In-State Recruiting analysis

I don't agree that the difference between us and academically-highly-ranked schools with better recruiting and better results is that they have crip majors in which to hide their athletes, because our athletes cluster in majors that are obviously less challenging than the toughest that GT has to offer.
 
18in32 said:
I don't agree that the difference between us and academically-highly-ranked schools with better recruiting and better results is that they have crip majors in which to hide their athletes, because our athletes cluster in majors that are obviously less challenging than the toughest that GT has to offer.
Click to expand...
You think Business Administration at GT is comparable in rigor to Gender Studies at Stanford or Health and Fitness at Michigan?
 
ThisIsAtlanta said:
The only reason anyone is talking about the brand is because someone on the "we suck" side of the fence brought it up.

Why do we even have that side of the fence?
Click to expand...

I dunno. 3 of 4 losses to Puke? 2 of 3 losing seasons and missed bowls? having the mutts 1 play from a natty in our backyard after curb stomping us?

edit: It was Architorture who brought up Duke, NW, and Vandy
 
Last edited:
RamblinWreck92 said:
We're only behind in recruiting and on the scoreboard, apparently. Who gives AF about those? It's all about the brand!
Click to expand...

Did you even bother to read those? Here's a tidbit from the second one in case you didn't, or your ability to read is impacted by your acute butthurt syndrome.

We wanted to find out exactly how high school football players perceive the Power 5 schools, so we asked 224 recruits to grade their interest and desire in each program as if they were the number one recruit in the country (i.e. they had offers from every school). This process gave us a peek into the minds of the most important demographic: teenage football players.
Click to expand...

So, we are clearly ahead of Duke and NW in the minds of the kids we are recruiting. Time to find something else to cry about.
 
coit said:
Did you even bother to read those? Here's a tidbit from the second one in case you didn't, or your ability to read is impacted by your acute butthurt syndrome.



So, we are clearly ahead of Duke and NW in the minds of the kids we are recruiting. Time to find something else to cry about.
Click to expand...

yes, Colt, I read it. And we're not ahead of Duke in recruiting nor the scoreboard. Time to find another excuse.

Hopefully, CNW will be the savior we need him to be.
 
RamblinWreck92 said:
yes, Colt, I read it. And we're not ahead of Duke in recruiting nor the scoreboard. Time to find another excuse.

Hopefully, CNW will be the savior we need him to be.
Click to expand...

Actually, the scoreboard against Duke reads any of the following:

55-33-1
1869 - 1423
2 - 0
4 - 0

...or you know, 0 - 0
 
ThisIsAtlanta said:
Duke has a better football brand than we do over the last 4-5 years? That's the most hilarious kind of nonsense. What have they done that tops an Orange Bowl win? Does anybody think that their bowl wins over Indiana and Northern Illinois are better for their "brand" than that was for ours? Come on, man. While they certainly have obtained impressive results for what they have, you have to ignore basically everything football related to be under any illusion that what they have is more than what we have. Absolutely nobody who isn't already a Duke fan cares that they turned 6-6 (3-5) into 7 wins at the hands of a MAC also-ran, and the people who are celebrating it as part of their ascendancy are just highlighting what the Duke football "brand" is. It's a historic legacy of uncompetitiveness, marginality, and failure among the worst in the nation that still bother themselves with the pursuit of the sport. They haven't come close to undoing that image, not remotely. The zenith of their football program in living memory is a 9 win season where they didn't play for their conference and lost their bowl game, and everyone knows it.

While we certainly haven't helped ourselves by sitting at home twice in the last four years, it ain't that bad.
Click to expand...
Ed Sawyer said:
Oh look, someone did a study on this and it ran in the Wall Street Journal.

https://graphics.wsj.com/table/COUNT_09212017

Oh, here's one someone did with recruits.

http://picksixpreviews.com/how_to_win_in_recruiting.html

I don't see Tech behind either Duke or Northwestern.
Click to expand...
I endorse these posts.

Which is why the recent results against dook have contributed to my personal butthurt in a non-linear way ...
:bigcry:
 
Tough school, ingrained (or inbred if you like) bias towards ugag for many, limited facilities, limited spending. GT would have to make a perfect hire to do much better...and that person will be gone in 3 to 5 years for an easier job with higher pay. CPJ is GT and GT is CPJ.

If a person wants a good education in engineering or something similar they will choose GT. Most who want to bang hotties and make it to the NFL aren’t going to choose GT. Most of your college football players who say education is important are only saying that publicly so their mother doesn’t kick their ass.

What is the point? Enjoy GT for what it is academically and athletically. Big changes in both would be needed for football to improve.
 
I evaluate our recruiting and player development when we play UGA each year. I look at the starting 24 - offense, defense, punter and kicker and ask, “How many of our guys would I start ahead of their guys?” On a good year the number is about a third, 8 or 9 players. On bad years the number is only a couple or three. Look at the last fifteen years and the trend line is not good.
 
77GTFan said:
I evaluate our recruiting and player development when we play UGA each year. I look at the starting 24 - offense, defense, punter and kicker and ask, “How many of our guys would I start ahead of their guys?” On a good year the number is about a third, 8 or 9 players. On bad years the number is only a couple or three. Look at the last fifteen years and the trend line is not good.
Click to expand...

15 years is pretty close to when the percentage of an advancement towards a degree started counting for college football players. Or is that a myth?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top