Question About Recruiting Improvement

Compared to most here I am not one with a good grasp on recruiting.

But I have to believe all the covid issues, no h.s. spring ball, etc that scouting / recruiting is different this year.

Due to that i am more curious than ever who else our commits got offers from.

But looking at the range/size of our recruits i gotta believe we are heading up.

Thank you. I also feel like we are heading up. I hope the virus and other problems will not hurt our coaches' momentum. I believe they are working very hard, and they have my enthusiastic support.
 
Everyone also needs to understand that the factory schools tend to offer later. Our strategy is to offer earlier to lock up the guys we really want before the factory school offer comes in.

So it is not shocking that some of the kids we like don't have factory offers. If the factory knows he's solid to GT, they may not offer at all just to keep their rejection rate down.

There are a lot of dynamics at play here and with signing day nine months away, the only real measure is what GT thinks and not what you think the factory thinks.

Thank you. That's a good point. Also, if the higher ranked programs decide to go after our commitments, it seems like their ratings go up. Do you think the people ranking recruits are reliable? Do you think it would be better to eliminate the stars ranking system and just go by other, more objective things, like who else offered them scholarships?
 
Valid question, but I trust the staff's evaluation. If we offered these guys this early, we obviously want them (as do many other big schools).

I think most here know how big of a CPJ fanboy I am, but it's pretty obvious to me that our recruiting has improved dramatically. CGC's culture change has had a positive impact that is fun to watch.

Thank you. The fact that you admire Coach Johnson, as I do, makes your opinion especially helpful to me.
 
1. Thank you for the question. It’s a good topic to discuss here.

2. Thank you to everyone else for answering like adults without accusations, arguments, name calling, or references to OP’s mother.

Thank you. I appreciate what you said.
 
Thank you very much. People like you are giving me a better understanding of how to evaluate our recruiting. I have been a Tech fan a long time, but I didn't understand how to evaluate recruiting as well as many younger fans do, so these answers are very helpful to me.

A lot of people understand recruiting less than they think they do.

It is not about what the recruiting services say. It is not about what team has what ranking by the recruiting services.

It is about getting the players that make your team better. Part of that is getting the players you have evaluated and you want. So a lot of what we "know" is by reading the tea leaves. Are you on a kid for a long time and you lose him? That is bad. Are you on a kid for a long time and suddenly everyone is interested in him but you keep him anyway? That's good. What teams are you beating to get your signees? Are you getting commits because the player's other opportunities close on them? That's bad. Are you getting commits because the players cannot contain their excitement about GT anymore? That they and a few of their peers commit together? That's good. Do you hear about good players who want a commit here but can't get in because of ship limits and go to some mid-level P5 school far away, cuz they are good players but no one close can fit them in? That's good. And so on.

My read is we miss on a few of our targets and hit on a lot of targets, and the ratio means we are building the team we want to build. That is all we want. And, if Brent Key has known a kid for 4 or 5 years and has an opinion, I am going to put his opinion over that of an overworked recruiting regional dude who is trying to rank order hundreds of kids, none of which can go to the camps that these services rely on due to the Rona.

I really like what I see of Richey. Really, really like. He's got good height and is not overweight and we will be able to add good weight on his frame. Good weight is good. Bad weight is bad. For a lineman. He moves like a future high round draft choice. He shows some advanced technique from all his summer camps, far more advanced than he should be for coming out of a small country school. And ups to that small country school as they are state champs so they are doing some good things on their own there. And I watch his interview that is posted nearby and he checks that box. He will make our team better. Totally confident of that, barring injury. And on draft night, someone will say, "Another Brent Key disciple drafted high."

Yet this guy I am raving about will probably be one of our lowest ranked signees come signing day. I don't care. I trust the coaches. I trust the current process. I looked for myself and made my own confirmation. He's a player. Bank on it. Don't quote me what 247 or Rivals say. They know a lot but they are stretched thin and are not, you know, P5 coach-level evaluators.
 
Last edited:
Here are a few things I've learned about recruiting.
1. Some things don't make sense.
2. Rankers care more about camps than they do film. Which is somewhat understandable bedause they have a clearer picture of techbique and level of competition.
3. Don't camp and your rankings will not improve. Camp and they might. Many guys commit and then shut it down and they get passed in rankings.
4. A lot of it is a guessing game. Rankings are determined a lot by just one or two sets of eyes.
5. OL are very hard to scout and rank.
6. Not all 3* are equal.
7. It actually does matter what school a kid is committed to.
8. Look at offer lists but also know that those may or not be accurate. They are reported by the athlete. And not all "offers" are real, committable offers.
9. Our guys are underrated. Theirs are overrated. If they choose to go elsewhere it is because they got paid. :)
10. And finally, we are recruiting better. We have more 5.7+ than we had by a good margin. Our size is worlds better. We also have finished 2nd or among the top choices for a lot better talent, many of which will join us as we build more relationships.
 
In PJs last few years, we would had to flip recruits from the Old Dominions and Coastal Carolinas of the world to fill out our classes. Many of our guys only had lower Go5 offers. PJs three-stars are wayyyy different than GCs three stars. Offer list alone is all you need to look at to tell the difference. Class ranking is also drastically improved.
 
I have to agree with the OP. Clemson signs 18 OL/DL every year. We aren't even close to that!
 
Remember also that these guys have another entire season to play in high school. Lots of ranking movement during a class’s senior season.
 
I offer this (again) with no agenda (I quite like our recruiting class), just feels pertinent to the thread.

2o4p3w.jpg
 
I don’t think the question is whether we’re recruiting at a higher level. I think it’s pretty clear at this point that we are. I believe the question is whether we’re recruiting at a higher-enough level to win more games on average running similar schemes to everybody else. Which I’m not so sure about yet.

Top 25-30 classes probably translates to 5th/6th in the ACC and 7 or 8 wins per season assuming coaching is equal across teams. So we’d need player development and/or schemes to be better than other schools to get up into the 8/9/10 win category that I think everybody is hoping for.

Either that or we still have a lot of work to do on the recruiting front despite the improvement we’ve already had there. I think the ‘22 cycle will be a good barometer for CGCs tenure here. The staff will have had 3 years to recruit those kids. By that point we’ll need to be making a jump into the Top 20 region to show that we can be a threat to win the Coastal/ACC under CGC.
 
Guarantee at least three of the guys we have committed don’t sign.

Our staff is still going after the big boys and will be until signing day.

Were finally playing the game.
 
Thank you. That's a good point. Also, if the higher ranked programs decide to go after our commitments, it seems like their ratings go up. Do you think the people ranking recruits are reliable? Do you think it would be better to eliminate the stars ranking system and just go by other, more objective things, like who else offered them scholarships?
Do I think the people ranking recruits are reliable? I think they are reasonably reliable if - IF - they look at enough film and consider the context but they often don't have enough time so use proxies. Let's say a service rates a guy as a two-star who then gets offers from the factories. The rating service will quickly "re-evaluate" and change their rating since, as we all know, the factories don't trip over themselves over tw0-stars. That is just one example. Similarly, let's say this two-star commits to Wake Forest in April and cuts off his recruiting. He could have been a candidate to rise to a four-star but the other metrics (interest from factories, for example) don't exist. Doesn't mean he is really a two-star.

Bottom line - the information is not perfect and there is a lot of noise in the data. As to your second question, I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with the star system as long as everyone understands its limitations and imperfections. Many folks put way too much stock in it.
 
It’s important to remember in this conversation that if some Coastal teams go 6-0 in the division, they would have probably a good shot at an undefeated season or maybe 11-1. If Tech were to go 6-0 in the Coastal this year, the season would probably be 9-3 at best, maybe 8-4. Recruiting challenges are from from the only built-in difficulty.
 
I don’t think the question is whether we’re recruiting at a higher level. I think it’s pretty clear at this point that we are. I believe the question is whether we’re recruiting at a higher-enough level to win more games on average running similar schemes to everybody else. Which I’m not so sure about yet.

Top 25-30 classes probably translates to 5th/6th in the ACC and 7 or 8 wins per season assuming coaching is equal across teams. So we’d need player development and/or schemes to be better than other schools to get up into the 8/9/10 win category that I think everybody is hoping for.

Either that or we still have a lot of work to do on the recruiting front despite the improvement we’ve already had there. I think the ‘22 cycle will be a good barometer for CGCs tenure here. The staff will have had 3 years to recruit those kids. By that point we’ll need to be making a jump into the Top 20 region to show that we can be a threat to win the Coastal/ACC under CGC.
best post of the year! i've never been a jimmie/joe guy like most. recruiting for the scheme is most important as many have said. but the key, gotta have scheme that works. sure clempsum and bama can win strictly w/jimmies. but once u get to their level, they got scheme and great coaches as well. it's a two step process and i certainly believe step one (recruiting) is absolutely headed the correct direction. on to step two, scheming and putting up some Ws!! 21 or 22 will be telling, fully agree. but don't discount a step that must be taken this year!!
 
best post of the year! i've never been a jimmie/joe guy like most. recruiting for the scheme is most important as many have said. but the key, gotta have scheme that works. sure clempsum and bama can win strictly w/jimmies. but once u get to their level, they got scheme and great coaches as well. it's a two step process and i certainly believe step one (recruiting) is absolutely headed the correct direction. on to step two, scheming and putting up some Ws!! 21 or 22 will be telling, fully agree. but don't discount a step that must be taken this year!!

If you could win with just jimmies Tennessee wouldn’t have been garbage for almost 20 years.
 
If you could win with just jimmies Tennessee wouldn’t have been garbage for almost 20 years.
Tennessee ööööed up by concentrating solely on Jimmies. Got to get a few Joes in there too.
 
Back
Top