How much is a 5-Star recruit actually worth to a fan base / boosters?

[OriginalGatorHater]

Clemson Football: A look at Recruiting Class Rankings under Dabo Swinney

Here's a look at the all-time recruiting class rankings for Clemson football since Dabo Swinney took over as the head coach of the Tigers.

rubbingtherock.com

The highest ranked class Dabo had was ranked #7. Thats an average class rank of 12 since 2013. Miami might not recruit at a Bama level but it can at least average a class in the 10-14 range like Clemson. The difference is Clemson is light years better at evaluating and developing talent. When I talk about Miami needing good recruiters, I don't mean coaches who land 5 stars. I mean coaches who can identify talent, whatever the star level.

How many times is this ridiculous take going to be thrown around on this website. Last year when Clemson dominated Only 3 teams had more 5 stars than Clemson. Clemsons "low" ranking is due to them taking small classes. not because they aren't recruiting at the same level as other teams.

 

[Hurricane23]

150K up front for Evan Neal, probably another 150k when he signed

 

[Hurricane23]

Dlinemen, Olinemen, QB's, and Corners get paid the most

 

[AUcane]

Albert Means went for almost $200k ~ 20 years ago so you do the math.

 

[BoxingRobes]

Dlinemen, Olinemen, QB's, and Corners get paid the most

Those top corners go for a **** grip.

You right on that one.

 

[MiamiChris]

Another spec thread on compensation of college athletes.

I say “fan base / boosters” because that is who is actually paying for recruits now. And I imagine if these Tuscaloosa Chevrolet examples come to fruition, it will still be fans / boosters paying for these athletes. So how much is a game changer actually worth?

Let’s take Evan Neal. How much is he actually worth to the fans? A hundred thousand a year? A million dollars a year? More?

Starting LT is worth $250,000 to a team that is winning

 

[GojiraCane]

Another spec thread on compensation of college athletes.

I say “fan base / boosters” because that is who is actually paying for recruits now. And I imagine if these Tuscaloosa Chevrolet examples come to fruition, it will still be fans / boosters paying for these athletes. So how much is a game changer actually worth?

Let’s take Evan Neal. How much is he actually worth to the fans? A hundred thousand a year? A million dollars a year? More?

Supposedly the OU wide receiver got 250K.

 

[Garnacho]

Supposedly the OU wide receiver got 250K.

Ceedee?

 

[bocacane]

Facts


My thing is why do people think this helps? My brother was talking about marketing......like kids like Odell want to go to LA and the NYg let him rot in Cleveland. Same why Lebrun left to the heat then LA marketing is huge.....Miami Cali should benefit somehow right?

They need to figure something out to take advantage of there likeness and name

Spot on here! Miami doesn't have the booster network like an Alabama or <insert SEC school>. If Miami can use its location and assets to get kids paid more now with the coming legal "marketing" money, this will level the financial playing field. NO ONE wants to go the school in Tuscaloosa, Alabama.... They go there because of MONEY and OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE MORE MONEY (in the pros). Miami must find a way to get these kids PAID and the power comes back to schools like Miami, USC, etc... This NCAA change opens up a new world for Miami and they need to take advantage of it!

 

[emrok]

How many times is this ridiculous take going to be thrown around on this website. Last year when Clemson dominated Only 3 teams had more 5 stars than Clemson. Clemsons "low" ranking is due to them taking small classes. not because they aren't recruiting at the same level as other teams.

20% of high school graduates are illiterate, so they aren't on this site. That means there is plenty of space for people to misinterpret rankings, so much so that 247 banks on it. The mistake you are making is thinking everyone thinks like you. Gotta hope the coaches know better.

 

[OriginalGatorHater]

20% of high school graduates are illiterate, so they aren't on this site. That means there is plenty of space for people to misinterpret rankings, so much so that 247 banks on it. The mistake you are making is thinking everyone thinks like you. Gotta hope the coaches know better.

What are you trying to say here?

 

[emrok]

What are you trying to say here?

People are stupid. If you lower your expectations, you might be happy or at least less angry.

 

[Squid Bumciorek]

How many times is this ridiculous take going to be thrown around on this website. Last year when Clemson dominated Only 3 teams had more 5 stars than Clemson. Clemsons "low" ranking is due to them taking small classes. not because they aren't recruiting at the same level as other teams.

From 2012-2019 Miami had more ESPN top 300 players than Clemson 4 times. Clemson had more ESPN top 300 players than Miami 4 times. Miami also had a smaller class than Clemson 4 times.

Clemson is getting 5 stars now because they beat the **** out of Bama and are probably going to win the championship again. The 2019 Tigers are loaded because kids want to play for a winner. That wasn't the case in 2016. When they won in 2016, they had a grand total of 2 5 star players on the roster. Clemson signed 39 ESPN top 300 players from 2012-2015. Miami signed 40 top 300 players in that timeframe. On paper Miami was recruiting nearly as well as Clemson up to 2016. Yet Clemson went to the playoffs multiple times and won a championship against an Alabama team that had FAR more 5 star recruits. Why did Clemson succeed where we failed despite us having more top 300 players? Because Clemson is better at finding players who fit their system and developing them. Our guys don't do much in college, yet get drafted and do well in the NFL.

 

[OriginalGatorHater]

From 2012-2019 Miami had more ESPN top 300 players than Clemson 4 times. Clemson had more ESPN top 300 players than Miami 5 times.

Miami had a smaller class than Clemson 4 times. Clemson is getting 5 stars now because they beat the **** out of Bama and are probably going to win the championship again. The 2019 Tigers are loaded because kids want to play for a winner. That wasn't the case in 2016. When they won in 2016, they had a grand total of 2 5 star players on the roster. Clemson signed 39 ESPN top 300 players from 2012-2015. Miami signed 40 top 300 players in that timeframe. On paper Miami was recruiting nearly as well as Clemson up to 2016. Yet Clemson went to the playoffs multiple times and won a championship against an Alabama team that had FAR more 5 star recruits. Why did Clemson succeed where we failed despite us having more top 300 players? Because Clemson is better at finding players who fit their system and developing them. Our guys don't do much in college, yet get drafted and do well in the NFL.

Wrong. Last years class was one of the worst classes Clemson has had in quite a while. They didn't "just start getting 5 stars after they pummeled Bama last year". That team that pounded out Alabama had the 4th most 5 stars in the nation on that team. Bama had 3 more 5 stars than Clemson, that is not "far more". That is the difference between Stanford(with 3 5 stars) and Oregon(with 0 5 stars). Every year Clemson won the national championship they had a much higher avg. recruit ranking on the team than Miami.

 

[Squid Bumciorek]

Wrong. Last years class was one of the worst classes Clemson has had in quite a while. They didn't "just start getting 5 stars after they pummeled Bama last year". That team that pounded out Alabama had the 4th most 5 stars in the nation on that team. Bama had 3 more 5 stars than Clemson, that is not "far more". That is the difference between Stanford(with 3 5 stars) and Oregon(with 0 5 stars). Every year Clemson won the national championship they had a much higher avg. recruit ranking on the team than Miami.

You are wrong. You seem to think that Clemson has been some kind of recruiting juggernaut since the beginning of the century. Not even close to true. Miami and Clemson were about even in terms of overall recruiting (# of ESPN top 300 players) in the Al Golden era. In 2016 Clemson was not "loaded" with 5 stars. I believe they had three 5 stars in total- a CB, OT, and DE. No 5 stars in 2017. Then in 2018 they got an insane haul, landing three 5 stars. Now they are going to sign an absurd number. That's what happens when you win multiple championships and send 1st rounders to the NFL. But the 2016 championship which set this run up was not built on 5 stars. It was mostly 3 and 4 stars, which Miami had almost the same amount of. Even with the boost from playing in the championship game in 2015, Miami and Clemson had the same number of ESPN top 300 players (50) up through the 2016 recruiting class. Dabo's skill is similar to what made Butch so successful- he's really good at identifying talent that is a perfect fit for his program.

 

[OriginalGatorHater]

You are wrong. You seem to think that Clemson has been some kind of recruiting juggernaut since the beginning of the century. Not even close to true. Miami and Clemson were about even in terms of overall recruiting (# of ESPN top 300 players) in the Al Golden era. In 2016 Clemson was not "loaded" with 5 stars. I believe they had three 5 stars in total- a CB, OT, and DE. No 5 stars in 2017. Then in 2018 they got an insane haul, landing three 5 stars. Now they are going to sign an absurd number. That's what happens when you win multiple championships and send 1st rounders to the NFL. But the 2016 championship which set this run up was not built on 5 stars. It was mostly 3 and 4 stars, which Miami had almost the same amount of. Even with the boost from playing in the championship game in 2015, Miami and Clemson had the same number of ESPN top 300 players (50) up through the 2016 recruiting class. Dabo's skill is similar to what made Butch so successful- he's really good at identifying talent that is a perfect fit for his program.

Why the **** would I care about them in the beginning of the century? They sucked then.

Dabo is not like Butch. What part of "4th most 5 stars in the nation" are you not understanding? Even in 2016 they were still top 10 average recruit ranking and close to top 5. Miami and Clemson may have had the same number of top 300 players, but Clemsons were ranked MUCH higher than Miamis. Clemsons average recruit ranking that year was about 2.5 percent higher than Miamis. To put it in perspective, Texas Tech was 2.7% lower than Miamis.

 

[Squid Bumciorek]

Why the **** would I care about them in the beginning of the century? They sucked then.

Dabo is not like Butch. What part of "4th most 5 stars in the nation" are you not understanding? Even in 2016 they were still top 10 average recruit ranking and close to top 5. Miami and Clemson may have had the same number of top 300 players, but Clemsons were ranked MUCH higher than Miamis. Clemsons average recruit ranking that year was about 2.5 percent higher than Miamis. To put it in perspective, Texas Tech was 2.7% lower than Miamis.

You are cherry picking to support a losing argument. The 2.5% better in 2016 is an irrelevant number. First it says nothing about 2012-2015. Second, if Clemson gets 1 recruit with a 98 rating and Miami gets 2 recruits with a 96 rating, they are 2% "better." I'd rather have the two 96s. And you honestly think that 2.5% better recruiting is the difference between winning a national championship and going 8-5? If you believe that, then it would appear that you dont understand player evaluation. The only thing the Texas Tech number shows is that they are also bad at player eval and development. Players slide up and down the ESPN top 300 rankings all the time. A guy leaning Clemson might be ranked 60th, our guy is 55th. Then Al Bundy Jr scores 4 TDs in a game and commits to Clemson and suddenly he is ranked 30th. It doesnt mean he is that much better.

Because the evals are subjective and players bounce around the top 300 based on where they commit and game to game performance, the better metric of a good class is the raw number of top 300 players. Clemson might get 10 recruits ranked 190-200 in the ESPN rankings, Miami might get 10 ranked 220-230. No person who understands recruiting would say Clemson blew Miami away because all their top 300 are higher. Its basically a wash due to variability. Fact is that from 2012-2016 Miami and Clemson had the exact same number of top 300 recruits. Our best season was 9-4. They made the playoffs multiple times and won a championship.

Also, are you claiming Clemson had the 4th most 5 stars when they played in the national championship game in 2014? They were in a four way tied for 8th overall (according to 24/7 they had 4 5 stars, 29 4 stars, and 37 3 stars). Miami was not far behind in a 5 way tie for 10th overall (2 5 stars, 24 4 stars, 45 3 stars). The small variation does not explain the discrepancy between a 9 win season and playing in the national championship- especially when you see the positions their 5 stars played (Watson was not a 4 star).

Of course Clemson separated themselves now and 5 stars are knocking on their door- winning multiple championships tends to do that. What I'm interested in is how Clemson got to where they are. When they won in 2015, they had the same number of top 300 players as Miami. That is a fact.

 

[OriginalGatorHater]

You are cherry picking to support a losing argument. The 2.5% better in 2016 is an irrelevant number. First it says nothing about 2012-2015. Second, if Clemson gets 1 recruit with a 98 rating and Miami gets 2 recruits with a 96 rating, they are 2% "better." I'd rather have the two 96s. And you honestly think that 2.5% better recruiting is the difference between winning a national championship and going 8-5? If you believe that, then it would appear that you dont understand player evaluation. The only thing the Texas Tech number shows is that they are also bad at player eval and development. Players slide up and down the ESPN top 300 rankings all the time. A guy leaning Clemson might be ranked 60th, our guy is 55th. Then Al Bundy Jr scores 4 TDs in a game and commits to Clemson and suddenly he is ranked 30th. It doesnt mean he is that much better.

Because the evals are subjective and players bounce around the top 300 based on where they commit and game to game performance, the better metric of a good class is the raw number of top 300 players. Clemson might get 10 recruits ranked 190-200 in the ESPN rankings, Miami might get 10 ranked 220-230. No person who understands recruiting would say Clemson blew Miami away because all their top 300 are higher. Its basically a wash due to variability. Fact is that from 2012-2016 Miami and Clemson had the exact same number of top 300 recruits. Our best season was 9-4. They made the playoffs multiple times and won a championship.

Also, are you claiming Clemson had the 4th most 5 stars when they played in the national championship game in 2014? They were in a four way tied for 8th overall (according to 24/7 they had 4 5 stars, 29 4 stars, and 37 3 stars). Miami was not far behind in a 5 way tie for 10th overall (2 5 stars, 24 4 stars, 45 3 stars). The small variation does not explain the discrepancy between a 9 win season and playing in the national championship- especially when you see the positions their 5 stars played (Watson was not a 4 star).

Of course Clemson separated themselves now and 5 stars are knocking on their door- winning multiple championships tends to do that. What I'm interested in is how Clemson got to where they are. When they won in 2015, they had the same number of top 300 players as Miami. That is a fact.

How am I cherry picking? Recruiting classes don't really matter. What matters is how much talent is on the team at a given point in time. I am picking the years that Clemson won the NCs.

That is not how these percentages work. Its not like Clemson has half the amount of players as Miami.

No, I do not believe that, which is my entire point. Clemson and Bama are recruiting closely enough that you can't say "well Clemson doesn't recruit at a high level, yet they dominated Bama." Clemson has the 4th most 5 stars Bama. They were still very close, which is not what you were saying before.

No one cares about having the same number of top 300 players. That is a massive ******* range. What matters is 5 stars and the upper echelon top 300 players. Miami was getting a lot of guys in that lower tier, while Clemson was pulling guys who were much closer to 5 stars.

You are moving the goalposts now. Before you were saying "Clemson wasn't recruiting at an elite level and destroyed Bama". Then you went and said "2.5% difference is not much difference at all". Well Clemson was less than 2.5% difference than Bama last year, a lot less.