How many more recruits can we sign in 2014?

[Carolinafan8908]

I know we are still on probation, and we currently have 17 commitments in this years recruiting class. How many more can we sign?

[cockybreeyan]

I think the magic number was 22.

[Danmcc3]

Originally Posted by cockybreeyan

I think the magic number was 22.

If we had started early we could have got 40 like tennessee

[Red Devil]

Not even in the top 25. Not good.

[Gamecocks1137]

Originally Posted by Red Devil

Not even in the top 25. Not good.

You can't really go by those rankings. We have some very good and needed players in this class.

[FlorenceCock]

Originally Posted by Red Devil

Not even in the top 25. Not good.

We most certainly are in the top 25 but it isn't like that matters anyway.

[beak2]

Just looked at rivals rankings and we are now at #23. Not higher because of lack on numbers only, IMO.

[4gamecockfb]

We are top 20 on other sites. Real good class already that has the potential to get a lot better.

[lfowens]

Recruiting is overrated but the ratings are over-rated. If recruiting rankings MADE a team, then Texas, Notre Dame, Florida, and Michigan would be in the top 10 every year but as you see they are not. Please don't get me wrong, recruiting is important, but it is more important to get what you need than to get the highest rated players. Truth is that less than half of players that get scholarships are on the team 3 years later. Coaching and development is the large X factor, and that is what is playing in our favor right now. Our recruiting is very solid again this year and we will get good quality players that fill our needs that we will coach and develop....Go Cocks!

[CarolinaGnB521]

I just want to say that recruiting is important - and as much as we hate to admit it, the recruiting rankings are fairly accurate too. While they are bogus in the fact of not adequately ranking teams based on who they got instead of "what" (in terms of stars) they got, the National Champion of the past 8 years has finished in the top 10 in recruiting (per Rivals) at most 2 years before winning the Title. So obviously that has to mean something, right?

However, at the same time, three of the winningest programs the past 4 years (South Carolina, Stanford, Oregon) all have only been in the top 10 the past 10 years a total of 4 times.

[Lil Jerry_Seinfeld]

It looks like, at least on Rivals.com, class ranking is based on avg recruit rank and the total number of recruits. Our total number if recruits is low based on sanctions and having a young team. So this hurts our total points. If u rank us simply on our avg recruit rating, I think we r actually in the top 15. So this looks like a very good class it's just a small group based on this year's circumstances.

[Travelin]

Haven't they started ranking these classes a second time in the fall? That would make the most sense. One ranking at signing day and another ranking at the end of that years regular season. That would give a more accurate picture of the class that was brought in on NSD in February.

With injuries, grades, playing time, transfers and suspensions a recruiting class in February could look a lot better or worse by the time December rolls around.

[cockybreeyan]

Originally Posted by Lil Jerry_Seinfeld

It looks like, at least on Rivals.com, class ranking is based on avg recruit rank and the total number of recruits. Our total number if recruits is low based on sanctions and having a young team. So this hurts our total points. If u rank us simply on our avg recruit rating, I think we r actually in the top 15. So this looks like a very good class it's just a small group based on this year's circumstances.

Yep, Rivals bases is not subjective to class size for some reason. Never understood that one.

Originally Posted by Travelin

Haven't they started ranking these classes a second time in the fall? That would make the most sense. One ranking at signing day and another ranking at the end of that years regular season. That would give a more accurate picture of the class that was brought in on NSD in February.

With injuries, grades, playing time, transfers and suspensions a recruiting class in February could look a lot better or worse by the time December rolls around.

A few months ago, I believe Rivals re-ranked an older class (2009 maybe?) and we finished with the second-best class

[Travelin]

Originally Posted by Travelin

Haven't they started ranking these classes a second time in the fall? That would make the most sense. One ranking at signing day and another ranking at the end of that years regular season. That would give a more accurate picture of the class that was brought in on NSD in February.

With injuries, grades, playing time, transfers and suspensions a recruiting class in February could look a lot better or worse by the time December rolls around.

A few months ago, I believe Rivals re-ranked an older class (2009 maybe?) and we finished with the second-best class-Cockybreeyan

I suppose a ranking after four years is even better. Thanks for the info.

[TKE226]

ahhh the numbers game

[Acockolypse Now]

Originally Posted by Red Devil

Not even in the top 25. Not good.

Check out our commit list.

From top to bottom this is probably the deepest talented class we've ever had.

Ignore the rankings.

[eklypised]

We're 23rd on rivals last I looked

[CockOla]

Originally Posted by Danmcc3

If we had started early we could have got 40 like tennessee

40 more headaches for TN. 40 multiples of NCAA eyes and problems aka tutor gates, scandalous hostesses, and Lame Kiffin watchful eyes. Sit back and watch UT implode in 2015. Simply two words... Good riddance.

[Gamecocks321]

Dang, we were at #21 earlier today according to Rivals, now we're at #23?

Once NSD comes and goes, I think we'll finish around #15-#18.

[trapper82]

We are going to get 5 more.