Longballs Dong…

April 7th, 2017 at 1:56 PM ^

while I endorse this comment, I can't help but think he probably doesn't care much. At .9360, Sims is the 14th highest ranked kid in GA. For comparison, he would be second in Michigan. Michigan's 14th ranked kid has a score of .8529 and 639th in the country. In short, Georgia is loaded with talent.

EDIT: of the 31 composite 4 stars in the state of GA, 2 have committed to UM, 0 to Georgia.  11 have committed out of state.  Last year, there were 33 4 stars, and UGA landed 16 of them.  It's obviously early, but the trend doesn't look good for Kirby. 

 

1464

April 7th, 2017 at 12:46 PM ^

Speaking of guys who didn't commit to Alabama, how is Bama's recruiting off to such a slow start this year?  Only four guys, like us, but two of them are three stars?  Shouldn't they already have 20 of the top 100 guys at this point?  

EastCoast

April 7th, 2017 at 12:07 PM ^

I love me some Georgia talent!

I think it's telling that Chris Partridge is the main recruiter in Georgia. One of the most underrated staff hirings in America.

ABOUBENADHEM

April 7th, 2017 at 12:23 PM ^

know the two schools.  UGA = campus setting in small town outside Atlanta, lots of SEC type coeds, pretty high end and normal college exprience.  GT = urban campus in Midtown Atlanta, lots of engineering types, limited pickings from a coed standpoint and a more cerebral college exerience overall.  It depends on what you are looking for, but the fun, college college experience is much more in play at UGA.

MotownGoBlue

April 7th, 2017 at 1:17 PM ^

Yet a school like Stanford still lands elite prospects, with greater competition amongst in-state rivals.

As is, GT's football program (loaded with 2* and 3* athletes) is currently better than UGA's (loaded with 4* and 5* star athletes). It seems to me GT lacks something else along the lines of recruiting.

It's not that I don't "know the two schools" (not that I attended both) but the fact they have ZERO elite, in-state talent on their roster as of late is puzzling.

Ezeh-E

April 7th, 2017 at 1:25 PM ^

Stanford and GT differ greatly. Stanford is 48% women undergrad, whereas GTech is 35%. Stanford has a wide variety of non-engineering majors, GTech very few. Stanford is much more prestigous in a much more scenic location.

Lastly, all the big name colleges in CA are in the Pac-12. The SEC is much more engrained in the culture of southern states like Georgia than the ACC is.

MotownGoBlue

April 7th, 2017 at 1:11 PM ^

Right, the style doesn't necessarily translate well for all positions at the next level, but, it still baffles me how they haven't even snagged one recent elite prospect from their own state, after moderate success with much lesser talent, over the last 10 years.

True, the system could be the underlying detractor. I'm not sure Calvin Johnson, for example, would have played at GT under Paul Johnson or not.