»
Topic: Clemson doesn't develop their players
Replies: 51   Last Post: Jul 9, 2012, 5:11 PM by: cu1981fan
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 51  

Clemson doesn't develop their players

emoji_events [64]
Posted: Jul 7, 2012, 11:58 PM
 

according to a coot that called into a radio station in Columbia on Friday. The host (fill in) seemed to concur.

So I decided to do a little research. I looked at what has happened with each school's 2006, 2007 and 2008 recruiting classes:

ESPN recruits with a score of 80 or higher from 2006 to 2007:
USuC:
Kenrick Ellis (2006) – Transferred
Brian Maddox (2007) – Undrafted
Stephen Garcia (2007) – Undrafted
Mark Barnes (2007) – Transferred
Joe Hills (2007) – Transferred
Cliff Matthews (2007) – NFL 7th round
Chris Culliver (2007) – NFL 3rd round
CC Whitlock (2008) – Still on the team (despite issues)
Shaq Wilson (2008) – Still on the team
Out of 9 players rated 80 or higher by ESPN:
33% Transferred
22% Undrafted
22% Drafted by the NFL
23% Still on the team

Clemson:
Byron Maxwell (2006) – NFL 6th round
CJ Spiller (2006) – NFL 1st round
Ricky Sapp (2006) – NFL 5th round
Jamie Cumbie (2006) – Undrafted
DeAndre McDaniel (2006) – Undrafted
Willy Korn (2007) – Injured/Transferred after graduating
DaQuan Bowers (2008) – NFL 2nd round
Jamie Harper (2008) – NFL 4th round
Kyle Parker (2008) – National Baseball Leaque
Brandon Thompson (2008) – NFL 3rd round
Antoine McClain (2008) – Undrafted
Dwayne Allen (2008) – NFL 3rd round
Tarik Rollins – Transferred
Kenneth Page – Dismissed
Marquan Jones – Undrafted
Spencer Adams, Andre Ellington, Xavier Brewer and Tig Willard returning for 2012
Of the 19 players rated 80 or above by ESPN:
42% Drafted by the NFL/National Baseball Leaque
21% Undrafted
5% Transferred
5% Dismissed
5% Injured
22% Still on the team

* So with top players Clemson has a higher placement rate in the NFL. USuC does excel in one category - the number of top players that transfer out of their program.

I also looked at the opposite end of the spectrum – players that were unranked/unrated by ESPN at the time they were recruited but went on to the NFL. For 2006, 2007 and 2008 classes:

USuC – Had no unrated players out of high school drafted by the NFL

Clemson – Had 3 unrated players out of high school drafted by the NFL: Andre Branch, Coty Sensabaugh and Chris Hairston. In addition, while not drafted, Michael Palmer was also an unrated player out of high school who is now in the NFL.


It's okay, that is what they have to tell themselves as they

[1]
Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 12:22 AM
 

see what Dabo is building in Tiger Town. It's just to scary for them to think about another Clemson dynasty in the making, so this idea helps their little chicken brains sleep better at night.

Go Tigers!!

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

Good info, but it's Major League Baseball (MLB)***

[3]
Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 12:33 AM
 



2020 student level member

Hmmm... I'm seeing NFL, not MLB. What am I missing?***


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 12:54 AM
 



2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

It says National Baseball League***

[1]
Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 1:10 AM
 



2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpgtnt_user_logo.pngbadge-ringofhonor-elswann.jpg

I think what helps them sleep at night is that they have

[4]
Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 7:26 AM
 

beaten us three straight years by an average of 20 points per win. Now, I don't mean to be "that guy", but for us to be implying that the coots are grasping at straws right now with regards to the recent football rivalry is silly.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: Clemson doesn't develop their players


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 12:36 AM
 

Very interesting stuff...


Re: Clemson doesn't develop their players


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 2:03 AM
 

Thanks for the post.
'the rest of the story...
GO TIGERS!!!

2020 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Nice research


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 2:15 AM
 

didn't check, but hoping all your data is sound.

B-)


I wonder


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 2:37 AM
 

It would be interesting to see the number of undefeated free agents that have been produced as well


Re: Clemson doesn't develop their players

[2]
Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 3:08 AM
 

We love Dabo. Keep the stats coming!


thats good,so do we

[3]
Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 6:26 AM
 

and now that the talent is coming to clemson by the busloads, get ready to resume your place on the state's silver medal podium. the streak will end in november, the same way the baseball run y'all were on came to a screeching halt a few weeks ago. see you in november in the valley, and be afraid, be very afraid.

military_donation.jpg

Re: thats good,so do we

[1]
Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 7:58 AM
 

You could be right, sarge, about November. Our baseball streak did come to an end (though, finishing number 2 in the nation "ain't" bad). Regardless, clemson was not the team that ended the streak. In fact, our baseball program still has clemson under its proverbial "thumb". But, at least you guys can live your dreams through other teams. Right?


Re: thats good,so do we

[3]
Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 8:19 AM
 

is that the pot calling the kettle black? i've heard for the last 20 yrs. (give or take a few yrs.) about usuc and the sec, if that's not living vicariously through others??? to tell you the truth i'm just glad somebody ended y'alls run, it was getting a little, no, a lot,old hearing all the dang crowing. the football crowing ends this year as well.

military_donation.jpg

Yes, you caught my point. Attaboy.


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 8:30 AM
 

It's hard for me to complain about finishing number 2 in the nation. If I am bragging (and I have been) about finishing number 8 in the nation in football, I sure as #### will brag about finishing number 2 in the nation in baseball. And like I implied earlier, you could be right about our football crowing will end in November. I acknowledge that. But "afraid" about it? It's only a game and, games don't scare me.


Re: Yes, you caught my point. Attaboy.


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 5:47 PM
 

You missed the point about living vicariously through other teams. #### fans chanting "SEC SEC SEC" after every victory and claiming every SEC NC in football and BB like it's your own.


Re: Clemson doesn't develop their players


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 3:32 AM
 

But the chickens do lead by a large number on the all-state prison team.....most arrested!!


Re: Clemson doesn't develop their players


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 4:48 AM
 

Good research


Re: Clemson doesn't develop their players

[1]
Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 6:34 AM
 

Thanks--point
but you know the coots do not understand facts


Re: Re: thats good,so do we


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 8:58 AM
 

Living through other teams? Hmmm that's funny because I seem to know half of your fanbase now cheers for WVU and almost all of y'all have used "West Virginia just scored again" in some way, shape or form. All teams live through others from time to time, don't pretend like you don't.

2020 student level member

That should shut him the F up...I love facts! great job***


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 9:18 AM
 




like the premise and the draft/nfl rosters contradict the


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 11:40 AM
 

coot argument any day but unless I'm missing something, the data seems to be incomplete---

for example, where are Ingram, A. Allen, Geathers, Robertson, Watkins, Norwood, Cook(?)

for Clemson-- Jenkins, Gilchrist, Ford, Butler, Connor(?)

just seems to be very incomplete-- also-- not sure about Free agents

drafthistory.com does a good job of showing draft picks


Re: like the premise and the draft/nfl rosters contradict the

[1]
Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 12:21 PM
 

Don't forget alshon and Gilmore.


those guys would have been 2009 not 2006-2008

[1]
Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 12:31 PM
 

still too many guys from the 2009 classes on rosters so too early to really analyze that group


Re: like the premise and the draft/nfl rosters contradict the


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 6:07 PM
 

Connor was 2005 but Butler Ford and Jenkins are missing


Butler and Jenkins were rated 76 (below 80) so

[1]
Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 6:36 PM
 

I did not include them. Ford was unrated by ESPN - don't remember/know why.


by not including the guys below 80 who got drafted/made it


Posted: Jul 9, 2012, 11:28 AM
 

to NFL it makes your whole selection looked bias or you're hiding something even if you aren't. I listed a bunch of Coots and Tigers that didn't appear on your list that must have been below 80 but got drafted-- not sure I got them all but I'd say that shows those players were developed by their respective staffs


Re: Clemson doesn't develop their players

[1]
Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 12:05 PM
 

Why would you only look at highly rated players? Seem to me you would look at all players. Actually lower rated players would give you a better idea of development. High rated players can get by on talent alone.

Haven't done the math, but just my initial observation. Also why would you fire your offensive and defensive coordinator in those years if they are doing such a good job of developing kids?


Re: Clemson doesn't develop their players


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 12:18 PM
 

Why would the cockerel coaches just jump ship if its sailing so good
Tigers had to run theirs off

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

First of all, I believe he addressed lower-ranked recruits

[1]
Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 12:26 PM
 

in his post.

Secondly, don't be ridiculous with your coodinator question. We clearly changed our coordinators because of lack of execution of game plans. It had nothing to do with player development. Besides, would you say that player development is the coordinator's main responsibility or is that more the position coach's job?

null


Re: First of all, I believe he addressed lower-ranked recruits

[1]
Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 12:33 PM
 

So spiller bowers korn were not ranked high in recruiting? Wasn't bowers the number one recruit in the nation? Your "stats" are selective and controversial.


READ the post, again, and attempt to comprehend.....

[3]
Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 1:21 PM
 

the listed players were the ones with a rank better than 80 by ESPN. The OP goes on to address the lower ranked players in the paragraph after the lists.

Sounds to me like you have selective reading!


Re: READ the post, again, and attempt to comprehend.....

[1]
Posted: Jul 9, 2012, 12:34 AM
 

I think what he was getting at was that everybody in the middle was missing.


Wow. You guys really don't read before you respond. ******

[1]
Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 3:26 PM
 



null


Re: Wow. You guys really don't read before you respond. ******


Posted: Jul 9, 2012, 1:24 PM
 

If you have the time, I would love to see the list updated with lower ranked players. I realize you cannot cover them all, but maybe make your cutoff at a rating of 60 or 70. There are some good players on both teams that got drafted to the NFL (some of which play) and are missing from your list. Several defensive players from Carolina and Stuckey and Ford from Clemson for sure.


proof that coots should S-tea-F-you


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 10:57 PM
 




coordinators failed at game plan/results -- player

[1]
Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 12:36 PM
 

development is more of postion coach responsiblity

that said-- the analysis needs to include all players not just selected--- the selection process used doesn't make sense sense... it only lists certain highly rated players and then there is a footnote identifying 3 lower rated players who succeded while leaving out what seems to be a wide swath of players.


Re: Clemson doesn't develop their players


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 5:44 PM
 

Clemson would fare even better if you just looked at number of players drafted. I think Clemson is in the top 10 for players drafted over the last five years.


Re: Clemson doesn't develop their players


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 12:43 PM
 

Thanks! Way to do your homework.


They made fun of Hairston on FGF


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 3:23 PM
 

When we took his commit he was a small kid with long arms and huge hands; they laughed at the "he can grow into his arms" thing. Who's laughing now?


Re: Clemson doesn't develop their players


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 3:38 PM
 

Just for the record Branch and Sensabaugh were in the 2012 draft and Hairston went in 2011.


in the wise words of Will Muschamp

[2]
Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 3:43 PM
 

"Stats are for losers. I like wins"


Re: in the wise words of Will Muschamp


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 10:53 PM
 

the wins and losses are the only stats that count.ask vinnie lombardi.the superbowl trophy wasn't named after him,because he had a mediocre coaching career.

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg

Re: Clemson doesn't develop their players


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 6:03 PM
 

Missing Jarvis Jenkins- 2nd round NFL draft


you should call in and correct them***


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 10:59 PM
 




Re: Clemson doesn't develop their players


Posted: Jul 8, 2012, 11:02 PM
 

FYI, Spencer Adams quit football a year or so ago.


Thanks - with clemsontigers.com website down it was


Posted: Jul 9, 2012, 12:02 PM
 

hard to find a current roster but I found a Greenville news article after seeing your post that said he quit to focus on track.

It wouldn't really alter the stats but thanks for the update.


Re: Clemson doesn't develop their players


Posted: Jul 9, 2012, 10:58 AM
 

The results on the field speak for themselves. Dabo wins championships! Tweet that!

CLEMSON + DABO = GREATNESS!!


Re: Clemson doesn't develop their players


Posted: Jul 9, 2012, 12:29 PM
 

Clemson also has more players in the NFL, prior to the draft this year we had 17 to their 16. They did have more players drafted this year though, 6 to our four. So sadly, providing no one retires this year, they will have more than us in the NFL.

If we include the last 3 years drafts (10, 11, 12) we have more, 12 for us, 8 for them.


Do these stats help us beat them?***


Posted: Jul 9, 2012, 3:14 PM
 




Since you are a Coot I think so


Posted: Jul 9, 2012, 4:53 PM
 

Since we develop players better than you do, we should beat you. The fact that we haven't has been a blip in history.


Updated - ALL Players in the 2006, 2007 and 2008 Recruiting


Posted: Jul 9, 2012, 5:11 PM
 

Since I was asked to look at all players and not just the 80+ and the non-rated, I did. If you want the full spreadsheet tmail me.

I used ESPN's Star system and came up with the following results. Note that this is based on the 2006, 2007 and 2008 recruiting classes. Players recruited in earlier and later classes are not included regardless of whether or not they were drafted. Both sides could come up with players you want to include or exclude but you have to keep the pool structured if you want a statistically valid analysis.

5 Star Players:
USuC - 50% in the NFL. Their 5 star players were Brian Mattox and Clifton Geathers.

Clemon - 100% in the NFL. Byron Maxwell, DaQuan Bowers and Jamie Harper. Jacoby Ford was unrated because he was a prep but even if you include him it is still 100%

4 Star Players:
USuC - 27.3%. Players drafted are Chris Culliver, Travian Robertson and Cliff Matthews out of 11 4 stars during the 3 recruiting years.

Clemson - 31.3%. Players drafted are CJ Spiller, Ricky Sapp, Kyle Parker, Brandon Thompson and Dwayne Allen out of 16 players. Even if you didn't count Parker we would still be at 25%.

3 Star Players:
USuC - 6.9%. Players drafted are Melvin Ingram and Antonio Allen out of 29 players.

Clemson - 12%. Players drafted are Crezon Butler, Jarvis Jenkins and Marcus Gilchrist out of 25 players.

2 Star Players:
USuC - 7.7%. Eric Norwood was their 1 player out of 13 drafted.

Clemson - 0%. Out of 13 players we had no one drafted.

Unrated/No Stars:
USuC - 0%. Out of 24 players no one was drafted.

Clemson - 33.3%. Players drafted were Hairston, Branch and Sensabaugh out of 9 players.

Other:
In total 21.2% of the 66 players Clemson recruited in 2006, 2007 and 2008 were drafted by the NFL or MLB. By comparison only 8.9% of the 79 players that USuC recruited in those years were drafted by the NFL.

I don't have time to research but it appears that USuC has a lot more players transferring or leaving early than Clemson. Saw this in checking some of the 5 and 4 star players and it also explains why they had 79 recruits during the 3 years while we only had 66.

The game is played on the field but when it comes to recruiting I think this proves we are developing players better for the NFL. And I have no doubt that we are preparing them better for life.


Replies: 51  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Season Tickets
FOR SALE: SEASON TICKETS FOR 2021 Lower Deck Section T, row 18, seats 5 & 7, plus a parking pass. $1900

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
9203 people have read this post