Started By
Message
re: 2022 Recruiting Thread
Posted on 4/9/21 at 11:51 am to BigBlueAU
Posted on 4/9/21 at 11:51 am to BigBlueAU
No one knows anything about recruiting. Clemson won their first natty with 25th rated recruiting classes. Now they sign who they want. There are about 3 - 5 programs who sign who they want every year and AU is not one of them. Actual statistical data shows if you can recruit top 15 every year you can win conference and national championships, these last few years notwithstanding. AU is a land grand school in Alabama in the shadow of the amateur version of the Cowboys\Packers\49ers. I like it.
3
Posted on 4/9/21 at 12:00 pm to alpinetiger
quote:
AU is a land grand school in Alabama in the shadow of the amateur version of the Cowboys\Packers\49ers
How dare you not include my Steelers in your list. I can't rely on your credibility now.
Posted on 4/9/21 at 12:03 pm to AuSteeler
Touché and apologies. My Roger Staubach is too strong.
Posted on 4/9/21 at 12:15 pm to alpinetiger
quote:
No one knows anything about recruiting. Clemson won their first natty with 25th rated recruiting classes.
You talking about 1981 or 2016?
Anyway, here’s the class ranking before 2016:
2015: 9th
2014: 16th
2013: 15th
2012: 20th
Especially helpful that they got DeShaun Watson in one of them
I think your point stands still. Their only top 5 classes have come in the last 3 Posted on 4/9/21 at 12:24 pm to TheJones
quote:Indeed and thanks. The “25th rating” wasn’t intended to be a citation, but rather a general point. And to your point, Watson was a huge part of Clemson’s success. Sounds like another guy at AU that maybe impacted AU’s last few classes under Tubs.
You talking about 1981 or 2016?
Anyway, here’s the class ranking before 2016:
2015: 9th
2014: 16th
2013: 15th
2012: 20th
Especially helpful that they got DeShaun Watson in one of them I think your point stands still. Their only top 5 classes have come in the last 3
(Edit) I spaced on 1981. Charlie Pell and Danny Ford. I’m sure they were top three in recruiting those years. I think Pell at UF had 109 violations before Spurrier came in and cleaned up the mess.
Both with deep Alabama history btw.
This post was edited on 4/9/21 at 12:30 pm
Posted on 4/9/21 at 12:35 pm to alpinetiger
I understand your point. But I’ve learned over the years in this thread that you’ll get obliterated here when your point is right but a supporting fact is off
So it’s good to clean some of that up before this turns into 2 pages of people analyzing all of the Clemson recruiting variables
So it’s good to clean some of that up before this turns into 2 pages of people analyzing all of the Clemson recruiting variables
Posted on 4/9/21 at 2:12 pm to TheJones
It's also worthwhile to note that having two "disastrous" classes in a row (in our case, in the 20s nationally) doesn't necessarily make you an also-ran, provided you have developed the guys you got in, and can pull at least one quality class with an impact player or two.
Our 2010 NC squad was the product of two classes in the 20s - #21 in '08, #23 (and #10 in the SEC) in '09 - bookended by two top 10 classes.
Of course that 2010 class had a pretty good QB in it, which helped...
Our 2010 NC squad was the product of two classes in the 20s - #21 in '08, #23 (and #10 in the SEC) in '09 - bookended by two top 10 classes.
Of course that 2010 class had a pretty good QB in it, which helped...
Posted on 4/9/21 at 4:00 pm to TheJones
I like where this thread is going. Proceed.
Posted on 4/9/21 at 4:10 pm to FearlessFreep
quote:My point exactly, more eloquently stated... you are a scholar and a gentleman.
It's also worthwhile to note that having two "disastrous" classes in a row (in our case, in the 20s nationally) doesn't necessarily make you an also-ran, provided you have developed the guys you got in, and can pull at least one quality class with an impact player or two.
Our 2010 NC squad was the product of two classes in the 20s - #21 in '08, #23 (and #10 in the SEC) in '09 - bookended by two top 10 classes.
Of course that 2010 class had a pretty good QB in it, which helped...
Posted on 4/9/21 at 9:04 pm to alpinetiger
quote:
There are about 3 - 5 programs who sign who they want every year
You mean the ones that are in the playoff every year?
Posted on 4/9/21 at 10:08 pm to RandySavage
No offense, Randy, but everyone knows why those schools are in the CFP every year.
It’s sucesss followed by strong recruiting.
We’re lacking both of those. We can play chicken and egg all day but the gotcha and grabass ends when programs sustain success and get who they want. Full stop.
That’s why the coaching change was important despite the temporary recruiting disadvantage. We’re going to have several lean recruiting classes. If the coaches are worth their salt they’ll be able to temporarily overcome that obstacle and build something. If they can’t then Auburn will be on the coaching market again in 4 years.
You guys can drop the know-it-all routine until this works itself out. Stating the obvious doesn’t make you woke. We know the reality of where we’re at
It’s sucesss followed by strong recruiting.
We’re lacking both of those. We can play chicken and egg all day but the gotcha and grabass ends when programs sustain success and get who they want. Full stop.
That’s why the coaching change was important despite the temporary recruiting disadvantage. We’re going to have several lean recruiting classes. If the coaches are worth their salt they’ll be able to temporarily overcome that obstacle and build something. If they can’t then Auburn will be on the coaching market again in 4 years.
You guys can drop the know-it-all routine until this works itself out. Stating the obvious doesn’t make you woke. We know the reality of where we’re at
This post was edited on 4/9/21 at 10:14 pm
Posted on 4/10/21 at 8:46 am to TheJones
We need to understand the reason for the change was mediocrity and lack of interior recruiting.
Two bad classes may not be good for immediate success but we need long term goals. I’m tired of 1 good yr and two bad
Two bad classes may not be good for immediate success but we need long term goals. I’m tired of 1 good yr and two bad
Posted on 4/10/21 at 9:35 am to TheJones
My comment was directed at the people who still call into queztion the validity of recruiting rankings and importance of recruiting, and somehow there are still some out there.
Posted on 4/10/21 at 9:59 am to RandySavage
I don't doubt the validity, I 100% believe recruiting rankings/sites were created to promote the bama machine. I just don't think we're ever going to beat them at their game.
I remember when it was Bill King and Forrest Gump, then the others came around and look who started getting all the hype, recruits and recruiting titles.
I doubt we ever win a recruiting title, not enough recruiting $$$ being spent. The best we can hope for is to win on the field and that winning will translate into top 10 to 5 classes and that could take a couple of years with the new staff.
WDE!!!
I remember when it was Bill King and Forrest Gump, then the others came around and look who started getting all the hype, recruits and recruiting titles.
I doubt we ever win a recruiting title, not enough recruiting $$$ being spent. The best we can hope for is to win on the field and that winning will translate into top 10 to 5 classes and that could take a couple of years with the new staff.
WDE!!!
This post was edited on 4/10/21 at 10:03 am
Posted on 4/10/21 at 10:44 am to ShredSquatch
My observation or working theory has always been that those top 5 or so prgrams who get who they want, always sign the players who are more developed at their age than many of their counterparts. So, it seems there is less projection and development risk for what a kid might develop into for those programs, and that lends itself to their consistiency of success. Of course it doesn't hurt that those places are developing their players once they arrive on campus as well.
With AU and about 10-15 other schools, they have rosters where a highter amount of projection of development takes place, and that makes the consistiency of results more volitile. However, there are enough good/great players on those rosters to be in the national conversation every year. I think it will be interesting to watch if Clemson stays in that top 5 group as far as consistient results. If Auburn with a lake can catch lighning in a bottle, I hope AU can as well with Harsin.
With AU and about 10-15 other schools, they have rosters where a highter amount of projection of development takes place, and that makes the consistiency of results more volitile. However, there are enough good/great players on those rosters to be in the national conversation every year. I think it will be interesting to watch if Clemson stays in that top 5 group as far as consistient results. If Auburn with a lake can catch lighning in a bottle, I hope AU can as well with Harsin.
Posted on 4/10/21 at 10:59 am to alpinetiger
quote:
With AU and about 10-15 other schools, they have rosters where a highter amount of projection of development takes place, and that makes the consistiency of results more volitile. However, there are enough good/great players on those rosters to be in the national conversation every year. I think it will be interesting to watch if Clemson stays in that top 5 group as far as consistient results. If Auburn with a lake can catch lighning in a bottle, I hope AU can as well with Harsin.
Exactly.
Look at the NFL.. at the 2 SB teams who played this year.
I read an article that 28 of the 44 starters for both offense and defense of both teams were 3* or less when recruited out of HS. There were only 3 5* players on either starting teams.
So since most of the players coming out of HS to play college football are not 4 and 5 star players, it shows that good college coaches develop those players to the point they make it in the NFL as eventual starters or at least on rosters.
It can be done. It doesn't have to be top 5 college teams. It's up to coaches like Harsin and ACs to develop and put a competitive team on the field that can compete for championships.
Now we get to see if this coaching staff can do what Malzahn could not do fairly consistently.
Posted on 4/10/21 at 11:04 am to AuSteeler
Randy I’m blaming you for all of these words I have to read.
Posted on 4/10/21 at 2:40 pm to TheJones
quote:
It’s sucesss followed by strong recruiting.
Was it really though? Maybe if you wrote $$$ucess followed by.....
Posted on 4/10/21 at 3:26 pm to GruntAu
quote:We are all part of the same hypocrisy.
Was it really though? Maybe if you wrote $$$ucess followed by.....
Posted on 4/10/21 at 7:07 pm to ShredSquatch
quote:
then the others came around and look who started getting all the hype, recruits and recruiting titles.
Well it wasn't Bama. Until Saban got there and maybe you haven't noticed but the recruiting titles have resulted in a lot of actual titles.
Page 31 of 395
Latest Auburn News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News