AJC > Sports > Tech > Blog > Archives > 2007 > September > 05 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USTech = 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
Comments
By ContactBuzz
September 5, 2007 11:41 AM | Link to this
Excellent blog. I have noticed the increased access and attention to GT football and it is much appreciated.
By CV
September 5, 2007 11:59 AM | Link to this
Very good article Matt!! I try very hard not to use the “academic requirements” card as an excuse. It’s very nice to have Tech’s higher academics recognized though. I believe Tech can succeed with higher standards and that it should not be used as an excuse but as a recruiting tool to get “smarter” student athletes.
By flats
September 5, 2007 12:11 PM | Link to this
Thanks for the straight scoop, Matt. Good info.
By elwoodGT
September 5, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this
Nice post, Matt.
I agree with your assessment. I think Tech can be successful - no, actually it’s more accurate to say Tech is successful both academically and athletically. When the #6 public university plays for the ACC championship, has been to 10 straight bowls and is currently ranked, I think it’s pretty good in both areas.
I am most proud of Chan and DRad for not backing down academically. One of the biggest challenges in our recruiting efforts is not so much GPA and SAT standards, but the relative narrowness of GT’s undergrad major offering. We do engineering, and business management. We do them very well, but for the most part, that’s what you’ve got. There are a couple of smaller degree programs, but certainly nothing like most schools offer, even high-standards schools like Stanford and Duke. If a smart athlete wants to be a vet, or an English major, or an anthropologist, or whatever, he’s gotta go somewhere else.
By BirdNBee
September 5, 2007 12:16 PM | Link to this
I was talking to a friend of mine yesterday about the improving coverage of Tech and the increasing frequency with which positive articles seem to be written about the school and the team. I think there are several reasons for this, which you seem to have hit on.
First, we have an AD and an administration who “gets it” with regards to positive publicity. They also seem to understand that in order to get the positive recognition, you have to sometimes air out the negative. I may not always love this perspective, but I certainly think it is the best approach for our long-term success.
The second factor seems to be the assignment of Matt and Mark to cover Tech. Both of these guys have shown their willingness and ability to give us the good and the bad about Tech sports. We sometimes hear fans lament that we don’t have “homers” reporting for us, but I would rather have the honest perspective of these two guys than someone who sugar coats everything and blows smoke up our collective skirt. Thanks Matt & Mark and keep up the good work.
By gte578e
September 5, 2007 12:19 PM | Link to this
Matt, as usual, you’re doing great! That article was spot on. I think we are elitists though. I think it stems from a variety of things. I want to share a couple with you.
First, (Matt this is for you to try specifically) if you ever want to understand why Tech has such a high academic image of itself, go to a Tech job fair, preferably the one in the fall. It’s so big it has to be in the McDome. Companies there slobber over themselves for the graduates. And we’re not talking Georgia Power, Delta, and other local employers. We’re talking Microsoft, the CIA, Boeing, NASA, a slew of banks, and other world class employers. It’s really hard as a 21-25 year old to temper that success without coming off as a total prick. I’ve written those blogs about redneck UGA fans. It’s easy to give into the hype.
Another thing that builds our elitist attitude is a lot of fans that don’t represent their school well telling us we’re gay losers. Again, not all Tech fans are nerds and not all UGA fans live in trailers. But, because of proximity the barage is quite constant in both directions. That begins to really engender those feelings at both schools.
Finally, we have history. They give out a statue every year that honors one of our coaches. Tech was the first team to win the original major bowls (even before ND and USC). Tech was the team that changed the way the nation looks at who you play as opposed to how many points you score (look into why Heisman scheduled Cumberland State and the average margin of victory by Tech in the late teens). Every year we (sometimes irrationally) expect greatness in sports, because we get there academically. We think it just comes because, we’ve got an amazing QB and offensive coordinator, or because we just got a coach that was an OC in the NFL, or because we’ve got this frosh QB with a ton of upside, or because we’ve got the best receiver in football, or whatever. We expect it.
The Schultz article about Tech was dead on! Hopefully now some of our elitism will be tempered and we’ll keep just a hint of it that will be deserved.
By JustMe
September 5, 2007 12:20 PM | Link to this
Right on Matt.
I have learned in my long life not to worry too much about perceptions. That is something you cannot control.
Do the best you can, be polite and nice, follow the rules, then let the chips fall where they may! If doing these things means that some people (ugay fans) think that you’re a snob - so be it.
By CheatersNeverProsper
September 5, 2007 12:23 PM | Link to this
By elwoodGT
September 5, 2007 12:14 PM I am most proud of Chan and DRad for not backing down academically. One of the biggest challenges in our recruiting efforts is not so much GPA and SAT standards, but the relative narrowness of GT’s undergrad major offering.
So “not backing down academically” at Tech is code for cheating?
By Tech Forever
September 5, 2007 12:27 PM | Link to this
Here’s the problem Matt. You point out the major reasons why recruiting is harder at Tech than most other schools (almost all other schools save 5 or 6). The issues are #1 our friends to the east (as well as most of the ACC) do not agree with that nor believe it and will argue to your face that “Tech goes after the same kids we do”, and #2 the media, specifically the AJC ignore these facts when covering Tech, sports, and recruiting. When was the last time the AJC did a feature story on 1 how difficult it is to get into Tech as an S-A, and 2 how much MORE difficult it is to STAY in school at Tech as an S-A? Seriously. Take the average GT football player and compare his high school work to the average UGA player (not Stafford or some other kid who had great grades in HS and is majoring in Vet Medicine or something b/c that ain’t the “average” UGA player) and then compare the courseload they have to take at their respective colleges.
I don’t think Tech folks problem lies is the fact that its more difficult at Tech. It lies in the fact that those facts aren’t recognized and appreciated by the masses. And the fact that nearly every UGA fan on the planet would argue with a Tech fan about this topic proves it. Does it mean Tech players are better people or smarter and UGA players are dumb? No. It means Tech players have to hoe a tougher row in high school and then in college tom play at Tech than any other ACC or SEC school save Vanderbilt.
By Mark
September 5, 2007 12:30 PM | Link to this
Matt that was terrific. Thanks for your efforts. Chan and DRad are going to put smiles on Tech fans’ faces for many years to come.
By Punt Return for TD
September 5, 2007 12:33 PM | Link to this
Uh-Oh, Chan’s talking about what needs to happen, but I’ll bet he won’t MAKE THE COACH’S DECISION to make it happen …..
The following was extracted from the “Win Far From Perfect” article.
…. The return game, though, showed room for improvement.
Jamaal Evans returned the second-half kickoff from his end zone and reached only the 16. His other return was only slightly better, 19 yards to the 24.
If Tech’s defense continues to shine, the Jackets won’t be returning many kickoffs. But punts are likely to be numerous. Tyler Evans returned three for 17 yards.
Gailey said he saw room for improvement in both areas.
COACH!! What’s so wrong about having a playmaker field punts!? (See Cal vs. Tenn; pay attention to Va. Tech on punt returns; ugh - even UGA has a playmaker returning punts; and that’s just 3 teams off the top of my head that have these “playmakers”)
No offense to Tyler Evans, but he ain’t a playmaker, and I only needed to see him return 3 punts in the ND game to figure that out ….. offense, defense, and SPECIAL TEAMS! I’m sure there’s a DB, WR, or RB on the squad that could be a PLAYMAKER It’s your job to find him!
I call them FREE points … why don’t you try and get some????
By GTA
September 5, 2007 12:38 PM | Link to this
By CheatersNeverProsper
September 5, 2007 12:23 PM | Link to this
By elwoodGT
September 5, 2007 12:14 PM I am most proud of Chan and DRad for not backing down academically. One of the biggest challenges in our recruiting efforts is not so much GPA and SAT standards, but the relative narrowness of GT’s undergrad major offering.
So “not backing down academically” at Tech is code for cheating?
No…that’s code for not recruiting a player that’s below our academic standards despite how well they play on the field.
By Reid Taylor
September 5, 2007 12:45 PM | Link to this
Thanks Matt, honestly is what we need out of an AJC sport writer’s blog. I hope that Tech fans will satisfy their “posting” desires with your column and stay the hell off that bulldog in journalist’s clothing blog. Bark Madely’s poisonous pin has NO place in Tech’s collective conscience. Let the excrement he spews be debated solely by those who bark like dogs. Go Jackets!!!
By 3 Rivers jacket
September 5, 2007 12:46 PM | Link to this
This ananysis and overanalysis of Tech has been going on for 30 years or mreand is very tiring. We all know that their academics are above those of Goeriga ns a lot of the ACc. What Tech people need to do is quit acting like second class citizens and expect to win. You do not have to be an SEC idiot to want to win. I think a lot of Tech people are afraid if they want to win they will be like that Hey winning is good losing is notlet us choose winning. The AJC with its back handed stabs from the likes of Jeff whats his name and Mark Bulldog will never be fans-that is not their job. Do not be afraid to win games and to expect to win them.
By GTZealot
September 5, 2007 1:03 PM | Link to this
Excellent writeup Matt. I am glad you are the Tech beatwriter, as no one else has done as good a job as you do since I became a Tech fan back in 1994.
By Reid Taylor
September 5, 2007 1:13 PM | Link to this
To 3 Rivers Jacket, we do expect to win and we are very proud of our football team and our school. Not one of us would trade our degree for anything that cow town has to offer. The difference between Tech and Georgia is that UGA, regardless of their coach, can always count on bringing in animals, and animals alone will get you 6 to 7 wins a year. Hell, both Ray Goof and “can’t get it done” Donnan consistently had top 5 recruiting classes. Tech, because of its standards, takes time to build a team and must have excellent coaching to do so. Tech now has both and we WILL beat Georgia this year.
By techie
September 5, 2007 1:31 PM | Link to this
Good article and journalism. You must have majored at Georgia - wow that was tough saying that but trying to stop being an elitist. Really appreciate your comments on recruting - very informative but I do agree with one comment above that limited curriculum is also rough on Tech recruiting efforts.
By Buzzn
September 5, 2007 1:34 PM | Link to this
This is definitely a step in the right direction. I was always paranoid about AJC coverage in the 90s due to hack jobs by writers like Mike Fish.
Hopefully writers with an axe to grind like Fish are no longer at the AJC, and the improved relationship will be a two-way street.
By Joshua Barlowe
September 5, 2007 1:41 PM | Link to this
Public Relations at Tech have been lacking in years past, but it has been a two-sided failure, that at Tech and that of the AJC/WSB/Cox machine being LARGELY made up of employees with connections and/or degrees from UGAg.
You can say that plays no part in coverage as much as you want, but I will always disagree, being a former employee of the AJC myself. As an insider it was well known that coverage was slanted; both for the reason of many UGAg grads at the paper and the fact that UGAg has a larger fan base, and therefore, will buy more papers.
It’s all hogwash. But — in recent years, progress is being made by both the Tech PR dept. and the AJC. Matt and Mike Knobler have been excellent writers for Tech and coverage has gotten better.
Maybe they can talk to their friends at WSB/Bill Hartman and knock some sense into their heads that GEORGIA TECH is home team for the ATLANTA Journal-Constitution and ATLANTA TV stations.
The team in Atlanta should get more coverage from the Atlanta media. So be it. Go Jackets!
By Doogie22
September 5, 2007 1:48 PM | Link to this
Matt,
Spot-on! Great blog and I totally agree. You have provided the best coverage in my 30 years of being a Tech fan - thanks!
By GahseyFan
September 5, 2007 2:03 PM | Link to this
Matt — thoughtful, well-tempered post.
By Jon
September 5, 2007 2:08 PM | Link to this
Great blog, Matt. Tech fans definitely appreciate your work. Keep it up.
By ljones
September 5, 2007 2:17 PM | Link to this
Wow, yet another media member talking about how it is “better for the school” if they open up and let the media go wherever they want, talk to whoever they want, all whenever they want.
Give me a break.
By John Ramos
September 5, 2007 2:30 PM | Link to this
Have you seen this great hat today at http://www.hatdaddy.com?
By John Ramos
September 5, 2007 2:31 PM | Link to this
Have you seen this great hat today at hatdaddy . com? www.hatdaddy.com
By dave
September 5, 2007 2:32 PM | Link to this
Hey Matt,
Any insight as to why the AJC used “goirish” in the URL for gameday pics & reports?
http://www.ajc.com/gen/gs-data/sports/2007/0907/0901goirish/2.jpg
By Matt Winkeljohn
September 5, 2007 2:53 PM | Link to this
All,
Thanks for responses pro and con.
As for a member of the media suggesting a benefit trickle-down from access, good luck arguing the principle coherently. More access equals more stories, generally most of them positive. More stories equals more awareness of the program/Institute, which equals more opportunities (the more that is written about Tashard Choice, for example, the better his chances at postseason awards).
As for the goirish URL, that was a terrible in-house mistake made by an employee who has been addressed. Way out of my league, and clearly bush-league. I apologize on behalf of the AJC.
As for UGA grads in the department, I went to Bowling Green, Mike Knobler to Harvard, the outgoing college editor to Syracuse, the incoming TBA, Carter Strickland somewhere out on the plains, I think (Oklahoma, Carter?), and Chip Towers UGA.
Mike Fish, who’s been gone for a few years, and is now at ESPN.com, is a Kansas man. Schultz, way out west somewhere, Bradley Kentucky, Terry Moore Miami of Ohio, Bisher Furman (seriously). That’s all I can think of right now.
Matt
By fred
September 5, 2007 3:09 PM | Link to this
Tech grads have a highly respected national reputation in management, leadership and entrepreneurism ( and I’m not boasting).In order to boost your company and your people leaders must be communicators who understand why open dialogue is so important. Academics should hire outside experts in communications who “GET IT” and let these folks fire the elitists.
By Winless
September 5, 2007 3:39 PM | Link to this
The endless rambling about Tech’s higher academic standards only foster the atmosphere of elitism that makes the school and its teams coarse and unlikable. Thanks for doing your part, Matt.
By techaholic
September 5, 2007 3:42 PM | Link to this
George O’Leary in an article in 2005 Sporting news said exactly what you are saying in this article.
Tech Marketing was not good and he was doing everything in his power to change that. He spoke about a school with a tradition and history in football.
He talked about a school right here in the great city of Atlanta. He talked about connecting to the media and using it to pass along all the positive info you could about GT.
He did that well. GOL may have been tough but he sure the heck knew how to get it done and what it was going to take.
We’ll see how far this goes. Tech grads seem to forget a LOT that a lot of the fans (season ticket holders) that have been attending GT games over the last 20 years are NON-GRADS.
These are the fans that mean a lot to this school moreso than grads as Tech grads are not abundent in the area.
He also said how important it was to recruit nationally … because he always believed GT was a national school … it is.
FUNNY HOW one coach who did well here knew what it takes and others are dummber than dumb!
By Georgia Trek
September 5, 2007 3:52 PM | Link to this
What a puff piece! Haha! Tech people are self-important tards!
By TechV
September 5, 2007 3:54 PM | Link to this
Tech will get the recruits - for those schools that say “don’t go to Tech it’s too hard” I expect Chan to say “they’re telling you they don’t think you’re bright or hard working enough to succeed at a real school.” Every program earns lots and lots of money from college athletes - GA Tech included. It’s a trade - you give them four years of your life and they make a load of money off of you, and you get free tuition and a chance to earn a degree. Thus, every school buys you with a degree, so that degree better be worth something to you in the long run for you - make it count. You don’t want to go to a school that doesn’t consider your academic and post-collegiate needs. When you become one of the 99.5% of the college athletes that don’t make it to the NFL - whether it’s because of lack of playing time, lack of exposure, lack of combine-specific qualities, or injuries, ask yourself what kind of degree and school you would rather have on your resume. Make a good trade - don’t let schools buy you cheap. It might be easier to take easy classes at an easy school, but ask yourself how far you can go with the degree you get from the school to which you went.
As a Tech alum, I can say that it was misearble there - I suffered day in and day out. Every week it was quiz after quiz in subjects that made my head spin. These subjects aren’t easy to Tech students just because they chose these courses. Some subjects are harder than others - period. At the end of the day, just like NFL teams respect work ethic, companies don’t like to hire slackers - they like to hire people who work hard and can persevere. If your career is in your hands, I’d choose carefully.
Now - notice what I’m not saying - I’m not saying if you go to UGA your degree isn’t worth toilet paper - UGA has many excellent academic programs - no matter what school you go to, just don’t cop out and get a junk degree just because some coach tells you it’s easier for you to maintain your eligibility. The school needs to make money from you, and the coach needs to win. Make a smart decision - go to a school that has a good athletic program, but study something worthwhile because you might be one of those 99.5% of the college athletes that don’t make it to the pros.
By TechIsGay-ley
September 5, 2007 3:56 PM | Link to this
I don’t think Techies are elitists at all. Not even close. To be an elitist one needs to be elite. Techies are not elite, Techies are dorks, social misfits, and generally have an inflated since of their own intelligence. Thusly Techies can’t be “elitists” by the very definition of the word.
By son_sir
September 5, 2007 4:00 PM | Link to this
Good article Matt. I don’t know where the blame lies, but Tech coverage always seems to take on that “in other local sports news” persona. And to GT folks in the Atlanta Metro, you just think it has been bad there. Out here in rural GA, ALL the college sports news focuses first on Athens. Thanks for enlightening us as to the backgrounds of your staff, but I suppose most of the media in the state as a whole, has a heavy slant (and personal ties) to UGA. I can understand the dollar factor is also a major consideration. Blue collar Georgia (in other words, the vast majority) is covered with red and black. Perhaps, in the past, the people at GT have seen that the media is heavily slanted and adjusted their attitudes accordingly. For whatever reason, GT does need to open up a little more and do what it takes to reach out to it’s fan base. Yes, we are heavily outnumbered out here in the woods, but we are still here and waving the flag. Many, like myself, are not Tech grads and have little affiliation other than to love the Old Gold and White.
You mentioned one name that deserves a lot of credit and you folks at GT better do what you can to keep him around. I was a teammate of Giff Smith’s at Georgia Southern and he is the real deal as a recruiting coordinator. The 2007 freshman class at GT proves it. He must attack his job the same way he did opposing offenses at GSU. He is a native Georgian and knows the state. Keep Giff on The Flats ! Unless, of course, the Georgia Southern head job ever opens up again. On a side note, there were rumblings of a future match-up between GT and Georgia Southern a while back. I hope that idea has been shelved. I couldn’t bear the internal conflict.
By Matt Winkeljohn
September 5, 2007 4:02 PM | Link to this
Winless,
Endless rambling? Have I ever discoursed in any detail in 18 mos. on the requirements Tech coaches are up against in recruting.
Funny how there’s an earlier comment on how there’s never any detail about this in the AJC, and then when there is — albeit in a blog — you talk about how there are endless ramblings on this very topic.
Maybe there are endless ramblings around coffee tables, but in general, the only ramblings I’m aware of in the mainstream are very broad pronouncements that Tech has a tougher time recruiting. Is there a secret web site with all these ramblings in specific?
Do you want to hide these tougher requirements, or word them vaguely and then hide behind them as a blanket excuse in the event athletic teams struggle on the field?
I really don’t see your point.
Matt
P.S. I didn’t cover O’Leary, but I know this: he was and is a hell of a football coach. He’s also been referred to as a tyrant, which is fine if you have 40 years of tradition in one place, like, say, Joe Paterno. Bobby Bowden wasn’t a tyrant, and still isn’t. There are multiple ways to approach the problem. Tech folks are supposed to be about improving systems. Is your suggestion for improving the systems at Tech to just keep quiet? To shutter coaches and players? Hold the status quo?
By Joshua Barlowe
September 5, 2007 4:10 PM | Link to this
Ahhh — I’m so glad UGAg fans show up here and represent themselves so well. It makes our case without us saying a word…
By BeeBad
September 5, 2007 4:37 PM | Link to this
IF there was increased access then Gailey would be answering questions on his show like Mark Richt does and not dumking the fans. Chan needs to take a testosterone shot and become a man. If there aren’t enough people calling in, no problem. I’ll call in every show and ask as many questions as they need. I’ve got a long list.
By Oldman
September 5, 2007 4:51 PM | Link to this
Yes, I am glad that Tech is reaching out to the community and courting more favorable media coverage.
I am very glad that academic standards are being upheld and intelligent students aith athletic ability are being recruited to play on our sports tesms. I live near an out-of-state SEC institution where the alumni are gleeful in there memories of athletes being given grades and receiving cash payoffs. According to them it never has been and stil is no secret that athletes do not perfrom their own classwork and receive cash payments from alumni for playing.
I was proud that Georgia Tech had not ever been on probation for NCAA violations and I am disappointed that we can no longer say that. I hope that 50 years from now we can still say that we have only been on probation once. I know that it is popular to think and say that anyone who follows the rules and tells the truth is a “sucker”, when all that seems to matter now is not getting caught.
I am also proud of the fact that, according to U.S. News rankings, 11 out of 12 schools in the ACC are in the top 100 of national universities.
If hoping that my alma mater is striving, and acheiving, the true goals for which it was created - academic excellence and searching for truth - then call me an elitist. I will cheer loudly for the yellow jackets and always hope they win, but my pride for Georgia Tech is tied to more than a scoreboard.
By Lee
September 5, 2007 5:11 PM | Link to this
Good comments Matt.
My judgement is, that with the restrictions you and others have enumerated, and even recruiting Nationally, it is extremely difficulty to recruit 25 top SA every year, which the other schools are able to do, with less restrictions.
We can usually recruit 15-20, but this causes serious depth problems because of injuries, players not reaching their potential, etc.
Our top players stack up pretty well, but with the restrictions, we generally lack the depth of top replacements.
This has been a complaint of GOL and other Coaches at Tech.
It is tough to get 25 top SA, due to academics, every year, which other schools seldom have a problem with.
This is one of the reasons Tech basketball has generally done better, because PH does not have to recruit so many each year, as does CG. If and when you talk to Paul, he will verify that.
Both of you are doing a good job in reporting Tech athletics. Thanks.
By jacketnation
September 5, 2007 6:09 PM | Link to this
Great article. Tech has the best of both worlds.
I wonder if they will have a pharmacy job fair anytime soon at UGA?
By Patrick Dawg
September 5, 2007 6:14 PM | Link to this
Who really cares about GT???? No one.
By Jacket_88
September 5, 2007 6:35 PM | Link to this
Matt:
Great blog material. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the subject.
It seems to me, as a life-long Tech fan and two-time graduate, that we Tech folks tend to fall into one of two groups, roughly speaking. The first group tends to be from the “old guard” and probably won’t ever be satisfied. They lived through the glory years of Dodd and their general attitude has been to resist major change in the athletic administration. These were the folks who lobbied hard for Bill Curry for AD. They’re good men, mostly, but their influence is starting to wane.
The second group is made up of those of us who graduated and/or followed the teams from the early eighties until today. We were and continue to be encouraged by Mr. Radakovich and his staff. We believe that Tech can uphold a higher academic standard and win. Is it harder to do so? You bet. But what choice do we really have? And, doesn’t the fact it’s harder make it that much sweeter when you see the teams succeed? Of course it does!
So I say, keep up the good work fellas and Go Jackets!
By Chad
September 5, 2007 6:38 PM | Link to this
Yesth!!! You are sthuch a good writer, Misther Winklejohn….that name sthort of turnsth me on!! Pleasthe keep up the awesthome articlesth. Be sthweet now. Ta-ta!
By Joseph
September 5, 2007 7:37 PM | Link to this
We are elite. Our Tickle Piles are the best in College Football. We also have an unprecedented record of success in Girlyman Contests.
By 2007
September 5, 2007 8:30 PM | Link to this
I’m not quite sure those GPA requirements are always met. Can you look up AT Barnes GPA at Cartersville high school.
By Mike Knobler
September 5, 2007 8:40 PM | Link to this
Thanks for the kind words about the work Matt and I are doing. This is my fourth football season covering Tech, and I have enjoyed the job.
Matt wrote a heck of a blog. I have a longstanding interest in the challenges of balancing academics and athletics. Every school makes choices about where to draw the line, and then it lives with those choices or alters them. What’s appropriate for one school isn’t for another. It’s easy to see how many games the teams win and lose. It’s a lot harder to see what compromises a school made or didn’t make.
By GTNC
September 5, 2007 10:47 PM | Link to this
Mike and Matt- what about creating a blog that discusses scouting our opponet for that particular week?
PS: Seems like we have now have a few top 25 teams on our schedule this year. after week (2) polls…UGA, Miami, Clemson, VT, Boston College. 5 by my count so far and that doesn’t include one more sneaking into the fold (Maryland).
By techman
September 5, 2007 10:58 PM | Link to this
Great article - keep the truth coming - these were not ramblings but the truth from an insider. While I think tech will continue to have trouble recruiting because of limited majors, higher standards, and more national alumni base; I nevertheless do believe atheletes are beginning to understand that only a few make it to the pros and even if you are one of the fortunate ones that you still will need an education after football. The tide is turning on recruiting and I believe if we play it right we can have some success with it. The test of “How many points do you get for a 3 point shot and how many quarters are in a game?” do not speak well for the other major college in the state - very shameful but pretty humorous as well. Most UGA fans laugh about the incident and while humorous, I would be very disappointed if I ever saw this going at Tech.
By Mike
September 5, 2007 11:21 PM | Link to this
Matt,
My compliments on a very thoughtful article/post. I amy not agree with every word, but I agree with much of what you have said, and respect the thoughts expressed. Nice work!!
By the way, as someone who used to live in Toledo, your supporting Bowling Green also explains a few things (just kidding!).
Jackets1973
By James Adams
September 5, 2007 11:30 PM | Link to this
Since this is a SPORTS section, let me remind all of you Techies who’s dander is up after beating Notre Dame: 6 in a row, 13 out of 16,22 out of 30. Thats domination, and that’s what UGA has done to you on the football field. Also, I LOVE the Jim Harrick pot-shots. That was 4 years ago, maybe I should bring up the interstate drug trafficking, or the classes James Forrest, Joe Hamilton and Keith Brooking used to take. Please try to compare yourself with someone you can compete with, like Samford. “Thats alright, thats ok, your wives will sleep with us someday!”
By falcon80
September 5, 2007 11:52 PM | Link to this
Wow, if only the rest of the media would admit why they like Democrats better! Guess Republicans and GT should just be nicer to the guys who are trying to crucify them.
By Techfan5
September 6, 2007 1:54 AM | Link to this
You Tech insulters are hilarious. James Adams, Falcon80, etc.
What you are too stupid too realize is that most of us rabid Tech fans know a lot of rabid UGA fans, too, and that we see them and talk to them all the time.
Most of those guys are cool; we enjoy debating college football, and the loser on the Saturday after Thanksgiving hates to show up to work to take the crap.
But…you losers who post vitriol (look that word up, trailer park scum) on here just amuse us, because we know that most UGA fans despise you almost as much as Tech fans do, BECAUSE YOU MAKE THEM LOOK BAD.
By Real Talk
September 6, 2007 2:36 AM | Link to this
Yes, Tech has high academic standards, requirements, and a tough curriculum. Yes, those aspects are higher/tougher than most (successful) college programs. However, that is no excuse. Southern Cal, Cal (Berkeley), UCLA, Michigan, and Notre Dame all have high academic standards & requirements. Albeit Tech doesn’t have the football tradition that USC, UCLA, Michigan, Notre Dame have and has tougher competition geographically in recruiting. Those schools are proof that it can be done. Even better proof is what Cal is doing now, and I’m sure will continue to do. They as high or higher academic standards/requirements than Tech, and have to compete geographically against schools will more (successful) football tradition. North Carolina is another high academic school, and Butch Davis has proven and & I’m sure will continue to prove that you can recruit at a school like that even in the southeast. Tech has also proved recently that not only can you recruit, but also win at a school like that even in the ACC/SEC region.
By surfrider
September 6, 2007 2:41 AM | Link to this
First thing to remember is many of the sports writers appear to be Ga. graduates or at least SEC graduates/fans. Second, the article really have’nt changed that much over the years. Third, that said there was a political deafness that came in with Gailey and at times with O’leary. Fourth, Curry and Ross were more politically astute and brought the media along with the fan base on what was happening. Fifth, Gailey did’nt like the media talking to freshmen early which makes him a candidate for NSA. Sixth, there is nothing better than confidence about possibly winning that brings the people out. I sense that now for the first time in Gailey’s Tech career that they have a legit shot going into every game including Ga.
By Drexel Gal
September 6, 2007 6:53 AM | Link to this
C’mon … you could have mentioned Tech’s arrogant former sports information director Allison George by name at least once.
By WFC
September 6, 2007 6:53 AM | Link to this
The academic problem at GT regarding football is not so much the difficulty of getting in and staying in as it is the narrow nature of the curriculum. That’s just the way it is.
I appreciate the coverage of GT football, especially the pre-season “in-camp” blog. No “secrets” revealed… never once did I see “direct snap to Choice” mentioned. Loved the coverage… got to know the players. BTW, Dwyer and Burnett will be studs. GO JACKETS!
By TC for Heisman
September 6, 2007 7:29 AM | Link to this
Thanks Matt, great write-up. I really enjoy reading your fresh material both on the state of the program and our team in 2007. Keep up the great work.
By mike
September 6, 2007 8:54 AM | Link to this
Great write up. Hopefully improvement will continue. Thanks Matt and Mike.
By J.A.
September 6, 2007 8:55 AM | Link to this
A “rabid” Tech fan is one of those urban myths. But the term rabid is an apt description of the typical tech co-ed.
By NotFromAroundHere
September 6, 2007 8:58 AM | Link to this
UGA still has a better football team than you guys and will beat you for the 7th time in a row. When really stressed or pressured, your team inevitably cracks like an egg.
By Lowcountry Bulldawgs
September 6, 2007 9:02 AM | Link to this
Matt,
Good blog. As a dawg fan and fan of the enemy I would call Tech fans Nerds, but they then would call me a Redneck. Why do we have to label everything? Can’t we just be :)?Good Blog again!
By Lee
September 6, 2007 9:30 AM | Link to this
I enjoyed your comments until I got to the line… “(my personal, non-professional loyalities lie with Ohio State and Bowling Green)”. Go Bobcats (Ohio U.)!
By tomw
September 6, 2007 10:00 AM | Link to this
Can the change in access be related to the person who was the football SID at Tech getting fired? I hope Georgia State knows what they’ve picked up off the trash heap if that’s the case….
By Good Old Fashioned Hate
September 6, 2007 10:20 AM | Link to this
Are we elitists? Yes.
Why? Because Tech has a glorious past as a school, as well as a national football power.
Chan is a great guy who understands the Institute (but needs to get his knife unshetathed on the field) and DRad seems to be understanding what Tech athletics are all about. We recruit real-live student athletes and give them opportunities to achieve great things in life beyond professional sports. That’s what a college is supposed to be.
My heart was broken when we violated NCAA rules two years ago. Many Tech alums have a fierce pride in the fact that we win with bona-fide student-athletes, no cheating, and tough schedules — that is tough classroom schedules. That’s what a college is supposed to be.
Thanks for your honesty. I think you’re also “getting it” about this wonderful Institute.
By Techater
September 6, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this
We have know for years that Tech people were Elitists and did not need Wayne Hogan to tell us. Just listen to them talk.
I was also thinking how bad Matt Winklejohn must have screwed up to be dropped from the Falcons all the way to TEch.
By 91Wreck
September 6, 2007 11:31 AM | Link to this
Real Talk - You are correct that each of the institutions you named have high academic standards yet they still win. But WFC’s point is valid - Tech has the double whammy of tough standards AND a narrow curriculum.
If you get a chance, look up the majors of the Cal football players. You will see that they have a wide variety of majors to choose from. At Tech, the players basically get to choose from Engineering or Management. Those two aren’t appealing to most student athletes.
By cyclejacket
September 6, 2007 11:35 AM | Link to this
And I was thinking how badly you must have wanted the restaurant manager to give you a break from washing the dishes so you could read the Tech blog.
I don’t understand why people think they have to come onto another team’s blog and make ridiculous spiteful comments. Debating a legitimate point would be acceptable and fun, you just waste others time as well as your own.
By yellowblood
September 6, 2007 12:05 PM | Link to this
TONY BARNHARDT: Thanks for the article on the Jackson kid from Dunwoody who plays at AP State. That story overshadowed by far the UGA and Tech wins Saturday or any other win. What a great day for college football. Tech, be careful Saturday.
By yellowblood
September 6, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this
Matt: Fine article. Keep it coming. There is a lot that Tech can do. Most of it is quite obvious. Does Gailey or Radakovich get out and make presentations to the various Tech alumni organizations ? I am in Greeville SC and would certainly attend. Or does Hewitt for that matter. Does the alumni association have a pregame or postgame reception at away games so that the locals can attend ? These are just the obvious. I like the idea of the new PR director. He needs to convene a task force or committee and I would be happy to participate as a Tech grad.
By Uncle Hud
September 6, 2007 12:24 PM | Link to this
yellowblood: I lived 18 years in Tampa, and we had football coaches, basketball coaches (Cremins was an extraordinary speaker), and AD’s, and President Crecine come speak. Ask your local chapter rep to request that type of speaker — they love to travel “out to the boonies” and speak to the faithful.
Honestly, the Tampa alumni were far more crazy for Yellow Jacket news than the Dunwoody club I now attend.
By yellowblood
September 6, 2007 12:27 PM | Link to this
Wink: Thanks for the article on the defensive game Saturday. Negative yards. To do what they did at South Bend has got to be the thrill of a lifetime, better than playing in half of todays bowl games. I only wish I had been there. Not for one minute will I let the attitude that “ND’s just not good this year” take away how special that win was.
By GT96
September 6, 2007 1:59 PM | Link to this
When giving credit for all of the positive changes at GT, lets not forget Dr. Wayne Clough. He is the man that had the guts to resist the big money donor request to hire Bill Curry. Thanks Dr. Clough for making that call!
By TechIsGay-ley
September 6, 2007 3:38 PM | Link to this
91Wreck: Don’t forget about Public Policy. It’s the political science of GT, only easier. There’s also that b.s. “History of Technology” or whatever it’s called. What a joke.
By stacks
September 7, 2007 5:40 AM | Link to this
Yes, we are watering down our cirriculum no thanks to Cough and the backwards regents!