In partnership with CBSSports.com
The place for Gamecock talk, news and information
The place for Gamecock football and recruiting talk, plus off-topic subjects.
The place for Gamecock basketball talk, news and information
The ultimate online destination for the latest scoop on Carolina's national power baseball program.
Everything from Gamecock Insider Tony Morrell, in case you missed it.
The place to read all past editions of Spurnotes
The best of the best
Buy and sell your Gamecock tickets here.
Feedback for TBS and 247Sports.
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Good article on ESPN on recruiting in the SEC. Gives the Gamecocks props for doing the best with the least and Florida the crown for doing the least with the most.
Is there a direct correlation to highly ranked signees and wins in the SEC? Well, you be the judge. Over the past four years (2009-12), Alabama and
My favorite line from the article:
"As the Head Ball Coach himself would say, somebody’s coaching ‘em up in Columbia."
C. Low named Tennessee, not Florida, as doing the least with the most:
"The school doing the least with the most over the last four years has been Tennessee. The Vols have signed 20 ESPN 150 prospects since 2009, which is tied for the fifth most in the SEC. However, the Vols are just 23-27 during that stretch (9-23 in the SEC) and have suffered through three straight losing seasons. "
Thanks for linking the article. I thought it was informative but raised more questions than answers. I think the numbers would be more meaningful if they broke down the players by position. For instance, the Vols signed a lot of top skill players but not many big uglies which may explain why their results have suffered (along with coaching changes, etc.).
ESPN,rather than look at their "Player rankings" , rationalizes that their "star" assigngements can't possibly be wrong. It's just some schools are able to coax better play out of their" lower" rated recruits.
Better coaching is a plus but identifying your own talent is key.
by that logic, wouldnt their "ranking misses" and lack of accuracy be proportional to all teams? are we saying they over or under value players for some teams but are more accurate for others?
the assumption i'd make looking at the article is how important coaching continuity is
This post was edited by BritBrant 17 months ago
The article only accounts for the top end of the classes. UT may have had more ESPN 150 players than we did, however, I would argue our classes top to bottom were better and I believe except for Lane's highly rated class we finished higher in the ratings every year.
Need to be showing to recruits.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports