Search results

Nope, those numbers reflect the ranking of every scholarship player on each team's roster.

Average ranking per player on each team's roster: Bama - 92.56 Clemson - 90.23 Miami - 88.17 Clemson is actually closer to Miami in talent than they are to Bama.

You aren't keeping up with what is going on in this thread. I recommend that you just stay on the sideline.

LOL...so Clemson has nearly a full class left over and you want to say that's not meaningful, and I'm sure a bunch more of those guys are in the 2 deep and therefore significant contributors. So, I'm proven right yet again.

What are those comparable numbers for Clemson? How many are in the 2 deep as well?

It's much more reflective of the roster than just looking at 2016 to 2018. I suspect that number is higher for Clemson.

It's clear that you are incapable of picking up on the point of this thread.

Go look at Clemson's classes over the last 8 years. They didn't just start recruiting at a higher level over night. It took years of success on the field, which was the result of evaluation, coaching, scheming and play calling.

You've missed the point of the thread, which is that we don't have to sign all the 4 stars and 5 stars to build what Clemson has built.

Why are you just limiting your comparison to 2016 to 2018? I suspect it's because that makes your numbers look better. How about you look over the 2014 to 2018 period, since that is actually more reflective of who would actually be on either team.

Clemson doesn't recruit at the same star level. If you actually read through the thread, you will see the clear evidence of this.

I think 44-16 was the result of better talent evaluation, better coaching, and better scheme and play calling. Bama has more talent on paper, and that is an undeniable fact.

Nope, you still missed the point. The point is that Alabama has recruited more talent on paper than Clemson. A lot more. In fact the gap between Bama's recruiting and Clemson's recruiting is actually bigger than the gap between Clemson's recruiting and Miami's recruiting. HOWEVER, I believe...

You have completely missed the point of the post.

I'm talking talent on paper vs. actual talent. Bama clearly has more talent on paper, but Clemson has done a better job of evaluating and coaching, which has resulted in probably better actual talent or at least comparable.

Again, I'm looking at sheer talent on paper (i.e., based on recruit rankings). There is a significant gap. Now, if we just look at talent on the field (i.e., based on actual performance), I think there is less of a gap. I'm attributing that difference between the two views to superior evaluation...

If you look up and down the starting line up, Bama has more talent overall and the difference is significant. Same applies to the 2 deep.

Boom! AND, this actually shows that Clemson is closer to Miami in talent level than they are to Bama.

Check the recruiting rankings bro.

LOL...so you went and looked at 2 years to support your point? LMAO! You're an idot, bud. Going back to the 2014 class, which would be reflective of the entire roster, Clemson only had a higher average recruit ranking than Bama in 1 of those years, which was 2018 (the class that would have been...