|
Replies: 48
| visibility 2806
|
CU Medallion [19991]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14274
Joined: 2009
|
For the folks so down on our '25 recruiting class,
3
Feb 13, 2025, 11:15 AM
|
|
who from this class would you like to get rid of? Our scholarship numbers and retention dictated the lower number this cycle - no way around that, it was what it was. We had a low max, and what we didn't bring in through the HS ranks we portaled in. But if it's as disastrous, crappy, poor, whatever, as many say - who exactly is the cause of that among our incoming and shouldn't have been signed?
|
|
|
|
 |
TigerNet Champion [118989]
TigerPulse: 100%
65
Posts: 76707
Joined: 2003
|
Re: For the folks so down on our '25 recruiting class,
3
Feb 13, 2025, 11:23 AM
|
|
and elite class would have an elite QB star QB, but hard to evaluate until they get on campus, another stud RB, a couple more 4-5-star linebackers, and we managed to hold onto the 2 4 star Dlinemen we lost.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19991]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14274
Joined: 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [16413]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 11095
Joined: 2024
|
Re: For the folks so down on our '25 recruiting class,
1
Feb 13, 2025, 11:28 AM
|
|
Nobody is going to trash talk like that Einstein.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19991]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14274
Joined: 2009
|
Re: For the folks so down on our '25 recruiting class,
1
Feb 13, 2025, 11:35 AM
|
|
So just trash the whole class and not have the stones to call out the pieces? Gotcha.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [16413]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 11095
Joined: 2024
|
Re: For the folks so down on our '25 recruiting class,
2
Feb 13, 2025, 11:45 AM
|
|
It's more nuanced than that. I think it's going over your head. How about the this? Take the top WR in the nation and replace someone, anyone. Does that work? Take the top LB in the nation and replace someone. Take the top OT and OG in the nation and replace a couple of players. I am sure you could easily do it.and wing it. This is not rocket science. Every class we sign doesn't have the best player in the nation at every position. People like what we have though and are supportive. The OP is just nonsense though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19991]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14274
Joined: 2009
|
Re: For the folks so down on our '25 recruiting class,
1
Feb 13, 2025, 11:55 AM
|
|
It's pretty black and white really. No reason to overthink it. Folks trash our class. It is comprised of 15 HS recruits plus 3 transfers. Who among the '25 class makes it so horrible?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [16413]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 11095
Joined: 2024
|
Re: For the folks so down on our '25 recruiting class,
1
Feb 13, 2025, 12:18 PM
|
|
Okay...if Trevor Lawrence were a recruit right now I would take him over any QB we have committed for 2025 and 2026, as well as any QB in our roster in 2026. Does that work?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19991]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14274
Joined: 2009
|
Re: For the folks so down on our '25 recruiting class,
1
Feb 13, 2025, 1:28 PM
|
|
Trevor Lawrence isn't an option. That's a wild and unapplicable hypothetical to our actual 2025 class that is being thrown under the bus with great regularity around here. We have a reality here, and your example is make believe.
Listen - I understand your points here and know you're not representative of the more doom and gloom set. The OP is clearly a thought exercise to present an uncomfortable reality for many. Trashing the class equates to trashing its components. Almost all of these kids are on campus now. While not the highest rated at any one position, they're all gamers who were solid enough to earn offers from our staff, and they want to be here. Our average player rating there is well within our norm that has produced trips to the mountaintop, and we are chock full of the same around them here now as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [16413]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 11095
Joined: 2024
|
Re: For the folks so down on our '25 recruiting class,
2
Feb 13, 2025, 11:25 AM
|
|
Nobody is going to write anything like you are asking. That said, they might take some random 5 star dude at the same position in a couple of spots. They might even want another stud LB or whatever. Who knows? Maybe a top rated QB? Personally, I like our class. I think it's way underrated. I wish we would have done a little more at LB, but overall it seems solid. Time will tell. It's all about the 2026 class now. Looks like it is going to shape up nicely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1964]
TigerPulse: 87%
31
|
didn't we have 7 guys decommit? and we replaced with lower ranked guys?
5
5
Feb 13, 2025, 11:27 AM
|
|
guessing that's the issue
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [1177]
TigerPulse: 98%
26
|
Re: didn't we have 7 guys decommit? and we replaced with lower ranked guys?
2
Feb 13, 2025, 11:58 AM
|
|
BINGO
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [8191]
TigerPulse: 100%
43
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19991]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14274
Joined: 2009
|
Re: didn't we have 7 guys decommit? and we replaced with lower ranked guys?
Feb 13, 2025, 2:20 PM
|
|
I disagree. The small size and subsequent overall ranking tied to that is what has many people in a tizzy. The '25 class rankings are referenced constantly in fretting about our future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [7064]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
|
Re: didn't we have 7 guys decommit? and we replaced with lower ranked guys?
Feb 13, 2025, 3:08 PM
|
|
If we had the decommits instead of their replacements this becomes a top 10 class with the exact same number of players, so claiming a small class is entirely to blame isn't entirely correct.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19991]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14274
Joined: 2009
|
Re: didn't we have 7 guys decommit? and we replaced with lower ranked guys?
Feb 13, 2025, 4:10 PM
|
|
The math doesn't come close to checking out on that one, even with 17 commits we were on pace for versus the 15 we wound up with. We would have maybe finished around 20th or so, tops. Blame it on retention and simple timing of less players exhausting their eligibility this year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [22764]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 14579
Joined: 1995
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19991]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14274
Joined: 2009
|
Re: Pumper gonna pump.
Feb 13, 2025, 12:16 PM
|
|
Who is it in this class that disappoints you for the class to be such a disappointment?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [16413]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 11095
Joined: 2024
|
Re: Pumper gonna pump.
Feb 13, 2025, 12:19 PM
|
|
So you're saying you think we have the top class in the nation? If not, why not?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19991]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14274
Joined: 2009
|
Re: Pumper gonna pump.
1
Feb 13, 2025, 1:04 PM
|
|
I believe we brought in a class of kids who our coaches wanted to be in the program or they wouldn't be here. I believe these kids, like those in all of our recruiting classes, really want to be here in this program also and are All In about it. I believe these kids will help us compete for championships in the coming years because that's how our program rolls. That Dabo and the staff stopped at 15 at the HS level when we were looking to fill 17 open spots, and opted for the portal route instead to fill in gaps, says a lot about the faith the staff has in the freshman signees we did bring in or we would have stopped earlier. And yeah, I have tremendous faith in our program leadership to trust them on that. No one does more with less with such dogged consistency in this sport than Dabo, and it's not even close.
If you're going solely on rankings services you have your answer. Being #1 there has never been our thing. It's very hard for us to approach that number because our retention and development aspect just doesn't free up enough room annually for us to bring in enough volume. We have our top class, though, because that's who we offered and signed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [16413]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 11095
Joined: 2024
|
Re: Pumper gonna pump.
Feb 13, 2025, 1:07 PM
|
|
So do you think we have the best class in the nation?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19991]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14274
Joined: 2009
|
Re: Pumper gonna pump.
Feb 13, 2025, 1:31 PM
|
|
See above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [16413]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 11095
Joined: 2024
|
Re: Pumper gonna pump.
Feb 13, 2025, 1:36 PM
|
|
I did. So you don't think we have the best recruiting class in the nation. Also, you do realize our coaches didn't get their top choices at every position don't you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19991]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14274
Joined: 2009
|
Re: Pumper gonna pump.
Feb 13, 2025, 1:45 PM
|
|
Have they ever gotten their top choice at every position? We offer 60-70ish annually and average around 22 or so signees. That's worked out pretty amazingly well so far. You can do better than that.
You are getting broken record on the top class in the nation extreme also, friend. The OP was about folks being so down on it. You aren't ignorant of our track record on class rankings over the years and the on-field success we've experienced. Being all "Rah! Rah! we're the greatest" is a far cry from the topic at hand. You can do better here also.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [16413]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 11095
Joined: 2024
|
Re: Pumper gonna pump.
Feb 13, 2025, 1:50 PM
|
|
Long story short, we didn't get everyone we wanted and we took other options. It's not our ideal class if they could have picked everyone they wanted. We did well, but could have done better. People realize that. These are different times. It's just common sense. The OP was just a dumb thread. Anyway, you have a good day. Go Tigers!
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19991]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14274
Joined: 2009
|
Re: Pumper gonna pump.
Feb 13, 2025, 2:10 PM
|
|
We land around 25-30% of our offers, i.e. 'everyone they wanted'. No class can ever lay claim to your idea of 'ideal' - not here, not anywhere. This group simply hasn't warranted the heightened angst and disdain that is out there about it - these kids who comprise it deserve better.
Go Tigers!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [401]
TigerPulse: 68%
17
|
Re: Pumper gonna pump.
Feb 13, 2025, 1:58 PM
[ in reply to Re: Pumper gonna pump. ] |
|
not true, we lost 7 decommits that we offered and wanted and needed. we added just 3 portal additions, still the fewest number in all of football outside of the service academies. We did not add a top tier QB to replace Cade or a punter that we needed worse than bad, so we signed a mediocre class. this will hurt and be obvious after the 25 season when we lose a lot of guys. if we play a 4-3 scheme, we still have 0 linebacker depth behind woodaz, brown, and maybe the Alabama transfer that hasnt played meaningful snaps yet??? so yes the recruiting is questionable, and signing just 3 portal guys doesnt fix the issues. the class is ranked outside the top 35 for good reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [16413]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 11095
Joined: 2024
|
Re: Pumper gonna pump.
Feb 13, 2025, 2:08 PM
|
|
26 composite ranking on 247.
32. Rivals
37. ESPN
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19991]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14274
Joined: 2009
|
Oh brother.
Feb 13, 2025, 2:12 PM
[ in reply to Re: Pumper gonna pump. ] |
|
If we signed more guys in this class we would have to cut active scholarship players on campus now prepping for this season and beyond. How can counting to 85 be that difficult? Come on, folks. Please.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [16413]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 11095
Joined: 2024
|
Re: Oh brother.
1
Feb 13, 2025, 2:16 PM
|
|
I think everyone should just make you happy. We signed the world's most perfect class. There isn't a player in the nation any of us would trade for someone we have. This class may go down as the most perfect class if all-time. There you go. Now move on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19991]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14274
Joined: 2009
|
Re: Oh brother.
Feb 13, 2025, 2:32 PM
|
|
Good heavens, dude. Not trashing and dumping on a class that was known to be small, that was forecasted to drop further down rankings as other program's classes filled near the end when we were maxed on scholarship numbers, somehow turns into making it out to be perfect, best ever, or else?
Moving on for sure. Have a good one.
Go Tigers!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [16413]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 11095
Joined: 2024
|
Re: Oh brother.
Feb 13, 2025, 3:27 PM
|
|
I don't think anyone really knows what you are trying to say, including yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19991]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14274
Joined: 2009
|
Re: Oh brother.
Feb 13, 2025, 3:48 PM
|
|
Your only alternative to not being disappointed with this '25 class and fretting over it and fearful of what lies ahead is an extreme position of believing that it must instead be perfect. That's what you've been pushing, and it's weak. Clear enough?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [16413]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 11095
Joined: 2024
|
Re: Oh brother.
Feb 13, 2025, 4:11 PM
|
|
I like the class and I think we have filled some great needs. I think we could have done better in certain areas. I don't stress about it all. I think we did great in certain areas. Nobody is pushing anything, other than your goofy remarks or "who would we replace"...etc. I don't think anyone even knows.whatbyourntalking about including yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [17448]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
|
Re: Pumper gonna pump.
Feb 13, 2025, 4:06 PM
[ in reply to Pumper gonna pump. ] |
|
Who is going pump several million dollars into NIL so we can go after the greedy money 💰 hungry players who probably would not fit in Dabo’s culture and program.
I think we have some really good prospects who could be stars from this class. Name another Clemson Head Football Coach who has played in 4 NC games a Won 2 of them. A HC who gave the mighty Urban Meyer his only shutout.
I think Tigernet needs to add another board and it The Bit$& Board. Maybe it would make The Football and Basketball boards more appealing to people who want to discuss football with common sense meaningful post without taking the fun out of the sport. ESPN and other have done enough to screw up college football.
Since 2018 I have seen a lot of Tigernet freeloaders slam coaches, players, fans, other posters, administrators and Clemson University.
If I have been guilty of the above, please accept my apology. Go Tigers I am “ All In “
The least the freeloaders could do is to Pay for their Tigernet membership !!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [10980]
TigerPulse: 96%
45
Posts: 12136
Joined: 2003
|
Re: For the folks so down on our '25 recruiting class,
Feb 13, 2025, 12:18 PM
|
|
Who did we sign that would not have been signed had we not had multiple decommits? There is your answer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19991]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14274
Joined: 2009
|
Re: For the folks so down on our '25 recruiting class,
Feb 13, 2025, 1:32 PM
|
|
You named no one. Answer your own question?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [10980]
TigerPulse: 96%
45
Posts: 12136
Joined: 2003
|
Re: For the folks so down on our '25 recruiting class,
1
Feb 13, 2025, 1:55 PM
|
|
You named no one. Answer your own question?
Do your own homework or were you unaware we lost seven commits and filled in with other guys?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19991]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14274
Joined: 2009
|
Re: For the folks so down on our '25 recruiting class,
Feb 13, 2025, 3:54 PM
|
|
You brought the decommits into it, you should have the stones to point out who you didn't really want that are now on our roster instead. Do your own dirty work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [10980]
TigerPulse: 96%
45
Posts: 12136
Joined: 2003
|
Re: For the folks so down on our '25 recruiting class,
Feb 13, 2025, 4:25 PM
|
|
You brought the decommits into it, you should have the stones to point out who you didn't really want that are now on our roster instead. Do your own dirty work.
Guess your google is broken? You asked and I answered. If you want specific names feel free to do your homework as its not that hard (for most).
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19991]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14274
Joined: 2009
|
Re: For the folks so down on our '25 recruiting class,
Feb 13, 2025, 4:39 PM
|
|
I wouldn't want to list out players you're disappointed to have on our roster either, so I can see why you're avoiding doing so even though you offered up that group on your own as a reason to dump on the class. A lot easier just to diss on them en masse as you have instead of calling out the individual that's here working hard for your enjoyment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [125]
TigerPulse: 100%
11
|
What I don't understand is
Feb 13, 2025, 12:29 PM
|
|
The roster is supposed to be going to 105. Why didn't we oversign in an attempt to prepare for this? Was Dabo worried this may change and he would have to cut some signees? Was there some concern that once it is official top talent may portal out to schools with high NIL budgets because they have more roster space? I don't know but would welcome any feedback.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [10980]
TigerPulse: 96%
45
Posts: 12136
Joined: 2003
|
Re: What I don't understand is
Feb 13, 2025, 1:56 PM
|
|
I dont believe the 105 starts until 2026 at the soonest
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [4016]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
Im not at all down on this class! Our coaches ,
1
Feb 13, 2025, 2:09 PM
|
|
are excellent at discovering talent and young people with strong academics and morals. Very pleased with this group of young men
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19991]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14274
Joined: 2009
|
Re: Im not at all down on this class! Our coaches ,
Feb 13, 2025, 4:00 PM
|
|
Not everyone is, even a poster I've been bantering with about this here. Too often though it's just thrown out there what a disappointment it is and how we've really fallen off simply due to its size yet we have close to a 10th rated player average, nobody brought in wasn't sought after by our staff, and they're here now and part of our program and All In for Clemson.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valley Legend [12988]
TigerPulse: 100%
47
|
Re: For the folks so down on our '25 recruiting class,
Feb 13, 2025, 4:43 PM
|
|
It wasn’t the retention. It was all the studs we lost due to being out is with NIL dollars. We lost at least four that could have played right away or at worst year two. No real splash five stars either. 2025 was an abysmal class. Check the national rankings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [8068]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
Posts: 15977
Joined: 2001
|
Re: For the folks so down on our '25 recruiting class,
Feb 13, 2025, 5:13 PM
|
|
the rankings don't mean squat to me when some teams have to sign 30-60 guys just to get to 85 and the rankings are based on accumulation vs stars. I wish we had signed a superstar QB but believe everyone knew Cade would be back so in this day and age it's harder to do that. That said, I think the kid coming in has a chance to be really good.
For me, I think this class is great because I look at it from the standpoint of - did we improve our roster over the previous year. Are the guys we are bringing in better than the guys we are losing? only time will tell but I really think Adams is better than anyone we lost on the DL. Jacobs is better than anyone we lost on the OL. I think Davidson will be better than Mafah in the longrun. Henderson, Ware and Watford seem to be as good as guys we lost. Did we sign anyone a TE or LB as good as Brininstool or Carter? maybe not but Heidt at DE fills a gap that existed all last year on the roster, and Alexander gives us someone that improves depth at LB if nothing else. I think everyone knows our TE of the future is CB, who redshirted. The FR LB is coming of an ACL so he'll have to work himself up. Safety might be the other position where we could have locked in someone as good or better. Again we only had like 9 scholarship guys exhaust eligibility. None were superstars. We had a few other backup types hit the portal. I think our overall roster talent has improved over last year. Also note, while we may lose some of our superstars after next year, our # of scholarship losses won't be huge next year either. The 2027 class is shaping up as the next opportunity for a large in #s class.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [8068]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
Posts: 15977
Joined: 2001
|
*vs. avg stars***
Feb 13, 2025, 5:15 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [1091]
TigerPulse: 100%
25
|
B. Jacobs will be a first round pick, Adams is a 3 year starter
Feb 13, 2025, 6:40 PM
|
|
Henderson and Davidson are both difference makers. Denson will make us thankful Hebert went elsewhere
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 48
| visibility 2806
|
|
|
50
