Wish we could have kept him. But at least this was resolved in time to use a scholarship on someone else.
Rod Byers, come on down.

A coach wouldn't "go through" an in-home visit to relay that info, per se.

Clemson went into that visit looking to shore up Pagan's public commitment to them. I don't know whether Pagan flat-out told Clemson coaches he was going to sign with Georgia, but by meeting's end, they apparently felt pursuing him was no longer worth their effort.

And they weren't going to keep their name in the ring, so to speak, just so that Pagan could put on the Georgia hat next Wednesday for a signing day "surprise."

If Pagan wasn't going to honor his commitment and, as I'm told, wasn't very forthcoming about his intentions, then Clemson didn't feel it owed it to him to play along.

floodcock,

Have to admit, I did a double-take at F/U.

It depends on how their in-home went with Dukes today. If Dukes gave them a strong indication he is headed elsewhere, then it could be as early as tonight (or, more likely, Friday).

If Clemson feels it's still in the game, they wait till a Dukes decision, which Tony Morrell reported could come as early as Monday.

I don't feel Dukes will drag coaching staffs out till a signing day announcement -- suspect Manning coach Robbie Briggs wouldn't allow that to happen, if nothing else -- so I would think Clemson could move on Tuesday at the latest, should all that unfold.

Follow up man..... follow up!

I sure would like to see Clemson offer Byers. Don't think he'll like being 3K miles away from his family just b/c he and Clowney don't get along.

Gut feeling is they will offer Byers. Just a matter of when.

Thinking out loud here, wouldn't you want to reduce the amount of time Oregon would have to put together a counter-pitch? That would be my strategy, while conversely not offering close enough to signing day that Byers felt pressured to make a decision that instant.

Or, do you reach out to him Friday night and pull him in for an 11th-hour official visit this weekend? ...

If we're truly his dream school then maybe it won't matter. But I'm with you. We need to get him on campus ASAP.

Slingle,

In the interest of peacekeeping, I think Brooster was saying Clemson cannot complain if those players (Clowney, Dukes, etc) become Gamecocks because Clemson is already signing an inordinate number of 5-star guys.

That's how I read it, at least, although I can see how it might be interpreted differently.

Maybe it's just me, but I think there is, or should be, a difference in ...

A. "Pulling" an offer late from a kid who you don't believe is worth the scholarship, but you took him early based on a missed evaluation.
B. "Pulling" an offer from a kid who publicly says he's committed to you but is not being forthright in his intentions, jerking you around and/or using you for leverage or signing day entertainment value.
C. "Pulling" an offer, for hypothetical example, from Jadeveon Clowney when you have no shot to get him.

To some degree, it's great business for folks like me when kids play the game and stretch their recruitment out till the end. But if I'm a coach, all I'm hunting for is the truth. And if a kid is lying to me, where's the impetus to be kind/patient and let him have his moment? In these two instances, I actually find Clemson's actions sorta refreshing.

Speaking generally and not about this instance, you hear a lot of stuff in this business.

It would be unethical and unfair to divulge a lot of it without having concrete evidence to support it. After all, anytime Team A loses a recruit it thinks it has to Team B, don't fans for Team A immediately believe Team B is cheating/done something sketchy to land said recruit? Certainly sour grapes fuels plenty of unsubstantiated rumor.

Which isn't to insinuate these actions don't occur. But without proof -- and it's not as if reporters, much less the NCAA, can subpoena the necessary info -- it would be reckless to spread even anonymously sourced accusations (that would automatically be assumed true by the public).