I don't like writing about recruiting. Never have and probably never will.
Part of this is because I'm just not sold on all the rankings. It seems to me they're two parts research, two parts guesswork, three parts alchemy and about eight parts hucksterism.
Yeah, most of his lists were good. But I thought his rankings of bearded women were way off.
The best reason, though, is still the one I gave last year.
And, for his money, C&F would rather have a five-star coach and three-star recruits than a three-star coach and five-star recruits. Mediocrity is a mindset that can be easily taught and even more easily learned.
That said, this is a blog that covers South Carolina sports, and particularly South Carolina football. So here we go.
The State sums it up thusly:
Steve Spurrier tried his best to keep the mood upbeat, but the South Carolina coach conceded that National Signing Day lacked some of last year's star power and accompanying giddiness. ...
USC was ranked No. 22 by Rivals.com and 35th by Scout.com. The disparity likely stemmed from how the country's two biggest recruiting sites viewed the Gamecocks' four-star prospects.
Rivals awarded four stars to six USC recruits, including four who signed with the Gamecocks previously: Fork Union (Va.) Military defensive backs Akeem Auguste and Antonio Allen, Fork Union tailback Eric Baker and Georgia Military defensive lineman Jarriel King. Scout had the Gamecocks with four four-star prospects. ...
[T]he Gamecocks enjoyed one signing day surprise when former Florida target Chaz Sutton, a defensive end from Savannah, picked USC.
The addition of Sutton, a four-star prospect who was dropped by the Gators because of academic concerns, pushed the Gamecocks into the top 25 in the Rivals poll. ...
But USC failed to keep the pace set instate by Clemson, which signed six of the top 10 South Carolina prospects, according to The State’s ranking. Chester athlete C.C. Whitlock was the only top-10 prospect in the state to sign with the Gamecocks.
Spurrier said most of Clemson’s instate signees committed last summer.
"I don't know if they grew up wanting to go to Clemson or what. We missed on a couple of the guys after the season was over," he said. "I don't think winning or losing the last game (vs. Clemson) mattered a whole bunch. Now losing all five of them may have mattered a little bit. But I think Clemson was going to get most of the guys they got regardless."
At least Spurrier's still taking a shot at Clemson.
One thing to remember is that in the sexier departments -- particularly QB and WR -- South Carolina either had THE SAVIOR OF THE PROGRAM signing last year or had several players signing. So there weren't going to be as many high-caliber recruits at those positions this year. These guys can count.
Well, most of them, anyway.
You do have to be concerned that the Gamecocks took a player who didn't meet Urban Meyer's (cough cough) rigorous standards. But you also can't be picky when you lost your last five games.
Meanwhile, I have to point out the signing of safety Jarrett Burns, out of my birthplace and longtime home town in Huntsville, Alabama.
Rocket City, represent!
The rankings mean little to me, except what they say about whether Spurrier's getting the players he wants. He seems to have had some trouble this year, which bothers me slightly.
But not very much.
Does the apparent drop-off in this year's recruiting class bother you?
Yes. You have to pull Top 10 every year to compete in the SEC East. (10 votes)
Yes, but what did you expect after five straight losses? (29 votes)
Maybe. Let's see how the new players work out. (10 votes)
No. The ratings are hocus-pocus anyway. (7 votes)
56 total votes