»
Topic: 247 no love for Clemson
Replies: 36   Last Post: Jan 23, 2019 3:40 PM by: CUAllTheWay®
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 36  

247 no love for Clemson

[1]
Posted: Jan 22, 2019 1:39 PM
 

There is no way Andrew Booth isn’t one of the top 32 players in America. He’s one of the two top corners in the nation this class along with Stingley. Just because he didn’t participate in their camps and all star games


Re: 247 no love for Clemson

[5]
Posted: Jan 22, 2019 1:46 PM
 

They had Nuk Hopkins the 11th best player in SC, the 29th best wr in the nation, and 213 overall.

https://247sports.com/Season/2010-Football/CompositeRecruitRankings/?InstitutionGroup=HighSchool&State=SC

2019 white level member

Re: 247 no love for Clemson

[1]
Posted: Jan 22, 2019 4:16 PM
 

They sure hit the nail on the head with that....


Composite is what matters

[1]
Posted: Jan 22, 2019 1:55 PM
 

https://247sports.com/player/andrew-booth-46039607/


Re: 247 no love for Clemson

[2]
Posted: Jan 22, 2019 1:56 PM
 

Ngata should be a 5 star as well. But since Justyn Ross was a 4 star nothing surprises me


Re: 247 no love for Clemson

[1]
Posted: Jan 22, 2019 1:59 PM
 

Ross was a five star on rivals. I think they’ve been more accurate regarding Clemson players the past few years


The good news is

[2]
Posted: Jan 22, 2019 1:56 PM
 

Recruiting rankings don't matter at all at the end of the day. 247 will be the ones looks stupid when he comes to Clemson and balls out.


Re: The good news is

[1]
Posted: Jan 22, 2019 3:39 PM
 

Stuppyhead said:

Recruiting rankings don't matter at all at the end of the day. 247 will be the ones looks stupid when he comes to Clemson and balls out.


“recruiting rankings don’t matter at the end of the day, IF AT ALL” according to Jake Bentley and Will Muschamp.

Jk - could not resist.

2019 purple level member

Stars DO matter...

[2]
Posted: Jan 22, 2019 2:28 PM
 

Year in and year out, the top teams are the ones who had a top 5 recruiting class in each of the previous 4 year span.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

..:: ru4god2 ::..


Re: Stars DO matter...

[1]
Posted: Jan 22, 2019 2:31 PM
 

Exactly. I wish people would shut up with that narrative.

Occasionally you hit 2-3 stars developing phenomenally.

military_donation.jpg

"We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution." - Abraham Lincoln


It isn't true


Posted: Jan 22, 2019 2:35 PM
 

2018 college football signing class: 2- and 5-year recruiting rankings - SBNation.com
https://www.sbnation.com/college-football-recruiting/2018/2/8/16990550/college-football-recruiting-rankings-2018-class


Re: It isn't true


Posted: Jan 22, 2019 4:14 PM
 

Based on those numbers it may not be true to say all the classes were ranked in the top 5, but all 4 of the CFP teams this season are in the top 10 of that list. Obviously player development is still key beyond bringing in the recruits, but getting those top guys does matter. Those coaches aren't going out here recruiting their butts off because they could just as easily develop and win with a bunch of 2-3 star guys.


That is an easy claim to make considering


Posted: Jan 23, 2019 10:54 AM
 

The cfp has been 4 teams
Clemson
Bama
Oklahoma
OSU

MSU, UGA, ND, and Washington made inconsequential appearances.

That means at least 6 teams ranked in the top 10 of recruiting sites don't sniff NC's.

16 teams in the top 20.

So what do those rankings really proclaim? What is the real world difference between #1 class with a made up score of 55.768 and the number 10 ranked class with a made up score or 50.854

Heck, I can say osU, clemson, bama, and oklahoma will be in the cfp based off my highly scientific cleat size pro index official predictor metric ...and be correct 90% of the time.


Re: It isn't true


Posted: Jan 23, 2019 11:29 AM
 

From Coach Muschamps mouth (paraphrasing of course)... I don’t look at star rankings. I know what a good football player looks like so I’ve never concerned myself with star ratings.

Based on their on field performance.... I’d say ive never seen a better arguement for why stars matter in recruiting.


Stars DO matter...& with a team loaded with stars,


Posted: Jan 22, 2019 2:38 PM
 

you have better chance of those 2-3 star guys developing. When that's all you got, you're gonna hit on 85 2-3 stars.


These stars and rankings serve 1 purpose


Posted: Jan 22, 2019 3:06 PM
 

Generate money.. this is why each of these services come out with stats and charts indicating why their rankings mean something. Teams won and loss way before these services were created.

In fact there used to be just one... the 1st 1 I remember was rivals...

It us like fantasy football. Once some1 figured toy could make money, 60 more popped up.

What matters the most is that you have a coaching staff that can identify talent regardless of stars.


Re: These stars and rankings serve 1 purpose


Posted: Jan 22, 2019 4:19 PM
 

What isn't about money? There was a time when you'd struggle to find your team's game on tv, and now it's all there due to money. Money does drive most things, and the star rankings aren't always accurate, and they shouldn't be all that matters, but we've won with a lot of 4 and 5 star guys. Yes, we've certainly had ones like Renfrow, but for every Renfrow we've had many more highly ranked guys like Watson, Lawrence, Watkins, Ross, Wilkins, Hyatt, etc...


Re: Stars DO matter...


Posted: Jan 22, 2019 2:33 PM
 

Clemson won without top 5 classes though


That isn't true..but anyway***


Posted: Jan 22, 2019 2:34 PM
 




Re: Stars DO matter...

[1]
Posted: Jan 22, 2019 2:37 PM
 

To an extent, we've had 0 top 5 classes in recent years. Zero in the last decade for that matter yet we have 2 national championships in 3 years. Odds of a 5 star being elite is much higher than a 3 star yes and they definitely are fairly accurate of their development forward into college and beyond and is closer to accurate than wrong but putting the RIGHT talent on the field with the right character off the field is more important that your star rating and I think that's what people get at.


You don't need top 5 classes to win a national title.

[2]
Posted: Jan 22, 2019 2:44 PM
 

But you need a 4-5 year average of top ~10 classes.


Re: You don't need top 5 classes to win a national title.


Posted: Jan 22, 2019 2:54 PM
 

Clemson didn't have that either leading up to our first national championship under Dabo, but put the right pieces in the right place. In fact we only had 1 top 1 class and 1 as low as 20.


Re: You don't need top 5 classes to win a national title.


Posted: Jan 22, 2019 2:54 PM
 

10*


In 2016 our previous 5 classes were

[2]
Posted: Jan 22, 2019 3:35 PM
 

2012 - 14
2013 - 14
2014 - 13
2015 - 4
2016 - 6

5 year average = 10.2
4 year average = 9.25

And that's about as low as you will find for a national champion since recruiting rankings became a thing. Our coaching staff has done a tremendous job.


Re: In 2016 our previous 5 classes were

[1]
Posted: Jan 22, 2019 3:39 PM
 

2012-20
2013-13
2014-16
2015-9
2016-11

5 year average=13.8
4 year average=12.25

This is a composite of all recruiting sites rankings combined and where they had us for these years.


I still prefer Rivals, particularly for the older years.


Posted: Jan 22, 2019 4:03 PM
 

The composite is getting better (because ESPN and 24/7 are slowly getting better with their own rankings), but Rivals has been the best for years.


Re: I still prefer Rivals, particularly for the older years.

[1]
Posted: Jan 22, 2019 5:25 PM
 

No disagreement but the post stated 247 so that's where I was getting my information.


Re: Stars DO matter...


Posted: Jan 22, 2019 3:06 PM
 

this year

all over the place, really

https://www.sbnation.com/college-football-recruiting/2019/1/21/18191515/super-bowl-starters-as-recruits

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg


Re: Stars DO matter...


Posted: Jan 22, 2019 3:48 PM
 

Interesting.

2019 white level member

Re: Stars DO matter...


Posted: Jan 22, 2019 4:12 PM
 

I’d take a whole team of hunter renfrows than a team of 5 stars.


You have to look at it in perspective

[1]
Posted: Jan 22, 2019 3:15 PM
 

Back a few years ago they acquired Scout.com's recruiting. I imagine a lot of people from Scout are now working for 247. With that said, when Scout was reporting on recruiting which I think lasted for around 15+ or so years, Clemson NEVER had a top 10 recruiting class according to them. It looks like 247 has inherited a little bit of that bias at lest when it comes to their rankings and not the composite.


Scout used to be awful for football.

[1]
Posted: Jan 22, 2019 4:05 PM
 

24/7 has improved it quite a bit.


Re: 247 no love for Clemson


Posted: Jan 22, 2019 3:21 PM
 

Recruiting rankings are irrelevant . It’s become a beauty contest like the Heisman. I trust the coaches to chase the right personnel, and then what happens on the field is what matters.
Their track record is pretty darn good


Re: 247 no love for Clemson


Posted: Jan 22, 2019 4:06 PM
 

Honestly, why does it matter?


Re: 247 no love for Clemson


Posted: Jan 22, 2019 4:11 PM
 

Let them keep doubting us! It’s worked out great the last few years!


Re: 247 no love for Clemson


Posted: Jan 23, 2019 2:34 PM
 

I couldn't tell you who is rated what by who or even care. I know that if our staff offers him then they see something there. That is all that matters. Stars are for astrologers not football players.

badge-donor-10yr.jpg

I told my friend that Nuk was our #1 need in his class


Posted: Jan 23, 2019 3:39 PM
 

When he had like 3 ints before half in the 1st round of the 3A SCHS Playoffs his sophomore year at D.W.D.

Straight Ball Hawk!

2019 white level member

Replies: 36  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Season Tickets
FOR SALE: SECTION "M" -- (4) Lower Level North Side, Row H-H, Aisle seats together, ASKINg $1200/seat $4800 f...

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
4733 people have read this post