(12-16-2016 04:34 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 03:23 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 03:03 PM)panama Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 02:39 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 11:23 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  I agree with all of that. But most ga state posters I've seen seem to believe that most student athletes would want to be in downtown atlanta v some "small hick town"

They are wrong. You can find players, especially JC guys who just care about playing time but on average it is a hindrance. I would rather be in a southern metro than northern or out west, of course.

Memphis
USC
Washington
USF
UCF
Temple
Houston
Miami
Georgia Tech

...and on and on

Proving my point. All of those schools have had AWFUL stretches despite being surrounded by talent. I don't know how Temple even gets in your list. Memphis has never had sustained football success. Houston is having some now but was losing to upstart UTSA and Texas State a couple of years back. Miami has not been very successful since the 90s and struggles to draw any fans. USC overcame their issues by paying players before returning to mediocrity. Georgia Tech? Meh.

I have heard a lot of parents and players comment over the years about coming to a college town to get the college experience or to escape the large metro where they live.

Nothing is an absolute one way or the other but on a scale, I would say difficulty of recruiting to a large urban campus is a 7 compared to a 3 for traditional college town campuses.

On campus stadiums, space, trees, distance from industrial parks and neighborhoods, etc. all make for a more preferable college experience for most.

Other than close to home than not, location in a big city or small rural town has never hurt or helped any program. Last I checked Tuscaloosa is not NY. There are more teams in rural towns in the top 25 than not or at least not in areas that are considered to be a large city. If you watched last chance U location is the last thing JUCO's care about. Its playing time and name.

Probably why I explained that Jucos are the best bet for those campuses. The effect predominantly applies to the 17 y.o. and his folks choosing a college. A lot of it is based on perception rather than reality but that makes it no less true.

(12-16-2016 04:39 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 04:34 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 03:23 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 03:03 PM)panama Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 02:39 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  They are wrong. You can find players, especially JC guys who just care about playing time but on average it is a hindrance. I would rather be in a southern metro than northern or out west, of course.

Memphis
USC
Washington
USF
UCF
Temple
Houston
Miami
Georgia Tech

...and on and on

Proving my point. All of those schools have had AWFUL stretches despite being surrounded by talent. I don't know how Temple even gets in your list. Memphis has never had sustained football success. Houston is having some now but was losing to upstart UTSA and Texas State a couple of years back. Miami has not been very successful since the 90s and struggles to draw any fans. USC overcame their issues by paying players before returning to mediocrity. Georgia Tech? Meh.

I have heard a lot of parents and players comment over the years about coming to a college town to get the college experience or to escape the large metro where they live.

Nothing is an absolute one way or the other but on a scale, I would say difficulty of recruiting to a large urban campus is a 7 compared to a 3 for traditional college town campuses.

On campus stadiums, space, trees, distance from industrial parks and neighborhoods, etc. all make for a more preferable college experience for most.

Other than close to home than not, location in a big city or small rural town has never hurt or helped any program. Last I checked Tuscaloosa is not NY. There are more teams in rural towns in the top 25 than not or at least not in areas that are considered to be a large city. If you watched last chance U location is the last thing JUCO's care about. Its playing time and name.

Probably why I explained that Jucos are the best bet for those campuses. The effect predominantly applies to the 17 y.o. and his folks choosing a college. A lot of it is based on perception rather than reality but that makes it no less true.

The number of kids that are disaffected by the campus location is so small that when it actually happens it stands out.

Miles did not fail recruiting Georgia and Atlanta because of where our campus is located.

(12-16-2016 04:42 PM)panama Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 04:39 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 04:34 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 03:23 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 03:03 PM)panama Wrote:  Memphis
USC
Washington
USF
UCF
Temple
Houston
Miami
Georgia Tech

...and on and on

Proving my point. All of those schools have had AWFUL stretches despite being surrounded by talent. I don't know how Temple even gets in your list. Memphis has never had sustained football success. Houston is having some now but was losing to upstart UTSA and Texas State a couple of years back. Miami has not been very successful since the 90s and struggles to draw any fans. USC overcame their issues by paying players before returning to mediocrity. Georgia Tech? Meh.

I have heard a lot of parents and players comment over the years about coming to a college town to get the college experience or to escape the large metro where they live.

Nothing is an absolute one way or the other but on a scale, I would say difficulty of recruiting to a large urban campus is a 7 compared to a 3 for traditional college town campuses.

On campus stadiums, space, trees, distance from industrial parks and neighborhoods, etc. all make for a more preferable college experience for most.

Other than close to home than not, location in a big city or small rural town has never hurt or helped any program. Last I checked Tuscaloosa is not NY. There are more teams in rural towns in the top 25 than not or at least not in areas that are considered to be a large city. If you watched last chance U location is the last thing JUCO's care about. Its playing time and name.

Probably why I explained that Jucos are the best bet for those campuses. The effect predominantly applies to the 17 y.o. and his folks choosing a college. A lot of it is based on perception rather than reality but that makes it no less true.

The number of kids that are disaffected by the campus location is so small that when it actually happens it stands out.

Miles did not fail recruiting Georgia and Atlanta because of where our campus is located.

It stands out because I rarely hear the opposite. Why did Miles fail then? You do have a great advantage of offering FBS football in a talent rich state. That will allow you to at least beat our the top FCS programs.

You just have to offset the commuter campus perception with facilities and coaching.

(12-16-2016 05:01 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 04:42 PM)panama Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 04:39 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 04:34 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 03:23 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  Proving my point. All of those schools have had AWFUL stretches despite being surrounded by talent. I don't know how Temple even gets in your list. Memphis has never had sustained football success. Houston is having some now but was losing to upstart UTSA and Texas State a couple of years back. Miami has not been very successful since the 90s and struggles to draw any fans. USC overcame their issues by paying players before returning to mediocrity. Georgia Tech? Meh.

I have heard a lot of parents and players comment over the years about coming to a college town to get the college experience or to escape the large metro where they live.

Nothing is an absolute one way or the other but on a scale, I would say difficulty of recruiting to a large urban campus is a 7 compared to a 3 for traditional college town campuses.

On campus stadiums, space, trees, distance from industrial parks and neighborhoods, etc. all make for a more preferable college experience for most.

Other than close to home than not, location in a big city or small rural town has never hurt or helped any program. Last I checked Tuscaloosa is not NY. There are more teams in rural towns in the top 25 than not or at least not in areas that are considered to be a large city. If you watched last chance U location is the last thing JUCO's care about. Its playing time and name.

Probably why I explained that Jucos are the best bet for those campuses. The effect predominantly applies to the 17 y.o. and his folks choosing a college. A lot of it is based on perception rather than reality but that makes it no less true.

The number of kids that are disaffected by the campus location is so small that when it actually happens it stands out.

Miles did not fail recruiting Georgia and Atlanta because of where our campus is located.

It stands out because I rarely hear the opposite. Why did Miles fail then? You do have a great advantage of offering FBS football in a talent rich state. That will allow you to at least beat our the top FCS programs.

You just have to commuter campus perception with facilities and coaching.

Wasn't it obvious to most that watched. Miles rarely had all three phases playing at the same level. This year at least three games were decided by special teams disasters. While I wont say miles was a bad coach in key moments you can point to a situation where he got out coached off the top of my head the USA game, which also featured a special teams disaster in the waning seconds. As far as the campus stuff. Much more goes into it than that I would counter with the fact that the coaches at those times are culprits as well. Plus the fact that most schools are in rural areas. But there are instances of success. The problem is once coach ____ leaves does the guy keep the momentum or does it die down till coach X revives it.

(12-16-2016 05:01 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 04:42 PM)panama Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 04:39 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 04:34 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(12-16-2016 03:23 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  Proving my point. All of those schools have had AWFUL stretches despite being surrounded by talent. I don't know how Temple even gets in your list. Memphis has never had sustained football success. Houston is having some now but was losing to upstart UTSA and Texas State a couple of years back. Miami has not been very successful since the 90s and struggles to draw any fans. USC overcame their issues by paying players before returning to mediocrity. Georgia Tech? Meh.

I have heard a lot of parents and players comment over the years about coming to a college town to get the college experience or to escape the large metro where they live.

Nothing is an absolute one way or the other but on a scale, I would say difficulty of recruiting to a large urban campus is a 7 compared to a 3 for traditional college town campuses.

On campus stadiums, space, trees, distance from industrial parks and neighborhoods, etc. all make for a more preferable college experience for most.

Other than close to home than not, location in a big city or small rural town has never hurt or helped any program. Last I checked Tuscaloosa is not NY. There are more teams in rural towns in the top 25 than not or at least not in areas that are considered to be a large city. If you watched last chance U location is the last thing JUCO's care about. Its playing time and name.

Probably why I explained that Jucos are the best bet for those campuses. The effect predominantly applies to the 17 y.o. and his folks choosing a college. A lot of it is based on perception rather than reality but that makes it no less true.

The number of kids that are disaffected by the campus location is so small that when it actually happens it stands out.

Miles did not fail recruiting Georgia and Atlanta because of where our campus is located.

It stands out because I rarely hear the opposite. Why did Miles fail then? You do have a great advantage of offering FBS football in a talent rich state. That will allow you to at least beat our the top FCS programs.

You just have to offset the commuter campus perception with facilities and coaching.

Midwest coach who was smug and didn't build relationships. Just don't be a jackwagon and you will be fine. CSE doesn't have full staff announced and has had a 3 star ATH commit in last 24 hours. Trickett is after his two 3 star QB commits at FAU. One decomitted last night. I think we will be ok.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

You can't apply the same rules to historic 100 year football programs. Alabama doesn't win because they have rolling hills where frat boys can play hacky sack and flag football

No they win because they have a staff that players know can get them drafted

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

(12-16-2016 03:23 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  Proving my point. All of those schools have had AWFUL stretches despite being surrounded by talent. I don't know how Temple even gets in your list. Memphis has never had sustained football success. Houston is having some now but was losing to upstart UTSA and Texas State a couple of years back. Miami has not been very successful since the 90s and struggles to draw any fans. USC overcame their issues by paying players before returning to mediocrity. Georgia Tech? Meh.

I have heard a lot of parents and players comment over the years about coming to a college town to get the college experience or to escape the large metro where they live.

Nothing is an absolute one way or the other but on a scale, I would say difficulty of recruiting to a large urban campus is a 7 compared to a 3 for traditional college town campuses.

On campus stadiums, space, trees, distance from industrial parks and neighborhoods, etc. all make for a more preferable college experience for most.

We have absolutely no problem recruiting, have gotten several 4* recruits in the last few years, have 10 scholarship players on our roster from FL, are getting more and more from VA, and even have two on the roster from NC and TN. We also happen to have a lot of talent in PA and NJ to mine.

As far as the college experience goes, I interned at FSU and ASU, and don't feel like I lost out on anything by going to Temple.

It's only going to get easier easier for us as we recently built the most expensive dorm in the country, and are in the midst of a $300M project highlighted by a new library and our first quad.

(12-16-2016 02:49 PM)glsjunior74 Wrote:  The U built their program with city guys who wanted to stay home. It helps when you can always go home and get a meal from momma rather than being all the way in Jonesboro freaking Arkansas trying to heat a Cup O Noodles and hanging out at the Piggly Wiggly for fun

The U didn't hire high school coaches and assistants no one else offered because they were cheap to hire.

I love how a person can be from the middle of Arkansas and make statements about the mentality of high school kids around the nation.

Nate Fuqua added as DC

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Wuufford has a damn good defense. That's a good hire.

I tend to agree

His recruiting area also included west central Georgia (Fayetteville, Colunbus, Macon and McDonough)

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

App's current DC came from WC as well.

Elliott seems to building a solid staff.

Looks good on paper so far

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Satterfield's very first hire at App was the Wofford DC.

If all goes according to plan, Elliot will now take two assistants from Garnder-Webb, a couple GA's and a buddy from his previous job.

Only three positions left. Hopefully at least one more who has coached HS in Georgia

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

(12-18-2016 06:00 PM)panama Wrote:  Only three positions left. Hopefully at least one more who has coached HS in Georgia

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

May I recommend Rance Gillespie?!

(12-19-2016 09:28 AM)boroeagle2 Wrote:  

(12-18-2016 06:00 PM)panama Wrote:  Only three positions left. Hopefully at least one more who has coached HS in Georgia

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

May I recommend Rance Gillespie?!