For those of you who live and die by recruiting rankings
- Thread starter Irmo Cock
- Start date
For sure, IrmoOriginally posted by Irmo Cock:
Well, let's see...Miami took FSU to the wire and I believe we beat them didn't we? You really can't say that because it's nothing but whiny girly speculation.
lol. i believe if you look up "whiny girly speculation" in the dictionary, you will see the Football Theory of Transitivity (team A beat Team B, Team B beat Team C, therefore Team A is better and should beat Team C) at the very top of the list of examples...Originally posted by Irmo Cock:
Well, let's see...Miami took FSU to the wire and I believe we beat them didn't we? You really can't say that because it's nothing but whiny girly speculation.
Yeah, sure the stats can back up that national champs recruit well, but there are certainly examples of teams who do not recruit well doing big things as well. Mizzou won the East two years in a row, and they have fewer 4 and 5 star guys on their roster and any other SEC school. I believe TCU recruits mostly lower level guys- 2 and 3 star guys- and they should have been in the playoffs this year. ONE 4* on their roster this year!
It is important to get good players, but splitting hairs over one 4* kid over another is stupid... Once you get good players, you have to coach them up and put them in position to succeed,
It is important to get good players, but splitting hairs over one 4* kid over another is stupid... Once you get good players, you have to coach them up and put them in position to succeed,
I don't understand how anyone can honestly argue that recruiting ranking aren't that important? Do you think it's just a coincidence that our best years came with Clowney, Lattimore, Gilmore, Alshon, etc.? When we had our share of top rated recruits, we were an elite team. They left, and we are not elite anymore. Every class doesn't have to be spectacular, but you can't go three or four years in a row filling needs. At some point, to win you have to have some elite players.
And yes Missouri won the east two years in a row, but in those two years they beat one SEC team that finished with a winning conference record. One in two years! And they have been flat embarrassed in the title games when they had to play teams that have recruited at an elite level ranking wise.
And yes Missouri won the east two years in a row, but in those two years they beat one SEC team that finished with a winning conference record. One in two years! And they have been flat embarrassed in the title games when they had to play teams that have recruited at an elite level ranking wise.
Virginia Tech beat Ohio State. Wake Forest beat Virginia Tech.
Wake Forest = National Champion!
usc got a Wake Forest transfer.
usc = National Champion!
Wake Forest = National Champion!
usc got a Wake Forest transfer.
usc = National Champion!
Ohio State
2010 class ranked # 25, 2011 class ranked # 11, 2012 class ranked #4, 2013 class ranked # 2
2014 class ranked # 3
Average 5 year ranking # 9
Previous 4 year ranking #5
South Carolina
2010 class ranked #24, 2011 class ranked # 18, 2012 class ranked # 19, 2013 class ranked # 16
2014 class ranked # 16
Average 5 year ranking # 18.6
Previous 4 year ranking # 17
math wins = I win.
Originally posted by Irmo Cock
Noooo it didn't. You forgot to put ours up too. You are NOT gonna win this one sonny.
Saying yall are the national champion because of a wake forest transfer makes more sense than saying you would get the doors blown off by any team in the playoff?
I don't know what is so wonderful about this years class. Maybe, compared to the incoming freshmen class next year will be head and shoulders ahead of this years class.What I'm trying to say is it may yield more wins to have the third best class next year than the best one this year. Is the basic assumption here that every class is just as good as the last or the next?
TCU's Rival's rankings over the last 5 years has been somewhere between 30-50. They have only had a handful of 4-stars over this period. Their entire team has been built almost exclusively with 3-star recruits. Having said that, I'd rather have the 4-5 star guys, but TCU has done quite well without them.
pepsicock
Well-Known Member
I don't know why anyone wants to argue our recruiting is fine as i. We are way behind the times, drastically outspent, and need to figure out how to market ourselves to great players outside of South Carolina. When we actually land a couple of 5 stars from another state I'll Consider revising this opinion.
Here's a question...who rates these players? Does Rivals, ESPN, and other agencies sit around a room and watch a couple of games and throw out stars? Based on stats I've seen they are less then 50% accuracy rate. BTW, JJ Watt was a 2 star according to his tweeter feed. It's all about the desire of the young man and what coaches can do with them. Give me a 3 star athlete who works his ass off vs. a 5 star dude who thinks he's all that any day.
How about compare a 5 star who works is ass of to a 3 star who works his ass off. The 5 star is going to be better most of the time. These ratings are not garbage. They're not perfect by any means, but they are a pretty good tool for predicting how well teams perform in actual games.
Here's a stat...this years Super Bowl...0 5 stars, four 4 stars and the rest 3 or lower. Im saying who ever evaluates these guys are more wrong then right.
Not according to Jesse Palmer. He still calls you South Carolina's "little brother." Said when Clemson wins FIVE in a row...then it may go back to being referred to the other way. BTW...what recent national championship trophy you got in your trophy case?
We have two men's baseball trophies from 2010 and 2011.
Sorry buddy but both teams had a 5 stars on the team . Christine Michael for the Seahawks and Dominique Easley on IR for the pats . If you think stars don't matter read this .
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football-recruiting/2014/2/18/5312840/college-football-recruiting-teams-championships
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football-recruiting/2014/5/12/5696710/nfl-draft-recruits-five-stars-two-stars
http://sports.yahoo.com/texas/football/recruiting/player-Christine-Michael-63777
http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/recruiting/player-Dominique-Easley-92086
What the ratings are-
When comparing one specific player vs another it is completely subjective garbage and a craps shoot. You have no idea if this highly rated HS player will wash out or be a star, and you have no idea if this "low rated" 2* kid will turn into JJ Watt by his senior year. Nobody can predict the future and you can name dozens of examples of 5* guys who did terrible compared to 3* kids who got drafted... It is a total guess and arguments using specific player examples are silly...
The team rankings- consensus ranking across all sites- are the best indicator we have of how a class stacks up against others UNTIL THEY GET ON THE FIELD. Team class rankings are still far from an exact science, but they are a decent barometer for a measure of the level of talent a team has.
Arguing who is better among a 4* vs a 5* when one is a 6.0 and the other a 6.1 rating on Rivals is silly as there really is no measurable difference. When you are compare guys rated apart by a couple TENTHS of a percent you are truly splitting hairs and any recruiting analyst for this site will tell you that. Who gets that 5th star is as much about visibility, getting your tape out there and creating a buzz at camps as it is about who actually has more talent.
In the end, if someone winds up with a class ranked #31, is there a big difference between them and a class ranked top 5? PROBABLY, YES. If someone was ranked... Say #20, is there a big difference between them and #15? Probably NOT, NO. In my experience you just want to stack your rosters with talent pretty comparable to your opponents, fill your needs, recruit players to fit your style... Then it is all down to who can coach them up the best! We are NEVER going to recruit like Bama! That top 5 class ranking we had at one point was simply the product of us having more guys committed earlier than most the other teams... We didn't have the kind of star power to keep it there and as other guys added more flash, they would have passed us whether we kept all the players we had or not... Might have wound up as a top 15 class instead of a top 20, but who knows if it would have made a big difference in the future of our program or not. We FILLED OUR NEEDS, we got loads of great talent at DL, OL, WR, DB... This is a solid class with enough difference makers to change the face of our D Game 1 next season. Now we just have to coach 'em up and we added a guy to help us do that too!
Compare us to clemzun all day, but they LOST the only good coach on their staff this offseason and have a clown for a head coach and a DC who was a reject the picked up from Okla. while we have a LEGEND- one of the most feared and respected names in the history of college football running our program. I will take my chances with our top 20 guys. We may not win a NC next year, but there is no reason to think we cannot improve over last season and build towards championship contention with the guys we have and the ones we are bringing in.
When comparing one specific player vs another it is completely subjective garbage and a craps shoot. You have no idea if this highly rated HS player will wash out or be a star, and you have no idea if this "low rated" 2* kid will turn into JJ Watt by his senior year. Nobody can predict the future and you can name dozens of examples of 5* guys who did terrible compared to 3* kids who got drafted... It is a total guess and arguments using specific player examples are silly...
The team rankings- consensus ranking across all sites- are the best indicator we have of how a class stacks up against others UNTIL THEY GET ON THE FIELD. Team class rankings are still far from an exact science, but they are a decent barometer for a measure of the level of talent a team has.
Arguing who is better among a 4* vs a 5* when one is a 6.0 and the other a 6.1 rating on Rivals is silly as there really is no measurable difference. When you are compare guys rated apart by a couple TENTHS of a percent you are truly splitting hairs and any recruiting analyst for this site will tell you that. Who gets that 5th star is as much about visibility, getting your tape out there and creating a buzz at camps as it is about who actually has more talent.
In the end, if someone winds up with a class ranked #31, is there a big difference between them and a class ranked top 5? PROBABLY, YES. If someone was ranked... Say #20, is there a big difference between them and #15? Probably NOT, NO. In my experience you just want to stack your rosters with talent pretty comparable to your opponents, fill your needs, recruit players to fit your style... Then it is all down to who can coach them up the best! We are NEVER going to recruit like Bama! That top 5 class ranking we had at one point was simply the product of us having more guys committed earlier than most the other teams... We didn't have the kind of star power to keep it there and as other guys added more flash, they would have passed us whether we kept all the players we had or not... Might have wound up as a top 15 class instead of a top 20, but who knows if it would have made a big difference in the future of our program or not. We FILLED OUR NEEDS, we got loads of great talent at DL, OL, WR, DB... This is a solid class with enough difference makers to change the face of our D Game 1 next season. Now we just have to coach 'em up and we added a guy to help us do that too!
Compare us to clemzun all day, but they LOST the only good coach on their staff this offseason and have a clown for a head coach and a DC who was a reject the picked up from Okla. while we have a LEGEND- one of the most feared and respected names in the history of college football running our program. I will take my chances with our top 20 guys. We may not win a NC next year, but there is no reason to think we cannot improve over last season and build towards championship contention with the guys we have and the ones we are bringing in.
congrats on finally winning one. The last time Clemson won Miley Cyrus was still Hana Montana and the recruits from this year were in what? 8th grade? You know, like 2,000 days ago.
Clemson fans are the most delusional on the planet.
Clemson fans are the most delusional on the planet.
I agree 100% with what I highlighted. I don't agree with much past that. Good post though. Not everyone has to agree.
Actually, you guys were pretty even. Since 2005:
Year----------Clemson-------------South Carolina
2005.................17th............................23d
2006.................15th............................24th
2007.................21st..............................6th
2008.................12th............................22d
2009.................37th............................12th
2010.................18th............................25th
2011...................8th............................18th
2012.................14th............................19th
2013.................14th............................16th
2014.................13th............................16th
2015...................4th............................19th
Average..........15th............................18th
As for QB, it often is the key. The key to your success from 2011-13 was not your explosive offense. It was your defense and Connor Shaw. You need to find another Connor Shaw to keep your drives alive. Your defense will return to the top 20, as you return eight starters from last year. Inexperience was the cause of your defensive decline last year.
Your biggest obstacle is your schedule, which may well be the toughest in the SEC this year:
North Carolina returns most of their team. They will be tougher this year.
Kentucky returns the heart of their team. They will be a handful.
Georgia is Georgia, and this year, it will be between the hedges.
UCF loses 13 starters, so they will be worse.
Mizzou returns much of their team, plays you at Mizzou, and is coming off a two-year record of 23-5. Ouch!
LSU returns 15 starters and looks to be better than last year. Fortunately, you have them at home.
Vandy returns to being Vandy. No worries.
Texas A&M, however, gets stronger, and the game's at College Station.
Tennessee is my choice to make the biggest jump this year with excellent QBs and 18 returned staraters.
Florida loses 12 starters but have a new coaching staff. The game is at W-B, so you should win.
Clemson loses 11 starters but have been recruiting well. Fortunately, you have them at home.
Bowl game is always 50/50
The Gamecocks could very easily have one of the top teams in the SEC and still finish 7-6.
Recruiting rankings do matter. Just look at the correlation between final poll ranking and recruiting rankings. Normally these go hand in hand. Bama, OSU, FSU, LSU, and others are always up there in both recruiting and the final polls each season.
However, the TCU's and Boise State's of the college football world say HELLO. These schools, along with Baylor and a few others are never ranked highly in recruiting, yet they win big on the field.
The truth is that better players make better coaches, and the better coaches turn decent players into better players. One of these alone does not guarantee success on the field.
However, the TCU's and Boise State's of the college football world say HELLO. These schools, along with Baylor and a few others are never ranked highly in recruiting, yet they win big on the field.
The truth is that better players make better coaches, and the better coaches turn decent players into better players. One of these alone does not guarantee success on the field.
Similar threads
