"Tepid Signing Day"

swampsting said:
It's a good, not a great, class. It could have been a great class. But it's pretty solid. I hate we couldn't bring in Finley and Campbell. I
Click to expand...


Meh. It's a mediocre class that does nothing to separate us from the other middle to lower level ACC teams.

If you think going 7-5 against 1 FCS team, 1 non P5 team, and 4-5 ACC midgets is good, then this is a good class.
 
Diseqc said:
Meh. It's a mediocre class that does nothing to separate us from the other middle to lower level ACC teams.

If you think going 7-5 against 1 FCS team, 1 non P5 team, and 4-5 ACC midgets is good, then this is a good class.
Click to expand...

Take some time to look at the individual footage of the players. It may instill more confidence in the coaching staffs ability to identify talented players.
 
optionqb said:
Take some time to look at the individual footage of the players. It may instill more confidence in the coaching staffs ability to identify talented players.
Click to expand...

These negative nanny don't want to do that. They know about recruiting. If you don't believe it just ask them. They don't need to know more than they already know because they know it all. :biggrin::biggrin:
 
optionqb said:
Take some time to look at the individual footage of the players. It may instill more confidence in the coaching staffs ability to identify talented players.
Click to expand...


You're right. Our coaches are so good at talent recognition and other coaches are so bad.

:rolleyes:
 
Diseqc said:
Meh. It's a mediocre class that does nothing to separate us from the other middle to lower level ACC teams.

If you think going 7-5 against 1 FCS team, 1 non P5 team, and 4-5 ACC midgets is good, then this is a good class.
Click to expand...

You're right - no reason to play the games. The season was wrapped up today.
 
Consistency in the mid 50s in recruiting means that when you have a bunch of 5th year seniors and 1 or 2 difference makers (2014) then you can have a special season. The problem I see more than anything is signing all these "high character guys" that leave the program after a couple of years dealing with the GT curriculum. If you are going to sign so many Urkles you better hope some of them care enough about football AND GT as the school they want a degree from before you sign them. Very little of our attrition seems to come from football related matters
 
Reading a Bark Madley article is like using the bathroom in a porta-john, it predictable, pathetic and full of öööö. I really don't know why they are still paying this fool to write articles.
 
Maybe it's because I was busy today, but I don't remember NSD being such a blah day in quite a while. It's kind of like waking up on Christmas morning with the squirts.
 
Bradley is an idiot but his article is not false or bashing Tech.

He raises a very valid question: is 7-6 good enough at Georgia Tech? If it is, then stay the course. If not, something has to change. Improved recruiting, perhaps?
 
Diseqc said:
You're right. Our coaches are so good at talent recognition and other coaches are so bad.

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

just because committed recruits did not continue updating their recruiting profiles throughout the process does not mean they were not courted by other coaching staffs and we kept them.

The fact is, in the business of recruiting sites, if you commit early and generate no real buzz by being steady in your recruitment, you're not going to get re-evaluated, they're not going to really waste time to update your profile, and you're just not going to generate the attention for them that they need.

I think that's the case for more than a few of our early commitments.
 
GTCrew4b said:
just because committed recruits did not continue updating their recruiting profiles throughout the process does not mean they were not courted by other coaching staffs and we kept them.

The fact is, in the business of recruiting sites, if you commit early and generate no real buzz by being steady in your recruitment, you're not going to get re-evaluated, they're not going to really waste time to update your profile, and you're just not going to generate the attention for them that they need.

I think that's the case for more than a few of our early commitments.
Click to expand...

Does that apply to just our early recruits or does it apply to every school's early recruits as well?
 
Yep but can someone please get that Sweatin to the Oldies ööö off my feed?!?
 
Dirty Jacket said:
Bradley is an idiot but his article is not false or bashing Tech.

He raises a very valid question: is 7-6 good enough at Georgia Tech? If it is, then stay the course. If not, something has to change. Improved recruiting, perhaps?
Click to expand...

Last 50 years have already answered the question...
 
I heard Kirby Smart on the radio say he was able to pick up recruiting so easily at Georgia because he just called up kids he had already been talking to for 3 years. I wonder what GT's philosophy is on that.
 
This was a fair article. I believe our recruiting should be in the 30 to 50 range nationally. Seeing Rivals and Scout have us at 70 and 65 requires us to be honest about the talent level coming in to the program. It does not mean these kids can't be successful, but it does mean their development as football players must be significant. It's a steep climb.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top