AJC > Sports > Tech > Blog > Archives > 2007 > September > 05
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
Tech = elitists? Maybe, but so what?
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
I’m going to steal some themes from colleague Jeff Schultz today, and ruminate a bit more on the changing mindset at Georgia Tech, and whether or not you all are “elitists.”
First, to make it clear, Jeff did not write that as one of his own thoughts, as was suggested by a blogger on The Hive. That’s in a Wayne Hogan quote. Wayne made the observation.
He was hired for several reasons, including marketing expertise, and one of them was to spend up to a year assessing the relationship between the Tech athletics department and the public at large. Since that relationship is serviced to a considerable degree by the media through its various portrayals, Wayne — with background in media as both a member of it (long, long ago when he worked at the Tallahassee Democrat) and as an SID and more — has focused on that. He surely found that for many years, media access at Tech was quite limited at times, and some relationships were strained at best, perhaps moreso with local electronic media than print (I know, you think I’m making that up).
It doesn’t take a genius to see that Tech wants more media coverage. And to get more media coverage, an entity needs to be friendlier with the media. That doesn’t mean always agreeing with what the media reports, or editorializes; but don’t be obstinate, or unneccessarily covert. That approach more often than not will raise ire and/or suspicion, and dissuade future attempts at even warm and fuzzy feature stories and the like. Again, that doesn’t take a genius to figure out.
That’s been a problem at Tech for many years. The situation has improved a little in recent years, even before the ongoing makeover began. No need to go into detail here, as some of that information is sensitive to all parties (rarely involving me, I might add, as I was away on Falcons/NFL duty for eight years prior to moving over to Tech coverage in Feb. 2006), but fellow members of the media talk. Plus, I dealt with some of the Tech obfuscation/defensiveness in the mid-90s, when I was a college writer.
At any rate, it’s worth noting that during much of the time FSU came of age as a football power and consequently media staple/darling, Hogan was the SID in Tallahassee. And the Seminoles were uncommonly open about what was happening on campus, trend setters in terms of providing media access to players and coaches — even as athletes found themselves frequently in hot water for quite a stretch.
Yes, a primary part of the job of raising the profile of a program relates to winning, which Bobby Bowden’s teams began doing with amazing regularity. But when the powers that be make access that much easier, more stories are done, more interviews granted, etc. The net result is a gain for the athletics program, and the institution, even if some warts are exposed in the process. Over the long haul, conducting business like this seems likely to reduce suspicions, to limit the idea that somebody is hiding something.
Jon Tenuta was on the radio early yesterday. When’s the last time that happened? Maybe I’m wrong, but I see that as part of a new mindset, not that Jon hides anything. He just doesn’t say that much for public consumption, at least not traditionally.
Chan Gailey has been more open this fall, and the permission of in-practice blogs during the summer reflect this change in attitude, even if a smattering of folks on The Flats are vehemently opposed. There are some who loathed those blogs, who thought they were too transparent regarding injuries, and even personnel deployment. Notre Dame read them, you can be sure. Didn’t seem to help the Irish, but my selfish take is that Tech fans were better able to connect and relate to their team through the process.
Tech does not need to operate in a vacuum, and wouldn’t even if it were a private institution, which it is not. Not if the powers that be plan to operate a Division I program in a BCS conference in a huge metropolis where there is steep, steep competition for attention and the consumer’s dollar.
As for the elitist comment: That is a pretty bottom-line word, and perhaps it is a bit too harsh. But for lack of another ready word, it works for now. And remember, that was Wayne Hogan’s word.
Tech is different than many institutions. The Jackets do face some recruiting hardships relative to a large percentage of other D-I programs. In short (and not in total), if a kid does not have a GPA of 2.55 by the completion of his junior year, Tech can’t recruit him. The Jackets had to pass on a very, very, very good local player who chimed in at 2.51. He has committed to USC. Gailey and other coaches can appeal borderline cases, but Chan rarely chooses this route, feeling that surviving at Tech once there is tough enough that early warning signs should be heeded diligently.
Test scores (SAT, ACT) are a consideration, of course, and to get into Tech, student-athletes also need more math in high school than most colleges require.
Also, Tech calculates HS GPAs a little differently than some — but not all — colleges. If a kid flunks a class in high school and then repeats it, many colleges drop the F from consideration and replace it with the new grade. Tech considers both grades in GPA calculation. They’re not the only school that does this, but it is a factor in whom they can recruit from time to time, as GPAs will sometimes be lower by their calculation method.
I understand Tech alums wanting to retain the right to consider their alma mater as special, and it is, as most graduates from other schools would suggest their schools are as well. I understand some apprehension from folks who steadfastly want to safeguard against any compromise, or lessening, of academic standards.
For my two cents, though, it is plausible to have the best of both worlds, no compromise of standards required. Tech coaches know what they’re up against in the recruiting world. They must be, and apparently recently have been, less likely to go after recruits who are going to be problematic. That narrows the field for sure. But then coaches go hard after kids in that limited pool. It’s a competitive world no matter what approach you take into it. So go compete your butt off, just as students must in the classroom once they arrive.
There is already evidence that the most recent recruiting class, though small with 18 members, is a cut above. That’s all the proof I need to see that it can be done. Maybe some years will be less productive than others, as coaches say the pool of academically-stout prospects in Georgia this year is thin relative to last year and what they foresee next. But there are 49 others states to look at in situations like this.
Tech can have the best of both worlds — academic and athletic. But coaches have to work that much harder to pull it off. They know what they signed up for; they’re adults. And they have a plan, keyed currently in football by the keen organization and focus of recruiting coordinator Giff Smith and others.
I’m not a Tech fan (my personal, non-professional loyalities lie with Ohio State and Bowling Green), but my job is more pleasant when Tech succeeds. I think Tech can succeed in both worlds, which I don’t see as mutually exclusive, just rare bedfellows. It’s a big bed, though, with room aplenty.
Matt
