There is always a valid concern that a movie remake, however well-intentioned, might ruin the reputation of its beloved original.   

This month, “Ghostbusters,” the 2016 remake of the 1984 original, takes aim at breaking down gender barriers and pushes the public to reexamine what they view as “normal” in the movie industry. Led by the star-studded cast of Melissa McCarthy (“Spy”), Kate McKinnon (“Sisters”), Kristen Wiig (“Bridesmaids”) and Leslie Jones (“Trainwreck”), “Ghostbusters” seems like a two-hour “Saturday Night Live” skit that falls flat at some points but is filled with enough well-placed jokes, cameos and social commentary to make it a good movie.

“Ghostbusters” is by no means a re-mastered version of the original. Gone is the blunt and borderline apathetic delivery of lines that has come to define Bill Murray, replaced with the high-energy and fast-paced rattling off of punch lines that are characteristic of McCarthy’s movies. However, while the overall feel of the remake is much different from the original, it stays true to, and more importantly is respectful of, its origins.

The plot is largely the same as the classic and the script is peppered with references to the original that will make any “Ghostbusters” fan laugh out loud. The cast brings to life a 21st century version of the “ultra-nerd” Ghostbuster team, using language meant to be incomprehensible scientific jargon, but to the average Tech student these supposedly intelligent barrages end up being hilariously scientifically incorrect. For instance, isotope radiation
has no smell.

Leslie Jones differs from the other three Ghostbusters members in every way, as was the intention for the character of Ernie Hudson in the original. However, as the movie progresses, there is an ever-growing sense that the film is supported by barraging the audience with familiar faces and riding on the love for the original instead of being a gem of its own. An annoying amount of suspension of disbelief is required to become engrossed in the plot, and the movie seems disjointed, leaving the audience to endure the time between each punch line. Even so, the jokes are still funny, and it is great to see such renowned comedians working together. At the end of the day, however, it is simply an average-quality movie.

Where “Ghostbusters” earns back its merit is in its social commentary. The movie is very self-conscious of the significance of the casting, and pulls no punches. Director Paul Feig purposefully portrays all male characters as incompetent, with Chris Hemsworth leading the pack as a “beautiful idiot” secretary.

The Ghostbusters team perfectly depicts the difficulty of being female in America. Despite their success, they are discredited and told to stand down from their position, often times by the very people who caused the problem in the first place. The movie makes low blows in a more literal way where the villain is ultimately defeated with a well-aimed shot to his manhood. It is an unapologetically feminist movie, but it is nothing more, mercifully avoiding becoming anti-men; it is simply not anti-women.

“Ghostbusters” is not memorable, but its pointed humor and star-studded cast make for an enjoyable experience to say the least. It was an homage with a mission, and on that front, it succeeded.

William Shakespeare has, perhaps deservings, earned a reputation for the dense, nigh incomprehensible writing style present in many of his plays. This status is easily understood if one attempts to read any of Shakespeare’s plays as though it were a novel, however, reading it while being mindful of its proper medium, or better yet, seeing one of Shakespeare’s works performed dissipates the fog of antiquated dialog.

In such a performance, each actor, as opposed to a single reader, is then responsible for comprehending the intended meaning and translating the written words into a captivating narrative. Such is the case at Shakespeare Tavern with each of its actors dedicated to creating coherent and entertaining performances.

Currently, the playhouse is performing Shakespeare’s “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” and will be doing so every weekend until Aug. 7. This play follows four hopelessly intertwined lovers and an acting troupe as they wander through a fairy infested forest.

The performance opens with a man upset that his daughter Hermia (Sarah Beth Moseley) wishes to marry Lysander (Stephen Ruffin) instead of the father’s choice for a husband (Demetrius, Brandon Partrick). To complicate this further, Hermia’s friend Helena (Jennifer Lamourt) is madly in love with Demetrius, who ignores her completely.

Upset with her father’s stubbornness, Hermia and Lysander run off to be married. Demetrius follows her, and then Helena follows him despite being told that their respective quarry do not return their love. The forest’s fairies and love potions get involved, and hilarity ensues.

While this whimsical play might be as well-known as “Romeo and Juliet,” audience members can never be quite certain what to expect, as each rendition tends to differ from the rest that have gone before. The vague nature of the fairies lends itself to a wide variety of interpretations, and, although the main plot points will forever be the same, the tone of delivery or the props used make each “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” portrayal unique in a way that a straightforward play such as “Romeo and Juliet” could never achieve.

Perhaps the most defining change (or at least the most readily observable change) in each portrayal of the play is the character of Robin Goodfellow, or Puck, the fairy servant of King Oberon, Lord of the Fairies. His appearance (and gender) changes from performance to performance, sometimes appearing as a ballerina or even a robot.

The Shakespeare Tavern performs this play every summer, and has also seen its share of Robin Goodfellow personas.

This year, the mischievous Puck, played by Jeremiah Parker Hobbs, was a satyr. His performance was commendable, and sometimes his mere presence on stage was enough to make the audience laugh.

Even with this fascinating character to contend with, Moseley’s Hermia and Lamourt’s Helena were by far the best acted characters and provided much of the play’s comedy. These two actors played their roles well and, while some interpretations of “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” portray these women as incompetent or whiny, Moseley and Lamourt seemed to believe in their characters’ passions and motivations.

At one point, the two, thinking the other has stolen their boyfriend, get into a rather unladylike shouting match as the two men in question fight in a decidedly undignified manner in the background. Even though the content of the shouted argument is basically both women telling the other who they love, seeing the four fighting in such a ridiculous manner is quite humorous, especially since the fighting of the men includes the occasional bout of thumb wresting (albeit intense thumb wresting complete with vindictive staring).

With such entertaining scenes being the norm throughout this version of “A Midsummer Night’s Dream,” those interested in a lighthearted comedy without much thinking involved would enjoy this Shakespearean play, as laughs abound, and the plot is not particularly detailed beyond the initial setup.

Imagine this scenario: you are driving down a busy Atlanta street. The radio is tuned to the local rock station playing a song from Blink-182’s “California,” a recent chart topper. To your right, a glowing billboard advertising “Ghostbusters” vies for your attention. Your veins turn to ice as you move for the brakes, just barely missing a pedestrian and making you even more late for tonight’s episode of the X-Files reboot.

As you slowly regain your composure, the man in the street stands undeterred and seemingly unaware of your presence. Wild eyes meet yours as his gaze moves from his phone, and after a short apology the man runs off into
the night.

Occurrences like these have become more common as Pokemon Go, a mobile app developed by Google offshoot Niantic, becomes the new ringleader of America’s nostalgia circus. Yellow Jackets and squirrels are no longer the only animals on Tech’s campus as 150 different Pokemon have swarmed the midtown area, followed closely by students intent on catching them all.

These Pokemon are the central figures of a Japanese media franchise dating back to 1995. This is hardly the same phenomenon that gripped the world over two decades ago, however. Game Boys have found themselves replaced by smartphones, while bedrooms and schoolyards have given way to parks, restaurants, and the busy streets of Atlanta

The games, which have historically  offered  person-to-person interaction in the form of trading, training and battling these digital monsters with your friends, have finally found their stride in the social landscape by bringing players outside and into public spaces. This social aspect, combined with the game’s unparalleled ubiquity, have turned Tech’s campus into an almost surreal virtual hunting ground.

While the game has been lauded for its efforts at getting people outside and active, it has also garnered a fair amount of criticism. Absent-minded pedestrians have flooded Atlanta’s streets, putting their desire to “catch them all” ahead of their will to live. Private property all across the country has been rife with trespassers, with home and business owners blaming the game for their unwelcome guests.

The game’s ability to draw a crowd has not been overlooked by culture-savvy business owners, however. Pokemon Go has proven to be an economic boon to small businesses, with many restaurants and bars reporting up to a 50 percent increase in profits since the game’s release at certain times. Pokemon lures, an in-game item that can be bought for real-world money, have become a common business expense around the Midtown area. For businesses like Tech Plaza’s Sublime Donuts, the sales brought in by these lures are a Godsend.

“People come in here, grab some donuts, and play Pokemon. They say this area is the hot spot,” a spokesperson for Sublime said. “We have definitely seen business go up in the past few weeks.”

Fortunately for them, Pokemon Go has found its way onto a record number of phones: Apple’s App Store reported that the game received more downloads in its first week than any other app in history, despite only being available in three countries. Though the craze has slowed of late, developers have taken note that public alternate reality games can be immensely successful.

So while they may not be hunting Pokemon, mobile users will continue to be drawn out into Atlanta’s streets, businesses and restricted areas. No matter individual opinions, there seems to be a bright future ahead for dive bars, dogs and data plans.

On Nov. 24, 2015 a grand jury came to the decision to not indict Officer Darren Wilson for shooting Michael Brown, an 18-year-old African American teenager, on Aug. 9, 2015 in Ferguson, Missouri. On Thursday Jul. 17, 2014, Staten Island resident Eric Garner was put in an illegal chokehold by NYPD Officer Daniel Pantaleo and died shortly afterwards.

The decisions of these two now infamous cases has brought about the question for many Americans whether or not the confrontations between these African American men and white police officers is a racial issue, marking the latest chapter in America’s age old fight for civil rights.

The root of the #BlackLivesMatter movement can be traced to the acquittal of George Zimmerman ­— a volunteer officer for his local law enforcement — after evidence showed Zimmerman shooting 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida. Upon the seemingly back-to-back deaths of Brown and Garner, the #BlackLivesMatter movement was pushed to the national stage.

On the morning of July 8, the body of a 22-year-old male by the name of Michael George
Smith Jr. was found hanging from a tree near the Nelson Mandela monument in Piedmont Park. There were countless protests sparked all across the city, each becoming increasingly more violent. Citizens, with a great many Tech students among their ranks, demanded to know the identity of the young man.

“There were a lot of college students, and I know that [it] was led by a sorority from Spelman,” student Hillary Nicole said of a recent demonstration through Peachtree Street. “I felt bad about blocking the streets, but then I realized that was kind of the point. I don’t think people protest just because they’re upset. I think protests are held on populated streets like [Peachtree] to get people’s
attention.”

In a response to the protests rising across the city, Mayor Kasim Reed stated that citizens should “not prejudge the circumstances surrounding this young man’s death.” He even pledged that police would “share all evidence discovered in the course of the investigation.”

To ensure that Atlanta and its police department would not be subject to the scrutiny facing other cities, Reed and local Black Lives Matter leader Mary Hook met on a live broadcast on WSB-TV for the “Atlanta Unite” town hall meeting. Hook presented Reed with a series of demands, with Reed expected to respond by the beginning of August.

Reed’s cooperation is a good sign for politically active college students who are eager to have their voices heard but want to avoid the violence and antagonism that has marred demonstrations in other cities.

“I used to think that protests were pointless,” said Nicole. “[Now] I think they’re meant to create empathetic conversation in the community. I also think that it’s important for college students to be active in civil rights. It’s our future that [older] activists are fighting for.”

Fourth-year AE Moose Lundy’s thoughts are similar, stressing the importance of millennial activity in the fight for social justice.

“It’s very important for the younger generation to be involved in activism,” he said. “We have a lot more energy, we have fresh new voices and ideas, we’re in positions where we are willing to learn, and it is our immediate  future at stake.”

While some groups continue to protest throughout Atlanta’s streets, a majority of our city’s Black Lives Matter societies agreed to a brief ‘cooling off’ period, considering Reed’s attention a good start to getting their voices heard by Atlanta’s higher-ups.

Considered by many to be the largest Progressive bastion in the southeast, Atlanta and students  from schools like Tech and Georgia State should prove to be mainstays in this chapter of American civil rights history and beyond.

“You’re looking at your phone, on the map, right, and you see this little blue line. Well in five to ten years, you’re going to see it projected in real time on the road.”

If fifth-year ME Seth Radman is to be believed, the future could prove to be an exciting time. It should be, at least, for his Tech-based startup Plutonium Apps, which was recently invited to audition for season eight of ABC’s hit show “Shark Tank.”

The company, established by Radman in 2014, has since “[been] featured in an Apple commercial, guided clients to over $2 million in funding, won a national pitch competition, worked with professional sports teams, collaborated with a $25 million investment company and seen [its] apps get over 1000 downloads in a single day,” courtesy of their website.

One of Plutonium’s latest endeavors, a smart watch app called Pulse, demonstrates Radman’s pioneering mind-set when it comes to technology.

“A good company is one that isn’t reacting to changes, but is peering around the corner and kind of steering technological progress,” he said. “That’s why we made our first Apple Watch app.”

Pulse simulates a metronome on the smart watch, doling out perfectly-timed vibrations at pre-set intervals. Radman and Chief Technical Officer Stephen Schwahn, both members of Tech’s band program, saw the app as a quiet and hands-free way to help musicians keep rhythm.

The app’s uses proved to include more than just musical applications, however.

“We get five to ten emails every day from people telling us what they like and what they don’t like,” Radman said. “But it’s not just feedback, there are stories. There are Olympic athletes who are using it to train, paramedics use it to keep consistent chest compressions, there was even a woman that used it to make sure she didn’t swallow too often because it affects something in her larynx. It’s incredible what people are using it for.”

The team has also partnered with local organizations, such as Tech Square Labs and the Atlanta Hawks, to help take on the burdens of app development.

Based in Atlanta, Plutonium’s clients tend to be local to the area.

“We’ve been trying to do a lot of networking around Atlanta,” Vice President of Marketing Karima Alkhalid said. “We really care about the people we are working with so we decided ‘Hey, we should go meet those people,’ so we look up events around Atlanta and we just get to know people and see what they’re up to.”

A 2nd year IE, Alkhalid has helped the firm acquire clients throughout the 404 and beyond. Her pitch, paralleled directly by the the team’s guiding principles, is centered around the fact that they aren’t a “huge company, like an app factory, just trying to shoot out an app.” Plutonium’s quality, they believe, lies just as much in their relationship with clients as much as with their technical knowledge.

“We believe that everyone should have the opportunity to get their idea out there,” Schwahn said. “I think that kind of sums up everything in a nutshell.”

Even though they’ve become a solid means of turning those ideas into products, the team is quick to credit Tech with their success.

“I know a huge part of this we owe to Georgia Tech,” Radman said. “One of their recent goals is to inspire creative and entrepreneurial thinking. I personally want to encourage students here that even remotely have an idea to go for it. You’re a student at
Georgia Tech.”

With initiatives like Tech Square Labs and Startup Summer, Tech has brought an entrepreneurial spirit to Midtown Atlanta. Thanks to this increased focus on student innovation, Plutonium Apps and many startups like it are able to grow from dirty college dorm room to national attention and generous funding in a matter of months.

After the initial small talk, conversations segue into current events, but people tend to focus on lighter topics rather than things that matter.

From news articles to the conversations that take place, I have learned that Taylor Swift ended her relationship with DJ Calvin Harris in June. She started dating Tom Hiddleston, just two weeks later. Calvin Harris has since deleted tweets about Swift and started wearing Yeezys. Meanwhile Kim Kardashian ignited a war with Swift through an interview and then released several videos which Swift claims to be an act of “character assassination.”

With the immense detail and fascination at mundane details of celebrities’ lives, I’m surprised that we don’t have a live update on them — today Swift woke up from bed, ate breakfast, checked in on social media, and continued to live her life. Gasp.

This same detail and vigor is not present when people engage in heavier topics. Not only are people afraid of stepping on toes when it comes to differing viewpoints, but many people are not well informed on these topics.

The news can be depressing or even boring especially after a long day. It is easy to get swept away by the glamour and excitement of celebrity gossip to escape reality. However, knowing the details about celebrity gossip achieves absolutely nothing. Not only are these discussions fruitless, but most of what is written comes from unnamed sources, is based on speculation, and reads way too much into social media posts. Since we so rarely ever hear from celebrities about their personal lives what we read may  not even be true.

While, it’s important to allow your mind to decompress, it is also vital to remember that the world goes just beyond a single individual. So, to what extent does one need to be involved in current events?

For starters, no one is required to dedicate their life to world issues. It’s unrealistic since the news continuously changes and discoveries are continually being made. However, keeping up with the news as opposed to the Kardashians is so much more beneficial because although you may not be directly affected by what is happening these issues actually impact society.

Bombings happen quite frequently in the Middle East and while we may not be directly impacted, it can affect our country’s foreign policy. The Zika virus may not be an imminent threat to you, but this August hundreds of athletes are  exposing themselves to the virus to represent their country in the Olympics. The GOP’s platform aims to repeal marriage equality and discriminate against minority groups in an attempt to “make America great again.” But do we want to become a nation that practices hate and discrimination?

For those that do care about their community, educated dialog is the first step to enacting change, and to start these conversations it’s vital to know what is happening. Instead of scrutinizing the decisions of celebrities on their personal life, let’s have analytical conversations about the state of the world because it’s these kinds of conversations that can inspire change and make an impact.

You don’t need to stop reading celebrity gossip all together. Just keep in mind, that while you try to know everything about Taylor Swift, you will probably never even be on her radar.

The First Lady of the United States has always been a face-value representation of the sitting President’s opinion of women, and by extension, how the United States views the role of women and family at a given point in history.

Earlier first ladies took on a hostess role, greeting guests at the White House and for the most part staying out of the public eye, while modern first ladies such as Eleanor Roosevelt and Michelle Obama have advocated for causes like civil rights and children’s physical fitness and health.

In addition to fiery rhetoric and a few quotable sound bites about building walls and keeping hot sauce in purses, the 2016 election cycle has also seen what will become a split in the future role of the American First Lady: one election outcome sees a traditional, supportive wife, while the other brings the possibility of a First Husband. This split highlights shifting American attitudes —and hypocrisy — towards the role of women in the modern American family.

Melania Trump embodies many female characteristics and roles social conservatives favor — though she is a successful model with her own jewelry line, her primary focus has been motherhood, raising their son Barron while Trump has, to his own admittance, never changed a diaper. She describes herself as more traditional, stating in an interview with US Magazine that she voices political views at home, but in public she defers to her husband: “That’s my husband’s job. I leave that to him.”

In contrast, Trump’s daughter Ivanka is more modern — she is an independent businesswoman who has been the leading female spokesperson for Trump’s campaign. She was the one to introduce him at the Republican National Convention, and she is more relatable to younger voters, who are more accustomed to women working outside the home.

Despite the Republican Party opposing programs that would benefit working women, such as paid maternity leave and more access to birth control and family planning, Trump’s campaign team understands that the role of American women has evolved, meaning it is beneficial to Trump’s image if modern, independent Ivanka has time in the spotlight.

The comparison between the two is a symptom of American hypocrisy towards the role of women. Why is it that, in the words of New York Times writer Jill Filipovic, men like Trump marry Melanias and raise Ivankas?

He will treat his wife one way and his daughter another because an attractive, traditional wife and a successful, modern daughter are extensions of himself that reflect well on him in different ways. Even with both women’s accomplishments, Trump speaks more on their physical attributes: he tweets pictures comparing Melania’s face to that of Heidi Cruz, and on several occasions remarks about how he would date Ivanka if she were not his daughter, going so far as to state that she has the figure to pose for Playboy.

While these statements are just examples of the bizarre Trump comments we have grown desensitized to, it is important to remember that Donald Trump would not be popular if his views did not reflect the opinions of the millions who will vote in November and showcase their views on women with one check of the ballot.

The immediate aftermath of Brexit was a flood of analysts trying to determine exactly what the referendum meant for the United Kingdom, its trade partners and global politics. Would others follow? Would Scotland, mostly in favor of the European Union, vote to leave the U.K.?

The next day, Google reported that Internet users in the U.K. were asking such questions as, “What is the EU?” Some citizens admitted that they had voted for the referendum to protest the government, not because they actually favored leaving the European Union, and Prime Minister David Cameron’s immediate announcement of resignation shocked even ardent Leave supporters, who were busy backing away from untenable campaign promises.

But no degree of surprise could change the outcome. Leave had triumphed over Remain, and the EU Parliament pressured the U.K. to secede as soon as possible to avoid economic uncertainty.

On the other side of the pond, we are preparing for our presidential election. At this point, it’s cliché to refer to both Clinton and Trump as poor options. Clinton is the consummate insider in a nation that is increasingly frustrated with career politicians. Trump has maligned a number of interest groups in advancing a platform that has been described as xenophobic, inconsistent and impractical.

Clinton has only recently escaped indictment for using a private email server to transmit classified information. Trump faces legal action of his own over allegations of fraud at his eponymous for-profit university.

Neither candidate has unified his or her party base; Clinton has come closer than Trump, but has left a legion of Bernie supporters unsatisfied. In reaction to what many Americans are coming to see as a presidential race between two evils (look no further than the favorability ratings for the candidates), some would rather not make the choice altogether.

If you’re have decided that you’re better off sitting out the 2016 election, or, even worse, casting a “protest vote” for a candidate you don’t believe in just to express your frustration, I ask you to reconsider. Not because voting is integral to the American fabric or because democracy is dependent upon the consent of the governed — this is not an episode of “The West Wing.” Vote for the person you believe in because this election and its consequences are far too significant to act otherwise.

The next president will face a number of challenges and have many  opportunities.  He or  she will shape the judiciary branch, perhaps nominating three justices to the Supreme Court, not to mention numerous district and circuit court judges. Abroad, contending with humanitarian crises in the Middle East and an increasingly complex relationship with China will be routine.

At home, immigration reform and increasing racial distrust will be on the table. And for all the complaints we may have about the two major parties’ presidential nominees, their platforms are quite different. It is our duty to choose the approach we deem the most appropriate.

The process can be frustrating, but there are plenty of ways for us to express these frustrations. By speaking up and taking actions such as calling state and local representatives, the people can express their opinions and make an impact in ways besides the presidential election. If you are upset by national and local corruption, read up on your representatives and senators, and vote for those that you feel you can trust. The national election is not the only election that makes a difference.

But voting for a presidential candidate whose ideas you don’t support just to “stick it” to one you dislike is immature, not to mention dangerous. For all the positives of democracy, it enables citizens to rashly and irreversibly effectuate severe impacts.

In the past month, we have watched in awe as British citizens have dealt with the fallout of a decision that many did not even mean to make, one that could result in the end of the United Kingdom altogether. Let us not follow in their example and instead treat this crucial decision with the absolute seriousness it demands.

Outsiders to Tech football often think first of its unconventional attack, a jumble of bruising running backs, quick edge players, field-stretching receivers and a quarterback mobile enough to perhaps form a coherent offense. Left out of the discussion is the defense.

While hardly reminiscent of the 1985 Chicago Bears’ fearsome unit, Ted Roof’s players have provided timely stops in big games, from an end-zone interception against previously unblemished Florida State passer Everett Golson to a clutch sack to prevent a Bulldogs score before halftime in the latest rendition of “Good, Clean, Old-Fashioned Hate.”

The success of the Jackets defense, particularly its individual performances, was not lost on general managers at the 2016 NFL Draft, where two Tech players were selected: defensive end, Adam Gotsis, and cornerback, D.J. White.

Selected by the defending Super Bowl champion, the Denver Broncos, Gotsis will have an early opportunity to join one of pro football’s finest defenses in recent memory. An Australia native, the 6-foot-4-inch team captain made an impact that reached beyond his relatively modest statistical contributions. 

Gotsis occupied double teams, freeing up linebackers to make plays against the run and pass. His absence for much of the UNC game following a controversial ejection began the Jackets’ unraveling against Marquise Williams and the Tar Heels offense, and a season-ending knee injury against the Cavaliers stripped Tech of its premier player in its defensive front seven.

Broncos fans can expect Gotsis to occupy a similar role at the next level. While he has gotten after the passer on occasion and shown flashes of disruption, scouts question his ability to stay on the field in third-down situations, courtesy of NFL.com. His forte will likely remain his capacity to free up elite edge rushers like Von Miller and DeMarcus Ware, a strong enough value that Denver general manager John Elway saw  fit to draft Gotsis.

On Gotsis, Elway said that the former Jacket was “a guy that we targeted and we didn’t want to take any chances to let him slide,” courtesy of ESPN.com. The Hall of Fame quarterback turned team executive was reportedly enamored the defensive end’s physical stature upon meeting him, although he admitted that the team drafted Gotsis earlier than most projections would have led outsiders to expect.

Other NFL pick, cornerback D.J. White, will forever be remembered in Tech lore for sealing the 2015 contest against UGA with an overtime interception. He will look to make his mark on a similarly rich football tradition in Kansas City, joining the Chiefs and occupying the same division as former teammate Gotsis.

While Gotsis found himself drafted on day two, White waited until the sixth round to hear his name called. This was not a drastic surprise — the cornerback class was a particularly strong one in a rather deep draft — but will no doubt provide the Atlanta native with a chip on his shoulder.

CBS Sports’ Rob Rang wrote before the draft that while White lacks the long frame that pro scouts increasingly covet in corners and safeties, he has the athleticism and skillset to succeed in the nickel package, guarding smaller slot receivers.

While no other Jackets heard their names called in Chicago during the draft, multiple have found opportunities via undrafted free agents. Safety Demond Smith and running back Broderick Snoddy signed pacts with the Green Bay Packers. Smith joins former Tech standout Morgan Burnett in the Packers defensive backfield.

Meanwhile, safety and special teams maven Jamal Golden earned a free agent tryout from the Atlanta Falcons.

Despite its typical inability to recruit elite high school talent and its unconventional style of play, Tech has seen a number of stars on the Flats turn into excellent competitors at the NFL level.

Wide receivers such as Calvin Johnson and Demaryius Thomas, defensive ends like Michael Johnson and Derrick Morgan, and the aforementioned Burnett have played key roles on their respective teams, while young players such as Jeremiah Attaochu are beginning to assume significant roles themselves.

Nonetheless, the jump from college football to the National Football League is rarely an easy one. Offensive linemen are bigger and more athletic, defenders apply honed technique along with raw talent, and both offensive and defensive schemes become significantly more complicated.

This rapid escalation has its casualties. For example, former Tech wide receiver Stephen Hill has toiled in relative obscurity despite his position’s pedigree at Tech. There is no guarantee that even the brightest of college stars will achieve any success in the NFL.

Whether the Jackets’ latest batch of NFL players will make it big or succumb to the NFL’s high pressure environment will be a small subplot in one of professional sports’ most fervently followed theaters.

With academic controversies rocking institutions from Florida State to UNC-Chapel Hill, the term “student athlete” seems to have moved away from the former word and towards the latter.

Questions of compensation and the legitimacy of NCAA rules against certain player activity have arisen, forcing all participants in the system, from athletes to fans to administrators, to confront that college athletics has morphed from a character-building pastime to a highly lucrative business.

When University of Kentucky men’s basketball coach, John Calipari, announced that all of his players, from top-five material to walk-ons, would declare for the NBA draft in an effort to exploit a procedural loophole; it said less about the shrewd Wildcats helmsman than it did about a system in which the college experience is little more than a development league for the truly gifted.

Leaving school after a season is not a sign of disloyalty; it’s a calculated risk, a business decision. One college injury can derail the career of a previously surefire pro prospect, costing him millions in a matter of seconds. Choosing to leave is understandable.

In the face of the increasingly quasi-professional climate of college athletics, Tech’s teams have fared as well or better in the classroom than they have on the field of play. The NCAA’s Annual Progress Report (APR) recognized a number of Jackets teams for their strong academic track record.

Implemented in 2003, APR was implemented in an effort to better quantify the success of Division I athletic programs in maintaining their participants on the path to graduation. Devising a metric for this performance would also allow the NCAA to punish failing schools and reward those that took the education of their student athletes seriously.

In calculating APR, each student-athlete in a program is evaluated out of a possible two points. One point is awarded for staying in school over the course of that year, and another is earned if that student maintains academic eligibility, as determined by GPA, throughout the year.

Once points are tallied up, they are divided by the number of athletes in the program and multiplied by 1,000 to provide a final score. Teams failing to maintain an average score of 930 over a four-year period are disqualified from competing in NCAA championships the following season, courtesy of NCAA.com.

Sixteen percent of teams nationally had a perfect score over a four-year period ending in 2015, and nearly 95 percent would face no sanctions. The best-performing student athletes were ice hockey players, with a four-year APR average of 987, while Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) and Football Championship Subdivision (FCS) competitors brought up the rear of the field, with average scores of 964 and 954 each.

Despite having stronger standing as athletic powerhouses, the so-called ‘Power 5’ conferences — the Big 10, Big 12, Pac-12, SEC and ACC, all of which are granted the ability to legislate certain internal regulations — outscored their less heralded counterparts.

Only 3 percent of Power 5 squads face ineligibility for NCAA-sanctioned championships, while the same holds true for 6 percent of conferences without autonomous governance.

While national average APR has more or less held steady, 13 of 15 Tech teams improved their scores this year, every program except for the men’s and women’s basketball teams.

Although perfect scores of 1000 for volleyball, men’s swimming and diving and golf are incredible feats, perhaps most impressive on the national spectrum is the lofty 987 posted by Paul Johnson’s Jackets football team. Although Tech suffered through injuries, misfortune and the growing pains of inexperience on Saturdays, their score places them in the 90th percentile nationally and second-best in the conference, courtesy of ramblinwreck.com.

Tech football’s retention and eligibility prowess stands out at a time when the sport lags behind others in preparing its participants for life outside of the sport. Football accounts for 5 of the 16 men’s teams that lost postseason access after the 2014-15 season thanks to low APR scores.

These accolades are no stranger to the Jackets. The men’s golf team, for example, has sustained a decade of success under head coach Bruce Heppler, wining the APR Public Recognition award each year.

Whether Tech’s teams will improve on a mostly tepid showing across the board last season remains an open question,. In the blink of an eye, a season that seems destined to end in a conference championship or bowl game can slip out of control.

Regardless of how many trophies Tech athletes bring to campus, though, they will no doubt continue a tradition of academic excellence.