|
Replies: 18
| visibility 101
|
Varsity [208]
TigerPulse: 93%
13
|
|
|
|
 |
Orange Blooded [2081]
TigerPulse: 94%
31
|
Re: Recruiting rankings and stars almost means nothing
Feb 25, 2019, 11:47 PM
|
|
Stars matter but coaching matters also!
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20613]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 11150
Joined: 2016
|
Re: Recruiting rankings and stars almost means nothing
Feb 26, 2019, 7:09 AM
|
|
I never shared this, but I thought it was time.
It won't bother anyone since I'm the only one surviving. Back many years ago a high school football teammate of mine and his family decided they were going to contact one of the ranking agencies. After a couple hundred dollars (probably a LOT more now days) and membership to the agency, he went from no ranking, to a high rated TE in the state and on the national list of TE recruits.
I'm not crazy and know visible talent and athletic ability of many make it obvious for most of the high ranked players but there is a lot more to it. There are many high school studs playing against inferior competion and then can't or won't compete against equal talent. And it's probably not far fetched to say there are still under the table "shenanigans" going on.
I know the Tigers have a formula to do it. Dabo said it earlier, they recruit the individual first and then the player with a whole lot more than we'll ever know mixed into the recipe. Just keep doing what you're doing Dabo and staff! Go Tigers!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2115]
TigerPulse: 98%
32
|
Re: Recruiting rankings and stars almost means nothing
Feb 26, 2019, 1:21 PM
[ in reply to Re: Recruiting rankings and stars almost means nothing ] |
|
My opinion it’s most important star ranking, second is character, and third is coaching.
Not true in NFL but college you can out athlete teams. I think what sets out staff apart is that character piece. Most logical fans can’t argue that stars don’t matter when you look at the 2018 team and see just how many 4 and 5 stars we had.
Difference is a CW42 vs a Q Williams. Both 5 stars but one is the epitome of his university and sets an example on how to work vs the other who quit on his team when facing adversity. Another example is Bryant vs Bosa at tOSU. Quit on his team.
Dabo finds a way to get stars and character. Match that with great coaching and that’s the recipe for a dynasty apparently.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valley Protector [1464]
TigerPulse: 100%
29
|
Re: Recruiting rankings and stars almost means nothing
Feb 26, 2019, 7:13 AM
|
|
The 2018 NC team is not made up of only 2015 recruits. THere are also recruits from 2016, 2017, 2018 and even some 2014 recruits. While stars are not the only indicator, had you rather have a team made up of 4 and 5 stars or 1 and 2 stars?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Titan [48079]
TigerPulse: 100%
58
Posts: 49059
Joined: 2004
|
Re: Recruiting rankings and stars almost means nothing
Feb 26, 2019, 7:19 AM
|
|
Plus, generally our best players were highly rated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20613]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 11150
Joined: 2016
|
Re: Recruiting rankings and stars almost means nothing
Feb 26, 2019, 7:38 AM
|
|
Absolutely, the highest star rated players make the difference but I haven't ever seen or heard of ESPN, 247, or Rivals give a star rating for character. That's something the recruiters have to figure out. Mix the 5* with 4* players together with the developing 3* and non-rated walk ons that all have character and drive to be the best, then you have it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Tiger [35158]
TigerPulse: 100%
56
Posts: 37080
Joined: 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [507]
TigerPulse: 100%
19
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5502]
TigerPulse: 100%
38
|
Re: Recruiting rankings and stars almost means nothing
Feb 26, 2019, 7:31 AM
|
|
Best analogy I can come up with is:
would you rather have a team of Rachel Maddow's or a team of Ainsley Earhardt's?
A team of Rosie o'donnells or a team of Nancy O'dells?
Just saying, stars matter!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Tiger [35158]
TigerPulse: 100%
56
Posts: 37080
Joined: 2003
|
I don't want any of those people on a football team
Feb 26, 2019, 8:17 AM
|
|
Not a single one.
Not even in lingerie footbal.. especially in lingerie footbal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [41055]
TigerPulse: 100%
57
Posts: 23040
Joined: 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32465]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
Posts: 24177
Joined: 2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Warrior [5074]
TigerPulse: 100%
37
|
Re: Recruiting rankings and stars almost means nothing
Feb 26, 2019, 8:17 AM
|
|
It was a class that they're saying went from #9 to #1. It's not as if if had an unranked class or anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [2]
TigerPulse: 80%
1
|
Re: Recruiting rankings and stars almost means nothing
Feb 26, 2019, 8:48 AM
|
|
Alabama always comes in first or second in recruiting class rank.
Clemson is always several places lower.
Alabama has so few trusted players on defense, they rarely sub .
Clemson AVERAGES playing over 70 players per game.
Curious
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Conqueror [11484]
TigerPulse: 100%
46
|
Re: Recruiting rankings and stars almost means nothing
Feb 26, 2019, 10:08 AM
|
|
Except when they do mean something.
Rankings and stars absolutely matter.
What matter is that you finish in the top 15-20 and not in the 45-60 range.
No, the difference between #2 recruiting class and the #7 recruiting class usually does not matter.
There is too much variability with how players are ranked.
However, please find any team who recruits in the 30-50 range even that can compete regularly with the elite teams.
The tiers of recruiting matter.
The spot by spot rankings do not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [22128]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
|
Re: Recruiting rankings and stars almost means nothing
Feb 26, 2019, 12:15 PM
|
|
Who says stars don't matter? We brag when we sign a 5***** and wish more 5***** prospects will commit to the Tigers. We moan and groan when a 3*** commits and wonder what the coaching staff is thinking. Most of us fans are somewhat like those so-called experts who assign a star rating. We look at the number of stars and know little or nothing about their character, academics, attitude, etc, and hope those 5***** will come our way. We look at the list of schools recruiting a prospect and conclude the prospect must be good. We sometimes tend to believe the ranking services look at this factor when ranking a prospect.
However, when it is all said and done, I will still prefer the 5***** and 4**** over the 3*** and 2** prospects.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1750]
TigerPulse: 100%
31
|
Re: Recruiting rankings and stars almost means nothing
Feb 26, 2019, 12:40 PM
|
|
I get your point but if we are consistently 30th in recruiting rankings we aren’t winning national championships. Recruiting rankings matter but I agree they are not the only thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [8718]
TigerPulse: 100%
43
|
Re: Recruiting rankings and stars almost means nothing
Feb 26, 2019, 2:00 PM
|
|
In retrospect, the 2014 class didn’t turn out that great. Thank God that class had DW4.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 18
| visibility 101
|
|
|
50
