AJC > Sports > Tech > Blog > Archives > 2007 > October > 05 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USTech 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
Comments
By College Football Fan
October 5, 2007 4:53 PM | Link to this
The problem with Tech is that they think the rules apply to everyone else but themselves. The GTAA did not think the metro wide water ban applied to them…obviously because they are special and entitled, and not responsible for keeping the rules like the rest of us.
It is sort of the same mentality that got them on academic probation. When they got caught it was “Oh, we didn’t know it meant us too and we turned ourselves in right after someone else turned us in first so we should not be held accountable.” What a bunch of putzs.
With everyone else trying to conserve water and make it through the drought, Tech can’t even be a good neighbor to the rest of metro Atlanta. So why should folks in metro Atlanta support Tech football?
By Ced
October 5, 2007 5:05 PM | Link to this
CFF-
WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING??????????????
GO AWAY!!!!!!!!!!!!
By gtNC
October 5, 2007 5:14 PM | Link to this
Matt, just two cents from a GT alum who agrees with you. Yes, GT is a difficult place to get a degree. I do believe that it is harder than most. But that is why we maintain higher recruiting standards. The 51% rate is something that fans should be ashamed of, not make excuses for. I, for one, am embarrassed and hope that the current crop of student athletes, who seem to be excellent young men and role models, will raise this number, with increased support from the GTAA. And to College Football Fan: of course watering the grass is the same mentality that got us on probation. Um… what? We’re here to read about college football.
By firechangailey.com
October 5, 2007 7:56 PM | Link to this
Dunderhead athletes do get into Tech though. Reggie Ball for instance. You can also look to the HC for another dunderhead.
By GT GRAD
October 5, 2007 10:05 PM | Link to this
The academic probation which CFF mentioned above was caused by mistakes made during the change from the quarter system to the semester system. GT self reported to the NCAA when a GT employee determined they had made some mistakes. This is the first time in history that they have ever been on probation. Get your facts straight and stop trying to paint a misleading picture!
GT plays by the rules and has always realized the NCAA rules apply to everyone. GT has an impressive history of success and integrity. All of the GT alumni and fans should be proud!
CFF needs to get a life (he is probably the same person who is obsessed with the tickle pile comments….sour grapes and always looking for an opportunity to write negative comments. Grow up and move on with your life.)
By 3 Rivers jacket
October 5, 2007 10:21 PM | Link to this
Why are Georgia fans so obsessed with Tech. Follow your team. Your obsession with tech is really small. I thought you guys did not even consider Tech a realprogram but you are more interested in us than you are the DAWGS. Go bark or whatever.
By surfrider
October 6, 2007 2:40 AM | Link to this
The key numbers to look at in my opinion during a coaching regime is first Attrition. Further defined means players leaving early, flunking out, or quiting or getting kicked out, whatever. Bill Curry and Bobby Ross tried to address this problem early as they were focused on some details. One can be a great or good recruiter like Bill Lewis but if your players don’t have the system or capability to stay in school it shows up on the field sooner or later. Gailey’s tenure has had some attrition like all changes do but they seemed to have gotten better at addressing it. As you mentioned the best way to measure this graduation rate is through cross referencing the general population. If the student body is 51% then the athletic portion is doing o.k. even better if it’s better.
By GTinNC
October 6, 2007 3:12 AM | Link to this
OK, OK. Love the article and comments by those that have never attended Tech. For the record, there is a saying at Tech (by those that have attended or are attending), “Screwed by Ma’ Tech.” I like the idea that an earlier post suggested; the NCAA should also benchmark the graduation rates of student non-athletes against students-athletes. A big deduction in points on Tech’s ranking by “US News & World Report” is Tech’s low graduation rate. That’s right - the profs at Tech figure you’re big boys and girls now, so belly up to the table, and get it on. If you can’t stand the heat then get out of the fire, or something like that. It’s tough at Tech, no babying around, low graduation rates for non-athletes & low graduation rates for athletes. So let’s normalize the equation (called a curve - is that familiar?), so it’s indicative of the total population - % graduation rates of student-athletes divided by % graduation rates of student non-athletes. Now let’s see the deal.
By BME 82
October 6, 2007 6:26 AM | Link to this
doesnt chan bear some responisibililty with any current issues?
wasnt chan the guardian at the gate when we had grade gate and pot gate and rb gate?
how does chan have accountability for those occurences? well ill tell you…. chan has repeatedly stated that he treats his ‘student’ athletes the same way he did the ‘professional’ athletes he coached in the nfl? huh?????
anybody but an idiot can see that there is a vast difference in the maturity level between an 17-21 year old college student and a pro athlete replete with his entourage and lawyers and advisors and and and….
AND to think that parents expect chan to keep tabs on how thier ‘kids’ are doing. i dont think that they expected chan to treat them as if they were 30 year old multi millionares.
if i was a parent and i found out chan lack of diligence caused their son to waste the chance to graduate because of this stance i would be p**.
why do i bring this up? well we cant do a thing about gol and his past practices but we can affect what our current ‘dunderhead’ is doing.
By Tom
October 6, 2007 9:48 AM | Link to this
Matt, my friend, you need to attend Tech for a couple of weeks and then write your article. You might be surprised. I’ve seen straight A high school students cry over calculus classes.
By Matt Winkeljohn
October 6, 2007 10:47 AM | Link to this
Tom,
My wife graduated from Tech, and I’ve talked to plenty of Tech students to have a grasp on how difficult it is. That’s not the issue; it doesn’t matter. There are other schools in this land that are very difficult as well. They, too, should not be happy if they’re bringing up the rear in their conference in graduation rates.
And maybe you should attend Tech again, and this time with the help of an academic tutoring/monitoring system like the one available to student-athletes.
If you don’t see a 51 percent graduation rate (in six years) as reason for alarm, if you don’t see being last in graduation rates in a 12-team conference, then you’re not seeing the forest for a few trees in the way.
Again, the NCAA doesn’t care how hard it is to stay in or graduate from Tech, nor Ma Tech, nor professors who may or may not have agendas. Tough reality, but reality nonetheless.
And for the umpteenth time, I have never said that Tech’s not difficult, but like a lot of people — like, say, Georgia fans — I get tired of hearing it as an excuse. If it’s too hard, don’t go there in the first place.
Matt
By ben
October 6, 2007 1:57 PM | Link to this
College footbal is as much about education as the war in Iraq is about democracy.
By Chan Sux
October 6, 2007 3:33 PM | Link to this
How can any coach lose to Maryland and Virginia in the same season if they aren’t at Duke? Chan needs to pack his bags if DRad thinks anyone can be fooled into paying the Tech fund to watch bad football again next year. Let’s run it up the middle on third and 16 and set up a 50 yard field goal for someone who had already missed one. Nice coaching genius. I hope the Dolphins and Steelers never win again for not hiring that old fossil away and saving our season.