forums

Manny basically has a one year window

Tony Perps said:
Stick to making homophobic comments about recruits
Click to expand...
I wondered how he would fit. That's no different then wondering why you started this thread.
Stop using defense mechanisms. You spent a whole thread trying to walk that dog back. Then tried to give everyone stats. Then got childish and added emoji's.
You're in your 50s I'm ashamed for you
 
Advertisement
The real concern is that without a major increase in spending, recruiting doesn’t usually get better. Clemson’s recruiting took off because they started spending like crazy.

Legit recruiting staffs come out of the gate like gang busters and put everybody else on notice. The whole, “first you win, then you recruit” is largely a myth that every fanbase that has no hope of recruiting, holds on to.

Ideally I would have like to have seen a better first year bump than what we are getting when projecting recruiting going forward. But the class isn’t over yet, so we will see.
 
Advertisement
OriginalGatorHater said:
Because I assumed you actually followed the chain of comments and had an understanding of the context. As opposed to just responding to a comment without understanding the context.

I will give you a brief synopsis.

Porsters are saying BCs don't matter and our class is elite even though it is 35% BCs.

Another poster said we need 50% BC ratio to win an NC. I chimed in that 50% BC ratio is the absolute minimum we should be shooting for and that in fact of the last 3 finalists the ratio was closer to 75% than 50%. The average of those 6 teams at the time of their NC game is about 70%.

As you pointed out Clemson 16 was an outlier in that they were only 55%, but that still is over 50% and most 55% BC teams are not going to win it unless you have a very elite QB like Clemson and are going against a very mediocre freshman QB like Bama had.

More importantly, Clemson has been stacking chips since then. Their ratio last year was about 65% and look at their current class. Filled with 5 stars.
If BCs didn't matter like some porsters said Clemson would continue "stacking the underated 3 stars" instead of immediately swapping to BCs when they had the chance to.

Also, look at how much more dominant the 18 Clemson team was with all the more BCs. That 55% BC team BARELY scraped past a freshman hurts with upperclassmen Deshaun Watson going against them.

They just blew out a Bama team with a great non freshman QB while using a rookie QB.
Click to expand...
Nah man. I read the whole thread. It's just that my honor could not abide allowing your, completely fabricated, 75% stat to go unchecked.

Even if all your numbers are completely correct - I'm treating them as such - simply calling 2016 Clemson an "outlier" isn't a respectable response (a whopping set of 4 data points isn't exactly an exhaustive sampling). Fact is they won a chip with 2 or 3 more blue chippers than the "required" 50%. And simply bringing up multiple "yeah, but"s doesn't change it. And - Using margin of victory in the national championship game to try and prove your point is quite a stretch. Did they win, or not? Who cares if 2018 Clemson was marginally better than 2016? Has no bearing on the conversation (other than as another point in your "moar stars is better" maxim - that no one is really arguing against).

To the star ratings point - what's do you mean by "had the chance to?" Did Dabo forget how to recruit last year? I mean, coming off a chip with the most dominant team of the last decade, you'd think he'd be able to pull any kid he wanted - and yet... >50 bcr. What happened? So Clemson was more bullish on about 6 or 7 guys than the rivals dudes - who do you trust more?
 
Tony Perps said:
So you agree with my thread
Click to expand...
No. Your thread stands for the premise that if Manny doesn’t kill it in his first year and load up on blue chip recruits he is doomed to fail like Folden and Shannon and the others. That’s not even close to what I’m saying. Manny only needs to have a good season and build on the buzz and momentum with the program that he’s already built.

He doesn’t need a roster laden with blue chippers to string together a couple good seasons (10 wins/Coastal/win a bowl game); he can do that easily with the roster he already has if he and the guys he hired are good solid coaches.

You’re neglecting the fact that a lot of our losing over the last 17 years is a direct result of horrible leadership at HC and some historically bad offensive and defensive coordinating. We didn’t lose to Puke because we didn’t have enough blue chippers.
 
This seems like a good moment to inform peeps that Manny is surreptitiously, insidiously creeping up on the recruiting scene. His work remaking the roster immediately was very good under the circumstances. He didn’t quit and added a juco OL over the summer, which was a depth need. Depth is critical to both competition, and ability to redshirt. The class he’s putting together for ‘20 will be good, perhaps very good, and address our needs. We should add a bunch of good OL, have a restocked DL, a good wr haul, and a qb who can compete early. Oh, also a 5* RB, a shot at a 5* TE, another 4* TE, good LB candidates....

If Enos delivers on offense, and I think he will, Manny is set up for a bang up ‘21 class.

Other things to notice: Manny is recruiting right over guys who committed. He ain’t resting. If guys take trips, they could lose their spot. Good.
 
Advertisement
Ajcane8 said:
Nah man. I read the whole thread. It's just that my honor could not abide allowing your, completely fabricated, 75% stat to go unchecked.

Even if all your numbers are completely correct - I'm treating them as such - simply calling 2016 Clemson an "outlier" isn't a respectable response (a whopping set of 4 data points isn't exactly an exhaustive sampling). Fact is they won a chip with 2 or 3 more blue chippers than the "required" 50%. And simply bringing up multiple "yeah, but"s doesn't change it. And - Using margin of victory in the national championship game to try and prove your point is quite a stretch. Did they win, or not? Who cares if 2018 Clemson was marginally better than 2016? Has no bearing on the conversation (other than as another point in your "moar stars is better" maxim - that no one is really arguing against).

To the star ratings point - what's do you mean by "had the chance to?" Did Dabo forget how to recruit last year? I mean, coming off a chip with the most dominant team of the last decade, you'd think he'd be able to pull any kid he wanted - and yet... >50 bcr. What happened? So Clemson was more bullish on about 6 or 7 guys than the rivals dudes - who do you trust more?
Click to expand...

Its not four data points its 6 data points. The 75% was not fabricated. If you actually read the comment properly you would have seen it was the average of those 6 teams.

Dabo is going to regret that trash class he picked up last year. Luckily for him he is making up for it this year.

You are the one arguing against it.
 
OriginalGatorHater said:
Its not four data points its 6 data points. The 75% was not fabricated. If you actually read the comment properly you would have seen it was the average of those 6 teams.

Dabo is going to regret that trash class he picked up last year. Luckily for him he is making up for it this year.

You are the one arguing against it.
Click to expand...
I've already asked forgiveness for being incapable of deciphering your original hieroglyphs. You seem unwilling to grant it - oh well.

I'm not though. I've made my point, clearly, multiple times. Never once did I say it's better to have 3*s. Never said the blue chip ratio isn't a valuable tool in evaluating rosters. I simply took exception to you fabricating your own entirely new blue chip ratio. And to the general malaise that permeates from the "MoAR sTArZ" crowd. Sue me for thinking us and our 48% bcr aren't as far away as some of you guys make it seem.

And - You really think clemson would take a "trash class" in a cycle where they won the title and could get any kid they wanted (as evidenced by their 2020 class). Maybe, just maybe, some of those Clemson 3*s were under/poorly rated. Maybe, just maybe, some of ours are too... Come on man, take that rivals teet oucha mouf.

And and - jesus christ, it's July. Maybe worry more about our 35% bcr in October or December or February. Right now, we're at 7bc, 13non - finish with 4 more bc's and only need to net 2 bumps to reach the mythical 50%. An entirely plausible outcome. I realize we'll never reach 75, because we suck and Manny can't recruit and enos is overrated and we should just fold the program and...
 
Ajcane8 said:
I've already asked forgiveness for being incapable of deciphering your original hieroglyphs. You seem unwilling to grant it - oh well.

I'm not though. I've made my point, clearly, multiple times. Never once did I say it's better to have 3*s. Never said the blue chip ratio isn't a valuable tool in evaluating rosters. I simply took exception to you fabricating your own entirely new blue chip ratio. And to the general malaise that permeates from the "MoAR sTArZ" crowd. Sue me for thinking us and our 48% bcr aren't as far away as some of you guys make it seem.

And - You really think clemson would take a "trash class" in a cycle where they won the title and could get any kid they wanted (as evidenced by their 2020 class). Maybe, just maybe, some of those Clemson 3*s were under/poorly rated. Maybe, just maybe, some of ours are too... Come on man, take that rivals teet oucha mouf.

And and - jesus christ, it's July. Maybe worry more about our 35% bcr in October or December or February. Right now, we're at 7bc, 13non - finish with 4 more bc's and only need to net 2 bumps to reach the mythical 50%. An entirely plausible outcome. I realize we'll never reach 75, because we suck and Manny can't recruit and enos is overrated and we should just fold the program and...
Click to expand...

It was plainly written.

Except I DIDN'T that is why I won't "grant it". Its because you keep bringing it up. I understand you misread it. That is fine, but you keep saying I fabricated the ratio, when I didn't.

Our 48% is fine. This current class is not fine.

Go read the Clemson forum. They were whiffing on kids left and right last year whining about UGA and Bama bags. Now they are back with a vengeance and UGA and Bama are whining about Clemsons bags. The entire Clemson forum knows their class last year was nothing special.

I never said Enos was overated. I never said Manny sucks. However, Manny can't recruit. That is a fact. Look at his LB recruiting under Richt.
 
Advertisement
Ethnicsands said:
This seems like a good moment to inform peeps that Manny is surreptitiously, insidiously creeping up on the recruiting scene. His work remaking the roster immediately was very good under the circumstances. He didn’t quit and added a juco OL over the summer, which was a depth need. Depth is critical to both competition, and ability to redshirt. The class he’s putting together for ‘20 will be good, perhaps very good, and address our needs. We should add a bunch of good OL, have a restocked DL, a good wr haul, and a qb who can compete early. Oh, also a 5* RB, a shot at a 5* TE, another 4* TE, good LB candidates....

If Enos delivers on offense, and I think he will, Manny is set up for a bang up ‘21 class.

Other things to notice: Manny is recruiting right over guys who committed. He ain’t resting. If guys take trips, they could lose their spot. Good.
Click to expand...
Manny immediately addressing our pressing needs through use of the portal is both the most proactive and clever thing done at Miami in nearly 20 years.
 
OriginalGatorHater said:
It was plainly written.

Except I DIDN'T that is why I won't "grant it". Its because you keep bringing it up. I understand you misread it. That is fine, but you keep saying I fabricated the ratio, when I didn't.

Our 48% is fine. This current class is not fine.

Go read the Clemson forum. They were whiffing on kids left and right last year whining about UGA and Bama bags. Now they are back with a vengeance and UGA and Bama are whining about Clemsons bags. The entire Clemson forum knows their class last year was nothing special.

I never said Enos was overated. I never said Manny sucks. However, Manny can't recruit. That is a fact. Look at his LB recruiting under Richt.
Click to expand...
Liar, liar, thoughst pants are ablaze.

Sure I mis-read it, the same way I constantly mis-read Cyrillic script.

Come on man - your sarcasm/syntax/hyperbole/metaphor knives seem to be a tad dull, so I am just assisting you the only way I can (by continuing to be the whetstone on which those knives are honed).

Honestly, I’m aware that I should stop (I know you won’t) - I just happen to enjoy tilting at this particular windmill.
 
Advertisement
Ethnicsands said:
Sadly, eating cereal with a spoon would also qualify as the most proactive and clever thing done at Miami in nearly 20 years.
Click to expand...

139312.webp
 
mossmadness said:
The real concern is that without a major increase in spending, recruiting doesn’t usually get better. Clemson’s recruiting took off because they started spending like crazy.

Legit recruiting staffs come out of the gate like gang busters and put everybody else on notice. The whole, “first you win, then you recruit” is largely a myth that every fanbase that has no hope of recruiting, holds on to.

Ideally I would have like to have seen a better first year bump than what we are getting when projecting recruiting going forward. But the class isn’t over yet, so we will see.
Click to expand...
It’s not sustainable. There WILL be another recession in the near future, and depending on how severe it is means that college spending in turn will have to take a haircut. Can Clemson continue to spend and spend and spend to kee Dabo, keep his staff, and maintain the most opulent facilities in that recession...while at the same time the general student body is taking out ever increasing loans just to attend? I’ve said this before...at some point in the near future it will become a substantial political issue when students who are taking out incredible debt to attend schools are given the barest amenities while the same schools spend lavishly on football and create palaces that only the athletes can attend. It’s not sustainable.

I could be wrong, but I actually think Miami would be better positioned if this happens than other colleges. We haven’t overspent or incurred heavy debt.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top