|
Replies: 22
| visibility 2,464
|
Commissioner [928]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 531
Joined: 12/4/21
|
The Evolution of our Recruiting
Dec 20, 2022, 7:45 AM
|
|
NSD is arguably the most important and exciting day for every college football program (not including the one team that will be winning a Natty). It is the culmination, yes on going as well, of in many cases many, many years of reviewing film, talking to HS coaches, building relationships with recruiting which includes thousands of text messages and phone calls, crisscrossing the nation making HS game visits and in home visits as well. Not too mention putting on camps. The number of hours/days/months/years plus money that goes into recruiting just one player is staggering. Just to sign one player that you have identified as the right match for your program. Now multiple that by 20-25 per cycle.
It is very apparent this class will be very different in how we secured those commitments. In the past, on the June 1st (it really ends up being all of June), 2 years prior to the NSD date, we have made a huge deal of rolling out our first wave of offers. These offers are always made to the recruits we have spent a significant amount of resources identify as the best match based on anticipated need, development potential, God given ability and culture match. In the past of our initial offers we have always landed 8-12 of these individuals. This year we will only land 3 (Woods, Burley and Terrell).
For all of the other early offers, we missed. It seems the majority of our current commitments received offers in late 2021 or early 2022. It appears for our 2024 cycle we are already seeing less early offers. I wonder if the strategy moving forward will be to offer a little later in the hopes of weeding out those seeking NIL signing payouts. This would allow us to maximize time, energy and money towards recruits we have a better chance of landing.
Here is a link, you can click on each recruit and then their timeline to see when they were offered and what visits they ended up taking. I think it tells a story of what our future recruiting will look like.
https://247sports.com/college/clemson/Season/2023-Football/Offers/
|
|
|
|
 |
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
Will be interesting how it plays out. COVID in person
Dec 20, 2022, 7:54 AM
|
|
restrictions weren't lifted until June 1, 2021. Not long after that Clemson held its Elite Retreat, which was the predecessor to this year's first Summer Officials.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44037]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32955
Joined: 2/22/03
|
Every program dealt with COVID restrictions during the pandemic.
Dec 20, 2022, 9:36 AM
|
|
So there’s that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
Of course they did, but it affected the timing of things
Dec 20, 2022, 9:43 AM
|
|
in the OP and prior, Clemson had not offered until recruits visited.
Just because everyone dealt with it, doesn't mean that things were impacted equally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44037]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32955
Joined: 2/22/03
|
So you’re saying you believe COVID impacted our program more than others?***
Dec 20, 2022, 5:45 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [82038]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17305
Joined: 1/14/17
|
Sweet Fancy Moses.
Dec 20, 2022, 6:04 PM
|
|
Does the drop in your reading comprehension directly correlate with your pulse? If so, I can't wait to watch you struggle with the Dick & Jane series of novels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5016]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3546
Joined: 7/7/12
|
Re: The Evolution of our Recruiting
Dec 20, 2022, 7:58 AM
|
|
That's a very thought-provoking and interesting observation. I didn't count, but it looks like the majority that we missed went to Ohio State, Georgia and 'Bama - maybe not so surprising, given the success of those teams in the national view.
Your implication is the question as to why we didn't get comittments from more of those we offered. Maybe it had to do with declining success in the CFB playoffs - or maybe because of coaching changes. Of course, it's possible that NIL was an influence, but absent facts to support that idea, it can't be declared a primary reason.
Frankly, I believe that the decline of our offensive success had a lot to do with recruiting over the past 2 years and that includes coaching and QB/WR play.
We still have a highly ramked class and should do fine, but there's no question that there's room to do better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [928]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 531
Joined: 12/4/21
|
Re: The Evolution of our Recruiting
Dec 20, 2022, 8:21 AM
|
|
I would have to agree with you on all accounts.
Over the last two years we have also seen more "last minute" offers going out, offers made in October-December of the respective recruiting cycle. Some have called these "fall back" offers. I would much prefer us to avoid this type of offer and get super aggressive right after our marquee recruiting event, whether it is the All-in BBQ usually held in July or this year's June event. If we don't get a verbal or at the very least a silent commitment, it is time to broaden our board and at this point move to a "first to commit" approach. While I hope I am wrong, there are 4-6 "project" players now on scholarship that had no Power 5 offers. Given the fluidity of rosters, if a recruit can't be envisioned to make the 2-deep in their 2nd FULL year, they probably shouldn't be offered a full scholarship but maybe as a PWO, let them prove it.
Maybe it is just me but in this day and age, I would rather take 2-3 shots at grad transfers or highly rated recruits we have previously vetted and recruited but lost out on that may have made a bad decision for whatever reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5016]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3546
Joined: 7/7/12
|
Re: The Evolution of our Recruiting
Dec 20, 2022, 8:38 AM
|
|
I suppose the choice would be to take a first-year and build him into the 2-deep by his Jr or Sr year - or - wait until the need occurs and try to find a transfer or a game-ready first year to fill the need in the 2-deep.
Either way is a gamble. I think I would rather use the former approach, since it puts bodies in the slots (and hopefully they stay put), but the absolute requirement for success in this manner is to have highly successful developmental coaches - one of our present challenges, which likely causes your concern for the approach.
Waiting until the need occurs and trying to find a player negates a lot of the need and usefulness for developmental coaching, but finding the right player - or getting him to commit (NIL or otherwise) - is the challenge - and one that if not successful leaves the team in perhaps worse shape than having a mid-talent player in the spot.
Roster management has to be a nightmare.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [928]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 531
Joined: 12/4/21
|
Re: The Evolution of our Recruiting
Dec 20, 2022, 9:20 AM
|
|
Here's the good news, if the past is a predictor, given our positive culture, we don't loose guys off of the 2-Deep. While I would love to have quality roster depth all the way to the scout team, I am afraid those days are gone. The transfer portal is full of 2-4 deep looking for playing time or top tier looking for NIL dollars. I think the path moving forward is to play the hel! out of your 2-deep and never lose these guys to the portal. Hopefully the 3-deep are looking future graduations/NFL and are willing to compete. If the injury bug hits, fingers crossed, some development has taken place or you have a handful of loyal kids who have stuck it out.
Looking forward at the CFP's, unfortunately there will be 3 teams that will always be dominant, Alabama, Georgia, Ohio State (lookout USC & Texas might be two to add with their NIL and good coaching staffs). You will always have one team that catches lightening in a given year (TCU, Cincinnati) and after that you will have us, Oklahoma, LSU, Notre Dame, Michigan, now maybe Miami, maybe Oregon, one other SEC school (Florida, Texas A&M) plus one more wild card. That is it, whatever parody was left in college football a few years ago, is gone because recruiting has gotten so lopsided towards just a handful of schools. Not to mention, some of these schools are really surging more than others. I really hope we can hang onto our top tier status as things shuffle out over the next few years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1932]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 2520
Joined: 6/18/01
|
Re: The Evolution of our Recruiting
Dec 20, 2022, 9:45 AM
[ in reply to Re: The Evolution of our Recruiting ] |
|
Those last minute recruits are the result of Dabo filling roster spots of people who transferred with whatever was left on the market. This is a bad trend. He can improve his roster with the portal but instead were dealing with all the negatives without gleaning any positives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4304]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 3166
Joined: 11/7/22
|
Simple answer. Prime Time Opponents and CFP games
Dec 20, 2022, 8:34 AM
|
|
without these. Clemson will not recruit well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4304]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 3166
Joined: 11/7/22
|
DJU and the management mishap costs more than W/L-es***
Dec 20, 2022, 8:35 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30455]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47452
Joined: 12/20/99
|
What have our ranking been each year since the FIRST class
Dec 20, 2022, 8:43 AM
|
|
that started our CFP run until now? I'd be really curious to see how it has fluxuated
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48272]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14910
Joined: 11/7/20
|
Re: What have our ranking been
Dec 20, 2022, 9:28 AM
|
|
Guess you're on the TD ferry list too. Anyway, I'd been working on this to try and get facts. Interesting stuff. This does not take into account the misses we have had on our offers to the top of our board recruits as discussed above. Some of this will shock. Sorry don't have word or excel.
Yr. Rank. Sze +91. +93
13 - 15 - 22 8 - 8 stayed n develop - 3
14 - 16 - 19. 5 - 3 stayed n develop - 3
15 - 9 - 24. 11 - 9 stayed n develop - 8
16- 11 - 21. 11 - 7 stayed n develop - 8
17 - 16 - 14. 9 - 5 stayed n develop - 6
*18 - 7 - 17. 11 - 7 stayed n develop - 10 (6 transfer 2 injured after freshman year)
19 - 10 - 29. 10 - 5 stayed n develop - 8 (3 transfer and 16 from class transfer, quit, hurt)
20 - 3 - 23. 14 - 7 stayed n develop - 12 (5 transfer or busts. 12 in class transfer, quit football and more possibly leaving)
21 - 5 - 18. 17 - TBD 10 (1 left 1 injured)
22 - 10 - 21. 10 - TBD 6
23 - 10 -25. 9 - N/A
As you can see, our class rank has remained pretty close. Our classes are getting bigger because in 2013-2016 we didn't have much transfer. Interesting too is early on, we may not have had quite as many high targets 91 rating but the ones we had, stayed and developed at various stages. Now they're leaving. After 18, things clearly changed. So, our recruiting rating has been consistent and or even higher but we've had more injuries and busts than we had. In addition, we tended not to have as many developmental guys make it later as we did early on.
Would like some of you experts interpret the data. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48272]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14910
Joined: 11/7/20
|
Re: What have our ranking been
Dec 20, 2022, 9:56 AM
|
|
Meant to add. +91 is your 4* middle of the pack +93 (last number out of the +91 and above were how many +93 - +99 considered high 4* targets and 5* talent)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [928]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 531
Joined: 12/4/21
|
Re: What have our ranking been
Dec 20, 2022, 9:57 AM
[ in reply to Re: What have our ranking been ] |
|
Thanks Clemgalaways. Your data was a little tough to read at first but I think I understand it and you have uncovered a few trends. Whether they are concerning or are predicting future challenges I don't really know. I appreciate you taking the time to data mine.
Here is what I will say, while everyone always wants to focus on the highly rated "misses" Bowman, Tchio, Ladson, McMichael, Belk (some, not me, will even include DJU even through he started 27 games, he was just a bad fit). At least most recently, most misses from a ratings standpoint have been at the bottom half of our classes. This is where the development should come from but hasn't, these guys come year 3 and 4 should be making an impact. Take a look at our 2020 & 2021 classes, they make up almost our entire 2-deep and keep in mind, these are our most highly rated classes of all time.
The 2022 class could be very telling, at the top we have several high-end players who will start a boatload of games, at the bottom we have a kicker, a punter and then 8 guys that had zero or only 1 Power 5 offers. It appears Turner might be a "Renfrow" like find, for our sake, I sure hope there are a few others or our roster depth will be a problem in 2023/2024. Relying on true freshman to fill more than 2-3 starting positions is a gamble.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7177]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6881
Joined: 1/25/17
|
3-Star Players Clemson Developed into. . . .
Dec 20, 2022, 12:58 PM
|
|
In this, you would have to include the 3-star talent that has developed at Clemson.
Hunter Renfrow - 2-star.
Travis Etienne -3-star(Rivals.com).
James Skalski - 3-star.
Isiah Simmons -3-star.
K'von Wallace - 3-star.
Nolan Turner - 2 or 3-star depending on what service.
Baylon Spector - 3-star.
Grady Jarrett - 3-star.
Tanner Muse - 3-star.
Jordan Mcfadden - 3-star. Likely to get drafted as a OG. 5-star and one of my all-time favorite Tigers players Mitch Hyatt 5-star went undrafted.
In short, I think with so many "HIGH 3-STARS" out there - I think we will be just fine. Clearly, we have taken players who we only maybe had to beat out a SBC or MAC school for and made them household names or in the case of most or all of the above(depending on current status) are all NFL players.
Dabo takes pride in developing talent. 3-star players; even those who just missed out on being 4-stars are being left out; because schools are getting portal players instead of signing these players.
So, based off historical data, "I am going to hope the trend of developing solid to outstanding FBS players continue"! Cole Turner comes to mind on our current roster!
https://n.rivals.com/content/prospects/2018/jordan-mcfadden-181894?view=pv
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7177]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6881
Joined: 1/25/17
|
Re: 3-Star Players Clemson Developed into. . . .
Dec 20, 2022, 1:04 PM
|
|
To be clear: since we have done well in the past. I have not seen anything that makes me believe we will continue. Dabo has shown a good eye for lower-ranked players.
I wish he wouldn't do it on the OL as much, but even there we have done alright. I didn't list them all; but just strictly off recent track record: "regardless of a lower rating/ranking I like the players we pick"! Especially because they tend to be grinders who will work on the 1 or two aspects that prevented them from being a higher-tier recruit.
The key question is: "can they play ball in the 1st place"! You can help a kid get stronger/faster/bigger if that's what kept them from being a higher-tier player. Can they play ball at a high level? And are they willing to work to get better? If yes, I think Dabo has shown he gives those players an opportunity.
And mind you, that was when many high 3-stars were getting scooped up. There are more available now; so in my mind at least, "we will be okay as long as that trend continues"!
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5016]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3546
Joined: 7/7/12
|
Re: What have our ranking been
Dec 20, 2022, 2:23 PM
[ in reply to Re: What have our ranking been ] |
|
I'm not sure how we compare to other highly ranked teams, but from those stats it appears that we have a large % of players who leave before their eligibility is up. If they go to the NFL, no problem, but if they are transfers, that might be a concern.
Players usually transfer becaue they feel they deserve to play more thn they do. I wonder if 4* and 5* ramked players are quicker to transfer if they don't make the 2-deep by Jr year than 3* players who have steadily improved through developmental coaching. I suspect we might work harder than some teams to find potentially good 3* players who have a high ceiling because they might be a little more grateful of their opportunity and will sticl around and are hard workers that set a good example for others. The absolute requirement for that strategy to work is to have an excellent developmental staff - which I think is where we could stand some improvement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7177]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6881
Joined: 1/25/17
|
Re: What have our ranking been
Dec 20, 2022, 5:31 PM
|
|
I'm not sure how we compare to other highly ranked teams, but from those stats it appears that we have a large % of players who leave before their eligibility is up. If they go to the NFL, no problem, but if they are transfers, that might be a concern.
Players usually transfer becaue they feel they deserve to play more thn they do. I wonder if 4* and 5* ramked players are quicker to transfer if they don't make the 2-deep by Jr year than 3* players who have steadily improved through developmental coaching. I suspect we might work harder than some teams to find potentially good 3* players who have a high ceiling because they might be a little more grateful of their opportunity and will sticl around and are hard workers that set a good example for others. The absolute requirement for that strategy to work is to have an excellent developmental staff - which I think is where we could stand some improvement.
I agree with all you said. And, have said much of the same things on tnet. To your last sentence though: "wouldn't the list of names I provided above indicate that our developmental staff is high level"? I didn't even list them all in terms of players who started out during the Dabo era as high 3-stars who ended up on an NFL roster.
I think it is "a strong indicator we have a good developmental staff and culture"!
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5016]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3546
Joined: 7/7/12
|
Re: What have our ranking been
Dec 20, 2022, 7:00 PM
|
|
I do agree that our staff has over time done a good job with player development, but I do think that we have slipped a couple of notches over the past couple of years. As examples, consider our WRs n=and QB. On the plus side, TEs have improved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8534]
TigerPulse: 49%
Posts: 11502
Joined: 9/9/06
|
Re: The Evolution of our Recruiting
Dec 20, 2022, 8:48 AM
|
|
Time makes no difference, the signing is what matters. The entire recruiting situation has been hard but is very, very hard today because players can still go the NFL and into the Portal after tomorrow. What looks like a number tomorrow, may not the number at all and therein lies the problem. Coaching is hard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 22
| visibility 2,464
|
|
|
50
