AJC > Sports > Tech > Blog > Archives > 2007 > October > 08 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USBad records in classroom and on field
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Last week was a rotten one for Georgia Tech. And the 28-26 loss at Maryland, with another bad start by the defense, and a miserable first half for the offense, and some second-guessable decisions at the end, was only part of it.
Yes, it’s not good to have a football team that’s 3-3, 1-3 in the ACC, the worst combination of overall and ACC record at this point of the season since 1994. (The 2003 team started 3-3 overall. The 2002 team started 1-3 in the ACC.)
But first came the annual release of Division I teams’ graduation rates, and the Yellow Jackets ranked last in the ACC. I’ve heard and read all the arguments about graduation rates, that Tech doesn’t have an easy major in which to hide athletes, that Tech is a difficult school for all students, that Player X went on to make a lot of money in the pros so who cares if he graduated? Frankly, none of those arguments hold water.
If Tech doesn’t have an easy major in which to hide athletes, it still has the responsibility to recruit athletes who can compete in the classroom. If that leads to more of a competitive disadvantage on the field, so what? Are you willing to buy victories at the price of your academic mission?
Sure, Tech is a difficult school for students at large, not just athletes. But if Darryl Richard can graduate in three years, is it asking too much that Tech find other athletes who can graduate in six? And it’s a myth that athletes are doing poorly but doing a lot like other students.
Here’s a chart we published last November, comparing athletes’ graduation rates with graduation rates for the student body as a whole. (We’ll be printing another one in a month or so when we get this year’s figures. The reason last week’s story didn’t include such a comparison is that I was writing about the NCAA graduation success rate, a formula different from the one used to calculate graduation rates for the overall student body.)
Graduation rates for the 1999 freshman classes, using the federal government’s formula (graduation rate equals number who have graduated from that school within six years of enrollment divided by number of freshmen who enrolled):
ACC
School …………….All……..Athletes……..Diff.
Boston College …91…………90……………..1
Clemson ………….75…………63 …………..12
Duke ………………93………….91…………….2
Florida State………66…………57…………….9
Georgia Tech …….76…………54 …………..22
Maryland ………….77………….76…………….1
Miami ………………71………….68…………….3
N. Carolina ……….84 …………73 …………..11
N.C. State …………71 ………..56 …………..15
Virginia …………….93………….74 …………..19
Virginia Tech ……..76………….63 …………..13
Wake Forest ……….88 …………74 …………..14
As you can see, Tech’s athletes performed less like their fellow students than any other group in the ACC.
The anecdotal arguments that say grad rates aren’t important because some pro players make a lot of money without earning a degree has two serious flaws. First, a very small percentage of Tech’s non-graduates go on to pro careers. Second, and I know some of you will disagree with me on this, college isn’t about helping people make money, it’s about helping people get educated. Tech isn’t supposed to be like those guys on TV telling me how I can make millions in real estate buying houses with no money down. It’s supposed to have a higher purpose than that.
The good news is that the academic progress rate data (showing how well Tech retains players and keeps them eligible) suggest current athletes will graduate at higher rates than those who enrolled in the late 1990s. (Graduation rates will dip because of the so-called flunk-gate of the early 2000s, but they should rise after that.)
(The APR, not graduation rates, can trigger sanctions such as scholarship cuts and bans on postseason competition. Apparently, I confused some people when I wrote the NCAA’s graduation success rate doesn’t “penalize” schools for players who leave with good academic standing and eligibility remaining. What I meant to say is those players are omitted from the calculation in the NCAA’s formula, and thus the team’s graduation success rate isn’t lower — the schools aren’t penalized under the formula — when players transfer if they would have been eligible had they stayed. That makes it different from the federal government’s graduation rate formula.)
Permalink | Comments (49) | Post your comment | Categories: Football
.JPG)
-1.JPG)
Services »
Comments
By old gold engineer
October 8, 2007 4:04 PM | Link to this
Mike, I agree that the recently released figures are shameful for GT. Unfortunately, that is all water under the bridge. Is there any projection that the current bunch of student athletes will do better? Not much we can do about the past, but I would like to see the present regime ensure we do better now and in the future.
By Tech Booster
October 8, 2007 4:18 PM | Link to this
Athletes should not be compared to “all other students.” They should be compared to other “at risk” students. I was one, didn’t graduate from Tech, but my experience there was not one I would trade for anything. I think my main problem was maturity — and I later got a PhD after flunking out of Tech. Tech taught me what was required to be successful.
The same for football players. It literally makes me sick to my stomach to talk to Notre Dame fans who say that they have “close to” an 100% success rate and don’t allow red shirting. (Hmmmm… Yes, they actually say this.)
This is true: If your success rate for your football is even close to your general population, and your general population has better academic tools than the athletes, you should expect a lower grad rate. That is if you are running an honest program.
What’s better: An IM degree at Tech that’s earned or a high grad rate. I’m guessing if Tech does need to do something better — it’s to help players continue their education if they don’t get a degree from Tech. MANY of my friends in addition to me went from Tech and were very successful at other schools. Our Tech experience made it much easier.
By RAMBLE ON!
October 8, 2007 4:34 PM | Link to this
Graduation rates? I’m still waiting for someone to wake me up from this nightmare. I keep seeing us on the 25 yard line with 2 minutes left in the game, only to run the same play four times in a role. Yes 4 times, you see we had a holding call on 3rd down, but my nightmare is soooo bad, on 3rd and 20, we run the ball straight up the middle for no gain…SOMEONE PLEASE WAKE ME UP, I CAN’T STAND IT NO MORE!!!!!
By GT
October 8, 2007 5:12 PM | Link to this
The real question that has to be asked, if we are hiring all these hired guns why aren’t we winning more ballgames. This article or blog makes it sound like a football factory. It may be a factory which Tech people are supposed to be able to run but it ain’t no football factory. So what’s your point?
By Gojackets
October 8, 2007 5:26 PM | Link to this
I think all schools should get credit for athletes that graduate more than six (6) years after entering school. They should just keep track of those athletes separately. It says alot when Brian Oliver who was a senior in either ‘90 or ‘91 and Joe Hamilton to come back and graduate this past spring. Tech gets no credit for them graduating and they should, as should other schools.
If the ultimate goal is to educate the athletes, all student athletes that graduate, should be counted no matter how long it takes.
By JD
October 8, 2007 5:26 PM | Link to this
We should be ashamed of our graduation rates, not making excuses for why they suck. They need to get better, period.
By ME
October 8, 2007 5:55 PM | Link to this
Mike, The Augusta Newspaper recently published an article concerning the University of Georgia. A second study again found Georgia students study 10 to 11 hours outside of class each week. The study, which included some Georgia Professors said Georgia students study less than half the time as students at other schools. Also, the study recommended that Georgia increase the math and science courses in degree programs. How can Georgia be at the bottom of the SEC? When a normal student only studies outside of the classroom an average of little more than an hour per day per week and with very few or no math and science classes required then, just think what an athlete’s schoolwork must look like - albeit the infamous basketball course taken by student athletes. So, when you state you feelings for GT’s educational roadmap - do a better job of comparing schools within state and the quality of the educational process for students who finished high school in the state. Education is a state of Georgia Issue, not just GT and GA………
By m
October 8, 2007 6:00 PM | Link to this
Tech has the sorriest coach in college football history. He is a PE major from Florida. He single-handedly lost the Maryland game by his stupid decision to play for a field goal instead of trying to get a touchdown when we had first down on the 25 yard line and plenty of time. ENOUGH is enough of this MORON. FIRE CHAN TODAY!!
By TDone
October 8, 2007 6:20 PM | Link to this
So what is 6 years to get a degree? From the time I started to the time I completed my B.A., it took me 9 years to get it done. Life got in the way. Does life get in the way at other schools? Yes.
But I think as long as a guy eventually graduates as in the cases of Brian Oliver and Joe Hamilton, then we are OK.
By Chantice
October 8, 2007 6:33 PM | Link to this
I could care less about graduation rates. Just win so that we can enjoy pleasurable Tickle Piles. Everyone is mean when we can’t hold Tickle Piles.
By smitty
October 8, 2007 6:42 PM | Link to this
yep, its bad all around……although i wouldn’t interpret too much from the numbers until you see how they were obtained, any outliers, statistical analysis, etc, etc, etc,…….one thing you might take from these numbers is you can’t blame GT’s academic standards for recruiting shortfalls….ie, we get the good athletes, we just don’t worry about graduating them……just kidding…………i guess since the season is teetering on the brink of collapse, we should talk about something besides football and GT’s failing head coach…….so lets talk about academics and student athletes and graduation rates………………….nahh, lets talk about that bonehead of a coach who would probably be included in the group of those who didn’t graduate……..you know, from the school of football strategery…………..chan fails football 101 every saturday…………aren’t you GT fans, sportsfans, and even you hivers tired of the GT team, led by its clueless leader chan, getting C’s and D’s in X’s and O’s over and over and over again……….
By smitty
October 8, 2007 6:49 PM | Link to this
and one more thing……you mention that students get six years to graduate……….it’s ironic that chan is in his SIXTH year and he’s FLUNKING OUT………..
By O'Leary
October 8, 2007 7:10 PM | Link to this
Hey those 1999 players are mine. Stop disrespecting them, It’s not Chan’s fault I recruited them.
By Male McMuffie
October 8, 2007 7:13 PM | Link to this
Ouch, that was painful. I think I reinjured by labia. Chan, I love you XOXOXO.
By GoldenDomer
October 8, 2007 7:16 PM | Link to this
Notre Dame has a 95% graduation rate for their football team and the compares nicely to their overall student graduation rate and NO “football majors” like general studies are offered. Nobody fails out of Notre Dame, because the students are serious about their Ivy League caliber education. The university supports its athletes because academic success for EVERY student is just as important as success on the football field.
There is a serious problem at a school that not only cannot graduate its football players but according to GT fans, can barely graduate its regular students because the school is so “tough”.
Maybe you should raise your admission standards or do a better job at teaching the students you let in because YES the whole point is getting a degree.
Apparently you are letting in football players that can’t hack it, and are not going on to pro careers for the most part. That is a huge waste of time for those kids who should be leaving school with a degree.
By Mike Knobler
October 8, 2007 7:49 PM | Link to this
Gojackets, you make a good point. Problem is you have to cut it off after six years, or seven years, or eight years, or some finite number of years, if you ever want to be able to measure how a class did. You can’t change the rate for the 2001 incoming freshmen because Brian Oliver, who came in long before them, graduated in 2007. It’s an accounting issue.
Smitty, Chan Gailey has a bachelor’s in PE from Florida.
ME, I don’t blog about Georgia, just Georgia Tech.
old gold engineer, yes, there are projections that current athletes will post better graduation rates than athletes who enrolled in the late 1990s.
By Terry
October 8, 2007 7:54 PM | Link to this
Unfortunately we have a coach that does not believe in motivation on or off the field. He says that enthusiasm only lasts 3 minutes. Maybe that is why we can’t play a complete game from start to finish.
The same coach says the seniors should know what they need to do, so he does not monitor them and lets them make their own decisions about class attendance, etc, after all he is for teaching them about life lessons.
Yes you can let them stumble and fall, but they need motivation. And I don’t see motivation, I don’t see enthusiasm, I don’t see leadership.
When I see comments from players that indicate they aren’t fired up until they are down, to me it translates into mediocrity, and mediocrity starts at the the top.
By theDude47
October 8, 2007 8:08 PM | Link to this
Knobler, did you ever go to Tech? The school is incredibly hard. I am struggling to get by, and I had a 4.0 GPA in high school and was valedictorian. To play GT football and major in engineering, would be too much for me. The average Techie doesn’t even graduate in 4 years. I think stopping the line at 6 years just doesn’t cut it. I am even going out on a limb to say I am happy with the results. I am frankly impressed that a majority of our players graduate. Go Jackets!!
By smitty
October 8, 2007 8:31 PM | Link to this
mr. knobler, re chan’s graduation/educational background, i was speaking in tongues or is that tongue in cheek………..as an alum from GT and UF, i should have some sort of sympathetic tilt for chan…….for the record, i don’t………personally, he seems like a nice old man but i disagreed with his hire at GT based on his record in the pros and in college, but i was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt initially…..see the last six years…..(also,please review the words of troy aikman or jerry jones, re his coaching career at dallas)…… professionally, he is incredibly lacking……a degree in pe from UF, and now he’s a football coach……..his coaching/football record at GT speaks for itself………..nuff said
By lizzieb
October 8, 2007 9:03 PM | Link to this
Things are probably differebt now….as is everything… but back in the dark ages we were proud that our acedemic standing in the University System was next to that of Tech. Somehow Bobby Dodd’s and Bill Curry’s recruits ( and others) were able to maintain their standing while winning football games. I think the ABSOLUTE worst thing to happen to us in the last 25 years is CHAN Gailey. Time to sack this guy and get somebody who is breathing and aware.
By old gold engineer
October 8, 2007 9:03 PM | Link to this
Mike, thanks for the update. That’s reassuring that we can look forward to better rates in the future. However, I suspect we’ll see a couple more years of less than outstanding numbers before they start trending upward.
By lizzieb
October 8, 2007 9:03 PM | Link to this
Things are probably differebt now….as is everything… but back in the dark ages we were proud that our acedemic standing in the University System was next to that of Tech. Somehow Bobby Dodd’s and Bill Curry’s recruits ( and others) were able to maintain their standing while winning football games. I think the ABSOLUTE worst thing to happen to us in the last 25 years is CHAN Gailey. Time to sack this guy and get somebody who is breathing and aware.
By joe
October 8, 2007 9:12 PM | Link to this
Goldendomer, I doubt GT will ever graduate 95-100% of it’s enrollment like ND, Duke or some Ivy league school, that’s just not the philosophy of the school. It is not a problem that raising admission standards will solve. GT is survival of the best, it seeks to find those who can overcome adversity, not simply score high on an entrance exam. The point is not to give everybody a degree; but to consistently produce a certain type of graduate. You don’t have to agree with the philosophy, and a lot of us question it; but it is what it is.
As for schools that give anyone who sticks around for four years a degree, and similarly have most of their athletes graduate in four years, I don’t see any real trick to that. My question would be if those athletes actually learned anything or is it just a certificate of attendance?
By StateSchoolGrad
October 8, 2007 9:53 PM | Link to this
That degree is not a certificate of attendance, it is your ticket to a job. And those of us that got out in four years with a degree didn’t just get it handed to us for showing up.
If you can’t graduate your students, you are a failure as a university. Period.
By AlabamaRamblinwreck
October 8, 2007 10:05 PM | Link to this
I agree with “m”….
Chan has to go. He has to go. He has to go.
We are underachieving at a rate that even surpasses what Chan did last year. He must go. How much longer must we put up with his studid conservative philosophy???
By Mr. Bitter
October 8, 2007 10:46 PM | Link to this
As an “architecture” major at TECH I had to stop playing (half-way) in my Intramural Hoops league (freshman year) that had one game per week (for 6 weeks) because if I did not devote my entire existence to studying and doing the design lab work I would have failed out. Yet “student athletes” devote 30-40 hours a week towards sports and still graduate??? What planet is that? Frank DeFord said it best - let the athletes major in “Sports”! P.S. There has NEVER been to my knowledge any Div. 1 football or hoops player who majored in architecture. CAN WE NOW END THIS INCREDIBLY STUPID THREAD!!!!!
By HeyMrBitter
October 8, 2007 11:08 PM | Link to this
“to your knowledge”??? are you really saying you know for a fact that no D-1 in all time has also been an architechture major?
you are right. That post of yours should have been a thread killer just from sheer stupidity.
Most student athletes can take 12-13 hours during season and then take summer school. and yes, graduate
By HeyMrBitter
October 8, 2007 11:08 PM | Link to this
“to your knowledge”??? are you really saying you know for a fact that no D-1 in all time has also been an architecture major?
you are right. That post of yours should have been a thread killer just from sheer stupidity.
Most student athletes can take 12-13 hours during season and then take summer school. and yes, graduate
By The Big Bug
October 9, 2007 12:08 AM | Link to this
I had rather have my BS from GT than a Masters from “The Golden Dome”. You have some nerve to comment with your “great” team’s record, though. I will give you that. Maybe you can beat Army this year.
By AlabamaRamblinwreck
October 9, 2007 1:31 AM | Link to this
Folks, I will now take a break from my “get rid of Chan” rants to explain something that non-GT people will never understand:
G.T. is not a normal college. I graduated (survived) Tech with an electrical engineering degree. What I went through at Tech cannot be compared to a “state” university. I also attended UGA (hate to admit this), Indiana University, Syracuse University, and several smaller schools. I also have many friends who got their engineering degrees at other schools.
At Georgia Tech, you have students who are the best of the best that cannot graduate. It is beyond hard at times, and it seems unfair, but when you are able to graduate, you know you have done something special, something that more than 50% who start out at Tech (engineering majors) could not do, even though they were very intelligent. It is a battle of survival, whatever it takes. 50% of the engineering students never get past their freshman year!! But that is not the only “weed out” that occurs; it happens again in the junior year!! My junior level E.E. courses had an average GPA of 2.2, not because the students were dumb, but because this is what was mandated by the department. The professors made the tests overly difficult so that they could distribute the grades as necessary.
Basically, what I am saying is that getting an engineering degree at Tech is like getting into Med school, only a small number of those who desire to will see their desire come to fruition. It took me 4 years and 2 quarters, and I am very proud of my degree. A division one athlete who can graduate G.T. is a special, dedicated person who has chosen to sacrifice a great deal of their personal freedom during their college years. I respect that very much, but I understand why so many of them would not choose that.
By surfrider
October 9, 2007 2:51 AM | Link to this
Well that’s an eye opener. When I enrolled in the 70’s the rate was 45% for all freshman. At that time they had the survival Swimming course which most procrastinated on until well they had to take it. But there is no doubt the intelligence of the students is probably greater in terms of more of them trying to get into the school that the overall rate would go up. Calculus was the standard reason given on the lower percentages. Back to Football for a minute. I saw some good things in the second half, both from wr’s, Bennett ( and Nesbitt in first half), and the defense to think the talent is capable. The recruiting has gotten better in the last year. We gained 484 yards, had 24 first downs, had the ball 37 minutes and we still lost the game. That’s because of the way the team is starting the games it has lost…BC, UVA and now Marylandy. We focus on a 60 minute game, one week at a time and see where we end up the season. We can still win 8 or more games but the second half team has to show up. The problem is this offensive system has’nt been in place for 6 years if had of, then who knows where we would be right now.
By firechangailey.com
October 9, 2007 8:39 AM | Link to this
Are graduation rates really something worth blogging over?
I think more importantly we need to discuss what a poor decision Chan Gailey made on 3rd and 20 and the fact that he’s a huge dissapointment to fans, alumni, students, and the team. The team fights hard to win, but are beat by poor coaching!
Surfrider - you must be one of those dreamers that’s been saying a couple more years for the past 4 years.
http://www.firechangailey.com http://www.firechan.com
By gatech87
October 9, 2007 8:46 AM | Link to this
When I was in school, the graduation rate was 50% (in 1987) for all students.
We just need to keep plugging away to increase the graduation rate.
But please don’t confuse Dook’s graduation rate of 95% with GT’s 52%. It is virtually impossible to flunk out of Dook. All you have to do is show up for class. I guarantee that 50% of Dook’s SA’s wouldn’t graduate from GT (add WF, UVA, UNC to that mix too)…
By RAMBLE ON!
October 9, 2007 9:13 AM | Link to this
Speaking of grades and football. We make an ‘A’ in a Physics test, only to go take out Health test and get an ‘F’.
…now, did we really run the ball 4 straight times up the middle to kick a 52 yard field goal?
You don’t do that in the NFL with kickers who get paid millions of dollars, do you?
By Coach K
October 9, 2007 9:39 AM | Link to this
Once you are admitted to Duke, you will eventually be given a degree. Suspect it’s the same at Notre Dame.
Hey Knob, think you could graduate from Tech in six years?
By Big Ernie
October 9, 2007 10:09 AM | Link to this
Mike,
One thing that you need to understand about TECH is that they “over-recruit” the freshman class, planning for a fall-out of 25%. This has been going on at least as far back as teh 60s when I matriclated there.
TECH is a b*** of a challenge academically. It is doubly hard when an athlete, or working your way through as I did.
Ernie
By GTstudent
October 9, 2007 11:29 AM | Link to this
I am a current student at Tech. I have had classes with football players over my last 2 years and it simply amazes me that these boys can do this with all of the stress that they have to deal with. I know that in my 2 years, I have had more meltdowns due to stress than my friends at other schools. It simply amazes me how they can handle it.
I had a football player in my English class freshman year. He was in my group for a project and he had to do his portion of the project on his own because he literally did not have the time to meet with us. They have class, workouts, practice, and believe it or not, mandatory tutoring and study sessions. I admire these students (yes…students) because they have more to deal with any ten Tech students combined. As far as I’m concerned…forget the graduation rates. Look simply at the difficulty, the schedules that these boys follow, and how you naysayers blast them every chance you get. I don’t blame them for taking 6+ years to graduate. Hell, it may take me that long…as an Economics and Management double major.
As far as I’m concerned…I don’t give a damn about graduation rates. Consider that these boys will leave Tech (with or without a degree) as respectable men who can multi-task like no other.
Give them a break…
And all this BS about Chan…he’s bound by a contract so shut up. Nothing is going to happen until that contract is up. I’m not happy with some of the calls that he has made, but deal with it. He’s the coach and that’s it. I know that we won’t win a National Championship before I graduate and I’m ok with that. If we don’t beat UGA the entire time I’m here…I’m ok with that too. (I want to, but it’s ok if we don’t) I know that when I graduate, my degree will mean more than any football score. Nobody is going to hire me based on whether or not we beat UGA. It’s just football guys. And I’m just as passionate about football as the next guy, but at the end of the day…it’s just a game.
By RAMBLE ON!
October 9, 2007 12:05 PM | Link to this
All I got to say is I worked my butt off for my 2.something GPA and I’m damn proud of it, that was Mgt too
Daryl Richards is a freak!! 3 years to get his degree and he’s working on his MBA…I say make him coach
By TomJoad
October 9, 2007 1:26 PM | Link to this
We are 3-6 over our last 9 games. Three 3-pt losses in a row, and then ridiculous heart breakers to Va and Maryland. Something’s seriously wrong, and after 6 years, it’s only getting worse. There certainly ain’t no hell-for-leather coaching going on. This conservative ball-up-in-a-cocoon crap has got to stop.
Yes, TB had a helluva game passing. But do you think that would have happened if we’d been up 7-0 at end of 1st quarter? Heck no, we’d have been sitting on that tater.
By reasonablefan
October 9, 2007 2:04 PM | Link to this
Calm down guys. Everything is good. Chan is a good coach and the team and coaches are family and on the road to winning multi championships. I just heard a high school recruit say this recently in the paper about his opinion of Tech. Well he hasn’t actually signed on yet but he will, if he gets no other offers.
By GT Grad
October 9, 2007 3:50 PM | Link to this
The point is the difference with the general population. I’m embarrassed that Tech’s athletes have struggled so mightily in the classroom.
GoldenDomer…I have plenty of friends who graduated from Notre Dame, and who are very classy people. But your post illustrates why most of the general public does not like Notre Dame…talk about arrogant…”Ivy league?”….uh, yeah…
ON AND OFF the field, Chan has failed. He may be a man of integrity, and a very nice man. But we are looking for a football coach, not an ideal next door neighbor.
It’s time for Tech fans to stop settling for mediocrity and start demanding more.
By Gadski
October 9, 2007 4:48 PM | Link to this
Mike Knobler taking Differential Equations at TECH is like a monkey trying to “f _ _ k” a football.
Knobler, till you have suffered the ring of fire, TECH academics, get first-hand references before you offer an opinion.
By bluto
October 9, 2007 4:52 PM | Link to this
It’s out of your control now almost entirely,” Gailey said. “All you can do is play one game at a time and see where you end up at the end of the year. But the odds are we’re not going to make it to the championship game.”
By bluto
October 9, 2007 4:52 PM | Link to this
It’s out of your control now almost entirely,” Gailey said. “All you can do is play one game at a time and see where you end up at the end of the year. But the odds are we’re not going to make it to the championship game.”
By Duke Grad
October 9, 2007 5:57 PM | Link to this
You Teckkies are so full of it. HOW do you know what it takes to graduate from other programs, particularly the ones at Duke, Notre Dame, Stanford etc? You types wouldn’t get out of those schools because it takes more than a slide rule and graphing calculator to make it. You have to have other skills and talents.
Your school is “different” alright. Stop downgrading other fine universities because they actually manage to graduate their students.
By shane
October 10, 2007 9:33 AM | Link to this
hey techies,the idiots of the”fire richt,fire everybody”movement are back on the uga blogs.i got sick of it so i will post with you guys if you don’t mind a stray dawg showing up.both schools had coaches in the 90s that were not of the highest character,the info on graduation rates is out of date.i wish we had current data,but i think both schools have improved in this area.if you are serious about firing chan,richt will be available if the morons in the uga fan base have their way.i have an idea,would it be possible to put all the fans with low iqs in one group and reasonable fans in the other?the smart guys get to keep richt,the dumbs ones can get chan,since they are dead set on firing somebody.it sounds like a win-win situation to me.
By shane
October 10, 2007 9:55 AM | Link to this
duke grad,i love coach k too,but this is a football blog.you must have gotten lost,because this blog is for fans of college FOOTBALL.i think you should hold off posting untill duke has a football team,stadium,athletes,and etc.i have heard rumors that major college football was played in the state of north carolina,but as of yet i have seen no evidence of it.i hope these rumors of football in that state are untrue because uga gets some of their highest rated prospects from nc.BTW,slide rules?i am probably the only one here that is old enough to remember them!say it ain’t so techies!
By not a fan
October 10, 2007 7:34 PM | Link to this
OMG. are you Techies REALLY trying to spin your terrible graduation rate as a GOOD thing? And are you REALLY dissing schools like Duke, Stanford and Notre Dame because they DO graduate their students? Are you REALLY saying those schools just hand you a diploma for showing up???
What kind of crack are they dealing down their these days???
By Jimmy
October 11, 2007 3:32 PM | Link to this
Mike, I have to respectfully disagree w/ you on this one. You say college isn’t about helping kids make money but helping to educate them. Well, then I have to ask what good is an education if you can’t make any money off of it?? Who cares if you graduated Magna Cum Laude if you don’t apply that diploma from said field?? Basically, what i’m saying is that an education that doesnt help you make any money in the real world is a waste.