We now have justification for pouring needed funds into recruiting . . .

[67gamecock]

There's an article in today's State paper re: the million (or so) $$$ Clemron poured into their recruiting 'department' under new director, Thad Turnipseed. I remember reading about this program-in-the-making a year or so ago. Their Prez went to their BOT and asked for approval for funding an internet accessed information website about 'all that is Clemson' - it was a football recruiting program in disguise. It appears to be working quite well.

We need to implement one that's . . . better.
This post was edited on 2/6 9:59 AM by 67gamecock

 

[G-C-Gamecock]

I see what you're saying, but we have had justification for years. We play in the SEC and are consistently out-recruited by other SEC programs, not to mention our in-state rivals. If that's not justification, I don't know what is. Regardless, recruiting won't be a major focus with HBC here. It hasn't been his entire career and won't change now.

 

[Cackdiesel]

Originally posted by G-C-Gamecock:
I see what you're saying, but we have had justification for years. We play in the SEC and are consistently out-recruited by other SEC programs, not to mention our in-state rivals. If that's not justification, I don't know what is. Regardless, recruiting won't be a major focus with HBC here. It hasn't been his entire career and won't change now.

Not to mention that at some point, he knows he won't be coaching the players he's recruiting. I'm not saying that Spurrier would intentionally give up on recruting, but it's human nature to not be as invested in the process when you know you won't be around to coach the recruits. And that starts happening 2-3 years before an impending retirement.

 

[67gamecock]

Originally posted by G-C-Gamecock:
I see what you're saying, but we have had justification for years. We play in the SEC and are consistently out-recruited by other SEC programs, not to mention our in-state rivals. If that's not justification, I don't know what is. Regardless, recruiting won't be a major focus with HBC here. It hasn't been his entire career and won't change now.

The Clem AD and Prez had to get Board approval for buying the software for this program - $250-$300,000 at least and, possibly, approval as well from State Budget & Control. I assume we'll have to do much of the same if we're going to implement a program that's worth the effort.

 

[67gamecock]

Originally posted by Cackdiesel:

Originally posted by G-C-Gamecock:
I see what you're saying, but we have had justification for years. We play in the SEC and are consistently out-recruited by other SEC programs, not to mention our in-state rivals. If that's not justification, I don't know what is. Regardless, recruiting won't be a major focus with HBC here. It hasn't been his entire career and won't change now.

Not to mention that at some point, he knows he won't be coaching the players he's recruiting. I'm not saying that Spurrier would intentionally give up on recruting, but it's human nature to not be as invested in the process when you know you won't be around to coach the recruits. And that starts happening 2-3 years before an impending retirement.

Why wait to right the (recruiting) ship? Why not set up the infrastructure (at least an organization chart, computer software, funding, etc.) now and get the ball rolling for the next HC. Turnipseed at Clem is not a coach - he's an AD Administrative employee.

This is a matter for Ray Tanner to take up . . . now. Time and SEC football wait for no man.

 

[ReadR00ster]

Well, we have to pay for two defensive coordinators, so that might put a damper on our recruiting budget.

 

[Cackdiesel]

Originally posted by 67gamecock:

Originally posted by Cackdiesel:

Originally posted by G-C-Gamecock:
I see what you're saying, but we have had justification for years. We play in the SEC and are consistently out-recruited by other SEC programs, not to mention our in-state rivals. If that's not justification, I don't know what is. Regardless, recruiting won't be a major focus with HBC here. It hasn't been his entire career and won't change now.

Not to mention that at some point, he knows he won't be coaching the players he's recruiting. I'm not saying that Spurrier would intentionally give up on recruting, but it's human nature to not be as invested in the process when you know you won't be around to coach the recruits. And that starts happening 2-3 years before an impending retirement.

Why wait to right the (recruiting) ship? Why not set up the infrastructure (at least an organization chart, computer software, funding, etc.) now and get the ball rolling for the next HC. Turnipseed at Clem is not a coach - he's an AD Administrative employee.

This is a matter for Ray Tanner to take up . . . now. Time and SEC football wait for no man.

I agree with you. I was just adding to the previous post.

 

[gamecockjosh]

Originally posted by ReadR00ster:
Well, we have to pay for two defensive coordinators, so that might put a damper on our recruiting budget.

I hope our BOT is not thinking this way. If you sell 80,000 tickets per game at 7 home games, that's roughly 560,000 tickets per year. Raise ticket prices two dollars a ticket and you have a million to spend on an infrastructure to recruit better. Recruit better and you win a national championship. Win a national championship and you get royalty dollars from everyone buying your stuff all over the country, sell out every home game, make much, much more money. Obviously I've oversimplified things, but the key is that sometimes you have to spend money to make money. Football is our cash cow....so spending more money on football is a good investment!

 

[dphillips593897]

Tunipseed was Bama's Recruiting administrator, and also a good friend of Dabo's at Alabama. Since Turnipseed arrived at Clemson, they now have a whole department organized only for recruiting and re-branding the Clemson name. The past 4-5 years our recruiting classes have been so close it didn't really matter who was ahead in the rankings, but pulling in a top 5 class with the amount of top 50 and top 100 players is pretty impressive. Seems what ever changes Turnipseed is implementing is working. Recruiting is a major part of building a program, and they are not only going after the skill players but they are also getting elite players in the trenches. This is where we have had a significant advantage over Clemson in previous years. The past 2 years their OL & DL classes have been impressive, also hitting on Alexander was huge for them.

 

[JKC4USC]

My suggestion for those that have concerns is to write to Ray Tanner and express said concerns. Ask questions, and politely ask for a response.

 

[hopefultiger13]

Originally posted by dphillips593897:
Tunipseed was Bama's Recruiting administrator, and also a good friend of Dabo's at Alabama. Since Turnipseed arrived at Clemson, they now have a whole department organized only for recruiting and re-branding the Clemson name. The past 4-5 years our recruiting classes have been so close it didn't really matter who was ahead in the rankings, but pulling in a top 5 class with the amount of top 50 and top 100 players is pretty impressive. Seems what ever changes Turnipseed is implementing is working. Recruiting is a major part of building a program, and they are not only going after the skill players but they are also getting elite players in the trenches. This is where we have had a significant advantage over Clemson in previous years. The past 2 years their OL & DL classes have been impressive, also hitting on Alexander was huge for them.

Big changes for sure. Interesting interview over the wire with Jeff Scott on this. He said when he took over the recruiting from Billy Napier, there were boxes of stuff (paper, charts, etc) that had to get moved from Napier's office to his and it was a big deal. He also talked about coaching players during practices and then running to his office to do recruiting stuff between meetings with only a couple of Grad students to help.

Now everything's software based and Turnipseed's office handles all the grunt work while leaving the recruiting coordinator to make contact calls and visits as the contact rules are still pretty tight. Handing the title off to Streeter, JS handed him a jump drive with a contact schedule on it and that was it.

 

[island mind]

Why does everyone worry about Clemson? Need to worry about all

the SEC teams in front. If you're good enough to win the SEC, you'll beat Clemson. But if Clemson is the "standard" you're striving to attain, may as well change conferences.

 

[Cackdiesel]

Re: Why does everyone worry about Clemson? Need to worry about all

Originally posted by island mind:
the SEC teams in front. If you're good enough to win the SEC, you'll beat Clemson. But if Clemson is the "standard" you're striving to attain, may as well change conferences.

I used to say that too. Bury your head in the sand if you want, but the improved recruiting up there is a game changer.

 

[67gamecock]

Re: Why does everyone worry about Clemson? Need to worry about all

Oh, good grief, island, I don't give a crap what Clemson is doing, but I DO care about what Carolina is or is not doing to improve our football recruiting and, right now, we need to bump it up to the next level.

 

[Pruittmatt44]

How much does our football ticket sales keep other sports afloat? I wrote a paper two years ago regarding whether or not programs could afford to pay its student athletes and my arguement was similar to what you just mentioned about ticket sales, of course my pay program constituted them being awarded the average pay of an part time job every other full time college student would be working. But what I found was actually quite interesting, but that's for a different topic. Back to the first point, for our other sports teams like our great equestrian team, what is able to fund them?

 

[pepsicock]

You mean to tell me THE YES PROGRAM is not working ?

 

[Number1pjones]

Re: Why does everyone worry about Clemson? Need to worry about all

Originally posted by island mind:
the SEC teams in front. If you're good enough to win the SEC, you'll beat Clemson. But if Clemson is the "standard" you're striving to attain, may as well change conferences.

What? Although klempsun is in a different conference, they are our in-state competition for recruits. They flipped Fields, if you haven't heard. Yeah, we better make some headway on the recruiting front or the taters will be leaving the bones for the buzzards(us).

We're talking about recruiting and we should be focused on klempsun and the other teams in the East. Look what Tennessee is doing. Georgia and Florida will always recruit at a high level when their staff is stable. But now Tenn has made a big move and Mizzou is improving their recruiting. We've already been left behind and if we don't try to catch up, we'll be back where we started. I do not want to see this program go back to losing to Georgia, Florida, Tenn and klempsun every year.

 

[island mind]

Do you think Spurrier recruits as hard as Dabo? If the answer is

anything other than yes, then there's your problem. Recruiting starts at the top. Dabo convinced them to do/spend all they can promoting their brand. If The Head Ball Coach would do the same, then there will be improvement. It really boils down to a difference in philosophies in my opinion. Clemson uses a lot of smoke and mirrors and flash to sell and like it or not, 17-18 year old kids think it's great. 40 year old Internet coaches might think it's stupid and might think they have a head cheerleader. But guess what…they're not recruiting you. They had a DJ on signing morning and partying it up. They know what they're doing on the recruiting trail. Coach Spurrier could coach circles around most head coaches he faces even at 70 years old. But he has a ways to go if he wants to be relevant on the recruiting trail. If he can develop 3 star guys into winning 11 games a season, imagine what he could do with a stable full of 4 & 5 stars.

 

[Cackdiesel]

Re: Do you think Spurrier recruits as hard as Dabo? If the answer is

Originally posted by island mind:
anything other than yes, then there's your problem. Recruiting starts at the top. Dabo convinced them to do/spend all they can promoting their brand. If The Head Ball Coach would do the same, then there will be improvement. It really boils down to a difference in philosophies in my opinion. Clemson uses a lot of smoke and mirrors and flash to sell and like it or not, 17-18 year old kids think it's great. 40 year old Internet coaches might think it's stupid and might think they have a head cheerleader. But guess what…they're not recruiting you. They had a DJ on signing morning and partying it up. They know what they're doing on the recruiting trail. Coach Spurrier could coach circles around most head coaches he faces even at 70 years old. But he has a ways to go if he wants to be relevant on the recruiting trail. If he can develop 3 star guys into winning 11 games a season, imagine what he could do with a stable full of 4 & 5 stars.

Did you highjack the first guys account? Did these two posts come from the same person?

 

[ReadR00ster]

Originally posted by 67gamecock:

There's an article in today's State paper re: the million (or so) $$$ Clemron poured into their recruiting 'department' under new director, Thad Turnipseed. I remember reading about this program-in-the-making a year or so ago. Their Prez went to their BOT and asked for approval for funding an internet accessed information website about 'all that is Clemson' - it was a football recruiting program in disguise. It appears to be working quite well.

We need to implement one that's . . . better.
This post was edited on 2/6 9:59 AM by 67gamecock

I don't think it's necessary. I think Spurrier get's whatever money he wants if his coaches tell him. They only need a certain amount of money to execute their recruiting plan and unlike some schools it doesn't include paying players to play for us.

 

[tigerRob1981]

Re: Do you think Spurrier recruits as hard as Dabo? If the answer is

Clemson's goal is to be able to beat whoever we play whether it be ACC, SEC, BIG 12, etc. If we keep building the line, something I feel has been suffering for a while, I don't see a reason we shouldn't. Players don't automatically become better once they put on a jersey that has SEC or any other conference branding on it. It didn't take Mizz or A&M years to recruit well enough to be able to compete in the SEC. You guys have the money to buy any software you guys want. One of good friends if a SC fan and he talks about the ever widening gap between SEC revenue versus everyone else. I'm sure if Tanner wants it and Spurrier sees the importance you will have it.

You still pulled in a nice class this year.

 

[67gamecock]

Re: Do you think Spurrier recruits as hard as Dabo? If the answer is

Originally posted by island mind:
anything other than yes, then there's your problem. Recruiting starts at the top. Dabo convinced them to do/spend all they can promoting their brand. If The Head Ball Coach would do the same, then there will be improvement. It really boils down to a difference in philosophies in my opinion. Clemson uses a lot of smoke and mirrors and flash to sell and like it or not, 17-18 year old kids think it's great. 40 year old Internet coaches might think it's stupid and might think they have a head cheerleader. But guess what…they're not recruiting you. They had a DJ on signing morning and partying it up. They know what they're doing on the recruiting trail. Coach Spurrier could coach circles around most head coaches he faces even at 70 years old. But he has a ways to go if he wants to be relevant on the recruiting trail. If he can develop 3 star guys into winning 11 games a season, imagine what he could do with a stable full of 4 & 5 stars.

Imo, a coach has to really LOVE recruiting AND have all the TOOLS on hand to be successful at it. Unfortunately SOS and USC are absent both of these necessary criteria .

 

[island mind]

Re: Do you think Spurrier recruits as hard as Dabo? If the answer is

Agree 100%. Here's hoping that will change somewhere down the line.

 

[LegalTiger]

Re: Do you think Spurrier recruits as hard as Dabo? If the answer is

Originally posted by Cackdiesel:

Originally posted by island mind:
anything other than yes, then there's your problem. Recruiting starts at the top. Dabo convinced them to do/spend all they can promoting their brand. If The Head Ball Coach would do the same, then there will be improvement. It really boils down to a difference in philosophies in my opinion. Clemson uses a lot of smoke and mirrors and flash to sell and like it or not, 17-18 year old kids think it's great. 40 year old Internet coaches might think it's stupid and might think they have a head cheerleader. But guess what…they're not recruiting you. They had a DJ on signing morning and partying it up. They know what they're doing on the recruiting trail. Coach Spurrier could coach circles around most head coaches he faces even at 70 years old. But he has a ways to go if he wants to be relevant on the recruiting trail. If he can develop 3 star guys into winning 11 games a season, imagine what he could do with a stable full of 4 & 5 stars.

Did you highjack the first guys account? Did these two posts come from the same person?

I had the same thought...perhaps an internal monologue?

 

[ReadR00ster]

Re: Do you think Spurrier recruits as hard as Dabo? If the answer is

Originally posted by tigerRob1981:
Clemson's goal is to be able to beat whoever we play whether it be ACC, SEC, BIG 12, etc. If we keep building the line, something I feel has been suffering for a while, I don't see a reason we shouldn't. Players don't automatically become better once they put on a jersey that has SEC or any other conference branding on it. It didn't take Mizz or A&M years to recruit well enough to be able to compete in the SEC. You guys have the money to buy any software you guys want. One of good friends if a SC fan and he talks about the ever widening gap between SEC revenue versus everyone else. I'm sure if Tanner wants it and Spurrier sees the importance you will have it.

You still pulled in a nice class this year.

Listen. If you think anyone in and around our football program doesn't think recruiting is a priority just because we don't spend as much money on it, you don't know what you are talking about. We are trying to win the SEC. Spurrier KNOWS how important recruiting is. It's just not the part of the job that he enjoys, so he relies on his staff and our strategy has not been been too kiss the rear ends of the prima donna 4 and 5 star players. We get in on the top guys early and see who out of those top recruits w likes us and those are the ones we focus on. Then we SEARCH the lesser known lower ranked recruits and JUCO players for those that we feel deserve a better rating but aren't being heavily recruited and they jump at our offers. What you saw this year at the end of the recruiting season is not the result of a lack of funding. It's the result of a defense being terrible the year before because players didn't not develop on that side of the ball for 2-3 years straight due to sorry coaching.

We overspend on our coaching. I think we get BANG FOR OUR BUCK when it comes to recruiting, but when it comes to coaching we are getting ripped off.

This post was edited on 2/6 3:50 PM by ReadR00ster

 

[67gamecock]

Originally posted by ReadR00ster:

Originally posted by 67gamecock:

There's an article in today's State paper re: the million (or so) $$$ Clemron poured into their recruiting 'department' under new director, Thad Turnipseed. I remember reading about this program-in-the-making a year or so ago. Their Prez went to their BOT and asked for approval for funding an internet accessed information website about 'all that is Clemson' - it was a football recruiting program in disguise. It appears to be working quite well.

We need to implement one that's . . . better.

This post was edited on 2/6 9:59 AM by 67gamecock

I don't think it's necessary. I think Spurrier get's whatever money he wants if his coaches tell him. They only need a certain amount of money to execute their recruiting plan and unlike some schools it doesn't include paying players to play for us.

Rooster, who said anything about PAYING players? SPENDING money to FIND them, communicating with them, logging them and earmarking the maximum number of contacts/visits you can make, create a website that serves an 18-year old - one that is user friendly and provides comprehensive information about the university and, YES, lots of promotional stuff about the school and its activities, a picture guide to the campus and Columbia (most SEC colleges are located in remote hick towns), etc.
Let's just do better
.
.

 

[ReadR00ster]

Originally posted by 67gamecock:

Originally posted by ReadR00ster:

Originally posted by 67gamecock:

There's an article in today's State paper re: the million (or so) $$$ Clemron poured into their recruiting 'department' under new director, Thad Turnipseed. I remember reading about this program-in-the-making a year or so ago. Their Prez went to their BOT and asked for approval for funding an internet accessed information website about 'all that is Clemson' - it was a football recruiting program in disguise. It appears to be working quite well.

We need to implement one that's . . . better.

This post was edited on 2/6 9:59 AM by 67gamecock

I don't think it's necessary. I think Spurrier get's whatever money he wants if his coaches tell him. They only need a certain amount of money to execute their recruiting plan and unlike some schools it doesn't include paying players to play for us.

Rooster, who said anything about PAYING players? SPENDING money to FIND them, communicating with them, logging them and earmarking the maximum number of contacts/visits you can make, create a website that serves an 18-year old - one that is user friendly and provides comprehensive information about the university and, YES, lots of promotional stuff about the school and its activities, a picture guide to the campus and Columbia (most SEC colleges are located in remote hick towns), etc.
Let's just do better
.
.

The coaches are finding the players and communicating with the. No matter what they aren't going to be constantly harrassing them about committing. They have a low pressure strategy and that is what they believe in, sorry if that bothers you, but it won't change until the head coach does. I don't think we need to increase our recruiting budget to sell our university. I think we need to hire coaches with better people skills to do it and keep improving the facilities.

This post was edited on 2/6 4:55 PM by ReadR00ster

 

[Tidal Creek Cock]

One poster brought up an interesting point about Columbia being a recruiting liability. I respectfully disagree. I think it has a lot more to do with selling the brand as some other posters have talked about. The coaches are selling USC and the campus, not Columbia (which is a great city). Plenty of elite programs are in mid size cities, such as FSU, Tennessee, Ohio State, Texas, and Wisconsin. There are plenty of others. I would consider selling USC a dream job. The campus is awesome. Light years ahead of what it was in the 90's. And so is the stadium and surrounding area (Gamecock Park, renovated fairgrounds, and new plaza being built - which should have been done a long time ago). Being in an urban area offers many advantages over a small town campus and those things need to be highlighted and sold! In many ways USC offers the best of both worlds. You can feel a million miles away in the heart of the campus and still enjoy the perks of a city. I love SOS and all he has done for us. I think a young, high energy, recruiting coordinator is what we need to complement his great coaching mind. And probably a high tech recruiting dept. too.

 

[slingshot22]

Re: Do you think Spurrier recruits as hard as Dabo? If the answer is

Originally posted by LegalTiger:

Originally posted by Cackdiesel:

Originally posted by island mind:
anything other than yes, then there's your problem. Recruiting starts at the top. Dabo convinced them to do/spend all they can promoting their brand. If The Head Ball Coach would do the same, then there will be improvement. It really boils down to a difference in philosophies in my opinion. Clemson uses a lot of smoke and mirrors and flash to sell and like it or not, 17-18 year old kids think it's great. 40 year old Internet coaches might think it's stupid and might think they have a head cheerleader. But guess what…they're not recruiting you. They had a DJ on signing morning and partying it up. They know what they're doing on the recruiting trail. Coach Spurrier could coach circles around most head coaches he faces even at 70 years old. But he has a ways to go if he wants to be relevant on the recruiting trail. If he can develop 3 star guys into winning 11 games a season, imagine what he could do with a stable full of 4 & 5 stars.

Did you highjack the first guys account? Did these two posts come from the same person?

I had the same thought...perhaps an internal monologue?

After we whipped the snot out of clemson the 5th time, Dabo said he had to do something. His players weren't in shape to beat Holloman and our big Defense. He said they didn't play "mean enough" to beat us. Heck, he had to do something.

 

[yeasos]

Originally posted by G-C-Gamecock:
I see what you're saying, but we have had justification for years. We play in the SEC and are consistently out-recruited by other SEC programs, not to mention our in-state rivals. If that's not justification, I don't know what is. Regardless, recruiting won't be a major focus with HBC here. It hasn't been his entire career and won't change now.

That is why no major championships, IMO, but happy with the 11 win seasons.

 

[gcock5]

good points. although a lot of progress has been made, we were well behind the 8 ball. Being picky here: but Austin and Columbus are not mid-size cities- unless the recession was far worse than i thought!

 

[AnCRooster]

We have a low budget because our coaches aren't putting in the effort and resources for recruiting. They aren't choosing to need more money. They aren't being held back by a number on a line.

This post was edited on 2/7 10:26 AM by AnCRooster

 

[Judson1]

To get the same talent here as he had at UF SOS would have to recruit twice as hard. It was only when in state recruiting was hot that we had our best years. You just gotta have great recruiting to sustain success at USC. Current level of recruiting won't do it

 

[tngamecock#]

Lots of morons out tonight.

 

[myrtlecock]

Lots of morons. Check. I want to win a national championship!!! Don't settle for mediocrity!!! Lol! SOS is the single best thing that we have ever had happen to us....yet some of you still want him gone.... Lordy.

 

[FORKCOCK]

I've asked this before.

Are we getting Spurrier's a game?
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[jhcajr]

Any more intelligent threads like this, with both sides participating, and our long rivalry is going to be tainted!!

 

[Irmo Cock]

Originally posted by tngamecock#:
Lots of morons out tonight.

These are our expert whiners, negative nancy's, taters in disguise, and just plain wrong most of the time.

 

[SHillTIger]

Originally posted by myrtlecock:
Lots of morons. Check. I want to win a national championship!!! Don't settle for mediocrity!!! Lol! SOS is the single best thing that we have ever had happen to us....yet some of you still want him gone.... Lordy.

Seems like the majority just want some kind of change in recruiting strategy. Alabama seems to have changed the recruiting game into more of a business than ever before. Clemson took that strategy but on a smaller scale. Recruiting has changed a ton in the past 5 to 10 years and if your strategy doesnt change with it you are likely going to see a drop off.

As a school and as a team USC has a ton to offer a kid IMO but if you dont put that out there the kids wont know about it. It almost seems like in your face and relentless is the only way to get the higher profile kids. I guess its better to be in your face and visible than be laid back and blend in with the crowd.

 

[supersoph1]

Clemson has two offensive cordinator coaches, a def. coord. that makes almost as much as our two def. cord. and they have 17 admin. coaches working in athletic office costing 3-4 million. What do you think about this?