Recruiting..

Re: the #\'s back me up...

[ QUOTE ]
This is correct, AFAIK, but what's really changed are exceptions granted for borderline cases. Daryl Smith would not be at GT under todays standards.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would Gailey of even tried?

it's a serious question. i think one of the reasons that the situation has changed so much is that Gailey has embraced the new standards. He has said publically that he prefers to recruit more academically qualified players and not have to worry about them so much once they are here.

Braine has said that Gailey has asked for 3 exceptions since he has been here (and all 3 were granted). IMO he should be asking for at least that many every year. I agree he wouldn't be here under Gailey but another coach may fight more for the boderline players.

I don't think we can use the new standards as the total reason for our poor recruiting under Gailey - since he has embraced.
 
Re: the #\'s back me up...

[ QUOTE ]
Oh, and we are in the middle of the pack in ACC recruiting.

[/ QUOTE ]

huh? based on what? we've been in the bottom 3 in acc recruiting every year under Gailey.
 
Re: the #\'s back me up...

I agree with this post. We should be asking for more exceptions but ONLY if we have the structure in place to help those kids succeed. If the coaching staff and admissions feel a kid is worth a shot we should give it to him.

The other thing that has been posted that I agree with is the need for calculus in every major. It simply doesn't make sense to me and should be reviewed.
 
Re: the #\'s back me up...

Gailey will tell you that he has asked for far more exceptions than 3.

Believe it or not, he gets turned down on these supposed "exceptions"
 
Re: the #\'s back me up...

if we can get a QB in this school that cant count - then obviously exceptions are being made!!
 
Re: the #\'s back me up...

[ QUOTE ]
Gailey will tell you that he has asked for far more exceptions than 3.

Believe it or not, he gets turned down on these supposed "exceptions"

[/ QUOTE ]

when will he tell u this? i've heard him say publically many times that he agrees withe the standards and that the administration is wonderful to work with and he is getting all the support he needs to be successful, etc...

if that is not the case - then Gailey is doing himself a real disservice by the way he is handling this publically - and Braine is telling 100% lies, again publically.

give me an example - who did he attempt to get an exception for and was turned down?

i get tired of all the inuendo - keep hearing things like 'if you knew all the stuff that Gailey has to put up with then you would be happy that we are able to sign any quality kids'

if he's gonna publically embace the standards and the administration then i don't have any sympathy for him - he can be the yes man for Clough if he wants but he will ultimately be the fall guy too- he's being paid to win football games.
 
Re: the #\'s back me up...

and by 'publically' i don't mean on the radio. I've heard him say this stuff in GT speaking engagements, with only a couple hundred Tech alumni/supporters present.
 
Re: the #\'s back me up...

Gailey already IS the fall guy, it just hasn't happened yet. Can't you guys see all the poloticing thats happening right now?

Unless CCG has a spectacular year next year, he's going down. The new AD will be able to show that he has a high standard for the program and instantly has everyone behind him, that will tend to bring in a quality coach or at least an "exciting" coach, who will also have all the fan momentum behind him (ok, all except for lawbee, but he'll jump on the bandwagon pretty quick).

Sometimes you lose the battle to win the war. And that is exactly whats happening.

I feel sorry for CCG, I have to believe that he wants to do better, he just sucks at delegation and hiring the right people (minus close friends, such as Wilson) and thats eating him alive.
 
Re: the #\'s back me up...

There are a million opinions on what should be public and what should not. This does not just apply to GT, but to public corporations as well. What is appropriate to say behind the scenes and what is appropriate to bring out to non decision-makers (like fans, media, etc.) for the sake of keeping your job and not necessarily showing a unified front for your organization. I cannot fault him for public-speak.

I do not want to give a name, but there was a kid we had (and if you read interviews from our commits you will catch it) that we requested using one of our supposed "exeptions" on. He was turned down because he did not have 4 years of math...only had 3.5 years. This is despite the fact that he had the grades and the test score. This kid was at a critical position for this years class as well.

Now...do you think we really have exceptions if you can ask for one and not get it? I think not.

Hopefully this will change with the overhaul that is going on.
 
Re: the #\'s back me up...

Boy Red I don't get the feeling that the overhaul is going to improve anything athletically. I hope your statement proves to be correct though.

Wasn't the Thomas kid an example of a request turned down by the Hill. Personally, if the coach commits to getting them through the school, and the kid is instate, and the kid's brother is a good asset to the family, then I think we should bring him in.

Lastly, someone said something about losing 10% of the scholarships due to lack of acceptable graduation rate. Well Chan is just about doing that right now without those restrictions, so why bother in reality? I think I'd rather just take "questionable" academic kids like Darryl Smith who get through anyway AND plays some football!
 
Re: the #\'s back me up...

Your second "paragraph" will be a key agenda item when the new AD takes over.
 
Re: the #\'s back me up...

[ QUOTE ]
Lastly, someone said something about losing 10% of the scholarships due to lack of acceptable graduation rate. Well Chan is just about doing that right now without those restrictions, so why bother in reality? I think I'd rather just take "questionable" academic kids like Darryl Smith who get through anyway AND plays some football!

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly! i thought the same thing, and 10% is the worse it gets? Come on - that's 2 scholly's per year, we're already undersigning by that many every year:)
 
Re: the #\'s back me up...

[ QUOTE ]
if we can get a QB in this school that cant count - then obviously exceptions are being made!!

[/ QUOTE ]

I luv it!
(Sorry Reggie, it's just a joke.)
 
Re: the #\'s back me up...

[ QUOTE ]
Unless CCG has a spectacular year next year, he's going down.

[/ QUOTE ]
'Peck, I agree with you...but maybe not spectacular, but a 8-9 win season will make it hard to fire CCG. Unless we have an embarassing loss to UGA or Samford...
 
Re: the #\'s back me up...

I don't think 8 changes much of anything (12 game season), I think 9 without an embarassing loss would be pretty spectacular to me, especially finally beating the mutts.

I could be wrong, but thats what I see going down.
 
Re: the #\'s back me up...

What is scary is that soon enough we will be paying the piper for the Hill's new conservatism.
 
Re: the #\'s back me up...

The Hill has always been conservative "sucking the energy out of Tech FB"~~~ ONLY when we have had an AD and a HC with strong enough personalities to stand up to this have we been successful ~~ Guess what folks, we presently have neither! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/soapbox.gif
 
Re: the #\'s back me up...

The potential penalty is 10% of total available scholarships, not the number that can be awarded in any given year...so the max penalty would be 9 because they round up. The NCAA can also impose more penalties if a school does not meet standards for a series of years.

I have no problem with giving some kids exceptions, but we need to be sure they deserve the break and can do the work. The answer here isn't to take a lot of risks with their academics, because it will catch up with us. If flunkgate happened 2 years from now I think it would kill us.
 
Re: the #\'s back me up...

Many people have suggested that we drop the 4th math requirement, while others have said we should just offer easy majors so that we again have a chance at fielding a competitive football team. If we did either, would we still be able to enjoy the satisfaction of looking down on rival schools from our academic position and keep the pride we now percieve?
 
Re: the #\'s back me up...

Duke and Notre Dame don't seem to have much trouble with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top