Reality of recruiting

Oldgoldandwhite

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,807
We all want as much talent as possible, but let's look at reality. Even if we signed all blue chips; all CFB teams have about 85 scholarship athletes. 44 make up the two deep. Throw in about 6 more for special teams, holders, kickers, etc. you come up with 50. So at any one time there are 35 or more that never get playing time. Whether these guys are 1* or 5* scout team members means little. If we sign 10 eventual starters, that is a good to great class. That would still give us 50 starters over 5 years which is way above the needed 22. I really only want 4- 5 playmakers and 4-5 contributors out of each class. The rest is just gravy. Just my opinion and it helps keep me grounded during the recruiting chaos every year.
 

AtWork

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
267
Location
Marietta, GA
We all want as much talent as possible, but let's look at reality. Even if we signed all blue chips; all CFB teams have about 85 scholarship athletes. 44 make up the two deep. Throw in about 6 more for special teams, holders, kickers, etc. you come up with 50. So at any one time there are 35 or more that never get playing time. Whether these guys are 1* or 5* scout team members means little. If we sign 10 eventual starters, that is a good to great class. That would still give us 50 starters over 5 years which is way above the needed 22. I really only want 4- 5 playmakers and 4-5 contributors out of each class. The rest is just gravy. Just my opinion and it helps keep me grounded during the recruiting chaos every year.
Exactly. If everyone lived up to the billing then you would have more football teams or more transfers. For someone to be real good you have to see what real bad looks like too. This will help you value the good much more. The way of the world is some people have bad breaks and some have good ones and some can't catch one.
 

Bigb

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
395
We do better on the field than most teams with average to good recruiting classes.
I don't even think this is true. I think we do right in line on the field with how our recruiting is.

5-6 last year against FBS teams is middle of the road.

Losing record since 2010 against FBS teams is middle of the road.

It is what it is. Not blaming it all on Johnson since it's not too different from his predecessors.
 

collegeballfan

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,694
From 2008 - 2014 - the ACC recruiting classes national rank, - per Rivals - averaged for the period - show FSU at #6 - UM at #16.- CU at #17 - VT at #24 and GT at #53.

Won - Loss records, conference games only for the same period have FSU at 35-13, VT at 35-13, CU at 34-14 GT at 31-17, and UM at 27-21.
 

alaguy

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,117
We all want as much talent as possible, but let's look at reality. Even if we signed all blue chips; all CFB teams have about 85 scholarship athletes. 44 make up the two deep. Throw in about 6 more for special teams, holders, kickers, etc. you come up with 50. So at any one time there are 35 or more that never get playing time. Whether these guys are 1* or 5* scout team members means little. If we sign 10 eventual starters, that is a good to great class. That would still give us 50 starters over 5 years which is way above the needed 22. I really only want 4- 5 playmakers and 4-5 contributors out of each class. The rest is just gravy. Just my opinion and it helps keep me grounded during the recruiting chaos every year.
Old,
Getting "starters" is not good enough.you need starters that contribute to a 8-4 or better team .L Young is a perfect example-he was a long time starter but was he the reason we were avg vs BCS teams or was he the guy who helped pull us up to the level we are.?
 

Bigb

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
395
From 2008 - 2014 - the ACC recruiting classes national rank, - per Rivals - averaged for the period - show FSU at #6 - UM at #16.- CU at #17 - VT at #24 and GT at #53.

Won - Loss records, conference games only for the same period have FSU at 35-13, VT at 35-13, CU at 34-14 GT at 31-17, and UM at 27-21.
Only because you stuck 2008 and 2009 in there. Those years are proving to be outliers that leaned heavily on players from a single class that has yet to be repeated.
 

mts315

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
718
Only because you stuck 2008 and 2009 in there. Those years are proving to be outliers that leaned heavily on players from a single class that has yet to be repeated.
We consistently have finished in the bottom quarter of the ACC recruiting ranking but we have consistently finished in the top quarter on the field. We have played in the ACC championship game 2 of Johnson's 6 years and have been tied for or been first or second in the Coastal 5 of his 6 seasons.
 

Squints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,033
Only because you stuck 2008 and 2009 in there. Those years are proving to be outliers that leaned heavily on players from a single class that has yet to be repeated.
Take those two years out we're still number 4.
 

GTRanj

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
333
Location
Atlanta, Georgia
Only because you stuck 2008 and 2009 in there. Those years are proving to be outliers that leaned heavily on players from a single class that has yet to be repeated.
I wonder what the b in big b stands for. Take 08 and 09 out and we are stool 4th. Jeeze man quit being such a Debby downer.
 

Bigb

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
395
We consistently have finished in the bottom quarter of the ACC recruiting ranking but we have consistently finished in the top quarter on the field. We have played in the ACC championship game 2 of Johnson's 6 years and have been tied for or been first or second in the Coastal 5 of his 6 seasons.
If only we can continue to have 1/3 of the division on probation or self imposed withdrawal we might be able to continue showing up to ACC champ games too!

Look. The fact that since 2010 we have a losing record against FBS teams and have still finished in the " top quarter" of the ACC says more about the ACC than it does us. Against teams that can be described as anything more than mediocre, our record is horrible. Saying that we consistently outperform our talent level doesn't follow.

Are the recruiting rankings perfect? No, of course not. But it's been consistently shown that teams that rank higher on those rankings beat teams that rank lower an overwhelming amount of the time. Georgia Tech included.
 

Boomergump

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
3,259
I did a quick study at some point recently (I think after UVA or maybe PITT) that showed our record against teams who have out-recruited us (by the published rankings) and our record against teams behind us in the recruiting game, was about the same. Anyway you look at it, it is pretty hard to reach definitive conclusions. We need more good players. I think we can all agree about that.
 

Squints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,033
If only we can continue to have 1/3 of the division on probation or self imposed withdrawal we might be able to continue showing up to ACC champ games too!
I understand the point but let's not act like we were 4-4 and the other two were 7-1. All three teams won the same amount of games.
 

SidewalkJacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,590
Fact: We can't get most of the kids everybody else can.
Fact: We have been hamstrung in terms of recruiting resources.
Fact: We excel at getting the most out of the least.
Fact: We consistently beat teams with much higher rated recruiting.

Truth: We should win more games than we have recently.
Truth: We can get even better players than we have been getting.
 

Bigb

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
395
There is no point in arguing with people who refuse to acknowledge facts and reality. Big bia has his agenda and will continue to make that known.
Way to have a civil argument without resorting to name calling. Really speaks highly of your maturity level.
 

Minawreck

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
623
UVA and UNC consistently rank higher than us on recruiting services sites. We consistently beat them. You could also say we consistently beat Clemson under CPJ, although we are just 1 for our last 4.
 
Top