|
Replies: 19
| visibility 274
|
Webmaster [∞]
TigerPulse: 100%
∞
Posts: 46596
Joined: 2012
|
TNET: Clemson signees see shifts in final Rivals rankings
Jan 18, 2019, 4:36 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Starter [352]
TigerPulse: 96%
16
|
Re: TNET: Clemson signees see shifts in final Rivals rankings
Jan 18, 2019, 5:05 PM
|
|
If it weren't for the downgrades, I'd say we have arrived to the level of SEC and Duke recruits, where our interest automatically causes them to be ranked higher.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [43143]
TigerPulse: 100%
57
Posts: 43562
Joined: 1998
|
since when is 42nd almost top 30?***
Jan 18, 2019, 5:07 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3766]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
Re: since when is 42nd almost top 30?***
Jan 18, 2019, 5:11 PM
|
|
moved up almost 30 spots to 42nd in Georgia
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11934]
TigerPulse: 100%
46
Posts: 16363
Joined: 1998
|
And yet ... all these players have the exact same talent
Jan 18, 2019, 7:01 PM
|
|
... that they had last week.
I remember when Mitch Hyatt went from 5-star and the top OL in the nation to a final rank of 4-star.
Has any OL from that class had a better career or had more impact on their team the past four years?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Phenom [14588]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 23653
Joined: 2004
|
There were only 2 tackles and 2 guards ahead of him
Jan 19, 2019, 11:27 AM
|
|
but he has had the best college career of any of them. It looks like 1 or 2 of those guys might get drafted ahead of him anyway though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Team Captain [465]
TigerPulse: 81%
18
|
Re: TNET: Clemson signees see shifts in final Rivals rankings
Jan 18, 2019, 7:26 PM
|
|
I wonder how many unsigned players moved into the top 250 to create more interest for Feb?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18408]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 10717
Joined: 2013
|
Re: TNET: Clemson signees see shifts in final Rivals rankings
Jan 18, 2019, 10:58 PM
|
|
What happened to Constantine? That’s a huge drop. Also, who was the fella that CBV was so pumped about to get? Linebacker... was that BC?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Titan [48079]
TigerPulse: 100%
58
Posts: 49059
Joined: 2004
|
Re: TNET: Clemson signees see shifts in final Rivals rankings
Jan 19, 2019, 9:43 AM
|
|
Rankings are odd. When I watch Constantine's film and watched the game he played live, he didn't look that explosive yet. Then I watch film on Vonta Bentley and he is all world. Rankings are odd.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18408]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 10717
Joined: 2013
|
Re: TNET: Clemson signees see shifts in final Rivals rankings
Jan 19, 2019, 5:39 PM
|
|
Thanks for the explanation. I appreciate it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Team Captain [471]
TigerPulse: 34%
18
|
Re: TNET: Clemson signees see shifts in final Rivals rankings
Jan 19, 2019, 4:00 AM
|
|
I hate it that we don't get all the five star recruits! I remember back in the day, I think it was about 17 years ago when we signed that two star recruit...what was his name? Oh yeah Hunter Renfrow. Hmmmm...I wonder what ever happen to him?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2723]
TigerPulse: 77%
33
|
Re: TNET: Clemson signees see shifts in final Rivals rankings
Jan 19, 2019, 8:21 AM
|
|
Chez Mullusi (sp?) also dropped from a 4 star to a 3 star for some crazy reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2724]
TigerPulse: 99%
33
|
The same people that give these rankings....
Jan 19, 2019, 8:29 AM
|
|
Picked Alabama. I trust our coaches
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [1166]
TigerPulse: 97%
26
|
Re: The same people that give these rankings....
Jan 19, 2019, 9:31 AM
|
|
I find it hard to believe that there are 57 football players and 4 running backs better than Jerrion Ealy . I have never seen film like that . I really hope we get him .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2367]
TigerPulse: 100%
32
|
Re: The same people that give these rankings....
Jan 20, 2019, 7:56 AM
|
|
Do recruiting rankings take into account that they may choose not to play that sport?
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7254]
TigerPulse: 96%
42
Posts: 13779
Joined: 2015
|
Re: TNET: Clemson signees see shifts in final Rivals rankings
Jan 19, 2019, 10:16 AM
|
|
How does Patterson move down so much at his position?
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [8071]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
For Example. Mike Williams was #37 WR
Jan 19, 2019, 9:21 PM
|
|
People who focus too hard on recruiting rankings are the same ones who: never would have agreed on a Hunter Renfrow getting a preferred walk on and later a scholarship!
Please, "pretty please w/sugar on top" look at the list I am attaching. Mike Williams his freshman year was better than most if not all on the list straight out the box.
People who put so much stock in star rankings are also the ones who run good coaches off! Because those over-inflated stars was supposed to instantly mean more wins. No, No, No. It doesn't work like that.
2018 and I forget what year Nebraska team coached by Tom Osborne - are in the conversation for best ever! Both of those squads have a high number of preferred walk ons and walk ons in common. Nebraska lived off walk ons for years!
Evaluation and "how you feel the player fits what you do" is more important than the star some of these services give! Some of the guys obviously; hit the mark no matter who is looking! But, not all of them. Some of those 5 star guys are just "ready for college today"! As opposed to a 3 star who may need a year in college to be ready to contribute! But, the 3 star has not peaked and the 5 star often has physically maybe even mentally too. Johnny 3 star plays with the same chip on his shoulder as the walk on sometimes. Lastly, the star rankings are done by "what schools" recruit players. They get so many points if certain big time - blue blood programs recruit them. And the # of those programs that do matters!
Clemson does not go after some 4 and 5 star guys on purpose! Instead choosing a 3 star player! Coach Swinney said it, "we probably never will have the #1 recruiting class"! And to me, that's okay. When you look back on these list of players 5 - 10 years from now; don't be surprised if you see "more guys" who made a name for themselves on the lower end of the list compared to the higher end!
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [8071]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [276]
TigerPulse: 98%
14
|
Re: For Example. Mike Williams was #37 WR
Jan 19, 2019, 10:01 PM
|
|
The most important thing to look at when it comes to recruiting is the offers. Mike Williams may have been the #37 WR but he had offers from everywhere. Offers tell the real story not the rankings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7998]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
Posts: 10786
Joined: 2007
|
I hear ya and agree with your point
Jan 21, 2019, 8:46 AM
[ in reply to For Example. Mike Williams was #37 WR ] |
|
if you're talking to people who are upset about being no. 1 in recruiting rankings but i do believe these rankings are of good utility in calculating the health of your program. If Clemson is consistently in the top 15 in recruiting rankings across the board then we are good to go. If we ever start consistently dropping out of that range then i think you'll start to notice a shift in our success... For instance if you want to take your roster full of walk-ons against my top 10 classes i'll take that bet all day.
Clemson didn't start getting over the hump until they started getting superstars on the team. It started with James Davis, morphed into Cj Spiller, which in turn led to Sammy Watkins and so on. Those individual players mixed in with our solid supporting cast is what got us to where we are today. And thats highly rated 5 star type talent. Great talent also opens the field up for the solid guys to expand their play. Travis Etienne with Kelly Bryant in the games is not the same as travis Etienne with Trevor Lawerence in the game. Travis's holes increased b/c defenses had to start playing the pass..thus almost turn Travis into a Heisman trophy winner.
This was the sole reason i was hoping Zion would've come to Clemson. Talent begats talent and i was hoping Zion would possibly make Clemson a trendy pick for players in the future. ITs a huge thing to have success in recruiting for any program. You misses are less detrimental and your potential is high when you recruit at a high level.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 19
| visibility 274
|
|
|
50
