AJC > Sports > Tech > Blog > Archives > 2006 > November > 07 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USSurprised by Hewitt
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Holy smokes … a lot to say,
First, from the world of the surprising …
Count me on that list with regards to Paul Hewitt saying that it was no fluke that freshman Zach Peacock started at center against Morehouse in the exhibition, and that he also will start the season opener against Elon because he’s beaten out Ra’Sean Dickey.
I even blogged as much yesterday. I was admittedly at a disadvantage because I didn’t get to see Saturday’s scrimmage, let along talk to Hewitt afterward, as I was in Raleigh with the football team. Still, gadzooks, Batman!
From listening to Hewitt, and by process of extrapolation, it seems to me that since the coach feels that he has plenty of players who can score yet has stated concerns about defense, Peacock gets the nod - at least for now.
Hewitt admits Peacock is not as good with his back to the basket as Dickey, but is better, “playing face up.” He also said this will not change anything they do offensively. And Hewitt couldn’t say enough about what a physical presence Peacock provides, raving about his defense and work on the boards. Yes, he’s a couple inches or so shorter than Dickey, but apparently very strong and willing to use the muscle.
For those who wonder, a lion’s share of the recruiting work on Peacock was done by assistant Charlton Young.
Two more basketball notes: Hewitt raved about Crittenton’s physical conditioning, saying he’s the best on the team already, “which is hard for a freshman,” but, “mentally, he has a lot to learn.” Also, in general, he loves how hard his freshmen are practicing.
I’m not surprised that Brad Sheehan is going to red-shirt. Hewitt said he needs to get a lot stronger.
Looking back to a story in Tuesday’s paper about AD Dan Radakovich saying there are going to be some “paradigm shifts” in fund-raising/gathering at Tech.
Wow, this was a lively topic on The Hive today, at least until the Peacock news hit. Some reactions:
First, the very first post states that that article is “vague,” and asks for reliable information.
The article is no more vague than Radakovich. As he said, some changes will begin rolling out within a few weeks. Other than to suggest that the Alexander-Tharpe fund will focus more on sizable donations and smaller contributions may be funneled through another arm of the AA, he was general in his comments. If he’d been more willing to be specific, the story would’ve been moreso as well.
I, too, would have preferred more specifics, but it’s Radakovich with the keys to the palace, so to speak. If he doesn’t want to roll out details before their time, it’s his call. Perhaps he’ll have more to say this week. I’ll try to check.
Secondly, somebody (nickname DoddDude) suggested the story was “second-hand information at best.” Wanna explain that? Do you think I just guessed that Radakovich said there were paradigm shifts coming? Or maybe that I taped what he said in the meeting, and asked more questions afterward?
If you can’t guess the answer, e-mail me and I’ll clue you in.
Yes, as mentioned, Radakovich was vague. That’s just the way it was. But the suggestion that changes are coming is not second-hand. It’s coming from the athletics director. There is, um, a big difference, huh?
Third, a whole lot of people on those threads seem ready to operate on assumptions driven by rumors — either on the internet (I haven’t seen them) or elsewhere — that there will be a “right-to-buy” tickets fee, and/or ticket increases and more.
Some even suggest the article in the paper suggests these things. It does not suggest any of this in any way, shape or form. I’m not going to report such a thing without knowing it. I have absolutely no information that these things are or are not coming.
People need to realize that much of the chatter on this topic is based on rumor and innuendo, growing like a wind-stoked wildfire.
I’d suggest patience. Answers will avail themselves eventually.
Lastly, as for the suggestion made by someone that the athletics budget deficit could be pulled in line by whacking programs that drain the budget … to maintain Division I status, an athletics program must have at least 16 sports, including some very specific breakdowns as to male-female opportunities provided.
Tech has 17. If a sport gets cut, it’d almost certainly have to be a mens sport (this is why wrestling’s all but dead at the D-I level in the Southeast, for example) - a varsity sport, not club. So which one would you whack? Tennis? Golf? Track and field? Swimming and diving. Cross country? Baseball?
Tough one to answer, eh? My answer: none. No way a Division I school, in the ACC, in Atlanta, should run a bare-bones athletics department. No way, whatsoever. So, you either find other ways to trim costs, and/or add revenue.
Why not wait and see what specifics the athletics department and Radakovich have in mind before blowing up?
Comments
By Pete
November 7, 2006 04:36 PM | Link to this
Matt,
As you report the new revenue issues, can you try to find out what will happen to people’s priority points, particularly those people who have been donating to the AT Fund for years and years?
Also, when you speak to DRad, can you ask or convey to him the fact that Georgia Tech is not like most big, southeastern state universities when it comes to some things. Particularly, look at the club seating fiasco from a few years ago.
DRad needs to seek the council from the alumni base before making radical changes because the demand for tickets is increasing at a moderate pace, but they stand to lose a lot of ticketholders if they make the asking price too high.
By Casey
November 7, 2006 05:09 PM | Link to this
Nothing against Dickey, I think he’s a great player… sometimes! Ever notice how he would turn it on and off? I haven’t heard a lot on Peacock until now, but I trust Hewitt’s decision and know how he loves defense. Dickey was just too soft sometimes, no pun intended! I just wonder how 3 freshman starters will hold up come ACC season.
By ncjacket
November 7, 2006 05:39 PM | Link to this
Matt,
You should know by now that there are many who post on the Hive we won’t sit idly by in a situation that suggests panic. I read the Hive first, then your article and couldn’t figure out what all the angst was over. Oh well, some things never change.
By RICHARD
November 7, 2006 05:40 PM | Link to this
WATCH YOUR WALLETS,FOLKS. WE A/T CONTRIBUTORS ARE FIXING TO GET THE SHAFT.
ALREADY THE HEISMAN GIVING LEVEL HAS BEEN JACKED 25%.
By mike
November 7, 2006 05:42 PM | Link to this
Matt, The Hive is just entertainment. I don’t think DRad checks in with us. We enjoy your work. Thank you and visit us sometime.
By GTGreg
November 7, 2006 05:48 PM | Link to this
Yeah, I didn’t really see much to panic over in Radakovich’s statement either. Thanks for your thoughts. Go Jackets!
By wakejacket
November 7, 2006 06:04 PM | Link to this
Thank you, Matt, and keep up the good work. You’re a serious upgrade in covering Tech athletics.
By DoddDude
November 7, 2006 06:16 PM | Link to this
Matt,
Sorry for how my post put the onus on your article. I was really not referring to your article specifically, but the insane reaction and wild speculation it incited on the Hive. We are in agreement on waiting to actually know something before reacting.
You do a great job.
Thanks, DoddDude
By Davey
November 7, 2006 07:00 PM | Link to this
I don’t get why everyone is so upset about Dickey not starting. If Peackock is doing better in practice wouldn’t that just make us a better team.
I trust Hewitts decision. Good luck to the boys and hope they have a good year.
By halfmetaljacket
November 7, 2006 08:38 PM | Link to this
Peacock may or may not start at 5 the rest of the season but the fact that he’s starting the first two games says he’s a serious factor.
Imagine if Tech chooses to ‘go small’ with Peacock at 5, Thad at 4, either Faye or Morrow at 3, either Morrow or Clinch at 2 and Crit at point.
FAST and athletic. Wonderment: will we leap to a better level with THREE rooks starting???
Looking forward to Radacovich’s new seating logic. Homer Rice launched the A-T logic we have now. It served us well, indeed, resurrected the program… . Let’s see what new rationale is in store. Changing every twenty years isn’t exactly hasty. Seems likely a twenty year tweak can align program needs and funding mechanisms better than standing pat… . . Rad knows what he’s doing.
By Ga_Tech_92
November 7, 2006 08:48 PM | Link to this
ping
By George P. Burdell
November 8, 2006 07:49 AM | Link to this
The new AD made similar comments at a speech he gave on Monday night, saying there were going to be changes made in the way contributions were handled without giving any specifics. He also indicated that the past practice of reseating the FB and BB tickets every 5 years won’t be happening anytime soon, if ever.
It all sounds a lot like we are going to a contribution for the right to buy tickets system and it kind of ticks me off if that means people that have been giving under the old points system suddenly are left out in the cold for anyone and anybody that shows up with some dough today. The club seats lost a ton of long time, faithful supporters that we will never get back. All is fine and good when the team does well, but it is a disaster during the down years. Already the club seats probably bring in dollars, but as we all know, many of the seats are sold to corporations and the tickets go to the other teams fans. You cannot build a successful program with the other team having fans sitting in the premium seats. I for one hope we are not heading that way but I believe all athletic programs are spending way above their means ( when real accounting is used, not the phony governent style accounting they use) and somewhere down the road they will pay the price. Unfortunately, for those of us who enjoy the sports, we may have already been driven away by then simply because we lack the bucks to keep up.
By Jim O
November 8, 2006 08:47 AM | Link to this
only when you have the kind of fan support shown by the washington redskins or va tech can you start ripping off the fans for the ‘rights’ to purchase tickets. i don’t see season sell-outs years in advance.
one good season by gt doesn’t translate into long term success, and we haven’t finished this one yet. i still remember my rat year when we were 9-0, only to lose to uga and then florida (spurrier) in the orange bowl. HOPEFULLY that won’t happen again, but it is 40 years later and the same set-up could occur.
there are other ways to raise money. I don’t know if it is legal, but what do you fans think of starting a new fund dedicated to a NCAA national champion (and football doesn’t count since there is currently no playoff). The first tech team to achieve this, gets the money to go to whatever they need to keep the program at a high level - more pay for assistant coaches, better practice facilities, etc. If we had started this 100 years ago, we would have billions by now - hopefully one of our programs will come through in the near future, but I have been waiting a long time as have all of you. But that said, I would gladly donate extra to a program such as this.
Thoughts???
By old gold engineer
November 8, 2006 11:25 AM | Link to this
I believe a successful football season will go a long ways toward improving fund raising. Obviously, different approaches need to be considered to address the debt facing the Athletic Administration. Relax and see what the AD proposes. He appears to be very capable thus far in handling the duties of his job, and I expect him to work this out in an equitable manner.
By Lee
November 9, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this
I heard that Georgia Tech got their butts kicked in a scrimmage with UAB a week or so ago? Anyone else hear about this scrimmage?
By WFC
November 11, 2006 06:55 AM | Link to this
The Peacock and Dickey situation could be the key to a very successful season if Dickey responds to the challenge. How many ACC schools will have a “point machine” like Dickey coming off the bench to provide a lift at crucial times? The key is Dickey’s maturity. Twenty minutes of Dickey going all out is much more valuable than 32 minutes at 75%. Hewitt will have to some great coaching here.