»
Topic: Development or recruiting? My own take.
Replies: 30   Last Post: Jun 25, 2018 12:15 PM by: 76er®
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 30  

Development or recruiting? My own take.

[62]
Posted: Jun 22, 2018 3:11 PM
 

(Long post warning...quoz is expounding on stuff all up in here. You've been warned.)

Everybody gets really worked up about recruiting. Which is important...but it's also only less than about 30% of the puzzle. Actually: 25%, by my math.

People also act like there's some science to the rankings, like there's no politics or promotion involved in the rankings, and that these rankings are as precise as the player ratings on their Madden consoles. You get the highest-rated team with the best players, you win all your games, right? And recruiting is just like that....

Well, no. Keep in mind there's one limitation first and foremost that never, ever shows up in recruiting rankings, and that is:

ATTITUDE. (Yes, I just used boldface. Take that, SportsSuites.) You can call this whatever you want - coachability, work ethic, learning curve, IQ, whatever - but whatever you call it, it's the most-important attribute a player can have. I say this as, among other things, a USSF-licensed coach who has taught kids all the way up to state level. Does the guy learn? Does he take hard coaching well? Does he get along with teammates or is he a cancer in the locker room? And guess what - this most important of attributes goes completely unremarked-upon (and unrated) by the recruiting services. They rate almost 100% off perceived physical talent. (The problem here is access...remark on a kid's nasty primadonna attitude, and see how fast his coach or school stops talking to you, and recruiting analysts require access to survive.) And it's amazing how often these attributes are likewise ignored by college recruiters who see the physical measureables and ignore the head and brain that control all of that.

The best college coaches don't just recruit the athlete. They filter out the bad apples - and there are a lot of them, unfortunately - and try to recruit the "right kinda guys", with an eye towards not just where that player is now, but where they will be in a few years with consistent work and quality coaching...and the right "culture" around them.

You have to get good enough physical talent, true. As they say, you don't win the Kentucky Derby on a donkey. But then you have to do something with it afterwards. And developmental coaching isn't factored at all into class rankings. I doubt Chris Peterson - who won a gazillion games at Boise before moving to Washington, where he has continued to win 10+ a year - has ever recruited a 5-star guy in his life, and not many 4-stars...but he wins an insane number of games, because he recruits the right kinda guys...and he can seriously coach him some football. Contrariwise, Butch Jones at Tennessee spent the last few years wasting more talent as any coach in America...well, Kevin Sumlin at A&M might have been close. Both of those schools out-recruited Clemson most years, the last decade. On paper. Five stars o' plenty. Wins, not so much.

So...those guys either did nothing with all that talent...or was all that talent as good as advertised? Both, I think. It's the old "zero sum" factor...multiply anything by zero, and the result is, well, zero. And a lot of the kids those schools recruited had highly negative attitudes...and had those attitudes all along, usually. A 5-star who won't work and won't learn is worth nothing to his team...and is a zero-star in reality. And a coach who can't coach can take even a good player and ruin them.

And then there's the whole "culture" thing. How your group or organization does what it does. A lot of coaches seem to have no clue about the whole "culture" thing, and the word "development" is just as alien to a lot of these guys. They regard players as fixed commodities. They don't trouble themselves to teach or encourage, they just sorta chuck their players into the churn and see who comes out on top, like beetles in a jar, and that's who plays for them. As for the losers (which is most of the locker room) well, see ya. Bobby Petrino at Louisville is maybe the worst at this aspect of the game that I've seen in awhile - he usually plays maybe 30 guys a game, if that - but Muschamp isn't far off. He just doesn't play his backups. Jake Bentley is the only QB who completed a pass for USC last year...like, what happens if he gets dinged? And you ever wonder why Louisville also always seems to crater at the end of the year, why USC under the Champ always seems to agreeably roll over for us, and why Petrino's (and, I suspect, Muschamp's) teams always seem to bleed talent faster than they get it until there is none left?

Well, culture. How they do what they do is kinda nuts, and certainly short-sighted. Us, we build players. All year. Often at the expense of lopsided scores and sometimes even comfortable wins.

Of course, all that defies a simple number and simple statistical analysis...which is why Clemson has remained the biggest outlier in recruiting-versus-wins for quite awhile. But then, we develop our guys (and in order to do that, you first must be willing to play them)...and we do our durndest to recruit the right kinda guys to begin with.

It ain't just "recruiting". It's "evaluation, recruiting, development, and culture" that determine how good a kid ends up being...and each component is probably a full quarter of the whole picture. So if you must do the math, do it that way. Take your "average star rating", adjust it for the ability of the staff to evaluate, then multiply it by how well the staff teaches and develops the technique and x's-and-o's of the game, and how the culture promotes accountability, physical development, chemistry in the locker room.

Your math ends up looking a whole lot different, you do it that way. Just FWIW.


Re: Development or recruiting? My own take.

[4]
Posted: Jun 22, 2018 3:38 PM
 

Excellent post. Spot on. I'd be just a tad more specific. Danny Ford regularly won with three and even two-star players because we had an insane strength program back in the day. Typically, we had the strongest team in the ACC, and one of the strongest teams in the country. Anyone remember when we played supposedly unbeatable Nebraska in the NC game back in'81? After two series, our linemen came off the field and told Coach Ford basically not to worry, "We got this." My guess is that in a conventional sense Nebraska was the more "talented" team, but on that day Clemson was the strongest, won in the trenches both ways, and won the game. I can't for the life of me remember the name of our middle guard, but he weighed 235----but could bench press 525. End of story.


Re: Development or recruiting? My own take.

[1]
Posted: Jun 23, 2018 2:01 AM
 

I’m pretty sure you’re talking about Rob Bodine from North Dakota...tough as nails.


Re: Development or recruiting? My own take.


Posted: Jun 23, 2018 2:06 AM
 

I believe Bodine played in the late 80’s, I was astonished at the power he had for his size.


Re: Development or recruiting? My own take.

[4]
Posted: Jun 22, 2018 3:40 PM
 




Re: Development or recruiting? My own take.

[1]
Posted: Jun 22, 2018 3:42 PM
 

It's not the players you miss out on and doesn't sign with you, it's the ones you sign that doesn't produce the way you want them to.

badge-donor-05yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg

Re: Development or recruiting? My own take.

[2]
Posted: Jun 22, 2018 3:49 PM
 

Quaz --- Old Joe21 gives you a LOUD AMEN.

military_donation.jpg

Re: Development or recruiting? My own take.

[2]
Posted: Jun 22, 2018 4:02 PM
 

But but but...... 3 stars!!!
This post is way too logical and not nearly hysterical enough for most of T-net.


Leadership among the players to me is what has

[2]
Posted: Jun 22, 2018 4:48 PM
 

really propelled us into this rarefied air of late. We're losing a massive amount of that leadership after this year, with an equally sized newbie squad coming in. With such an unusually high transition getting those 'right kind of guys' takes on even greater importance.

2018 white level member

Re: Development or recruiting? My own take.

[2]
Posted: Jun 22, 2018 4:50 PM
 

Quoz...I’m an optimist and realist like you, which is one of the reasons I appreciate all of your posts.

However, I don’t think you’ve exactly hit the nail on the head, IMHO. Given the ten teams with the most talent in CFB, most (if not all) don’t have the same culture or perspective on development like we do at Clemson. Our approach to development (both on and off the field) is one of the reasons I would support Dabo if and when our win total slips.

However, the bottom line facts are that a team cannot win championships without a majority of the roster at elite level 4/5 star talent. They just can’t. The article below proves it.

I’m not worried about recruiting today. If we get to February 2019 and have a signing class with a majority 3 star signees, then I will be concerned. But, I believe this staff will come through with that elite level talent.


Re: Development or recruiting? My own take.


Posted: Jun 22, 2018 4:50 PM
 

Sorry...forgot to post the article. It was posted in another thread as well.

https://www.sbnation.com/a/cfb-preview-2017/blue-chip-ratio


Doesn't account for the 'culture/ attitude' factor...***

[1]
Posted: Jun 22, 2018 7:58 PM
 



2018 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: Doesn't account for the 'culture/ attitude' factor...***


Posted: Jun 22, 2018 8:30 PM
 

“It boils down to teams that sign more four- and five-star recruits than two- and three-stars, over the previous four recruiting classes. That’s an exclusive club, usually consisting of the top 10 percent of FBS programs. All of the national champs over the last decade-plus have accomplished it, and often, the team taking home the trophy has signed many more elite players.”


This horse has been beat to death, but I guess I've got

[2]
Posted: Jun 22, 2018 6:05 PM
 

a few swats left in me.

I like the recruiting services and star-ratings for what they are, and I'd take a team full of 4 and 5-stars over a team of 3-stars all day long, all other things being equal. The problem is, all other things are never equal.

Recruiting services provide centralized sources of information we would not otherwise have, and their star ratings, flawed as they are, generally reflect the opinions of successful coaches (offers). I am grateful for all of that. They exist for profit, however, and rely on hits and subscriptions which undoubtedly factors into their rankings. They never have been, and never will be a substitute for face-to-face evaluation by football coaches, each of whom may be looking for something different. If people haven't learned to trust Dabo and his staff by now, then they haven't been paying attention.

Don't hate that donkey if he don't win the Kentucky Derby; he shouldn't be expected to, even if he tells you he can. It's your own damm fault if you do. Just laugh and be glad you've got a donkey.

2018 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H. L. Mencken


Re: This horse has been beat to death, but I guess I've got

[2]
Posted: Jun 22, 2018 6:15 PM
 

Well said, and because of this remember that this early in the recruiting cycle those who were 3* will now have another year of development (stats) and a Clemson commitment. +1.5* when the next edition comes out....


Could be!***

[1]
Posted: Jun 22, 2018 6:28 PM
 



2018 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H. L. Mencken


Re: Could be!***

[1]
Posted: Jun 23, 2018 11:41 AM
 

I can pretty much guarantee that this will occur.


Re: Development or recruiting? My own take.

[1]
Posted: Jun 22, 2018 6:23 PM
 

and yet Josh Belk got to Clemson somehow. Talk about lack of character, coachability, attitude, or whatever.

2018 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Photobucket is holding my sig pic hostage. Screw them.


2 star post

[1]
Posted: Jun 22, 2018 7:04 PM
 

ATTITUDE? pffffffttttt

Do they have to know the words to Cumbaya too?

jk ??????????????????

On the money


Better to get 5 sttars than 4 stars and better to get 4

[2]
Posted: Jun 22, 2018 7:07 PM
 

stars than three stars. The stats don't lie. The higher the stars, the higher the probability the player will make a significant impact. It helps with performance at a higher level, depth, and so on.


Only problem...


Posted: Jun 22, 2018 7:36 PM
 

other than alot of that running together.
Is how fun would it be on here if everyone just totally agreed with every single player
or recruit we were after. Part of the enjoyment, unless you're taking shots at some-
one personally. Is discussing who ya like, what ya like about certain players. And
what they bring to the table. That's what makes everyone different. Not being called a
"coot" because you have a lil' different opinion. To me what's sad is the folks who aren't
bold enough to give their honest opinion. IN a respectful manor grant it...
With that said, I think most ppl on here feel the staff is building something great- no
doubt. But its still fun to debate it, and see how it all plays out.

All walks of life, and everyone has their 2 cents.....I respect that.

#21


5* Attitude

[3]
Posted: Jun 22, 2018 8:04 PM
 

To Quoz's point, attitude is everything. Shaq Smith had 5* measurables and stats in high school...and he checks his ego at the door because of a 5*, team-first, attitude. DW4, 5* attitude....TL, 5* attitude. Heck, I'll give HJ his due and a 5* attitude. That he's choosing to transfer takes nothing from him, nor how he and Coach Swinney handled it. Grady Jarrett and Vic Beasley had 5* attitudes, as did Adam Humphries. And if it could be bottled, Christian Wilkins' attitude would be, perhaps, the most expensive elixir on the market, sought be every program in the nation.


Wow....POTY, perhaps

[2]
Posted: Jun 22, 2018 9:00 PM
 

Bravo, Q

- 13

2018 purple level member


Overall, there’s only about 10% of our 2019 class that I don’t like


Posted: Jun 23, 2018 12:57 AM
 

I think we take 32 guys this class. There’s about 2-4 commits/leans that I’m not a huge fan of. But every single one of these does have the kind of developmental potential to prove me wrong.

2018 student level member

Re: Development or recruiting? My own take.

[3]
Posted: Jun 23, 2018 8:42 AM
 

The true simple facts are, Dabo began his journey to the top of college FB beating a loaded LSU team with less than a hand full of 4 star recruits and loaded with no star, and 2 and 3 star players. I don't think there was a 5 star on the team. He and his staff began that climb to the top with development of what he could get to come to Clemson. I'm not even close to looking for a bridge to jump from. We will be fine, we're just spoiled these days at the top, at that is bc we have found that it can be lonely at the top bc not that many can get to where we are today!!!

Goooooo Tigersss!!!!


Message was edited by: allorangeallthetime52®


2018 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Re: Development or recruiting? My own take.

[1]
Posted: Jun 23, 2018 9:02 AM
 

A lot of great comments here. For what it's worth based on 247's recent rankings we now have the third ranked class for 2019.

2018 purple level member


Re: Development or recruiting? My own take.

[1]
Posted: Jun 23, 2018 9:50 AM
 

Yes but, those ranking really don't mean a whole bc, lets say that we were the only school in the power 5 that had 25 scholarships to give this season, with nobody having more than 15 to give, we would out rank the others with 2 and 3 star recruit over their 15 3,4 and 5 star recruits bc of the way they do the points.

2018 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Not a 5* on the team?

[1]
Posted: Jun 23, 2018 9:46 AM
 

Sammy, Tony, Charone, Stephone... as well as a few others that were close.

2018 student level member

TU, great post.. BUT..

[4]
Posted: Jun 23, 2018 11:29 AM
 

Let me first say, I really do not care about the rankings. I just don't. At all.

But these posts that defend where our players' rankings is ignore that everything you mentioned regarding character, culture, and coaching all applied the last 5 years while we were pulling in a steady dose of 4 and 5 star guys. The ONLY thing that changed from last year to this year is that the guys we're taking are across the board lower rated by all the services than what we've grown accustomed to. I'm not sure why people have a hard time with this.

It doesn't mean we stink, that our coaches have lost touch, or that we're on the down swing. We won't know what it mean for another 2-4 years. But for now, the guys we're taking are lower rated and we as fans have the choice of whether we're going to freak out about it or trust and take a wait and see approach. Heck, even with last year's class, the answer for me is still the same.. trust, wait and see.

Go Tigers!!

2018 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

null


I agree

[1]
Posted: Jun 25, 2018 10:25 AM
 

Saw this post over the weekend, and am a little late in replying. I in general agree with everything you said.

The only dissenting opinion that I have is that I do think there is merit in the recruiting services rankings, and players that are higher ranked in general end up being the best players. But player development does play a huge role in how good a player will become.

As others have stated, I don't get the big freak outs over this particular class. There are a lot of scholarships available, and there is still plenty of room to get some 4 and 5 star guys. And even if we don't get many this year, then whatever. It's 1 class...it's not going to cause the downfall of the whole football program. Also, I'll note that some of these 3 star guys that we have committed have an exceedingly large number of offers...something tells me they may be under ranked...otherwise the only other explanation is that 25 other schools have failed in evaluating the player.

2018 white level member

This poast is WAY too logical and well thought out to be on


Posted: Jun 25, 2018 12:15 PM
 

this bored. TU to you for trying to raise the Football IQ around heah, sir.

2018 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Replies: 30  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: South Carolina
FOR SALE: CU vs. South Carolina - $1,500 for 4 GREAT lower deck aisle tickets: Tickets are on the North side o...

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
3967 people have read this post