2011 Clemson vs. Georgia Tech Depth Chart Recruited Talent Analysis
Clemson travels to Hotlanta to face Coastal foe Georgia Tech on Saturday night. We'll see how this squad's recruited talent compares to our Clemson Tigers. Before we get into the analysis, I'll point out that I have taken the depth charts for both teams DIRECTLY from the Clemson website (www.clemsontigers.com). A pdf version of this can be found here. I will go ahead and tell you that because of injuries and Monday depth chart adjustments, some items here may end up a little out of place come gametime. I won't try to interpret or guess. In an effort to maintain consistency, I'll use both teams' depth charts as presented on the official Clemson Athletics website.
We should not have to tell you this, but some folks debate what to take from these articles. We expect you, the reader, to form an opinion of your own. Often we will give you our take on things, but you should independently form your own thoughts based on information out there. This article shows recruiting data for the depth chart roster as referenced above. It does not weigh experience nor does it evaluate coaching, preparation, etc... We think this is an interesting and valuable tool that is useful in overall program evaluation because there is a link between these star ratings and other metrics in both college football and the NFL.
Keep in mind as you look through this data that only players who were officially signed were given a "Star Rating". Players who were not signed could not be quantitatively assessed a recruiting rating. Such players get a "NA" rating and were not included in the averaged data. Again, all data was attained from www.Scout.com and www.Rivals.com. Players whose Scout/Rivals data was not available but were signed were assigned a "NR". We picked carefully through the data and believe all is correct. However, if we've overlooked an item we apologize in advance and ask that you point it out so that we can make the correction in our database.
Figure 1 and Table I both show an average of offensive players, defensive players, and specialist listed on the two-deep roster. Tables II through IV show the two-deep roster used for analysis along with the recruiting ratings for each player on the depth chart.
Again, Clemson has better RECRUITED talent than its opponent. The Tigers are over 3/4 of a star better on average on offense, over a quarter star on average better on defense, and 0.6 stars on average better overall, including CU crushing the Jackets on Special Teams. If games were played on paper, you would say that the Tigers would have a decided advantage based solely on recruited talent alone.
| Team | Recruiting Service | Offense | Defense | Specialists | Overall Average |
| Clemson | Scout | 3.46 | 3.25 | 3.71 | 3.40 |
| Rivals | 3.62 | 3.29 | 3.29 | 3.44 | |
| Average | 3.54 | 3.27 | 3.50 | 3.42 | |
| Georgia Tech | Scout | 2.90 | 3.00 | 2.00 | 2.82 |
| Rivals | 2.86 | 3.00 | 2.14 | 2.82 | |
| Average | 2.88 | 3.00 | 2.07 | 2.82 |
| Clemson Offense | Georgia Tech Offense | |||||||||||||||
| Pos. | # | Player | Hgt | Wgt | Cl. | Scout | Rivals | Pos. | # | Player | Hgt | Wgt | Cl. | Scout | Rivals | |
| LT | 79 | PHILLIP PRICE | 6-5 | 315 | *Sr. | NA | NA | LT | 64 | RAY BENO | 6-2 | 290 | *So. | 2 | 3 | |
| 63 | Brandon Thomas | 6-3 | 300 | *So. | 4 | 4 | 57 | Catlin Alford | 6-3 | 295 | *Fr. | 3 | 3 | |||
| LG | 63 | BRANDON THOMAS | 6-3 | 300 | *So. | 4 | 4 | LG | 52 | WILL JACKSON | 6-3 | 285 | *So. | 3 | 3 | |
| 73 | David Smith | 6-5 | 310 | *Gr. | 3 | 3 | 70 | Shaq Mason | 6-1 | 295 | Fr. | 3 | 3 | |||
| C | 55 | DALTON FREEMAN | 6-5 | 285 | *Jr. | 4 | 4 | C | 50 | JAY FINCH | 6-3 | 283 | *So. | 3 | 3 | |
| 62 | Mason Cloy | 6-3 | 310 | *Gr. | 3 | 3 | 76 | Nick McRae | 6-3 | 291 | *Jr. | 3 | 3 | |||
| RG | 74 | ANTOINE McCLAIN | 6-6 | 335 | Sr. | 4 | 4 | RG | 77 | OMOREGIE UZZI | 6-3 | 300 | *Jr. | 4 | 4 | |
| 62 | Mason Cloy | 6-3 | 310 | *Gr. | 3 | 3 | 71 | J.C. Lanier | 6-4 | 298 | *So. | 4 | 4 | |||
| RT | 72 | LANDON WALKER | 6-6 | 305 | *Gr. | 4 | 4 | RT | 61 | PHIL SMITH | 6-5 | 292 | *Jr. | 3 | 2 | |
| 70 | Gifford Timothy | 6-6 | 315 | *Fr. | 2 | 3 | or | 69 | TYLER KIDNEY | 6-2 | 262 | *So. | N/A | N/A | ||
| TE | 83 | DWAYNE ALLEN | 6-4 | 255 | *Jr. | 4 | 4 | WR | 5 | STEPHEN HILL | 6-5 | 206 | Jr. | 4 | 3 | |
| 80 | Brandon Ford | 6-4 | 235 | *Jr. | 3 | 4 | 80 | Daniel McKayhan | 6-0 | 198 | *Jr. | 2 | 2 | |||
| 86 | Sam Cooper | 6-4 | 240 | *Fr. | 2 | 2 | QB | 13 | TEVIN WASHINGTON | 6-0 | 205 | *Jr. | 3 | 2 | ||
| WR | 6 | DeANDRE HOPKINS | 6-1 | 200 | So. | 4 | 4 | 10 | Synjyn Days | 6-1 | 212 | *Fr. | 3 | 3 | ||
| 1 | Martavis Bryant | 6-5 | 205 | Fr. | 4 | 4 | AB | 17 | ORWIN SMITH | 6-0 | 202 | Jr. | 2 | 3 | ||
| QB | 10 | TAJH BOYD | 6-1 | 225 | *So. | 5 | 4 | 24 | Embry Peeples | 5-10 | 185 | Sr. | 3 | 3 | ||
| 8 | Cole Stoudt | 6-4 | 200 | Fr. | 3 | 3 | BB | 7 | DAVID SIMS | 6-0 | 218 | *So. | 3 | 3 | ||
| RB | 23 | ANDRE ELLINGTON | 5-10 | 190 | *Jr. | 4 | 4 | 27 | Preston Lyons | 6-0 | 211 | *Sr. | N/A | N/A | ||
| 22 | D.J. Howard | 5-11 | 195 | *Fr. | 3 | 3 | or | 21 | Charles Perkins | 6-0 | 219 | *Fr. | 3 | 3 | ||
| 5 | Mike Bellamy | 5-10 | 175 | Fr. | 4 | 5 | AB | 20 | RODDY JONES | 5-9 | 202 | *Sr. | 3 | 3 | ||
| 25 | Roderick McDowell | 5-9 | 190 | *So. | 3 | 4 | 9 | Tony Zenon | 5-8 | 182 | *Fr. | 2 | 2 | |||
| FB | 30 | CHAD DIEHL | 6-2 | 260 | *Sr. | 2 | 3 | WR | 84 | TYLER MELTON | 6-0 | 206 | Sr. | 2 | 2 | |
| WR | 18 | JARON BROWN | 6-2 | 200 | *Jr. | 3 | 3 | 81 | Jeff Greene | 6-4 | 200 | Fr. | 3 | 3 | ||
| 19 | Charone Peake | 6-3 | 205 | Fr. | 4 | 4 | ||||||||||
| 26 | Marquan Jones | 5-10 | 195 | Sr. | 3 | 4 | ||||||||||
| WR | 2 | SAMMY WATKINS | 6-1 | 200 | Fr. | 5 | 5 | |||||||||
| 13 | Adam Humphries | 6-0 | 190 | Fr. | 3 | 2 | ||||||||||
| Clemson Defense | Georgia Tech Defense | |||||||||||||||
| Pos. | # | Player | Hgt | Wgt | Cl. | Scout | Rivals | Pos. | # | Player | Hgt | Wgt | Cl. | Scout | Rivals | |
| DE | 97 | MALLICIAH GOODMAN | 6-4 | 280 | Jr. | 4 | 4 | OLB | 45 | JEREMIAH ATTAOCHU | 6-3 | 223 | So. | 3 | 3 | |
| 90 | Kourtnei Brown | 6-6 | 255 | *Gr. | 4 | 4 | 42 | Malcolm Munroe | 6-3 | 232 | *Jr. | 3 | 3 | |||
| NG | 98 | BRANDON THOMPSON | 6-2 | 310 | Sr. | 4 | 4 | DE | 92 | JASON PETERS | 6-4 | 270 | *Sr. | 4 | 4 | |
| 43 | Tyler Shatley | 6-3 | 295 | *So. | 3 | 3 | 93 | Emmanuel Dieke | 6-6 | 264 | *So. | 3 | 3 | |||
| DT | 94 | RENNIE MOORE | 6-3 | 265 | *Sr. | 3 | 3 | DT | 96 | LOGAN WALLS | 6-2 | 299 | *Sr. | 3 | 3 | |
| 99 | DeShawn Williams | 6-1 | 290 | Fr. | 3 | 3 | 90 | T.J. Barnes | 6-7 | 347 | *Jr. | 3 | 3 | |||
| BE | 40 | ANDRE BRANCH | 6-5 | 260 | *Sr. | 2 | 2 | DE | 94 | IZAAN CROSS | 6-4 | 292 | Jr. | 3 | 3 | |
| 93 | Corey Crawford | 6-5 | 280 | Fr. | 4 | 4 | 99 | Euclid Cummings | 6-4 | 270 | *So. | 3 | 3 | |||
| SLB | 34 | QUANDON CHRISTIAN | 6-2 | 220 | *So. | 3 | 3 | OLB | 34 | STEVEN SYLVESTER | 6-2 | 238 | Sr. | 3 | 3 | |
| 41 | Daniel Andrews | 5-11 | 205 | Sr. | 2 | 2 | 11 | Brandon Watts | 6-2 | 234 | *So. | 3 | 3 | |||
| MLB | 42 | CORICO HAWKINS | 5-11 | 230 | Jr. | 3 | 3 | ILB | 40 | JULIAN BURNETT | 5-10 | 220 | Jr. | 3 | 2 | |
| 12 | Stephone Anthony | 6-3 | 235 | Fr. | 5 | 5 | 54 | Quayshawn Nealy | 6-1 | 220 | *Fr. | 3 | 3 | |||
| 33 | Spencer Shuey | 6-3 | 250 | *So. | 3 | 3 | ILB | 54 | QUAYSHAWN NEALY | 6-1 | 220 | *Fr. | 3 | 3 | ||
| WLB | 46 | JONATHAN WILLARD | 6-2 | 220 | *Jr. | 3 | 4 | or | 30 | DANIEL DRUMMOND | 6-3 | 248 | *So. | 3 | 3 | |
| 8 | Justin Parker | 6-1 | 225 | So. | 3 | 4 | 58 | B.J. Machen | 6-1 | 232 | *Jr. | 3 | 3 | |||
| CB | 15 | COTY SENSABAUGH | 6-0 | 185 | *Gr. | 2 | 2 | LCB | 6 | ROD SWEETING | 6-0 | 184 | Jr. | 4 | 3 | |
| 17 | Bashaud Breeland | 6-0 | 185 | *Fr. | 4 | 3 | 36 | Jamal Golden | 6-0 | 185 | Fr. | 2 | 3 | |||
| SS | 5 | JONATHAN MEEKS | 6-1 | 210 | Jr. | 4 | 4 | LS | 1 | ISAIAH JOHNSON | 6-2 | 205 | So. | 3 | 3 | |
| 27 | Robert Smith | 5-11 | 210 | Fr. | 3 | 3 | 16 | Corey Dennis | 6-2 | 205 | Fr. | 2 | 3 | |||
| FS | 31 | RASHARD HALL | 6-1 | 210 | J*Gr. | 3 | 3 | RS | 28 | RASHAAD REID | 5-10 | 191 | Sr. | 3 | 2 | |
| 32 | Carlton Lewis | 6-2 | 205 | *Jr. | 3 | 3 | 14 | Jemea Thomas | 5-10 | 190 | *So. | 3 | 3 | |||
| CB | 29 | XAVIER BREWER | 5-11 | 190 | *Jr. | 4 | 3 | RCB | 8 | LOUIS YOUNG | 6-1 | 201 | So. | 4 | 4 | |
| 21 | Darius Robinson | 5-11 | 170 | So. | 3 | 4 | 35 | Michael Peterson | 5-11 | 190 | *Sr. | 2 | 3 | |||
| 14 | Martin Jenkins | 5-9 | 175 | So. | 3 | 3 | ||||||||||
| Clemson Specialists | Georgia Tech Specialists | |||||||||||||||
| Pos. | # | Player | Hgt | Wgt | Cl. | Scout | Rivals | Pos. | # | Player | Hgt | Wgt | Cl. | Scout | Rivals | |
| PK | 39 | CHANDLER CATANZARO | 6-2 | 200 | *So. | NA | NA | PK | 86 | JUSTIN MOORE | 5-10 | 171 | So. | 2 | 2 | |
| P | 96 | DAWSON ZIMMERMAN | 6-2 | 205 | Sr. | 3 | 2 | 44 | David Scully | 6-2 | 201 | *So. | N/A | N/A | ||
| KO | 96 | Dawson Zimmerman | 6-2 | 205 | *Sr. | 3 | 2 | P | 82 | SEAN POOLE | 6-1 | 161 | *So. | N/A | N/A | |
| or | 39 | Chandler Catanzaro | 6-2 | 200 | *So. | NA | NA | or | 85 | CHANDLER ANDERSON | 6-0 | 180 | *Sr. | N/A | N/A | |
| LS (PK) | 75 | Michael Sobeski | 6-2 | 195 | *Fr. | NA | NA | KO | 44 | David Scully | 6-2 | 201 | *So. | N/A | N/A | |
| 52 | Phillip Fajgenbaum | 6-0 | 220 | *Fr. | NA | NA | 86 | Justin Moore | 5-10 | 171 | So. | 2 | 2 | |||
| LS (P) | 52 | Phillip Fajgenbaum | 6-0 | 220 | *Fr. | NA | NA | LS | 55 | Sean Tobin | 6-3 | 220 | Fr. | 2 | 2 | |
| 75 | Michael Sobeski | 6-2 | 195 | *Fr. | NA | NA | H | 82 | Sean Poole | 6-1 | 161 | *So. | N/A | N/A | ||
| H | 96 | Dawson Zimmerman | 6-2 | 205 | *Sr. | 3 | 2 | PR | 37 | Zach Laskey | 6-1 | 201 | Fr. | 2 | 2 | |
| PR | 6 | DeAndre Hopkins | 6-1 | 200 | So. | 4 | 4 | 9 | Tony Zenon | 5-8 | 182 | *Fr. | 2 | 2 | ||
| 2 | Sammy Watkins | 6-1 | 200 | Fr. | 5 | 5 | KOR | 9 | Tony Zenon | 5-8 | 182 | *Fr. | 2 | 2 | ||
| KOR | 2 | Sammy Watkins | 6-1 | 200 | Fr. | 5 | 5 | or | 17 | Orwin Smith | 6-0 | 202 | Jr. | 2 | 3 | |
| 18 | Jaron Brown | 5-10 | 190 | *Jr. | 3 | 3 | ||||||||||
11 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
What kind of talent do we have red shirted on D this year?
Our Defense on paper is very underwhelming compared to our offense. This is not all that surprising considering the results on the field so far this year. How are we looking for people we have right now other than Blanks (jan. I think) and cortez davis?
Not many on defense redshirted this year...
Byers (DE), Maybank (DT), Goodson (LB), & Davis (DB). Dodd (DT) went to prep school after failing to qualify.
Maybank needed to get in better shape, hence the RS. Lots of opportunity at DT next year, with 2 starting spots opening. Maybank played his Senior year of HS as an OG, so he maybe a project…
Goodson should get solid PT on Special Teams. Davis should get a lot of reps in the spring and fall to see where he’s at.
by greenvandal on Oct 25, 2011 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions
The talent we have is inexperienced
so its too early to call on these guys. You have a true soph and a RS freshman splitting major PT at CB. A new SS and a one-legged FS. The backups at safety are underwhelming to put it mildly, but they are also young so I won’t be harsh.
I’m not happy with our DT/DE recruiting over the last 2 cycles, but we got the big one we needed this year with Watkins.
This was the legitimate knock against Paul Johnson
A lot of people claimed the Paul Johnson offense wouldn’t work at a BCS conference. I always thought that was crazy. If you can get the line to block well and a QB who knows what he’s doing, an option attack is a beautiful thing to watch. And I think it can still beffective in college football even if it has kind of gone out of style in recent years.
The legit question about Johnson, IMO, was whether he could recruit at an elite level. Recruiting at Navy and Georgia Southern just isn’t the same as in a BCS conference. And judging solely from sideline demeanor and his attitude in interviews (and I know that’s not a totally fair way to judge) I wonder if he’s got the personality for it. Like it or not, kids aren’t the same as they were 20 years ago.
Anyway, I guess time will tell, but if I were a Georgia Tech fan, I’d have some worries about the long term success of their recruiting. Go Tigers!
GT's option works at the FBS level, but not if the opponent has time to prepare or their defense out-talents you, in part because top recruits don't want to play in a (NFL-irrelevant) option offense.
PJ’s GT is 3-9 against FBS teams that had more than a consecutive week to prepare.
2008: 1-2. Beat UGA. Lost to UNC & spanked by LSU.
2009: 0-2. Lost to Miami & Iowa (GT’s 2 lowest yardage totals of the season.)
2010: 1-4. Beat suspension-decimated UNC. Lost to NCSU, VT, UGA, Air Force.
2011: 1-1. Beat NCSU (2 extra days). Lost to UVA (2 weeks. GT’s O scored only 2 TDs. D had a pick-6. 296 yds, 2nd lowest of season.)
-—————————————
It is worth noting that last season in the 2nd game, a bad Kansas team beat GT after reportedly spending the last few weeks of the summer preparing for the option. And in 2008, a lowly Wake took GT into OT just 2 weeks after facing Navy’s option attack. Prep time matters, a LOT.
One problem with GT’s option offense is that GT can never schedule an FBS opponent in week 1, and they are unlikely to ever beat a decent FBS opponent in a bowl game.
Our O out-stars their D, and our D out-stars their O both by about 0.5 stars.
But that GT option game is a talent differential minimizer, so they will move the ball and put up points. But I think Clemson out scores them. And I think that Clemson’s 1.43 star advantage on special teams is going to be an important factor.
Wofford runs the Triple
for around 20 plays a game I think, we also saw it a few times against MD. It’s just assignment football though. Having seen it will help, but how they prepare this week will be more important.
by PenthouseTiger on Oct 25, 2011 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought initially that it wouldnt, because the wingbone is different enough
but they did run the Veer and Counter option some in that game, and its a major part of GT’s system.
Hopefully we play better than last time at DE.
I think discipline trumps talent when facing GT.
We are more talented, but if a talented guy does not play his assignment, then he can get burned just as badly as anyone else.
"Clemson is coming!" - Stephone Anthony
by Tigerplowboy on Oct 25, 2011 5:10 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
And its true for any offensive system you face.
Folks think assignment football is easier, but in fact all defense is assignment football.
Tech’s system adds misdirection the same as ours to confuse those key reads but they do it with backs, and we with receivers in a shotgun set.
Disciplined defense is disciplined defense, no matter what system they’re facing, if you play your assignment you’ll be a good defense.

by 
















