Coach Paul Johnson Speaks "Very Slowly" For Chuck And Chernoff Radio Interview

by Winfield Featherston on Mar 8, 2011 5:35 PM EST in Georgia Tech Football

Paul Johnson did a radio interview today on the Chuck and Chernoff Show on AM 680 The Fan. Within the interview, they talk about Anthony Allen, Joshua Nesbitt, and A-backs that need to hold onto the football. The highlight of the interview is Paul Johnson defending his recruiting practices and the mentality of what a scholarship commitment means. Matt Chernoff asks Coach if he thinks a double standard is being practiced and Coach Johnson responds by drawing a parallel to dating other women while married and has to "talk real slow" to Chernoff so that proper understanding can take place. The portion comes about half way through the segment.

Paul Johnson Radio Interview March 8 2011

Tweet Comment 7 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Nice

I can see both sides of the argument. It’s amazing how, even after all these years, Georgia Tech is still causing trouble with the ethical recruitment of players. I agree with Coach Johnson’s premise that if players are still taking visits, then they’re not committed. I also see how it’s causing trouble because of the appearance of hypocrisy. His best point is that the media/recruiting people are assigning the term “committed,” not him.

by acedarney on Mar 9, 2011 12:16 PM EST reply actions

Also

You could look at it like this, based on his marriage reference: If you want to date someone who’s already married and that person obliges, it’s not your issue how the spouse sees it, in the case that there’s nothing they can do to stop it.

(Perhaps not the most practical or ethical of examples…..but still.)

by LilBroey700 on Mar 9, 2011 1:04 PM EST up reply actions

Yeah, that's a good analogy too

by acedarney on Mar 9, 2011 1:57 PM EST up reply actions

I certainly understand his position

As long as he is not pressuring a kid to commit early I think it is ok.

That said I think he is asking a lot of recruits and will continue to lose commits because of this.

by GTwill on Mar 9, 2011 3:03 PM EST reply actions

I agree with what the coach said

it is the media who keeps saying a kid is committed when he is not. If a kid is still looking around and taking trips he is not committed. That means he is fair game for any school that wants to talk to him. That is so obvious I cannot understand how this gets twisted around.

Also, it is the media who keeps saying that Coach Johnson pulls the offer if a kid goes somewhere else to look. As he said, that is not exactly how it happens. Reminding the kid that if you are still looking we will not hold your place and waste a scholarship seems perfectly reasonable to me. Clearly what has been happening is that when presented with this reality a lot of kids own up to the fact that Tech was not their first choice all along and they were stringing them along waiting for a better offer. Tech’s approach just forces it out in the open more quickly.

It is hard to have integrity in a world that only values results and doesn’t care how you got there.

by Atlanta's original team on Mar 9, 2011 4:44 PM EST reply actions

It's not that CPJ's stance can't be defended...

… but there are a heck of a lot of a strong counterargument to him. By defining commitment in a different way than other schools, he puts other schools in a stronger position to cherry pick Tech’s best recruits.

He can define commitment however he wants to, but the generally accepted CFB meaning is something like “I’m strongly leaning towards this school. I have an offer from them and am planning on accepting it.” That’s more than nothing, but it ain’t exactly akin to marriage.

Plus, by dropping the hammer on any “commit” who takes visits elsewhere, CPJ uses fear as a recruiting tool. That will work better on kids who are less likely to get offers elsewhere. If a kid is pretty sure that he can go to any of five schools, he’ll be fine to break his commitment – leaving Tech in the lurch. It’s the marginal kids that are really threatened by the loss of an offer.

It’s fine to desgin a recruitment system that aims to lock in the least-talented kids while scaring away the most-talented ones, but such a system is hardly above criticism. This system imposes additional requirements that other schools do not have, and can only narrow the pool of potential talent.

It may be a morally-superior system. It may get more of CPJ’s guys. It may be exactly what Tech needs. But color me skeptical.

by first and thom on Mar 10, 2011 12:45 PM EST up reply actions

You're right

about other schools being at a stronger position to cherry pick. However, he really has only had one instance where this actually came to fruition, and that guy isn’t playing football at that school anymore anyway.

CPJ has explained that he makes it clear to prospects what his position on the matter is. If they still want to take visits, he’ll let them, but they aren’t committed and recruitment continues. On the flip side, if they commit, they are done with recruiting and shouldn’t be “sleeping with the enemy” so to speak.

Whether or not this scares away better prospects I don’t know. However, I’m sure he has a spot open for the elite players. Look at how recruiting went this year: after some of the big names that Tech was recruiting went elsewhere, the commits started coming in quickly from the lesser talented players right before signing day. I assume that those guys knew that they were the second option if so-and-so didn’t sign and got their offer afterward.

by acedarney on Mar 10, 2011 2:26 PM EST up reply actions