On that Clemson path

When was the last time Clemson had 0 Dline in a class?
Comments
-
Compare the talent in the south to the west, that's why we will never be Clemson.
-
Let’s stop all the Clemson talk. We got our shit pushed in by Colorado.
-
There is no reason we can’t have top 10 classes, but there are so many more players to pull in the South than the West Coast. It’s not an excuse, it’s a reality.sonics1993 said:Compare the talent in the south to the west, that's why we will never be Clemson.
-
For UW to have a top 10 class they need to have the best instate class ever and they need to land every single one of them along with hitting most of there other targets. In the south, you can miss a lot more since theres so much talent. Plus USC needs to be terrible because if USC is on then you can forget about it.RoadDawg55 said:
There is no reason we can’t have top 10 classes, but there are so many more players to pull in the South than the West Coast. It’s not an excuse, it’s a reality.sonics1993 said:Compare the talent in the south to the west, that's why we will never be Clemson.
-
When the west does have a national champion they have great lines on both sides of the ball. USC many times. UW a couple or so
USC got every great lineman out west and recruited nationally
UW got Cunningham from Virginia but the rest of the 91 team was California and Washington
You can't miss. You cant let Smalls or JT go south
And now we have Oregon to contend with
Winners will win. Losers have a great excuse as always
I really hope Jimmy is the answer. I'm not getting any younger -
Yep, a really good in state class along with a couple really high 4 star/5 star guys from Cali and it can be done.sonics1993 said:
For UW to have a top 10 class they need to have the best instate class ever and they need to land every single one of them along with hitting most of there other targets. In the south, you can miss a lot more since theres so much talent. Plus USC needs to be terrible because if USC is on then you can forget about it.RoadDawg55 said:
There is no reason we can’t have top 10 classes, but there are so many more players to pull in the South than the West Coast. It’s not an excuse, it’s a reality.sonics1993 said:Compare the talent in the south to the west, that's why we will never be Clemson.
-
Last year plus stephon Wright and Kyle Ford is not that far off.RoadDawg55 said:
Yep, a really good in state class along with a couple really high 4 star/5 star guys from Cali and it can be done.sonics1993 said:
For UW to have a top 10 class they need to have the best instate class ever and they need to land every single one of them along with hitting most of there other targets. In the south, you can miss a lot more since theres so much talent. Plus USC needs to be terrible because if USC is on then you can forget about it.RoadDawg55 said:
There is no reason we can’t have top 10 classes, but there are so many more players to pull in the South than the West Coast. It’s not an excuse, it’s a reality.sonics1993 said:Compare the talent in the south to the west, that's why we will never be Clemson.
-
Or this year if we had offered Gee Scott early, taken DJ Rodgers and Banks, and had taken Levi over Peacock.AtomicDawg said:
Last year plus stephon Wright and Kyle Ford is not that far off.RoadDawg55 said:
Yep, a really good in state class along with a couple really high 4 star/5 star guys from Cali and it can be done.sonics1993 said:
For UW to have a top 10 class they need to have the best instate class ever and they need to land every single one of them along with hitting most of there other targets. In the south, you can miss a lot more since theres so much talent. Plus USC needs to be terrible because if USC is on then you can forget about it.RoadDawg55 said:
There is no reason we can’t have top 10 classes, but there are so many more players to pull in the South than the West Coast. It’s not an excuse, it’s a reality.sonics1993 said:Compare the talent in the south to the west, that's why we will never be Clemson.
-
If you go by just 247 rankings last year was a top 10 class. The year before was 13. This year could be in the top 10 or slide just outside.
-
And next year's class will be the greatest recruiting class in the history of the galaxy lol hthAtomicDawg said:If you go by just 247 rankings last year was a top 10 class. The year before was 13. This year could be in the top 10 or slide just outside.
-
Need Gee, Ringo, Carlton, Yary (not West), and a Flowe/Sewell (not McDonald).
You take high 3-stars and local studs like Esteen, Sawyer, and Bruener. But not middle-tier 3-stars like Smith, McDonald, and I hate to say Sunday cause I’m liking the kids story and how he plays with aggression, a la Dick, but yeah. -
Eh, UW had what, six 4 star OL/DL last year?
-
Now?RaceBannon said:
And now we have Oregon to contend with -
*insert coach* never had to deal with a ranked *insert opponent* hot take.dtd said:
Now?RaceBannon said:
And now we have Oregon to contend with -
Did I stutter?dtd said:
Now?RaceBannon said:
And now we have Oregon to contend with
Brooks was three years away from the 17 year plan to lose the Rose Bowl
We did not have to contend with Oregon in recruiting -
Or with being limited to 85 scholarships.RaceBannon said:
Did I stutter?dtd said:
Now?RaceBannon said:
And now we have Oregon to contend with
Brooks was three years away from the 17 year plan to lose the Rose Bowl
We did not have to contend with Oregon in recruiting -
UCLA tried back then so whatever. There’s always an excuse. Fifo or get out the way.RaceBannon said:
Did I stutter?dtd said:
Now?RaceBannon said:
And now we have Oregon to contend with
Brooks was three years away from the 17 year plan to lose the Rose Bowl
We did not have to contend with Oregon in recruiting -
AgreeAtomicDawg said:
UCLA tried back then so whatever. There’s always an excuse. Fifo or get out the way.RaceBannon said:
Did I stutter?dtd said:
Now?RaceBannon said:
And now we have Oregon to contend with
Brooks was three years away from the 17 year plan to lose the Rose Bowl
We did not have to contend with Oregon in recruiting -
There's the quookdtd said:
Or with being limited to 85 scholarships.RaceBannon said:
Did I stutter?dtd said:
Now?RaceBannon said:
And now we have Oregon to contend with
Brooks was three years away from the 17 year plan to lose the Rose Bowl
We did not have to contend with Oregon in recruiting
-
Not really. Clearly 85 leveled the playing field that UW was somewhat dominating. But it's been 25 fucking years, Race. Which program has a better record in the last THIRTY years? It's Oregon. And yeah, fuck '84 BYU. Was Kelee Ringo's mom even born yet? I get that you're you, but JFC, the context of everything CFB doesn't need to go back to Sonny Sixkiller to be valid.RaceBannon said:
There's the quookdtd said:
Or with being limited to 85 scholarships.RaceBannon said:
Did I stutter?dtd said:
Now?RaceBannon said:
And now we have Oregon to contend with
Brooks was three years away from the 17 year plan to lose the Rose Bowl
We did not have to contend with Oregon in recruiting -
sonics1993 said:
For UW to have a top 10 class they need to have the best instate class ever and they need to land every single one of them along with hitting most of there other targets. In the south, you can miss a lot more since theres so much talent. Plus USC needs to be terrible because if USC is on then you can forget about it.RoadDawg55 said:
There is no reason we can’t have top 10 classes, but there are so many more players to pull in the South than the West Coast. It’s not an excuse, it’s a reality.sonics1993 said:Compare the talent in the south to the west, that's why we will never be Clemson.
-
Great, a day before the early signing day that had a top ten class. By February this class will be in the mid to late teens.Canadawg said:sonics1993 said:
For UW to have a top 10 class they need to have the best instate class ever and they need to land every single one of them along with hitting most of there other targets. In the south, you can miss a lot more since theres so much talent. Plus USC needs to be terrible because if USC is on then you can forget about it.RoadDawg55 said:
There is no reason we can’t have top 10 classes, but there are so many more players to pull in the South than the West Coast. It’s not an excuse, it’s a reality.sonics1993 said:Compare the talent in the south to the west, that's why we will never be Clemson.
-
This thread is fucking stupid ... and the usual cast of idiots are nowhere to be found
GTFO with this settling excise making BS
This is a strong class in a number of ways ...
UW will never out recruit the true blue bloods ... shitty metric to measure against
The key is can we get enough talent and then put the pieces together in a way that the sum is maximized
Sick and tired of loser mindsets -
You literally just wrote this this.Tequilla said:This thread is fucking stupid ... and the usual cast of idiots are nowhere to be found
GTFO with this settling excise making BS
This is a strong class in a number of ways ...
UW will never out recruit the true blue bloods ... shitty metric to measure against
The key is can we get enough talent and then put the pieces together in a way that the sum is maximized
Sick and tired of loser mindsets -
I take recruiting ranking with a grain of salt ... there’s a bare minimum that you need to be at the table
After that, it’s all about what you do when you get them on campus
We are entering the territory you need ... you don’t play 85 players per game
We have never landed a class at the top tier nationally ... expecting us to do so as a sign of success is bound for disappointment. Aspirational goal ... absolutely.
The discussion in this thread is Top 10 ... it’s completely arbitrary. But when you separate and normalize the gaps in this range with the next handful of teams on either side what you find is comparable results. In that light ... there’s enough there to compete at the highest levels,
-
You may be right but saying they need a perfect class to get top 10 is a stretch. If they landed Ringo it would probably be there. Not far offsonics1993 said:
Great, a day before the early signing day that had a top ten class. By February this class will be in the mid to late teens.Canadawg said:sonics1993 said:
For UW to have a top 10 class they need to have the best instate class ever and they need to land every single one of them along with hitting most of there other targets. In the south, you can miss a lot more since theres so much talent. Plus USC needs to be terrible because if USC is on then you can forget about it.RoadDawg55 said:
There is no reason we can’t have top 10 classes, but there are so many more players to pull in the South than the West Coast. It’s not an excuse, it’s a reality.sonics1993 said:Compare the talent in the south to the west, that's why we will never be Clemson.
-
That's true but you have to remember that USC is dead right now in terms of recruiting. That's only going to last one more year and once they get rid of Clay, they will wake up and start getting the majority of the talent out west. That's when recruiting will get real tough.Canadawg said:
You may be right but saying they need a perfect class to get top 10 is a stretch. If they landed Ringo it would probably be there. Not far offsonics1993 said:
Great, a day before the early signing day that had a top ten class. By February this class will be in the mid to late teens.Canadawg said:sonics1993 said:
For UW to have a top 10 class they need to have the best instate class ever and they need to land every single one of them along with hitting most of there other targets. In the south, you can miss a lot more since theres so much talent. Plus USC needs to be terrible because if USC is on then you can forget about it.RoadDawg55 said:
There is no reason we can’t have top 10 classes, but there are so many more players to pull in the South than the West Coast. It’s not an excuse, it’s a reality.sonics1993 said:Compare the talent in the south to the west, that's why we will never be Clemson.
-
And on top of that, what’s the right metric to measure against? Points? Avg rating? Avg rating excluding kickers?Canadawg said:
You may be right but saying they need a perfect class to get top 10 is a stretch. If they landed Ringo it would probably be there. Not far offsonics1993 said:
Great, a day before the early signing day that had a top ten class. By February this class will be in the mid to late teens.Canadawg said:sonics1993 said:
For UW to have a top 10 class they need to have the best instate class ever and they need to land every single one of them along with hitting most of there other targets. In the south, you can miss a lot more since theres so much talent. Plus USC needs to be terrible because if USC is on then you can forget about it.RoadDawg55 said:
There is no reason we can’t have top 10 classes, but there are so many more players to pull in the South than the West Coast. It’s not an excuse, it’s a reality.sonics1993 said:Compare the talent in the south to the west, that's why we will never be Clemson.
It’s just not something to get worked up about -
Um...irony alert?Tequilla said:This thread is fucking stupid ... and the usual cast of idiots are nowhere to be found
-
I'm sorry, but huh? I have no idea what in the hell you're trying to communicate through words, which reminds me of Fatters' writing style. Please clarify.Tequilla said:I take recruiting ranking with a grain of salt ... there’s a bare minimum that you need to be at the table
After that, it’s all about what you do when you get them on campus
We are entering the territory you need ... you don’t play 85 players per game
We have never landed a class at the top tier nationally ... expecting us to do so as a sign of success is bound for disappointment. Aspirational goal ... absolutely.
The discussion in this thread is Top 10 ... it’s completely arbitrary. But when you separate and normalize the gaps in this range with the next handful of teams on either side what you find is comparable results. In that light ... there’s enough there to compete at the highest levels,