What's the difference in our recruiting?

flakjacket

flakjacket

Varsity Lurker
Joined
Jul 22, 2003
Messages
60
I have been away for awhile, (trying to focus on making a living), and admittedly have not kept up on all of the new commits. I know that verbal committments don't mean anything until national signing day, but we seem to be doing very well...especially in relation to the recent past. What's the sudden difference? How do we look in relation to Georgia and Florida State wth regards to their recruiting classes? Thanks, Flak.
 
flakjacket said:
I have been away for awhile, (trying to focus on making a living), and admittedly have not kept up on all of the new commits. I know that verbal committments don't mean anything until national signing day, but we seem to be doing very well...especially in relation to the recent past. What's the sudden difference? How do we look in relation to Georgia and Florida State wth regards to their recruiting classes? Thanks, Flak.
Click to expand...
In a nutshell, Geoff Collins and Giff Smith. Plus the peach state is pretty deep this year with quality players.
 
yep combo of the 2 above...G & G are taking the bulls by the horns..doing their evaluations early, getting offers to the kids lightning quick and staying on them like white on rice. Word is parents love Geoffs down to earth approach and the 'family atmosphere'...in addition to, the talent this year in the state is very very good..numbers wise..
 
I think we are not giving ourselves and the kids enough credit.

Georgia is always deep in players......and in qualified ones. But instead of the qualified ones crossing us off early in the recruiting process we are doing a much better job of selling our program to them.

Ironically a quick look at the big kids being mentioned that are not qualified yet....but are busting their butts in order to have a chance to get into Tech aren't Georgia kids.

To these guys and all of our Georgia kids I have a helluva of respect for the efforts they put in on and off the field.

Whether they sign with us or not.

But I sure love the ones that do!
 
Last edited:
statelinejacket said:
I think we are not giving ourselves and the kids enough credit.

Georgia is always deep in players......and in qualified ones. But instead of the qualified ones crossing us off early in the recruiting process we are doing a much better job of selling our program to them.

Ironically a quick look at the big kids being mentioned that are not qualified yet....but are busting their butts in order to have a chance to get into Tech aren't Georgia kids.

To these guys and all of our Georgia kids I have a helluva of respect for the efforts they put in on and off the field.

Whether they sign with us or not.

But I sure love the ones that do!
Click to expand...

State,I can't disagree with much of what you say here but when you can recruit only 10 in the top 50 most years our coaches need to have one hell of a closing rate.

By the way the Blog article is very good.
 
RickyReck said:
State,I can't disagree with much of what you say here but when you can recruit only 10 in the top 50 most years our coaches need to have one hell of a closing rate.

By the way the Blog article is very good.
Click to expand...

Just a guess, but I think a high % of the state kids that are both highly ranked and qualified to be at Tech will want to come if the recruiting continues to be as professional and aggressive as its been. Yes, we have to win to keep it going.

Smart kids want to be recognized for their achievements in the classroom too.
 
One thing is for sure we have adopted a much more aggresive approach to recruiting and the results have been very positive.
My hat's off to Chan and his very capable asst Coaches.
 
Ricky: I don't think that saying in years past that only 10 out of the top 50 rated players in the state would be able to qualify to get into Tech on a football scholarship is an accurate statement.

Also, far more than 50 kids in Georgia sign Div 1 football scholarships. Georgia annually ranks in the top 4-7 in the sheer numbers of players signing Div1 scholarships.

I'll bet that together Dekalb and Gwinnett Counties have 50 kids who on a yearly basis sign letters of intent to Div 1 schools.

WE CAN'T BLAME THE KIDS.....You, me, all of us fans can't blame the kids for not considering Georgia Tech. That's like GM blaming us because we don't buy their cars and trucks.

We have to sell our program and that is a multi-faceted effort that eventually ends in selling the kids themselves . We have failed in that effort, but I'd say we are getting ahead of the curve now.

As it has been stated before....there is no reason to dwell on the failures of the past. Our program is slowly but surely reemerging into the nat'l spotlight. The kids are recognizing us and putting us near the top of their lists. Gailey and the staff are doing an excellent job. It's a great time to be a Yellow Jacket! And the kids know it!
 
First, thanks to others on the board for all of the information answering my original query on “What’s the difference in our recruiting?” ...and thanks for bringing me up to date on "the issue".

Second, God bless Geof Collins and Giff Smith…and their parents for having them!:bowdown:

Third. I guess that Stateline Jacket is correct: "There is no use in dwelling on the past." However, I can’t help but make the statements and ask the questions below:

Historically, we have always been led to believe that Tech was (1) just too tough a place for many (read: most ) Georgia high school student-athletes to qualify academically and (2) had too narrow a curriculum to attract anybody but engineering and technical majors. As a result, in the past, we have always concentrated on recruiting nationally. If we are to believe that we have really turned a corner in recruiting -----especially with regard to in-state student athletes------then am I also to believe that we have deluded ourselves in the past and also been deluded by the previous administration (i.e. Dave Braine) with regards to the recruitment of in-state athletes? :confused: Have we been lied to in the past about the potential (or lack thereof) for recruiting in-state athletes to Tech? Is it that many of our suspicions about the previous administration’s competence (or lack thereof) were true? Is it that the previous athletic administration was just not very competent (grade scandals, use of ineligible players, etc.) I find it very interesting that our ‘quantum leap’ in recruiting comes six months or so after Braine has retired and Radokovich has become AD.

I am not intentionally “beating a dead horse” especially after the so called “horse” has been put out to pasture but, as a Tech alum, a fan of Tech sports in general and as one who considers himself “Georgia Tech born and bred” and who will, one day, will be “Georgia Tech dead”, do I have a reason to be angry with the previous administration(s) over our wasted or squandered recruitment opportunities of the past and near past? Does any of this play into Braine's last famous statement regarding the fact that we couldn't expect to win more than seven games a year? :bs:I'd like to know. Somebody help me to understand.:confused:
----------------------

P.S. I've learned that you "...just never know" how recruits are going to "turn out". Some do well, some don't. But based upon all of the advance press on 2007 football "commits" and Chan's ability to "coach up" athletes, looks like we can be contenders for the ACC Champions in just a few years-----despite Braine's statement about our seven game win "ceiling".
 
Last edited:
Very good post Flak. You raise excellent questions that do need to be answered.

Even though the past does not need to be dwelled on, the public statements Braine made could have been very harmful to the future of the program.
I believe he was only trying to justify his personal mediocrity but I would like to know some of the answers to the questions you have posed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top