Couple of Interesting Recruiting Trends

[Bubb Rubb]

Not asking for your help. If you want to keep believing that everyone in the SEC W would compete for the SEC E title easily ... knock yourself out.

Not EVERYONE. But 80% of it. I don't even know why you're protesting the point...because it's not even debatable. You might as well be trying to convince everyone that the earth is flat.

[dawgday166]

Not EVERYONE. But 80% of it. I don't even know why you're protesting the point...because it's not even debatable. You might as well be trying to convince everyone that the earth is flat.

Is that so? Do you have objective test data that isn't the eyeball test?

[Bubb Rubb]

I shared plenty of it before. But common sense should be the ultimate determinant.

As a coach, which looks more like a gauntlet to you?

1. Vanderbilt-Kentucky-Missouri-South Carolina-Georgia-Florida-Tennessee
2. Arkansas-Alabama-TAMU-Auburn-MSU-Ole Miss-LSU

[lamont]

No ... I"m not. I'm saying in 2015 we were better than AU & A&M, regardless of rankings. Should have been at a minimum 9-3 and I also think we should've beat OM at home. I'm saying with our recruiting rankings that we should not lose to USA, BYU, or KY.

I'm just stating what my expectations are. Everyone else can keep being excited about 7 - 8 wins if they'd like.

We were in no way better than Auburn in 2015. They have twice the talent we do on the OL and DL

[WSOPdawg]

While I'm glad we pay Dan enough to rank 16th in the nation, this just shows how far we've come compared to say 15 or 20 years ago. Yeah, we expect results by paying a coach $4.5mil a season, but recruiting is only a small part of that. There's also a matter of getting favorable results when the players hit the field and how one calls a game.

In the end, we're paying for W's. How we get there, I don't care as long as we are able to field a competitive team that occasionally makes a run for the SEC Championship. After all, look at TCU and VaTech -- here's a couple of teams that seldom rank in the top 10 in recruiting but manage to compete and win once the game (and season) starts.

[dawgday166]

We were in no way better than Auburn in 2015. They have twice the talent we do on the OL and DL

2015 not 2016. We beat them 17 - 9 at AU.

[lamont]

You had better realize how difficult SEC West competition is. To discount that fact is to be at best irrational and at worst a troll.

2017 SEC West will be rough. Everybody brings QB's back except A&M

[lamont]

2015 not 2016. We beat them 17 - 9 at AU.

Ahhhhh- misread it.

[Reason2succeed]

Mullen is recruiting and developing the X factor in all of this: the quarterback. No player affects the results of a game more than the player that has the ball in his hands most. In our run to #1 we had the superior QB in every single game however we had deficiencies at other positions. With Fitz and KT if we can plug those deficiencies then we will have "a chance" to do what Clemson did.

Beyond looking at each year by itself which is the definition of myopic we should look at the overall development of the program when evaluating Mullen. Here he as done an amazing job along with the former ADs of raising the profile of our team (so much so that your expectations have been raised considerably since his hire).

[dawgday166]

Mullen is recruiting and developing the X factor in all of this: the quarterback. No player affects the results of a game more than the player that has the ball in his hands most. In our run to #1 we had the superior QB in every single game however we had deficiencies at other positions. With Fitz and KT if we can plug those deficiencies then we will have "a chance" to do what Clemson did.

Beyond looking at each year by itself which is the definition of myopic we should look at the overall development of the program when evaluating Mullen. Here he as done an amazing job along with the former ADs of raising the profile of our team (so much so that your expectations have been raised considerably since his hire).

My expectations have been raised ... I won't argue that. This morning I read an article about his contract negotiations and he joked about using the Egg Bowl trophy in those ... may set it in the middle of the table during negotiations (if I recall correctly). That's cool and I'm sure he was joking. I'm very happy we thumped OM 55 - 20.

However I (dumb me) went into this past year thinking we should win about 8. Random said 6 - 7 at most. Looking back can anyone really say we should not have won 8 based on who we lost to and how?

Moral victories are getting a tad old to me and yes ... I'm expecting Dan to take the next step. Not expecting a miracle (like beating Bama for the West), but I believe the rest is doable.

[Reason2succeed]

Look at it like this... we pay 6th or 7th best HC money in sec west and 7th in overall coaching staff pay. We are getting what we pay for, no?

This plus you must also compare the salaries of assistant coaches. If we want great recruiters who can also get the job done we have to pay them to come and pay them to stay. Hiring Grantham was a step in the right direction in this. Once again this is the long term development of the program that should not be based on the results of one season in 2018.

[Reason2succeed]

My expectations have been raised ... I won't argue that. This morning I read an article about his contract negotiations and he joked about using the Egg Bowl trophy in those ... may set it in the middle of the table during negotiations (if I recall correctly). That's cool and I'm sure he was joking. I'm very happy we thumped OM 55 - 20.

However I (dumb me) went into this past year thinking we should win about 8. Random said 6 - 7 at most. Looking back can anyone really say we should not have won 8 based on who we lost to and how?

Moral victories are getting a tad old to me and yes ... I'm expecting Dan to take the next step. Not expecting a miracle (like beating Bama for the West), but I believe the rest is doable.

No one, not even Mullen would disagree with you that 2016 was a disappointment. He told the team that in the locker room after the Egg Bowl.

1) I know we are all fans doing what fans do but if you think you have higher expectations for the team than Mullen does you are deceiving yourself.
2) If you think you have answers that Mullen hasn't considered you are deceiving yourself.
3) There are things we do not know and things we on the outside don't have to consider when making our opinions. And we certainly don't have to face the consequences of every decision.

[WSOPdawg]

This plus you must also compare the salaries of assistant coaches. If we want great recruiters who can also get the job done we have to pay them to come and pay them to stay. Hiring Grantham was a step in the right direction in this. Once again this is the long term development of the program that should not be based on the results of one season in 2018.

That's why the addition of Grantham is, to me, one of the most important decisions we've made in a long time. Kudos to Cohen for paying to bring in a top-notch, proven DC.

[HSVDawg]

Compare recruiting rankings of the teams you mentioned within their conference division

The division competition is a weak argument because of Clemson. They beat the team that has finished #1 in recruiting rankings for the past decade and also won the SEC West / overall conference the last 3 years. They also outplayed that same team in every facet but special teams in last year's championship game. Their theoretical recruiting ranking compared to other SEC West teams isn't much better than ours, but they assembled a team that was better than all of the SEC in spite of that.

[msstate7]

The division competition is a weak argument because of Clemson. They beat the team that has finished #1 in recruiting rankings for the past decade and also won the SEC West / overall conference the last 3 years. They also outplayed that same team in every facet but special teams in last year's championship game. Their theoretical recruiting ranking compared to other SEC West teams isn't much better than ours, but they assembled a team that was better than all of the SEC in spite of that.

They faced 1 team in conference that had better recruiting rankings. We face at least 4 in the west every year with better recruiting rankings

[BB30]

Mullen is recruiting and developing the X factor in all of this: the quarterback. No player affects the results of a game more than the player that has the ball in his hands most. In our run to #1 we had the superior QB in every single game however we had deficiencies at other positions. With Fitz and KT if we can plug those deficiencies then we will have "a chance" to do what Clemson did.

Beyond looking at each year by itself which is the definition of myopic we should look at the overall development of the program when evaluating Mullen. Here he as done an amazing job along with the former ADs of raising the profile of our team (so much so that your expectations have been raised considerably since his hire).

This.. You can get away with top 15-20 classes and compete for a championship if you have an X factor at QB. Clemson without Watson the last two years struggles to get to 8 wins IMO. Watson put them over the top and hid some of their deficiencies. It is still hard to think about how close we were in 14 to doing the same thing Clemson did this year. That is one of the reasons I am hesitant to put Mullen on the hot seat (if he has decided he wants to bust it again) is the fact that we have never developed QBs and for us to compete we have to have the edge at QB.

[Really Clark?]

The division competition is a weak argument because of Clemson. They beat the team that has finished #1 in recruiting rankings for the past decade and also won the SEC West / overall conference the last 3 years. They also outplayed that same team in every facet but special teams in last year's championship game. Their theoretical recruiting ranking compared to other SEC West teams isn't much better than ours, but they assembled a team that was better than all of the SEC in spite of that.

You are making the same argument but using only 1 game from each of the last 2 to make it. That's even weaker. That same Clemson team struggled against an 8-4 Auburn team and lost to Pitt. Clemson has had a great team the last few years with some great talent, no argument and their classes probably were under ranked somewhat and a great QB helps, but the division argument is better than focusing on just one game the last 2 years. How bout we do that for the UNM vs Bama game the last 3? Does that make your argument stronger or weaker by focusing on just one game?

[HSVDawg]

They faced 1 team in conference that had better recruiting rankings. We face at least 4 in the west every year with better recruiting rankings

And if they faced the same 4 teams we faced, they would have beaten them too.

The following are indisputable facts:
1) Clemson's on the field product has been slightly better than Bama over the past two years.
2) Clemson's on the field product has been absolutely leaps and bounds better than every other SEC West team over the same time period.
3) Clemson has finished behind Alabama, LSU, Auburn, and Texas A&M in recruiting rankings on average over the 5 classes comprising the players on those two teams, and also finished behind Ole Miss two of those 5 years and probably about the same as them and us the other 3.

Clemson has way outperformed their recruiting ranking, period. You are kidding yourself if you don't think they would beat every team in the division. Hell, they beat the best two teams this year. Do they have to schedule LSU and beat them too?

[msstate7]

And if they faced the same 4 teams we faced, they would have beaten them too.

The following are indisputable facts:
1) Clemson's on the field product has been slightly better than Bama over the past two years.
2) Clemson's on the field product has been absolutely leaps and bounds better than every other SEC West team over the same time period.
3) Clemson has finished behind Alabama, LSU, Auburn, and Texas A&M in recruiting rankings on average over the 5 classes comprising the players on those two teams, and also finished behind Ole Miss two of those 5 years and probably about the same as them and us the other 3.

Clemson has way outperformed their recruiting ranking, period. You are kidding yourself if you don't think they would beat every team in the division. Hell, they beat the best two teams this year. Do they have to schedule LSU and beat them too?

I said earlier in the thread they were on another level than us. What makes you think they'd have run thru the west undefeated this year when they lost to Pitt? Is Pitt better than everyone in the west also? They beat Troy by 6. They went to OT with nc state. It took them a while to get going this year and an sec schedule requires you to be ready to go all year

[BB30]

And if they faced the same 4 teams we faced, they would have beaten them too.

The following are indisputable facts:
1) Clemson's on the field product has been slightly better than Bama over the past two years.
2) Clemson's on the field product has been absolutely leaps and bounds better than every other SEC West team over the same time period.
3) Clemson has finished behind Alabama, LSU, Auburn, and Texas A&M in recruiting rankings on average over the 5 classes comprising the players on those two teams, and also finished behind Ole Miss two of those 5 years and probably about the same as them and us the other 3.

Clemson has way outperformed their recruiting ranking, period. You are kidding yourself if you don't think they would beat every team in the division. Hell, they beat the best two teams this year. Do they have to schedule LSU and beat them too?

I agree that they would beat every team in the division individually. I think the difference is you can't really take weeks off in the SEC. Playing the teams you listed in consecutive weeks instead of throwing in an NC State, Wake Forrest, Boston College, and Syracuse makes life a lot easier. They legitimately have to play well two games the entire season to win their side of the conference and then winning the conference is a cake walk as the Coastal division is awful. I mean FSU and Louisville is really their only competition in conference play. One of those teams got beat by KY at home and Houston. The other was getting boat raced by OM before the wheels fell off in the second half, and lost to North Carolina and got killed by LVille. FSU also hung a whopping 17 points on Wake, managed to beat Miami by 1 point and hammered NC State by 4.

Clemson without Watson is an 7-8 win team at best.

I would disagree that Clemson's on the field product has been better than Bama over the past two years. What metrics are you using to decide that. They are 1-1 heads up. And, there is no way you can argue that Clemson is more talented as a whole than Bama. Again, without Watson they are a slightly above average team and if you stick them in the SEC without Watson they don't win more than 8 games.