The elephant in the room.

[Cisco]

Oh so I did some research on my topic no clemson.
Rivals for example, in the recruiting years that were influential in Clemson playing in the title game Back to back had classes of 14, 14, & 13.

In the years after dabo had proven himself a great coach............suddenly 4, 6 and 8 since. With the exception that in one year,they were 22 becasause they only had a 14 person class.
Now some will say recruiting spiked because of the success. well, maybe............but the classes of 14, 14, and 13 won a NT and then suddenly there classes immediately jump 10 spots. betcha a lot of that is respect from the recruiting services rather than recruiting service knowledge.

I'll agree with you halfway. I do think guys on the line between one ranking or another will sometimes get a bump. But we've certainly been the beneficiary of that before too. How many times have we took a flyer on some under the radar kids late who then gets "reevaluated" in the following weeks and gets a bump from two to three stars? Think the same thing would have happened if he ended up at Akron or even Illinois?

I follow Clemson. I can tell you with certainty that the notion that their rankings have improved simply because they are winning more is very false. They were recruiting well in the latter Bowden years and Dabo improved it. And once they started winning big when they hired Chad Morris and Brent Venables in successive years they simply got more traction with the very best recruits in the nation. These kids are rated at the very top long before pledge to anyone. Their roster is loaded with NFL dudes.

 

[Huskerthom]

I'll agree with you halfway. I do think guys on the line between one ranking or another will sometimes get a bump. But we've certainly been the beneficiary of that before too. How many times have we took a flyer on some under the radar kids late who then gets "reevaluated" in the following weeks and gets a bump from two to three stars? Think the same thing would have happened if he ended up at Akron or even Illinois?

I follow Clemson. I can tell you with certainty that the notion that their rankings have improved simply because they are winning more is very false. They were recruiting well in the latter Bowden years and Dabo improved it. And once they started winning big when they hired Chad Morris and Brent Venables in successive years they simply got more traction with the very best recruits in the nation. These kids are rated at the very top long before pledge to anyone. Their roster is loaded with NFL dudes.

I don't think it is an either or thing. They are getting better recruits but at the same time the recruits they get are probably also getting a bit of a bump because of who they are now.

 

[Californication]

Serious question, and the times have changed, but did our recruit rankings ever consistently compare with the best programs during that incredible 40 year run? My remembrance is that they didn't.

 

[Californication]

Only 11 kids on the field for each team at any given time. You get the right 11 on both sides of the ball and you can be a UCF that beats an Auburn who beat the eventual NC Alabama. You can have top 10 classes and be miles from beating a Bama....but you can have top 25 classes and be with in a TD....and then there's a chance.

I just don't think this is true week in and week out. there is only 11 on the field at a time, but you need 22 on each side to be high level contributors. Maybe one game, or if you only play one great team per year will you last with 11, but even that is tough because of fatigue and season wear and tear.

 

[Californication]

I 100% agree with you and I think most would. But for entertainment value, Go back and read a game day thread and you'd think Frost is the worst play caller who's installed a system that wont work in the Big Ten. Oftentimes stated by some regulars here. It's great off season reading. Lots of chuckles

Frost definitely had his bad moments this year re: play calling, imo. everyone does.

 

[South Omaha Husker]

It didn't allow my GIF to load from my phone!!!

Completely agree with you. Those guys are getting four and five stars because they are going to Alabama/Ohio State. When they don't pan out, the recruiting services aren't wrong because "they got beat out by another four or five star that was just better." Now, there's no argument that Alabama is going after the best players in the nation anyway, but recruiting services bump up kids rankings based on who they are going to. Bo Pelini's best class was... wait for it... 2011 after reaching the 2009/2010 conference title game twice in his first three years. The whole "look at the teams recruiting rankings that are playing in the CFP and tell me it doesn't matter" is just dumb.

Mike Sautter of the OWH said his players rankings were first based on who made the offer as he rightfully said that they know talent better than he does. Maybe when I retire I can be a recruiting rater? The thing I remember most of my one and only conversation with Milt Tenopir was when I asked him what he looked for most from a recruit and he pointed towards his heart. I think back in the 70's, 80's, 90's and before, coaches evaluations of film probably meant more than now as the Rivals, 24/7's, ESPN, Scout, etc. watch more film and have more information, so teams like Alabama, osu, Mich, Clemson can start at the top of the list and not have to waste as much time watching film first. The height's, weight's, 40 speeds are also more accurate and available now. That is how Osborne stole Trev Alberts out of iowa before Fry figured out he was a good player. By that time it was too late.

 

[36Blast]

Frost definitely had his bad moments this year re: play calling, imo. everyone does.

I definitely agree with you, but have you actually read the game day threads? If you didn't know who Scott Frost was, you would walk away thinking he is the worst head coach of all time. There are some dudes on this site that questioned practically every play call that didnt gain positive yardage

 

[Bigger Ed]

Oh so I did some research on my topic no clemson.
Rivals for example, in the recruiting years that were influential in Clemson playing in the title game Back to back had classes of 14, 14, & 13.

In the years after dabo had proven himself a great coach............suddenly 4, 6 and 8 since. With the exception that in one year,they were 22 becasause they only had a 14 person class.
Now some will say recruiting spiked because of the success. well, maybe............but the classes of 14, 14, and 13 won a NT and then suddenly there classes immediately jump 10 spots. betcha a lot of that is respect from the recruiting services rather than recruiting service knowledge.

I don't dispute your contention but It's a bit easier to recruit when you're a near shoo-in to make the playoffs. What might be more interesting is how recruiting class rankings fall off when a contender starts falling out of contention, e.g. Miami, Fla St., Texas.

 

[Huskerpilk]

I just don't think this is true week in and week out. there is only 11 on the field at a time, but you need 22 on each side to be high level contributors. Maybe one game, or if you only play one great team per year will you last with 11, but even that is tough because of fatigue and season wear and tear.

UCF did it...and is still doing it. So it happens. I get what you're saying...you're not making the playoffs every other year like OU, Clemson, Bama, tOSU, without top 10 classes but teams like Wisky, Iowa can get there every so often with 30-35 ranked classes so a team with top 20 can surely do it. I think NU gets there sooner rather than later and I'd bet they peak at top 15-20 classes.

 

[Californication]

UCF did it...and is still doing it. So it happens. I get what you're saying...you're not making the playoffs every other year like OU, Clemson, Bama, tOSU, without top 10 classes but teams like Wisky, Iowa can get there every so often with 30-35 ranked classes so a team with top 20 can surely do it. I think NU gets there sooner rather than later and I'd bet they peak at top 15-20 classes.

I don’t understand how you got “you can’t win with lower ranked classes” from my post on depth. I think you can make the playoffs with lesser ranked recruiting classes, but you need depth to get through a BIG, SEC type schedule. Wiscy, Iowa, MSU - they all have that depth, we don’t, and it may be a while before we get it across the board.

 

[Huskerpilk]

I think you can make the playoffs with lesser ranked recruiting classes, but you need depth to get through a BIG, SEC type schedule. Wiscy, Iowa, MSU - they all have that depth, so in my mind you are comparing apples to oranges.

You don't think SF can develop some depth. I'd say in 2-3 years our sideline will look much better than the 3 mentioned above.

 

[Cisco]

The way the 17 class has drastically shrunk, we've got a bit of a whole to climb out of to have enough experienced depth. I think we'll be pretty good as early as next year, but it could be 3-4 years before we have the balance of upper and lower class classmen that would be ideal.

 

[Pebbles09James]

UCF did it...and is still doing it. So it happens. I get what you're saying...you're not making the playoffs every other year like OU, Clemson, Bama, tOSU, without top 10 classes but teams like Wisky, Iowa can get there every so often with 30-35 ranked classes so a team with top 20 can surely do it. I think NU gets there sooner rather than later and I'd bet they peak at top 15-20 classes.

UCF also finished near the top class in their Conference for the past 4+ years meaning they were more often than not more talented than the teams they were playing. Not saying rankings are everything, but UCF is a bad example because they did recruit better than the people they played which is ultimately what we are shooting for as well...ours is just a more difficult task being P-5 and all.