• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Football transfer thread: General NCAA transfer rules talk

That misses the point. That's not how Clausen recruits. He takes the 20 to 25 guys that through the staff analysis, he projects as the best fits for the program over the next 5 years. Regardless of where they are ranked by a recruiting service. I will happily take (and would guess Creamy would too) the 25 guys that Clausen recruits and signs over the 25 guys ranked around Groulx, and they will kick the ass of almost every program that recruits in that same pool.

My guess is that Clawson would take most of these guys in a heartbeat over the majority of the guys he ends up signing, just like APP State would take our recruits over theirs. But that does not diminish the fact that programs like Wake and APP gladly take developmental, high-character guys and mold them in to players who eventually perform at a level in line with the 4-5 stars. No shame in that.
 
That misses the point. That's not how Clausen recruits. He takes the 20 to 25 guys that through the staff analysis, he projects as the best fits for the program over the next 5 years. Regardless of where they are ranked by a recruiting service. I will happily take (and would guess Creamy would too) the 25 guys that Clausen recruits and signs over the 25 guys ranked around Groulx, and they will kick the ass of almost every program that recruits in that same pool.


We weren't talking about Jimmy Clausen or Dave Clawson. I was talking about Creamy's hot take on recruiting rankings being a crap shoot.

But lest we forget, Clawson did recruit and sign Groulx, so I bet Clawson would rather take the 25 guys ranked around Groulx too. And bear in mind, Groulx originally committed to Wisconsin which is also not known for bringing in a ton of 4-stars relatively to their level of competition.
 
That misses the point. That's not how Clausen recruits. He takes the 20 to 25 guys that through the staff analysis, he projects as the best fits for the program over the next 5 years. Regardless of where they are ranked by a recruiting service. I will happily take (and would guess Creamy would too) the 25 guys that Clausen recruits and signs over the 25 guys ranked around Groulx, and they will kick the ass of almost every program that recruits in that same pool.

Yeah this is where I'm at.
 
We weren't talking about Jimmy Clausen or Dave Clawson. I was talking about Creamy's hot take on recruiting rankings being a crap shoot.

But lest we forget, Clawson did recruit and sign Groulx, so I bet Clawson would rather take the 25 guys ranked around Groulx too. And bear in mind, Groulx originally committed to Wisconsin which is also not known for bringing in a ton of 4-stars relatively to their level of competition.

I still stand by my take tho! Don't @ me
 
I don't think it's that much of a crapshoot. I mean, they're evaluated (usually) based on what they show and how they measure up, similar to picking a guy in the NFL draft. Most of those guys in the draft don't pan out either.

You do get your overrated and underrated kids, but sometimes kids are late bloomers and thrive in a situation where they're allowed to develop and maybe not get beat up by a bunch of 4 and 5 star kids. The inverse is also true, where kids peak early or they go into an environment where the competition is so tough they never see the field, or get discouraged because they can't crack the 2 deep.

Agree. Just because a player doesn't set the woods on fire at Wake, that doesn't mean they were overrated. Sometimes a player just isn't a good fit for the program, or doesn't like the culture on campus, and that negatively impacts performance. Not saying that's the case with every Wake athlete that washes out or with anybody mentioned on this thread, but it happens, not only in sports but in the working world.
 
Kinda hard to overlook two “Clausen” misspellings in a post explaining his recruiting philosophy.
 
I just love that no matter what, this topic gets brought up at least once a year.

You're welcome Ogboards
 
For Wake, recruiting rankings have never meant anything. Traditionally, our under recruited, low ranked recruits have outperformed our "top ranked" recruits. At the very least it's a wash.
 
Yikes. Jimmy Clausen.

Of course, every class has more misses than hits. Even Bama. Groulx was a miss by WF, Wisconsin, S. Carolina, NC State and everyone else that offered.

Fans like recruiting rankings because it gives us a way to think that we are keeping score in the recruiting process, but outside of the highest ranked recruits, where there is far more reliability, there is an incredible randomness and unreliability in recruiting rankings beyond the top 250 because the guys trying to rank more than 2,000 HS players in each recruiting cycle simply don't have the ability to determine whether the #107 offensive guard is actually a better college prospect than the #187 offensive guard. Clawson and staff have the edge: a) because they are smart and have devoted their lives to evaluating football talent and projectability; b) they actually get to work the players out in camps c) they get to meet the player and talk to his coaches; d) they will lose their jobs if they can't properly evaluate talent; e) Clawson is the one responsible for issuing the quarter of a million dollar scholarship; so, he is invested in getting the decisions as right as possible, while the recruiting service doesn't have the same stake in evaluating the #89th best slot receiver.

In 2019 recruiting rankings, 247 thought KW 3 was WF's worst recruit. From the moment he stepped on campus, Clawson knew the kid was ready to compete at a high level from game #1. There just is no comparison between the depth of understanding and accuracy as to how a publicly available recruiting service rates recruits and how a Power V staff rates recruits. As a result, it's pointless to get worked up when WF is ranked 12th in the ACC recruiting and Pitt is ranked 8th because those performing those rankings have performed such a limited analysis of each of the players as compared to the programs.
 
Last edited:
80% of Alabama's recruits every year are 4-stars or 5-stars. Please let me know when Deacon Blue outperforms the Crimson Tide.
 
Pilch’s post reads as if clawson has 20-25 groulx level guys available to him but chooses instead to go with his other lower rated guys based on projections or whatever. We offer a ton of guys at all positions and many at that groulx level but most of them aren’t here because they go with higher profile schools, not because we selected over them.
 
80% of Alabama's recruits every year are 4-stars or 5-stars. Please let me know when Deacon Blue outperforms the Crimson Tide.

Again, I'm not talking about 5 stars and I'm not really talking about 4 stars.

I do think the difference between 300-1000 is slim more times than not.
 
Pilch’s post reads as if clawson has 20-25 groulx level guys available to him but chooses instead to go with his other lower rated guys based on projections or whatever. We offer a ton of guys at all positions and many at that groulx level but most of them aren’t here because they go with higher profile schools, not because we selected over them.

If Clawson (or any Power V coach) offered only on publicly available rankings, they would have higher rated classes and crappier teams. There are plenty of players rated far above Taylor Morin or KW3 that WF could've offered that the Deacs had no interest in. Keep blindly relying on BS rankings (and to be clear, I'm not talking about Clemson and Bama who play in a different sandbox) and failing to understand why they don't translate in the standings.
 
I’m going to stop after this, but “blindly relying on recruiting rankings” isn’t what anyone is doing. I’m fine with Clawson’s recruiting. It’s just weird to imply that clawson doesn’t also offer 4 stars and would probably be happy to have them.
 
What exactly is the argument that Clawson, aka Clausen, is a good coach if recruiting rankings are meaningless and we aren't actually working at a talent deficit vs. 60 or so BCS teams? If we have just as much talent as Florida, Michigan, and Notre Dame, I'm pretty underwhelmed with "Clausen's" coaching ability.
 
I’m going to stop after this, but “blindly relying on recruiting rankings” isn’t what anyone is doing. I’m fine with Clawson’s recruiting. It’s just weird to imply that clawson doesn’t also offer 4 stars and would probably be happy to have them.

To simplify:

Every program offers far more players than they land. If WF has 20 available ships in a class, it doesn't just offer 20 kids. In a perfect world, every kid that WF offers would commit. Not reality. However, the recruiting classes that WF does land routinely outperform higher rated classes because of inherent biases in recruiting rankings which will always result in WF football getting a lower ranking collectively as a program and individually for each player. There is a reason why WF is always rated among the bottom 3 classes in football recruiting, but finishes higher than that in the standings over each of the last 5 years.
 
I'm also really uncomfortable calling Groulx a bust because he didn't produce in his first two years in a program.
 
Per Wake kids who know Grouxl personally, he's a bust of a human being.
 
The idea that the lower the rankings go the less reliable they are is completely sound.

The idea that there is not a general correlation between ranking groups (think stars) and skill level is not sound. Living at the long end of the tail is not a winning proposition generally.

The thought that we'd rather find diamonds in the rough than take higher ranked recruits is completely nuts. Show me some admitable 4-5 stars that wanted to sign with us but were refused.

The position that we cannot generally get 4-5 stars yet we have admirably closed the gap via a developmental platform is true.
 
Back
Top