Search results

The trouble is, you are using the irrelevant years where hardly any kids are even left on the roster which you can't or won't try to grasp.

You do realize, using your logic, we are thiiiiis close to Clemson. Last 3 years Clemson averaged the 11th ranked class Miami, 14th Because we signed more players But if you go by averages we are 2.55 lower We are so close guys!

You are missing a chromosome or two. This only proves that Clemson has comparable talent with more experience. 6 starters combined, 3 each, of the classes you want to use to support your absurd argument, played last night (one being a KICKER for Clemson). The majority of the rosters are from...

Clemson has 19. One doesn't count it's an extra kicker. 4 starters (missing one in the championship). So both teams had 3 starters (one of Clemson's being the **** kicker) in the championship from those 2 classes. You can look up the **** two deep. But the fact that Clemson had double the...

9 players on the current roster from 2014-2015, 6 not even starting, is more reflective of their current roster? Are you serious? Do me a favor and divide 9 by 85.

Alabama has 9 players total left from 2014-2015 and 3 starters. But sure that's actually reflective of who is playing. Christ man just walk away.

You do realize that from 2016 to 2018 Alabama's average is 92.74 and Clemson is 91.95? Thats your huge gap? Alabama's RANKING is hire because in that span they signed 25/29/22 compared to Clemson's 21/14/17. BAMA has high turnover and just because they signed 1,000 4 star DEs doesn't mean ****...

How is there a huge talent gap when Clemson recruits at the same star level as BAMA? Some of y'all really don't understand recruiting. BAMA makes top 3 yearly because they over sign and Clemson doesn't