|
Replies: 23
| visibility 100
|
CU Guru [1346]
TigerPulse: 100%
28
|
|
|
|
 |
Paw Warrior [5016]
TigerPulse: 100%
37
|
Re: ESPN ranks easiest recruiting
Dec 9, 2015, 11:16 AM
|
|
I agree with most of the rankings. I actually think we are too high if you are just ranking based on schools with the easiest recruiting. Certain schools recruit themselves into the top 15 ever year and it is up to the coach to pull in a top 5 class. Clemson does not recruit itself without the right coach leading the charge. This run we are on could change that but Dabo has taken us to a new level.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1346]
TigerPulse: 100%
28
|
I see it differently
Dec 9, 2015, 11:21 AM
|
|
Recruiting is so much more than the level of talent in your state or nearby. Otherwise why wouldn't GT be doing better?
To me school and coaching reputation is by far more important. And that is why it just seems weird to me that a site known for a Bama love affair would put UGA that much above them, for example. Just look at the results of recruiting over the past few years. It does NOT match this list very well.
Again, if it's just a matter of "easy" because talent is in your backyard, then GT and SCar should be pretty high on this list for starter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Phenom [14588]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 23654
Joined: 2004
|
You CAN'T factor coaches into this debate though. Obviously
Dec 9, 2015, 2:30 PM
|
|
some coaches are going to recruit well (relative to the standard for the school they are at) while others struggle, but this is more about the inherent ability for a school to get talent. That means access to talent, competition for that talent, and also the natural draw of the school.
This is why LSU is so easy to recruit to (and underrated on this list). They have a very talent rich state (LA might not be TX, FL, or CA, but it's near the top of the next group), zero competition from other schools in the state for that talent, easy access to TX, and the school is a big name that draws well. There are more players in the NFL from LSU than any other college.
If you compare that to Clemson, SC has far less talent, we have competition from South Carolina for that talent, and we also have to contend with schools like UGA and TN that historically try to poach some of our best players. In order for Clemson to recruit well we HAVE to go out of state to pick up guys from GA, FL, and NC, and we also have to be able to sell those kids on Clemson because our name alone isn't enough (yet)
The fact that we've recruited so well is a testament to Swinney and the staff, and also the tight knit family community and family atmosphere that they have been able to sell to the recruits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1346]
TigerPulse: 100%
28
|
How can you ignore coaches?
Dec 9, 2015, 2:35 PM
|
|
Just look at how Longhorn recruiting has suffered a little in he past few cycles. Local and regional talent matter. But I say how you have done recently AND your coaches matter just as much. Otherwise Texas Tech would be doing just as well as other Texas schools.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Phenom [14588]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 23654
Joined: 2004
|
Because the article is about the schools, not the coaches.
Dec 9, 2015, 2:46 PM
|
|
This is innate ability of the school to recruit - independent of whoever is coaching there. You can think of the school as providing the floor and the ceiling, and then the recruiting ability of the coaching staff will then determine where within that range the school will actually recruit.
Alabama with a crappy staff will still recruit top 25 classes, but Alabama will Nick Saban is the #1 school in the country in terms of recruiting. Would Saban pull #1 recruiting classes at Kansas though? No, because Kansas has a different recruiting potential than Alabama.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1346]
TigerPulse: 100%
28
|
Really?? I guess I misread "jobs" in the title
Dec 9, 2015, 2:49 PM
|
|
The article is about more than just nearby talent pool as I read it. And recruiting clearly requires more than local access. That's why I keep comparing GT and SCar to UGA and us.
Yes, school is a big factor. But a coach came in to SCar and upped their attraction. For a short time anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2820]
TigerPulse: 77%
33
|
makes sense to me. nothing wrong with thirteenth.
Dec 9, 2015, 11:35 AM
|
|
It isn't a breakdown of our recruiting classes--just an idea of how easy or difficult it is to recruit in a particular area. We recruit in a difficult place with an in-state competitor. We have to fight against UNC, Georgia, and Tennessee. Florida is just a little too far away to be a convenient stomping ground. Our facilities are very good. As the article does, though, we have to consider if Dabo and staff weren't here, what would recruiting be like? Thirteenth seems like a pretty level-headed assessment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1346]
TigerPulse: 100%
28
|
I think we are closer to the 10 spot
Dec 9, 2015, 1:42 PM
|
|
And FSU should probably be closer to the 6 spot.
Maybe the problem is the ranking based on EASY is so useless that opinions can be pretty different.
But I think we have it just as easy or easier than Oklahoma or Auburn for example.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Time Great [88574]
TigerPulse: 100%
63
Posts: 81630
Joined: 1999
|
Has us too high. SC is a very small state with two power 5
Dec 9, 2015, 1:52 PM
|
|
conference schools. Dabo, our program, and our school, should receive tons of praise for being able to overcome that and do so well.
I don't think you understand the term "easiest to recruit to."
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1346]
TigerPulse: 100%
28
|
I think I understand it pretty well
Dec 9, 2015, 2:04 PM
|
|
If this were just a matter of in state talent, then it would be a measure of easiest and SCar and GT and even some Florida schools like Miami should be near the top. After all, Miami coaches typically don't have to put much effort into south Florida.
It has to do with name and reputation as much as how much talent there is within a radius. There is a reason we do well in GA, NC, and parts of FL.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Phenom [14588]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 23654
Joined: 2004
|
It's not that simple at all. GT is clearly 2nd fiddle to
Dec 9, 2015, 2:41 PM
|
|
UGA in football, and has been for about 100 years now. UGA fans vastly outnumber GT fans and it's really the "local" school. Due to the academic nature of GT, they have many more out of state (even international) students and many of their graduates leave the area to work. It's not all together unlike the UNC-Duke thing where they have the slogan "we grew here, you flew here."
UGA is the dominant school in that state, and the majority of kids that grow up in GA wanting to play college football in the state dream of playing at UGA, not GT.
Also, i think you are overrating the talent in SC. Take a look at this http://www.footballstudyhall.com/2013/9/11/4718442/college-football-state-texas-california-florida
SC is 17th on the list producing less than 2% (looks like maybe 1.75%) of all D1 athletes from 2008-2013. Compare that to 15% from Texas, 14% from Florida, and 12% from California. Georgia is around 7% which means it produces roughly 4x the number of D1 players as SC. Louisiana is close to 4% - more than double SC - and LSU has a complete monopoly on those kids. Ohio is close to 7% and OSU gets the pick of the litter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1346]
TigerPulse: 100%
28
|
So you agree it is NOT just about nearby talent
Dec 9, 2015, 2:42 PM
|
|
School reputation and coaches are a big factor.
That's all I'm saying. And to me you can see it when schools don't play as well and still recruit. Or when schools do well but still don't pick up in recruiting like you would expect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Phenom [14588]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 23654
Joined: 2004
|
Coaching is a factor in ACTUAL recruiting, but that's not
Dec 9, 2015, 2:49 PM
|
|
what this article was measuring. That's where you are getting confused.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1346]
TigerPulse: 100%
28
|
I'm with you and get your points.
Dec 9, 2015, 2:52 PM
|
|
Maybe my point is better made by starting with the point that it is useless just to look at school coolness or attractiveness.
But even if that WERE the only thing considered for this article, it does NOT explain how UGA is so far removed from Bama.
Maybe ESPN has done some math regarding how many top recruits are nearby and look for an offer from each school they rank. But they certainly don't show it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Phenom [14588]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 23654
Joined: 2004
|
Well Bama has Auburn to compete with and the state of
Dec 9, 2015, 3:31 PM
|
|
Alabama has less talent than a state like Georgia. That said, Bama is one of just a handful of schools that can really recruit nationally because the brand name is so big.
Still, back when Bama was struggling their recruiting was lagging as well. Looking at Rivals rankings pre-Saban is actually pretty surprising.
2002 - 30th
2003 - 49th
2004 - 24th
2005 - 18th
2006 - 11th
2007 - 10th (Saban's first season - probably didn't have much time to recruit)
2008 - 1st
Of course Saban has enhanced the image tremendously with 3 more national titles in the last 6 years, and the work he has done there is likely to last for decades after he leaves.
Back to UGA though, they've actually had a top 10 class every year but 2 (12th and 15th) going back to 2002 which is the earliest records Rivals keeps online. That's really strong. I don't know if that's really the easiest school to recruit to, but it's certainly right near the top.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1346]
TigerPulse: 100%
28
|
Great stats! Which shows record + coach matter
Dec 9, 2015, 3:35 PM
|
|
I guess the whole idea of saying "easy" is just useless. It is ONLY easy with the right school, in the right location with nearby recruits, with the right coach. Lose one of those and you could make recruiting "harder". Or something.....
It would be interesting to see how ND and MI recruiting suffered when they had bad coaches. A lot I'd bet. So it wasn't so "easy" then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [29957]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
Posts: 34847
Joined: 2009
|
yes and it also shows why there are p[rograms ahead of Bama***
Dec 9, 2015, 3:37 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1346]
TigerPulse: 100%
28
|
Lately? Bama has school + record + coach
Dec 9, 2015, 3:43 PM
|
|
for a number of years. Still say if you keep winning with Saban Bama is "easier" to recruit than UGA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Phenom [14588]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 23654
Joined: 2004
|
I would imagine that the decline of Detroit and the midwest
Dec 9, 2015, 3:49 PM
[ in reply to Great stats! Which shows record + coach matter ] |
|
in general has hurt Michigan as much as anything. Michigan St becoming a big time program certainly hasn't helped either. Michigan still has a big name, but I don't think that brand is as strong as it was 10-15 years ago, and that's another school that really NEEDS to be able to recruit nationally.
ND has a lot of complicated factors. It's difficult to compare to most other schools.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1346]
TigerPulse: 100%
28
|
Yep. Mich State and maybe Ohio State challenge Mich
Dec 9, 2015, 3:56 PM
|
|
But according to ESPN Michigan has it easier than most schools including Mich State.
Everybody can have a different view of what easy means. This list is just way off in some ways and may be close in others. That's all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [29957]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
Posts: 34847
Joined: 2009
|
I think it does a prtety good job actually***
Dec 9, 2015, 3:34 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1189]
TigerPulse: 100%
26
|
Article posted 6 hrs ago but says we haven't won ACC since 2011
Dec 9, 2015, 4:08 PM
|
|
Talk about digging deep to do some research
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1346]
TigerPulse: 100%
28
|
Probably means it was written early in the season
Dec 9, 2015, 4:23 PM
|
|
and put away to fill pages now that the regular season is over.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 23
| visibility 100
|
|
|
50
