»
Topic: Interesting comparison. Rivals Team rankings by year.
Replies: 26   Last Post: Aug 16, 2013 10:58 AM by: ClemsonTiger1988®
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 26  

Interesting comparison. Rivals Team rankings by year.


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 5:37 PM
 

Recruiting rankings by year
Year Clemson Scar
2005 17 23
2006 16 24
2007 16 6
2008 12 22
2009 37 12
2010 19 24
2011 8 18
2012 14 19
2013 14 16

Clemson out recruited Scar 7 out of 9 years. Still those two years that they were ranked higher were pretty good years for them.
Does this provide any insight into why Dabo has had trouble with Spurrier? Or does it prove that recruiting rankings are meaningless? Any ideas?


Trenches... they have recruit better in the trenches


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 5:41 PM
 

our ratings have come from lots of skill players and average linemen.

This is the first year, well since the early 90's where I felt the OL and DL were, as a group, a strength.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

"Excuse me? I don't go down to your work and tell you how to flip the burger!"


Good point.


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 5:46 PM
 

It seems we rarely hit on highly rated linemen. At least until now.


Re: Good point.


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 7:45 PM
 

But you can develop linemen in the weight room. Remember Pryce, who ended up being our best offensive lineman? Gurley at Uga is now reportedly up to nearly 230. That's as big as some of our defencive ends. They can do it and we can't? And don't start the steroids BS. That's an excuse.


Steroids are much more than an excuse if they are using***


Posted: Aug 16, 2013 10:25 AM
 



2020 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

Re: Trenches... they have recruit better in the trenches


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 7:02 PM
 

You are all over it. The games are won and/or lost between the trenches, and we have recruited great skill, but not very good in the big ugly arena.

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Re: Trenches... they have recruit better in the trenches


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 7:47 PM
 

You are absolutely right.


Re: Trenches... they have recruit better in the trenches


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 7:39 PM
 

I'm not a fan of Spurrier, but I have to acknowledge that he is a great coach, almost certainly headed for the hall of fame. Four years ago he totally ravamped their S&C program. That's when they started man-handling us, beating us with a disheartening regularity.
I've long, along with others, have had serious doubts about our S&C program, and I've been attacked for this.
But we just don't seem to be able to able to add size and strenth to our players. And we tolerate overweight
do-nothings like Region. I don't have the answer, but I sense that something is wrong in that area of our program. Just my opinion. Any feedback appreciated.


Tell 'em coot

[1]
Posted: Aug 13, 2013 8:18 PM
 

dgcannon39 smh


Re: Tell 'em coot


Posted: Aug 15, 2013 10:45 PM
 

Tell em coot. Youre always cootin around. Why are you such a coot rimsuck69er?


Re: Trenches... they have recruit better in the trenches


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 7:44 PM
 

ABSOLUTELY!! I have been singing this song about our LINE recruiting for 15 years (or more)!!!one problem that continues is our not using any "chemicals"like the c$$ts and most of the rest of the ESPNSEC!

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg


Re: Trenches... they have recruit better in the trenches


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 7:50 PM
 

It's not chemicals. It's outmoded techniques. Let's get off that excuse.


I think that's it. Going back to TB's early years, it seems


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 8:04 PM
 

we have been in it, only to miss at the end with tons of highly regarded linemen. I'd guess that over half of the O-linemen we have signed over the last 15 years have been fall-backs.

2020 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


Dabo has had time to recruit and develop linemen.


Posted: Aug 16, 2013 10:58 AM
 

This will be Dabo's first year of having linemen that he's recruited.

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: Interesting comparison. Rivals Team rankings by year.


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 5:49 PM
 

May mean nothing but Clemson fans need to get even more mad that Clemson has out recruited USC for 9 out of 10 years dating way back.

So what is the reason when it isn't players. That leads to areas nobody wants to discuss. Coaching and coaching up players.

Like it or not USC has as many players in the NFL or more while not getting the big recruits like Clemson has.

It calls for deeper discussion but the result may simply be they had a decent fun of 4 years and now it is over.

military_donation.jpg

Re: Interesting comparison. Rivals Team rankings by year.

[1]
Posted: Aug 13, 2013 6:23 PM
 

It goes deeper than that, When Dabo took over his first recruiting year as the head man was only 12 deep and I think that 3 or 4 never made it or transferred so only 8 or 9 actually only really contributed. When you have a class that low in numbers it hurts depth, quality of the team, and the the numbers of guys you feel comfortable using on the field. We had the youngest team in the country in 2011 we had 43 or 44 true or red-shirt freshmen and we won the ACC championship and won 10 games for the first time in decades so if you ask me it was nothing but coaching that got those young cats to where they were and where they are at now. We have only had what around 10 or so give or take a couple players that were seniors for the past couple years opposed to 20 or 22 like most of the programs, now we will have those types of numbers next year but I think we are heavy soph and junior as well this year. What most of you fail to remember is that a lot of those DBs that USuCk got the year TB was fired was actually heavy Clemson leans but after TB "resigned" we lost a lot of good recruits being commits or from consideration. Regardless of what most people think it has taken the past year or 2 for Dabo to gain the credibility he needed for a lot of these kids needed to see before they invested 4 or 5 years in this great program. Your always gonna have about 5 or 6 highly recruited guys that are just Clemson guys and would be here regardless. Now as far as the trenches we have done a better job of that the past couple years we are always gonna struggle being in SEC country and every media pundit in the country telling these cats if you want to play in the league you need to be in that conference but if you had money in something you would push people in that direction too. We have to change that and beat everyone on the schedule and everything will take care of itself, we recruit #### well just think if we could throw beating 2 SEC teams, FSU, ACC Coastal Division Champ and win a Natty along with the sells pitch what that would do for the best university in the country, and I think it can be done and be done this year... NOW STDB AND LETS PLAY SOME FOOTBALL!!!!!!!


Re: Interesting comparison. Rivals Team rankings by year.


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 8:02 PM
 

Good points. I still think that a top lineman prospect is going to go where he believes he is going to be coached up. Prime example is LSU who has an outstanding
DL coach and strength program. Under Bowden we had become a finesse program. Change that to a "warrior" culture, and we'll start getting these top linemen. I think Venables is on the way to doing that. I still think we have problems in the S&C area. Let's see what happens against UGA.


Re: Interesting comparison. Rivals Team rankings by year.


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 7:02 PM
 

Bye, bye cootie pie.

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Re: Interesting comparison. Rivals Team rankings by year.


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 7:53 PM
 

Amen brother. We have serious deficienties in player development and that includes strength training.


Re: Interesting comparison. Rivals Team rankings by year.


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 6:38 PM
 

USuCk Hater I am with you, the schedule sets up for the best opportunity Clemson has had to go all the way. Win and everything else will fall in line.

Beat UGA and I think Fla St and USC are wins and Nat Champ is next in line

military_donation.jpg

Re: Interesting comparison. Rivals Team rankings by year.


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 7:50 PM
 

I know nobody here wants to read this but playing a much more difficult schedule, week in and out, increases their toughness. The more weight you lift the stronger you are, the further you run the more fit you are and the tougher your schedule the better you get. How often have you heard, "You only get better when you play those better than you." Barring injuries, playing a schedule where every team is tougher than any Clemson plays, except for (maybe)Fl. St. has made them a better team by the end of the last four seasons.


There's 3 teams propping up the SEC.


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 7:54 PM
 

And, it's been that way for several years now. Week in and week out, their schedule is no tougher than anybody elses'

2009_nascar_champ.gif

Re: There's 3 teams propping up the SEC.


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 9:06 PM
 

Vandy vs. Wake, Ken vs Duke, Tenn vs Md or NCS. Teams not proping up SEC, Fla (#13), SC (top ten), Tenn, Aub (nat champ 3 years ago), A&M (top ten). Guess you're right Md,Duke, Wake, GT, etc are just the same.


you forget that they don't play every team in the sec,


Posted: Aug 16, 2013 5:08 AM
 

vandy,kentucky,tennessee aren't very good, florida was vastly over-rated (just ask louisville). in the west you have miss., miss st.,arkansas,mizzou, and auburn who aren't any good. i'll give you uga in the east, and 'bama,lsu, and a&m in the west. take out the teams they did not play and that gives them an sec schedule that isn't that daunting.
i think you have to come up with a different theory.

military_donation.jpg

Thomas - there is merit to that....


Posted: Aug 16, 2013 10:21 AM
 

Just look at how the SEC has played in the NC games over the past few years. Most of those games have been over well before the 4th quarter.

I remember watching the OSU and UF National Championship a few years ago and UF players said after the game that wasn't even one of the 3 toughest teams they played all year.


Re: Interesting comparison. Rivals Team rankings by year.


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 7:58 PM
 

Thanks Thomas Sumter I agree 100% there is no difference right now wit the quality of players, Clemson has good coaches but are losing. I feel strongly that has to do with toughness and week in week out getting banged up and playing tough competition

Give Clemson a schedule of playing Fla St type teams 4 times in 1 year add UGA add USC and a few cupcakes and see if the product doesn't get better

Why else would USC be so scared of Clemson getting into the SEC. They already recruit incredibly, if they were in SEC they would get the players who want to beat the best and want to be in the best conference (right now) and would play tough games and get even better. The ceiling is higher for Clemson than it is for USC

military_donation.jpg

Re: Interesting comparison. Rivals Team rankings by year.


Posted: Aug 13, 2013 8:14 PM
 

I wouldn't put too much in the ratings of rivals. We get better players out of HS because we have exceptional facilities compared to the coots. Their stadium is awful and they don't even have a darn indoor practice facility yet. As much as I hate it, Spurrier is a good coach (no dabo). That punk Swearinger was a darn 2* coming out of HS and he went in the second round of the draft last year. I think we just need a better mix of 4 and 5* lineman AND skill players and we'll be whooping them like we did in the late 90s and ealry 00s again!


Replies: 26  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Season Tickets
FOR SALE: I pay 3600 a year Pay half and can buy 4 tickets lower deck on about 30 yd line at the cost of seas...

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
2237 people have read this post