AJC > Sports > Tech > Blog > Archives > 2007 > October > 05
Friday, October 5, 2007
Tech wins, but spare me excuses
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Sorry to be late .
I don’t think this game is going to be as tight as some believe. The matchup of Maryland’s big offensive line vs. Tech’s average-sized front might scare some on paper, but I think the Yellow Jackets got more than enough of the power running game in their faces at Virginia a couple weeks ago to learn a thing or two.
I don’t see them getting rumped again, and I think they’re going to rattle the heck out of the quarterback, whomever it is.
Offensively, as long as Choice is healthy, Tech has a fighting chance against anybody in the ACC, but sure would benefit if Taylor Bennett picks up the pace. Me, I’d like to see Josh Nesbitt take at least half a dozen snaps, perhaps more. A different look, for sure.
Tech wins 24-17.
Moving on, some have suggested that I took a shot in yesterday’s blog at the notion that it is more difficult to get a degree from Tech than it is from many places. Uh, no, that’s wrong. That had NOTHING to do with what I wrote.
I’ll boil down my thoughts as simply as possible: I fully believe that staying in school at Tech is difficult, and getting a degree is tough, too, but — here’s the key — for purposes of the NCAA’s tracking of graduation rates, WHO CARES? The NCAA is going to measure graduation rates, and they’re NOT going to do it on a curve based on degree of difficulty to obtain degrees. So get used to it.
The best suggestion I’ve seen is that graduation rates at each school be cross-referenced to the student body at large. Beyond that, no free passes no matter how difficult the school, nor penalties for schools that are easy — however you would possibly determine that? But here’s the trick: I doubt seriously the NCAA would consider amending its way on this matter.
Here are a few other thoughts about all of this: Some schools with much more impressive graduation rates are regarded as very fine schools, and please don’t lay the liberal arts argument on me.
It’s a reality that at almost all schools, student-athletes in general tend to land in majors that are less demanding many others. Not all of them, mind you, and I believe Tech’s easier majors are still difficult, but that’s irrelevant. The NCAA is not going to change it’s measuring system (again, I don’t think they are anyway).
Plus, Tech’s admissions standards, which are not so infrequently mentioned as a reason that recruiting is more difficult for coaches at The I, weed out many mediocre students. In short, there aren’t many — if any — rockheads getting into Tech.
Add that to the fact that every athletics department has an academic monitoring program, and for my two cents, a 51 percent graduation rate for football players given six years is not good enough. Period. And remember, that doesn’t count players who leave early or transfer so long as they are in good academic standing when they do (like Calvin Johnson). Tech doesn’t get penalized for that (not that these numbers were reflective of Calvin’s time at Tech anyway).
As for student-athletes who leave without being in good academic standing, and I can think of three in the past 10 months or so whom I believe may fit this category (but also wouldn’t count in the numbers just published because of the timeline), the question is … how do they slip through the cracks?
So, in sum, no dunderheads get into Tech in the first place, there is an academic monitoring system to aid and track student-athletes once they’re there, everybody knows what needs to be done, and that’s that. Fifty-one percent is not good enough. A “football factory” should bring up the rear of the ACC in this category. Not Georgia Tech, no matter how difficult school is on The Flats.
Matt
