chance to beat UGA from season to season.
 
OptionJacket said:
Come on. Every school, except us, has majors that everyone, including future employers, know are worthless. If a real student chooses to go to a school to get the same degree that a bunch of 4-5 star football/basketball players get then they’ll also be back living in their childhood home at age 26.

And your 2nd paragraph is just outdated thinking and the reason Bobby Dodd is half full most Saturdays and turns to shades of orange or red. I use to think like you and beat the same drum of “GT is doing it the right way” and I also had my personal stringent definition of what college “should be”. But then I actually listened and saw what every other school has done regarding sports and realized sports are a MAJOR factor at colleges. It isn‘t the tail wagging the dog at all. Let me ask you this - if GT dropped its football program and its CS major or Mechanical Engineering major on the same day which one would be reported on the news? What events bring the most people to campus? If you Google “Georgia Tech news” how many pages until you find something not sports related?

Listen, we are mediocre at sports because GT has chosen to be mediocre at sports. I fully understand and accept this which is why I can calmly sit in my own stadium and get barked at every other year. What I don’t accept is everyone blaming “others” who have created a balance and figured a way to be successful at both. I’ll continue to do what most GT fans do - I’ll root for GT and then I’ll adopt a team that actually has a chance to beat UGA from season to season.
Click to expand...
What do you not understand about adding majors having to be approved by the BOR, which is dominated by mutts?
 
gtphd said:
Digital Communications and Marketing fits Tech‘s mission, fills an industry need, and lets you tell athletes that they can major in TikTok.
Click to expand...
Here’s the answer to what have we done about it all. Our administration devised some majors that fit our institutional charter and are easier. Those cream of the crop players aren’t lining up for them. How many players actually come back to finish degrees? I’d wager very very few. They don’t care about academics. They've been sold a bill of goods by their HS coaches and college advisers to take the easiest road. I don’t know what else our admin can do.
 
I'm sure I'm going to offend someone but we have a History, Science and Technology degree at GT. I don't think you have to split an atom, splice a gene, etc to graduate from GT in HST. I'm guessing like other GT graduates, the folks who've graduated in HST have had or are currently having perfectly fine careers without having endured the rigors of carrying that dreaded calculus book up Freshman Hill.

You'd think 138 years into GT existence by now we'd have granted equivalent credit for football players throwing, kicking, carrying or catching footballs, blocking and/or tackling all summer & fall that we bestow upon the average pencil neck geek trodding up that hill 5 times a week with his coveted calculus book that weighs about half of what he does. Damn, they're both very heavy loads for both gents.
 
Supersize that order mutt said:
I think a lot of you are missing a very significant point. Even if Cabrera and whoever were willing to create degree programs that would attract more athletes, the GA BOR has to approve it, and they won't. The most recent example of their abusive power was allowing the cesspool to offer a couple of engineering degrees, and, as I said in another post, this crap has been going on almost 100 years, back to when the equivalent of the BOR refused it when Tech wanted to create a school of commerce. Adding that engineering program in Athens didn't help with their athletics, and it really didn't hurt ours. But since it is virtually impossible to get into Tech these days (they even reject "legacy" candidates with 4.0 (or whatever scale they use) HS grades. That definitely affects the fan base, and that is at least partially due to Tech choosing to go down that path. But they allow UGA to add whatever they want, whether academically sound or not, and they refuse to allow Tech to add whatever we might want. Like it or not, and I both do and don't like it, Tech is always going to be known for academics, and for us to excel in athletics, mainly football, it's going to require some very creative minds in the Tech administration, or a lot fairer treatment by the BOR.
Click to expand...
I agree with your tone. Ga politics are still backwards.
However I believe when ugagotengineering, Techcould have gotten anything it wanted. We blew it . We probably can still get anything but we continue to blow it.
 
midatlantech said:
Right up to that decision for UGA in a big and obvious way, yes true. But post that decision, I don’t believe you are accurate. But as every dsy passes, and we blow it, it will become less and less an opportunity.
Click to expand...
Has anything happened since that stupid decision that would lead you to believe the BOR has changed?
 
OptionJacket said:
Come on. Every school, except us, has majors that everyone, including future employers, know are worthless. If a real student chooses to go to a school to get the same degree that a bunch of 4-5 star football/basketball players get then they’ll also be back living in their childhood home at age 26.

And your 2nd paragraph is just outdated thinking and the reason Bobby Dodd is half full most Saturdays and turns to shades of orange or red. I use to think like you and beat the same drum of “GT is doing it the right way” and I also had my personal stringent definition of what college “should be”. But then I actually listened and saw what every other school has done regarding sports and realized sports are a MAJOR factor at colleges. It isn‘t the tail wagging the dog at all. Let me ask you this - if GT dropped its football program and its CS major or Mechanical Engineering major on the same day which one would be reported on the news? What events bring the most people to campus? If you Google “Georgia Tech news” how many pages until you find something not sports related?

Listen, we are mediocre at sports because GT has chosen to be mediocre at sports. I fully understand and accept this which is why I can calmly sit in my own stadium and get barked at every other year. What I don’t accept is everyone blaming “others” who have created a balance and figured a way to be successful at both. I’ll continue to do what most GT fans do - I’ll root for GT and then I’ll adopt a team that actually has a chance to beat UGA from season to season.
Click to expand...
You have an incredibly poor understanding of how any of this works.
 
OmnipoTech said:
You have an incredibly poor understanding of how any of this works.
Click to expand...
or excuse makers are too stuck in mud. in the age of NIL if we've learned anything it should be you got to make your own rules, and we're Georgia Tech, we can do that. stetson went to school for 6 years and didn't graduate. there's obviously ways to cheat the system and make it easier for SAs to let the big uglies on the field if you want to be competitive. or not, up to the institute. academic rigor can't be an excuse anymore in today's landscape if you want to win football games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top