Let's look at the freshman question a little more closely. There were two teams in the South that played a lot of true freshmen on defense last year: Georgia Tech and Alabama. Tech didn't fare very well, as we know only too well. The freshmen who stepped in and played defense at Alabama, on the other hand, were good enough to shut Florida down completely in the SEC title game. Playing a lot of freshmen will usually hurt you, but sometimes it can invigorate a team. George O'Leary speculates that eight to 10 players from this year's class of true freshmen will be playing this fall. Will they have the same positive impact as the freshmen who played for Alabama last year? Let's hope so. But there's no way of knowing that at this time, which makes any predictions of won-loss records a very dicey proposition.

But if you insist on a prediction: Tech will probably be a decided underdog in games against FSU, Virginia Tech and Clemson. Those would have to be considered probable losses. Recent history tells us that the Georgia game will be decided by a field goal or touchdown in the final seconds of play. That game should be a tossup. The other eight games on the schedule are all very winnable. I'm not saying that they are eight guaranteed victories only that Tech has a comparable or superior level of talent to each of those teams, and could be in a position to win them if the coaches can keep the players focused on the task at hand. I think a final record of 8-4 is eminently achievable, 9-3 is a stretch but not impossible, 7-5 would be a disappointment, and 6-6 would indicate that there are some serious shortcomings in the program.

The Joe Hamilton era is indeed over. But we may be witnessing the start of the Andy Hall era, which could be just as exciting in its own way. George Godsey is the number one QB at this point, but I look for Hall to be a factor. The kid is quicker and nimbler than Godsey and has just as good a throwing arm. As O'Leary noted during spring practice, even when a play turns bad, Hall knows how to make good things happen. He's capable of the kind of improvisational magic Joe H. was famous for. Watch out for Hall; he's a keeper. Whether Godsey hangs on to the starting job or is unseated by Hall, Tech should be in good shape on offense.

1. Hold that question until the 2002 or 2003 season and we'll have a more accurate answer. I've said this before, but I'll keep hammering away at it until people start paying attention: the true measure of a recruiting class is what it produces on the field not in how the so-called recruiting "gurus" rank it. Exhibit A: Georgia fans brag that they had back-to-back "Top 5" recruiting classes in 1998 and 1999 (an absurd claim on its face since 30 percent of those recruits didn't even make it into school), while sneering that none of Tech's recruits could even make Georgia's scout team. So which team won the Tech-Georgia game in 1998 and 1999?

   If the rankings from the "gurus" had any correlation to on-the-field success, Georgia would be the national champions every year and Nebraska would be lucky to finish in the Top 25. Recruiting is important, yes, but it is only the first step to a successful college program. What you do with the players after you get them in school how well you coach them up has much more to do with a program's success. Just ask Jim Donnan, who's learned this lesson the hard way (and got punched out by one of his assistants as well).

   My humble opinion is that Tech recruited a very decent class of players this year. But who can know for sure just how good they'll be until they step onto the field? Let's see what they do between the sidelines, then we can give a realistic "ranking" to this recruiting class.

   Looking back over the past 25 years, three of Tech's recruiting classes especially stand out:

   1975. Some have talked about this being Tech's greatest recruiting class ever, and I would certainly have to rank it among the top two or three. It featured Eddie Lee Ivery, Drew Hill, Al Richardson, and Kent Hill, who had great years at Tech and productive careers in the NFL. It also included Mike Taylor (the bookend OT with Kent Hill), DB Don Bessilieu, DB Don Patterson (whose son, Cory, is now trying to make the big leagues in baseball), RB Ellis "Bucky" Shamburger, OL Roy Simmons, DE Mike Blanton, TE Donnie Sewell and Harper Brown, a punter who only played at Tech for two years but had a leg almost as strong as Rodney Williams'
   1982. This was Bill Curry's third and by far his best recruiting class at the Flats it formed the nucleus of the legendary Black Watch defense that pulled the Jackets to a 9-2-1 record in 1985. Most of the strength in this recruiting class was on the defensive side, which produced DE Pat Swilling (later a perennial all-pro in the NFL); DLs Mark Pike (who had a long NFL career with the Buffalo Bills), Ken Parker, and Glenn Spencer (now the head coach at West Georgia); LBs Ted Roof (who still has a connection with the Tech program), Jim Anderson and Ralph Malone; and DBs Cleve Pounds and Mike Travis. The offensive standouts included TE Tim Manion, RB Chuck Easley (who scored the winning touchdown in the classic 1984 battle with Clemson), OL Mitch Waters and WR Daryl Wise. The class also included Antonio McKay, who didn't play much football at Tech but was fast enough to get gold medals in the 1984 and 1988 Olympics. There probably wasn't another recruiting class at Tech that produced as many quality players on defense as this one.
   1988. I think most people would have to rank this as Tech's greatest recruiting class ever. All they did was win a national championship and two bowl games during their time on the Flats. The offensive recruits included Shawn Jones, one of the two greatest QBs in Tech history; WRs Emmett Merchant, Bobby Rodriguez (who tied the record for career receptions) and Brent Goolsby; and punter Bill Weaver. On the defensive side, the class featured DBs Ken Swilling, Willie Clay and Kevin Peoples; DLs Marco Coleman and Kevin Battle; and LB Jerrelle Williams (who set the Tech career record for tackles, since eclipsed by Keith Brooking). That's gotta be an impressive collection of talent.

   If the recruiting class of 2000 can match or exceed the accomplishments of these three classes, then it will have been a great class indeed. But we won't know that for another three or four seasons.

17. In that case, which of the players do you think can contribute immediately as true freshmen?

1. I think that one or more of the linebackers (Holiday, Fox, Smith) and defensive backs (Tony Hollings, Jonathan Cox) probably have a shot at playing early. Tech is stacked deep with running backs right now, but Jimmy Dixon may be able to break into the rotation if he can ever get over his hamstring pull. It's extremely difficult for a true freshman to get playing time on the offensive line (as O'Leary says, "the farther you're away from the ball, the better your chances of playing"), but Tech's so thin at OL that it may happen with Robinson or Phillips.

17. Very good, actually. Every class O'Leary has recruited has been a little more talented than the class before it. That steady, incremental improvement is having its effect. It's useful to remember that when O'Leary first took over the Tech program in 1995, Georgia had the edge over Tech at all of the skill positions. By 1999, that situation was reversed and Tech had a decided advantage at the skill positions: Joe Hamilton at QB; Dez White, Kelly Campbell and Kerry Watkins at WR; and Sean Gregory, Joe Burns, Phillip Rogers and Ed Wilder at RB. Georgia did not have the equivalent talent or numbers at any of those slots. That's quite a turnaround for Tech.
    

    What's even more telling is that Tech's obscure recruits are outplaying Georgia's "prep All-Americans." For example, mutt fans have been insisting for the past four years that Jasper Sanks is "the next Herschel Walker," but take a moment to compare Sanks' accomplishments to Sean Gregory's, who came to Tech without a lot of hype. In 1998, when Gregory was the fifth-string tailback at Tech, he still gained more yards rushing for the season than Sanks did. In 1999, Gregory started the season as Tech's third-string tailback and still put up numbers almost as good as Sanks and Gregory didn't fumble away his team's two biggest games. Or shift your attention to wide receiver, where mutt fans have been holding circle-jerks over Terence Edwards. Compare the numbers that Kelly Campbell put up last season to Edwards, and you'll see it's no contest. It goes back to what I said earlier: production on the field is infinitely more important than the rankings of a bunch of SEC-biased "gurus." Tech's recruits are producing, and I don't see that trend reversing anytime soon.

     

We know from what's happened at Georgia that Quincy is a whiner, a complainer and a malcontent I'll never forget that moment in the 1998 Tech-Georgia game when Felipe Claybrooks body-slammed Quincy to the turf, and Quincy cried so loudly to the official that Jonas Jennings finally came over and slapped him upside the head to shut him up. If Quincy had spent two years riding the bench at Tech, we would have seen that same continual mouthing off and complaining. It's much better for him to have taken his whiney attitude down the road to Athens. On top of all that, Quincy helped Georgia lose two games in a row to Tech by choking in the clutch and overthrowing his wide receivers (as well as throwing the big interception to Marvious Hester). So when you think about it, Quincy has given Tech fans the best gift he ever could have given them: two big victories over Georgia. Thank you, Quincy.

Here's the question you should have asked: is there a more overrated player in college football than Quincy Carter? The answer is a resounding "no." I am absolutely mystified at all the pre-season magazines that include him among the top candidates for the Heisman Trophy and contend he is one of the best quarterbacks in the nation. On what evidence do they base that? Look at the passing efficiency ratings for last season and you will see that Quincy ranked 42^nd among Division I-A quarterback. That means there were 41 quarterbacks who put up better numbers than Quincy Carter. How does he jump from that mid-rank status to be considered a Heisman Trophy candidate? Especially when you consider that he's been the losing quarterback in every big game Georgia has played against a ranked opponent. I don't get it. I just don't get it.

Typical comments about the Quinster can be found in the latest issue of ESPN magazine, which wrote: "So much like Steve McNair, it's scary. He's big, strong and athletic, but it's his decision-making that makes him great. Knows he can beat you with his legs but isn't too quick to run, staying with the play and using his arm."

Now, let's deconstruct that description, sentence by sentence

So much like Steve McNair, it's scary.

Well, he's a lot like Steve McNair in the sense that he has two arms and two legs. After that, the comparison tends to break down. The only thing "scary" about Quincy, at least from Jim Donnan's point of view, is the way he overthrows wide-open receivers.

He's big, strong and athletic, but it's his decision-making that makes him great.

You mean like his decision to throw the ball right at Marvious Hester during overtime of the Tech game in 1999? Or possibly you mean his decision to overthrow so many receivers that Georgia went three-and-out throughout the fourth quarter of the Tech game in 1998? Or maybe it was his decision to go crying to the officials after Felipe Claybrooks sacked him? To me, a great quarterback is one who rises to the occasion and leads his school to victory over the toughest teams. Quincy is 0-6 against Tech, Tennessee and Florida.

Knows he can beat you with his legs but isn't too quick to run, staying with the play and using his arm.

The reason he "isn't too quick to run" is because he's afraid he'll be hit; Quincy has openly said he doesn't like to run the option. When he "stays with the play and uses his arm" he tends to tighten up and overthrow his receivers, particularly if the other team is hitting him hard with their pass rush.

Have all of these sportswriters been smoking crack for the past two years? Quincy's weaknesses and shortcomings are obvious to everyone (except mutt fans), yet he's given all these blowjobs in print by people who should know better. I think the adulation of Quincy stems from the one good game he's put together at Georgia, the 1998 LSU game. I will admit that he was in the zone that night and hitting everything that was open. Quincy and Georgia fans have been dining out on that LSU game for two years now, but they never stop to consider that he put up those numbers against a team that finished 4-7. That ain't much to brag about. But apparently it's enough for the sportswriters.

1. Tech did indeed play Notre Dame in the 1974 season opener, when the Irish were ranked no. 2 in the nation, and lost 31-7 at Grant Field. The game was noteworthy for several reasons: it was a nationally televised Monday-night game, it was Pepper Rodgers' debut as head coach, and it was also the first game for a promising freshman linebacker named Lucius Sanford out of Atlanta's West Fulton High. Sanford got raves from the TV announcers all game long and displayed the talent that would make him one of Tech's all-time greats. Although the Notre Dame game was a disappointing loss, the Tech team got it together by season's end to whip Georgia 34-14 in Athens.

1. My sources tell me they are good friends once again. I understand that to show there are no hard feelings, Coach Donnan has asked that Ramsey be made an honorary pledge at the Georgia chapter of Alpha Tau Omega. Donnan even promised to give the fraternity a new pickup truck.

1. I think the secret to Chiliman's success is all those bottles of Jim Beam he passes around while the pot is stirring.