In-State Recruiting analysis

coit said:
Not really. You started by saying that we’ve always had recruiting disadvantages, with the implication that it is’t a valid excuse now because we managed just fine in the 50s. My point is that you are talking apples and oranges. I’m not sure what your ultimate point is.
Click to expand...

I get what you mean and agree, but would still say that in the absolute sense we had disadvantages then too. Impossible to truly rate anything in a relative sense. APR prolly did make things worse, especially considering the UNC stuff.
 
I have a solution, offer an athletic management program that does not require calculus or physics, Kids would flock to TECH
 
85jacket said:
I have a solution, offer an athletic management program that does not require calculus or physics, Kids would flock to TECH
Click to expand...
The politics within the Board of Regents, populated by persons not associated with, nor inclined to assist Georgia Tech athletically (or in practically any other way) does not make this feasible. It is what it is. No athletic management major for you! ! !
 
DressCheeseSideSeaboard said:
WXj9dW8.gif
Click to expand...
Boom (?).

So you accept Minnesota, Kentucky, et. al. being ahead of GT?

Boom (?).
 
DressCheeseSideSeaboard said:
We were talking specifically about Duke and Northwestern. Reading is fundamental.
Click to expand...
Yes reading is a fundy. Let's read further. You apparently are accepting the results of that study that says Duke and NW do not have better recognition than GT. Reading further says that Minnesota and KY are better than GT. You good with those results?
 
LongforDodd said:
Yes reading is a fundy. Let's read further. You apparently are accepting the results of that study that says Duke and NW do not have better recognition than GT. Reading further says that Minnesota and KY are better than GT. You good with those results?
Click to expand...

What the öööö do Minnesota and Kentucky have to do with Duke and Northwestern?
 
LongforDodd said:
Yes reading is a fundy. Let's read further. You apparently are accepting the results of that study that says Duke and NW do not have better recognition than GT. Reading further says that Minnesota and KY are better than GT. You good with those results?
Click to expand...
Goalposts with legs. How bout that?
 
LongforDodd said:
Yes reading is a fundy. Let's read further. You apparently are accepting the results of that study that says Duke and NW do not have better recognition than GT. Reading further says that Minnesota and KY are better than GT. You good with those results?
Click to expand...
I don't know much about the two schools but UK has a lot going for it in terms of marketability. It is obviously in the SEC. It is the largest university in its state. It is a liberal arts university with tons of majors. It is easy to get into and stay in. I would guess a large portion of alumni stay in or near Kentucky. From quick searching they sell roughly the same number (35,000) of season tickets as GT did after the 2009 season (highest number save maybe after 2014 season but can't find that number quickly.)

And lastly, it has one elite revenue-sport program which helps its football program by increasing general exposure and revenue. It has an agreement with an apparel company based on its basketball team that it probably wouldn't have if it relied on its football program.

UK is certainly not a better football program than GT is, but I can definitely see where it is more marketable to HS kids.


U of Minnesota, likewise, is the largest university in the state (6th largest nationally, actually) and is a similar liberal arts college with all manner of majors to offer.
 
Last edited:
beej67 said:
The fact that we can't get semipro talent anyway is one of the exact reasons I like the 3O.
Click to expand...
So, like the service academies, we use the triple option offense in order to reduce the talent gap that results from our recruiting challenges?
 
Architorture23 said:
I don't know much about the two schools but UK has a lot going for it in terms of marketability. It is obviously in the SEC. It is the largest university in its state. It is a liberal arts university with tons of majors. It is easy to get into and stay in. I would guess a large portion of alumni stay in or near Kentucky. From quick searching they sell roughly the same number (35,000) of season tickets as GT did after the 2009 season (highest number save maybe after 2014 season but can't find that number quickly.)

And lastly, it has one elite revenue-sport program which helps its football program by increasing general exposure and revenue. It has an agreement with an apparel company based on its basketball team that it probably wouldn't have if it relied on its football program.

UK is certainly not a better football program than GT is, but I can definitely see where it is more marketable to HS kids.


U of Minnesota, likewise, is the largest university in the state (6th largest nationally, actually) and is a similar liberal arts college with all manner of majors to offer.
Click to expand...

Almost seems like this should be obvious and shouldn't require a 4 paragraph explanation.
 
$jacket$ said:
Stanford gets good players. Northwestern gets good player. Are our admission standards that much greater than theirs?
Click to expand...
They don't have the curriculum barriers that Renselear has. We do.

Go private and we can compete on an even playing field. Until then, UGA grads on the BOR have the keys to the car.
 
beej67 said:
They don't have the curriculum barriers that Renselear has. We do.

Go private and we can compete on an even playing field. Until then, UGA grads on the BOR have the keys to the car.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, there are a few folks who can't get it through their heads that our issue is not simply high admission standards (which many schools have) but the lack of an easy path to a diploma. So simple yet so elusive.
 
00Burdell said:
Unfortunately, there are a few folks who can't get it through their heads that our issue is not simply high admission standards (which many schools have) but the lack of an easy path to a diploma. So simple yet so elusive.
Click to expand...
Why is this so difficult to grasp? Aren't Tech people supposed to be smart? :shady:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top