Jeff Scott - Clemson's Recruiting Legend (link)
- Thread starter AtlasShrugged
- Start date
I like how Brad Scott says coaches who know x's and 0's are a dime a dozen so you better know how to recruit. I think it's backwards. I think the majority of coaches don't know jack about how to coach football. That's why they need to be good recruiters. Case in point Ward.
Got to give credit where its due
Those hicks can recruit. They have 12 top 300 recruits already and expect to close a couple more
Those hicks can recruit. They have 12 top 300 recruits already and expect to close a couple more
Agreed. And based on what they are recruiting to, they're probably the best recruiters in the country. I know that sounds like a jab, but it wasn't meant to be. Clemson isn't near the level of Bama, Florida, Florida State, etc but these guys beat programs like that for big time players in their own states every year.
Mike Bellamy, Lateek Townsend, Charon Peake, Willie Korn, and others say HELLO!
CU does recruit well. They can sell a small town environment to single moms worried about trouble, being a big fish in a crappy pond (acc football), and of course their 'great' traditions.....
Why wouldn't CU be successful. They have the largest fan base, stadium, and other areas that give them advantages over almost every school they play annually. Only FSU and VT can boast about fans, stadiums, and facilities on par with Clempsun. USC, on the other hand, is looking up at Bama, LSU, UGA, UF, AU, TA&M and UT in regards to stadium size, facilities, etc.
Hell, if USC were in the acc, and thank gawd we saw the light in 1971, we would be in the elite class for stadiums, facilities, and fan support as well.
This post was edited on 1/20 4:15 PM by hobcawcreekcock
CU does recruit well. They can sell a small town environment to single moms worried about trouble, being a big fish in a crappy pond (acc football), and of course their 'great' traditions.....
Why wouldn't CU be successful. They have the largest fan base, stadium, and other areas that give them advantages over almost every school they play annually. Only FSU and VT can boast about fans, stadiums, and facilities on par with Clempsun. USC, on the other hand, is looking up at Bama, LSU, UGA, UF, AU, TA&M and UT in regards to stadium size, facilities, etc.
Hell, if USC were in the acc, and thank gawd we saw the light in 1971, we would be in the elite class for stadiums, facilities, and fan support as well.
This post was edited on 1/20 4:15 PM by hobcawcreekcock
"One thing my dad told me from the very beginning, 'If you're going to make it in the coaching profession at the college level, you better be a great recruiter,'" Scott said. "
LOL. Should have done that at USC.
LOL. Should have done that at USC.
Every program has it's busts. I don't know USC football well enough to name yours, but I bet you could.
We do recruit well, but so do you. It's only this year that has seen some dissatisfaction with your recruiting and you are still sitting in the top 15... Not to shabby for a 7-6 season. We recruit with what we have, just like you. We have among the biggest fan bases and stadiums in the conference along with the small town environment. We sell that as hard as we can.
You play in the best conference in college football. Come play the best! Full huge stadiums every week, TV, etc. You sell that as hard as you can and I don't blame you. In fact, you are selling it right now to excuse why you aren't the best. I'd do the same thing.
The only thing I really disagree with is your last statement. You did leave the ACC in 1971 (and for good reason IMHO). But I'd suggest that your assent into a powerful football program didn't begin until you joined the SEC and SS became your coach. Until then, mediocre is a kind way to describe USC football. So if you'd stayed in the ACC, would you have the same facilities, advantages you've bought with SEC money? More importantly, would SS have come to coach at USC? I don't think anyone can answer what the state of your program would be. I'd be willing to bet it wouldn't be as good as it is now.
USC has certainly had busts in recruiting, which is why I brought up the names of the CU guys above. Recruiting is an in-exact science. Many 5* guys 'pan out', some don't. Recruiting services DO NOT evaluate heart, work ethic, team work, and character. Pat Dimarco is a perfect example of a guy that came to USC as a 2* recruit. He has played three full seasons in the NFL to date. Ko Simpson was a 2*, Sydney Rice 3*.
Finally, I will agree that USC football 'took off' after Spurrier's hire. We did have many decent years in between, and would have won the acc in 1984, 1987, and a few other years based on wins and losses with acc schools.
While leaving the acc killed a VERY GOOD USC basketball program, in the long run, it was one of the best things Carolina did athletically. We are reaping the benefits of SEC membership, monetarily and in reputation. Thank you FSU for not accepting the SEC overtures in 1991!
Appreciate the civil tone of your response, but you are a visitor here. I've seen much worse though.
And please tell me about all of those powerhouse Clemson football teams. You people are delusional as shit.
Funny, they don't mention Brad's time at USC. Wonder why? Because he was an absolute failure as a HC, that's why.
Nice post 13. Pretty accurate, I'd say. I will add that I think Clemson is where it is today after their last three coaches due to the hiring of SOS. Clemson realized that our time had come and they have pulled out all the stops to keep up, and therefore they have uplifted their program to this level. Our challenge will be finding the right replacement after he retires in 2-4 years. you have your advantages in recruiting as do we. There's not much difference in in a top ten class and a top 20 class, as long as you meet your needs.Then, thats where coaching and developing talent makes the difference.
People say this a lot, but I completely disagree. I'd agree if the top 20 class met there needs and the top 10 class didn't. But if they both meet their needs, top 10 classes are usually significantly better than those closer to a 20 ranking.
I remember Fat Scott getting busted by some high school coaches for
telling recruits lies about USC's academics and all. The coaches called USC and he got busted for it. I wonder if Jeff learned dirty recruiting and cheating from his dad? Perhaps other schools need to remind recruits what a racist school Clemson is and how their fans worship Ben Tillman?
telling recruits lies about USC's academics and all. The coaches called USC and he got busted for it. I wonder if Jeff learned dirty recruiting and cheating from his dad? Perhaps other schools need to remind recruits what a racist school Clemson is and how their fans worship Ben Tillman?
Since joining the SEC, Clemson has won 13 games and we have won 10 in the rivalry, Since the 21st Century, the series in tied 7-7. The benefits of the SEC are a big reason for this and that is why we landed Holtz and Spurrier IMO.
Now that the SEC Network launched in August, our recruiting will continue to improve and the future is brighter now than ever before.
Clemson has a losing record against every team in the SEC including Kentucky and Vanderbilt. Since we have finally become a good SEC program, we are dominating them too.
Now that the SEC Network launched in August, our recruiting will continue to improve and the future is brighter now than ever before.
Clemson has a losing record against every team in the SEC including Kentucky and Vanderbilt. Since we have finally become a good SEC program, we are dominating them too.
You can check it on this great site named winsipedia.com - they are 2-0 against Missouri but every other SEC has more wins against them than losses. Kentucky, Vanderbilt, and Arkansas have the advantage over Clemson.
Now that we have joined the SEC, it has made us better and soon our win total over Clemson since 1992 will exceed the wins they have over us.
Now that we have joined the SEC, it has made us better and soon our win total over Clemson since 1992 will exceed the wins they have over us.
I'm not sure what this has to do with the original topic or why wins and losses so far in the past seem to be an issue but if you want to go with historic facts then be my guest.
First, there are 3 teams on the list of SEC schools that do not have a winning record against Clemson. For whatever reason, you did not mention Mississippi State and the record shows 1-1-1 against them.
Second, Did you note that USC has a losing record against all but 3 of the SEC teams you mention as well as 7 of the ACC representatives inluding Duke? Heck, lets throw in a few more for good measure. USC currently has a losing record against all of the following:
Washington & Lee (VA) 2-3-0
Centre (KY) 1-2-0
Catholic (DC) 1-2-0
Davidson (NC) 6-14-0
Villanova (PA) 1-4-1
North Carolina Medical College 0-1-0
Georgia Navy Pre-Flight 0-1-0
Georgetown (DC) 0-1-0
Fort Benning - 176th Infantry (GA) 0-1-0
Fordham (NY) 0-1-0
Charleston YMCA (SC) 0-2-0
Charleston AC (SC) 0-1-0
Charleston AA (SC) 0-1-0
Augusta YMCA (GA) 0-1-0
Tell me again why any of this matters when it comes to Jeff Scott and his current recruiting?
If your not winning you're losing. Clemson has winning records against SC and Missouri in the SEC. They are. 500 with Mississippi State but that is not winning.
Clemson has been outscored by Vanderbilt 111 to 32.
Clemson's alltime winning% against the SEC is about 45%. Remove our pre-SEC games from that calculation and I estimate it would be less than 40% winning percentage.
The point is Clemson has a tough time beating teams that have resources dedicated to winning football games. The SEC provides resources that benefit member programs immensely. The teams beat each other up, but when the play teams on the outside like Clemson, they normally win.
Clemson has been outscored by Vanderbilt 111 to 32.
Clemson's alltime winning% against the SEC is about 45%. Remove our pre-SEC games from that calculation and I estimate it would be less than 40% winning percentage.
The point is Clemson has a tough time beating teams that have resources dedicated to winning football games. The SEC provides resources that benefit member programs immensely. The teams beat each other up, but when the play teams on the outside like Clemson, they normally win.
Huh? Where did I say that Clemson had a powerhouse football team? I was actually referring to USC (see the bold above). Clemson hasn't had a powerhouse team since the 1980s IMHO. We had a really good defense this year. Don't know if it was the best in the country, but it was legit good. Without Watson at QB, our offense was total crap due to a terrible OL. Put those things together and you have a decent team. Not great, not really even good. Just decent. We won a couple of games we probably shouldn't have and lost one (FSU) that we should have won.
This are two of the most irrelevant numbers there are when if comes to a discussion of how Clemson is today(or even the past 20 years) and how it has been since Jeff Scott has been recruiting for Clemson.
Clemson hasn't played Vandy since 1960 and has only played Miss St once since 1949 and that was in 1999 when I believe Scott was still a player.
