'24 GA LB Sammy Brown (Clemson commit)

[VolNash17]

Top 15 isn’t “poor”, but it’s bottom of the barrel of what is feasible.

How many times has simply Top 15 won the NC in the last 25 years?

Maybe once? All others, 24 of 25 recruited very very well.

No roster outside of 9th has won the championship since 2015 per 247. 6/8 were in the top 5. Only two that weren’t were 2016 Clemson (9th) and 2018 Clemson (6th)

 

[Vol8188]

No roster outside of 9th has won the championship since 2015 per 247. 6/8 were in the top 5. Only two that weren’t were 2016 Clemson (9th) and 2018 Clemson (6th)

Sure, but we should realize the transfer portal changes that. No team is going to hit the lottery 85 times on 3* guys. But through the portal you take underrated guys who’ve already proved themselves at previous stops, even though they’ll still count as 3*s on your roster rating.

Fentrell Cyrus and FSU being a prime example

 

[MarcoVol]

No roster outside of 9th has won the championship since 2015 per 247. 6/8 were in the top 5. Only two that weren’t were 2016 Clemson (9th) and 2018 Clemson (6th)

2019 LSU must’ve been right at #5?

 

[85SugarVol]

No roster outside of 9th has won the championship since 2015 per 247. 6/8 were in the top 5. Only two that weren’t were 2016 Clemson (9th) and 2018 Clemson (6th)

It’s been proven over, and over, and over again…

Recruiting matters.
Stacking ranked classes matter.

Some men you just can’t reach.

 

[85SugarVol]

Sure, but we should realize the transfer portal changes that. No team is going to hit the lottery 85 times on 3* guys. But through the portal you take underrated guys who’ve already proved themselves at previous stops, even though they’ll still count as 3*s on your roster rating.

Fentrell Cyrus and FSU being a prime example

I love the Portal. It is a valuable tool.

And when/if a team wins the NC via the Portal we will have one data point in its favor vs traditional recruiting.

 

[85SugarVol]

No roster outside of 9th has won the championship since 2015 per 247. 6/8 were in the top 5. Only two that weren’t were 2016 Clemson (9th) and 2018 Clemson (6th)

Show me the NC Team that recruited “ok” and just out-developed and out-schemed everybody else.

I’ll hang up and listen.

 

[NighthawkVol]

Top 15 isn’t “poor”, but it’s bottom of the barrel of what is feasible.

How many times has simply Top 15 won the NC in the last 25 years?

Maybe once? All others, 24 of 25 recruited very very well.

Clemson did. Miami’s run from 99-01 was built by classes in the 10-15 range. They had a class some consider the best of all-time that ranked 10th. I don’t think LSU’s 3 NCs since 2003 were preceded by all top 5 classes (though they probably had at least 1 top 5 class that preceded each).

Alabama’s run, followed by George’s, has sort of skewed things. It used to be that getting beck to back #1 classes was unheard of. Then Saban came in and got about 7 in a row. Then Kirby got a similar number of top 2-3 classes in a row. But there are still plenty of under-ranked players and if you can get enough top ranked talebt to put you around 10th while evaluating some guys better than the services, you’ll have enough talent to win championship if you develop, scheme, and create culture.

And now that we have a transfer portal, recruiting rankings are even less indicative of how much actual talent is on the roster.

 

[Carp]

No roster outside of 9th has won the championship since 2015 per 247. 6/8 were in the top 5. Only two that weren’t were 2016 Clemson (9th) and 2018 Clemson (6th)

Let's a little misleading since only 5 teams total have won a natty over this time frame. And with the CFP expanding, you'll likely to see more diversity.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

Let's a little misleading since only 5 teams total have won a natty over this time frame. And with the CFP expanding, you'll likely to see more diversity.

How is it misleading? So only 5 teams have won it you say. Is it a coincidence that all but one of those teams stacked top 5 classes year after year? The expanded playoff isn’t going to change anything. You are not gonna have a team that recruits in the 30s Cole to the playoffs and beat a team like UGA that recruits at the highest level. It’s just not gonna happen.

 

[85SugarVol]

Clemson did. Miami’s run from 99-01 was built by classes in the 10-15 range. They had a class some consider the best of all-time that ranked 10th. I don’t think LSU’s 3 NCs since 2003 were preceded by all top 5 classes (though they probably had at least 1 top 5 class that preceded each).

Alabama’s run, followed by George’s, has sort of skewed things. It used to be that getting beck to back #1 classes was unheard of. Then Saban came in and got about 7 in a row. Then Kirby got a similar number of top 2-3 classes in a row. But there are still plenty of under-ranked players and if you can get enough top ranked talebt to put you around 10th while evaluating some guys better than the services, you’ll have enough talent to win championship if you develop, scheme, and create culture.

And now that we have a transfer portal, recruiting rankings are even less indicative of how much actual talent is on the roster.

No. Clemson had Top 10 rosters for both of their NCs. #9 in 2016, and #6 in 2018.

2001 Miami? Are you serious? That’s the most loaded roster in CFB history. But I’d love to see the rankings you’re quoting for ‘99-‘01.

2003 LSU was during the infancy of national recruiting rankings (as alluded to above). But Rivals had LSU #1 in 2003.
2007 LSU had a #1, #2, & #7 ranked classes on its roster.
2019 LSU had a #3, #7, & #10 ranked classes on its roster.

Alabama loaded. Georgia loaded. Ohio St loaded.

You can not like recruiting rankings. That’s fine.
But you can’t argue the numbers.

 

[85SugarVol]

Let's a little misleading since only 5 teams total have won a natty over this time frame. And with the CFP expanding, you'll likely to see more diversity.

Misleading? Those 5 teams dominated recruiting - and won all of the NCs.

Misleading!

 

[85SugarVol]

How is it misleading? So only 5 teams have won it you say. Is it a coincidence that all but one of those teams stacked top 5 classes year after year? The expanded playoff isn’t going to change anything. You are not gonna have a team that recruits in the 30s Cole to the playoffs and beat a team like UGA that recruits at the highest level. It’s just not gonna happen.

I think the expanded playoff with 12 teams actually will expand the envelope. A team from the outside will get in and get hot. Probably.

But that possible future won’t change the conversation today, or the last 25 years worth of actual history.

 

[NighthawkVol]

No. Clemson had Top 10 rosters for both of their NCs. #9 in 2016, and #6 in 2018.

2001 Miami? Are you serious? That’s the most loaded roster in CFB history. But I’d love to see the rankings you’re quoting for ‘99-‘01.

2003 LSU was during the infancy of national recruiting rankings (as alluded to above). But Rivals had LSU #1 in 2003.
2007 LSU had a #1, #2, & #7 ranked classes on its roster.
2019 LSU had a #3, #7, & #10 ranked classes on its roster.

Alabama loaded. Georgia loaded. Ohio St loaded.

You can not like recruiting rankings. That’s fine.
But you can’t argue the numbers.

In other words, you don’t have to sign annual top 3 classes. That’s my point.

And yes, 2001 Miami was probably the most loaded roster in CFB history. They didn’t have a single #1 ranked class on that roster. They didn’t even have a top 10 ranked class. But that 1999 class is now considered perhaps the greatest class of all-time.

Tracking the Top 10 1998-2002

What happens to those 'great' recruiting classes? ESPN.com tracks the Top 10 classes from 1997-2001.

www.espn.com

 

[85SugarVol]

In other words, you don’t have to sign annual top 3 classes. That’s my point.

And yes, 2001 Miami was probably the most loaded roster in CFB history. They didn’t have a single #1 ranked class on that roster. They didn’t even have a top 10 ranked class. But that 1999 class is now considered perhaps the greatest class of all-time.

Tracking the Top 10 1998-2002

What happens to those 'great' recruiting classes? ESPN.com tracks the Top 10 classes from 1997-2001.

www.espn.com

Who said Top 3 is the standard? Certainly not me.
Or are we just creating strawman arguments in here too?

I said Top 15 was a bare minimum.
I never said Top 5.
I never said Top 3.

That’s just you all changing the parameters.

Lemming? Really? That predates the era of the industry recruiting rankings. But sure, if Lemming be DEAD WRONG (again) about 2001 Miami makes you feel better about this - then go for it.

 

[norrislakevol]

It's really simple. The better you recruit and develop, the larger margin for error you have in a given season. Scheme can only get you so far. For example, an OL made up of a bunch of 3 stars...maybe unless they are all red shirt seniors...is going to get pushed around most of the time by a defensive front 7 made up of 4 and 5 star players. Recruiting isn't the end all be all, but it is the first, and probably the most important piece of the puzzle in trying to win a championship. The portal is a new piece to the recruiting puzzle, and JH and company seem to do very well there. That can sort of bump up a 10th to 12th ranked class to the 5th to 7th range for example.

 

[85SugarVol]

It's really simple. The better you recruit and develop, the larger margin for error you have in a given season. Scheme can only get you so far. For example, an OL made up of a bunch of 3 stars...maybe unless they are all red shirt seniors...is going to get pushed around most of the time by a defensive front 7 made up of 4 and 5 star players. Recruiting isn't the end all be all, but it is the first, and probably the most important piece of the puzzle in trying to win a championship. The portal is a new piece to the recruiting puzzle, and JH and company seem to do very well there. That can sort of bump up a 10th to 12th ranked class to the 5th to 7th range for example.

It’s very simple. Indeed.

In over 20 years we’ve never seen a team win the NC without first recruiting at a very high level. No amount of coaching, development, or scheme has pushed an “ok” recruiting team to the title.

 

[NighthawkVol]

Who said Top 3 is the standard? Certainly not me.
Or are we just creating strawman arguments in here too?

I said Top 15 was a bare minimum.
I never said Top 5.
I never said Top 3.

That’s just you all changing the parameters.

Lemming? Really? That predates the era of the industry recruiting rankings. But sure, if Lemming be DEAD WRONG (again) about 2001 Miami makes you feel better about this - then go for it.

I'm changing the parameters? I'm having a discussion. This isn't combat.

I actually don't disagree with you. Top 15 is probably about the bottom of what you could recruit if you're going to win a NC, before the transfer portal, which can change everything. But I think it remains to be seen how much the portal can change that (i.e., can you recruit an average class rank of 20, but win a NC by killing it in the portal? We don't know what yet).

I just pointed out some of the outliers (Clemson, Miami), since it was mentioned. Lemming was what we had to go by back then. Yes, he was pre-industry rankings, but let's not pretend the current sites are expert evaluators on the level of coaches (which is why they're not making a lot more money on a coaching staff)...they follow the offers....which is exactly what Lemming, SuperPrep, etc. did. The fact remains that Miami's dynasty was built on classes outside the top 10 and the best recruiting class ever wasn't ranked in the top 10 by the people who ranked classes at the time.

Honestly, if Tennessee signs classes ranked about 12, 8, 6, and 9 (for example), as long as those classes fill needs and consist of guys who are fits, both systematically and culturally, it can compete for a NC because Heupel gives Tennessee a schematic advantage. I'm beginning to think Banks may do that too (thought the jury is still obviously out there). Add to those classes some talent from the portal, and championships are entirely realistic.

So calm down. No one is setting up strawmen. We can have a discussion without it being acrimonious. There are valid opinions either way.

 

[85SugarVol]

I'm changing the parameters? I'm having a discussion. This isn't combat.

I actually don't disagree with you. Top 15 is probably about the bottom of what you could recruit if you're going to win a NC, before the transfer portal, which can change everything. But I think it remains to be seen how much the portal can change that (i.e., can you recruit an average class rank of 20, but win a NC by killing it in the portal? We don't know what yet).

I just pointed out some of the outliers (Clemson, Miami), since it was mentioned. Lemming was what we had to go by back then. Yes, he was pre-industry rankings, but let's not pretend the current sites are expert evaluators on the level of coaches (which is why they're not making a lot more money on a coaching staff)...they follow the offers....which is exactly what Lemming, SuperPrep, etc. did. The fact remains that Miami's dynasty was built on classes outside the top 10 and the best recruiting class ever wasn't ranked in the top 10 by the people who ranked classes at the time.

Honestly, if Tennessee signs classes ranked about 12, 8, 6, and 9 (for example), as long as those classes fill needs and consist of guys who are fits, both systematically and culturally, it can compete for a NC because Heupel gives Tennessee a schematic advantage. I'm beginning to think Banks may do that too (thought the jury is still obviously out there). Add to those classes some talent from the portal, and championships are entirely realistic.

So calm down. No one is setting up strawmen. We can have a discussion without it being acrimonious. There are valid opinions either way.

Well then my apologies, but your very first sentence seemed to imply that I had set a Top 3 standard. I never did.

In other words, you don’t have to sign annual top 3 classes. That’s my point.

And I never said Top 5 either - for @bigl3327 if he’s still watching.

Yes - the Portal, and Playoffs, will expand the envelope (in my opinion). But it won’t change the actual, historical facts we’re discussing here now.

Clemson is an “outlier” - at #9 & #6
They recruited incredibly well.
They weren’t bums off the street.
Not sure why people hold them up in this way, but whatever.

Miami is another weird for me. Lemming was Dead Wrong about the Miami classes. And he’s really not comparable to the industry recruiting that came along.

 

[BruisedOrange]

Got excited seeing all this activity on the Sammy Brown thread.

Shoulda known...

 

[85SugarVol]

Got excited seeing all this activity on the Sammy Brown thread.

Shoulda known...

There hasn’t been an actual update on Sammy Brown in here since late May.

 

[MSME Vol]

There hasn’t been an actual update on Sammy Brown in here since late May.

 

[white65]

Leaning toward cheering for FSU to demolish Clemson and blow up the program, but then we'll be competing with FSU for more recruits so who knows.

I know Georgia was likely 2nd here but if he goes there maybe they drop Cole or another stud the could help us.

 

[CAVPUT]

Got excited seeing all this activity on the Sammy Brown thread.

Shoulda known...

It's VN baby....Vol Nation.

 

[TOUCHDOWN!!TN]

I love the Portal. It is a valuable tool.

And when/if a team wins the NC via the Portal we will have one data point in its favor vs traditional recruiting.

 

[LouderVol]

No roster outside of 9th has won the championship since 2015 per 247. 6/8 were in the top 5. Only two that weren’t were 2016 Clemson (9th) and 2018 Clemson (6th)

those are the rosters and not the recruiting rankings.

2018: 7th
2017: 16th

2016: 11th
2015: 9th
2014: 16th
2013: 15th

they only out recruited us twice during that time 2016, and 2018.

you don't have to recruit top 10 to have a Top 10 roster.

the classes that made up 2018 Clemson averaged 10.75 recruiting class.
2016 it was even worse 12.75 average recruiting class.

their average class ranking, and roster rankings have only improved since then.