MSU heavy weight rank the football roster

[The Croom Diaries]

I polled a number of well-known MSU sports personalities from various corners of the internet. The criteria was to rank the 22 starters based on their confidence level on how they would perform against elite teams...then rank the backups 1-22 based on their confidence level on how they would perform if the starter when down to injury.

Here are the results: http://maroonandwhitenation.com/2014...otball-roster/

[War Machine Dawg]

Dammit, Croom, I totally forgot about doing this. WMD FAIL.

[Pollodawg]

Lists look about right. No major gripes. I would have put Damien a little higher on the backup list. He did start and play pretty well what turned out to be the biggest game of the year for us last season. His poise alone in the EB for being a true freshman should have gotten him in the top ten.

[The Croom Diaries]

Dammit, Croom, I totally forgot about doing this. WMD FAIL.

You and about 10 others, ha. It's cool - was took long enough to tally 11 people. If I had 20 my calculator would have burnt out.

[CadaverDawg]

Surprised to see Cox so low, and Flowers below Thomas. If I'm reading it right, that would mean the average of MSU writers ranks Thomas ahead of Flowers?

[Hypnodawg]

RG and RT seem like a consensus concern

[The Croom Diaries]

Surprised to see Cox so low, and Flowers below Thomas. If I'm reading it right, that would mean the average of MSU writers ranks Thomas ahead of Flowers?

Slightly, yes. They were very close on almost every ballot. More actually had Flowers ahead but a couple of them tilted the scales in Thomas' favor.

[blacklistedbully]

Gotta be honest. This list makes me a little uneasy. We are quite possibly about to field one of the best all-around teams we have had in decades, and at the same time the SEC West may be more open for the taking then ever before. We have a golden opportunity if this team comes together and develops a real chemistry, and a real, "team-first" approach.

IMO, lists like this are only going to make the few players at or near the top feel good, and has the potential to make players farther down the list resentful or jealous. While it's easy to say our players shouldn't or won;t take much notice of what we say or print, I'm not so sure that's true in this day & age of immediate and easy access. And these are young kids who probably do actually give a damn what the public's perception is of them, especially their own fans.

Count me as one who is not wild about publishing any article that paints so many of our players in a relatively negative light. (And yes, being lower on the list IS a RELATIVELY negative thing, like being one of the last kids picked at a football pick-up game.)

ETA - Just to be clear, I generally like your stuff CroomD, just not this one, even though I find it interesting, Just don't like even the possibility it could make some of our players feel slighted in a time we really want them focused and hungry to kick ass as a team.

[Coach34]

my ballot:

ok- here we go:


1. McKinney
2. Chris Jones
3. Dakota Prescott
4. Matt Wells
5. Taveze Calhoun
6. Bennie Brown
7. Preston Smith
8. Josh Robinson
9. Jamerson Love
10. DeRunnya Wilson
11. Justin Cox
12. Jameon Lewis
13. Dillon Day
14. Malcolm Johnson
15. Justin Malone
16. PJ Jones
17. Blaine Clausell
18. Ryan Brown
19. Robert Johnson
20. Jamal Clayborn (maybe too low but couldnt put him anywhere higher)
21. Jay Hughes (provided he is healthy)
22. Ben Beckwith

[Schultzy]

Saw Gabe Myles on the list. He's gonna break some long touchdowns this year. My top five are Chris Jones, McKinney, Matthew Wells, Dak and Josh Robinson.

So fired up to watch JRob be the starter this year, so under rated.

[The Croom Diaries]

Gotta be honest. This list makes me a little uneasy. We are quite possibly about to field one of the best all-around teams we have had in decades, and at the same time the SEC West may be more open for the taking then ever before. We have a golden opportunity if this team comes together and develops a real chemistry, and a real, "team-first" approach.

IMO, lists like this are only going to make the few players at or near the top feel good, and has the potential to make players farther down the list resentful or jealous.

The way I see it is that if you're going to get your feelings hurt by something like this than you aren't tough enough to play football. Call me old-school, a relic or what have you but I believe a man should man up and prove people wrong, not go hide in a corner and cry.

Lots of things like this in my life motivate me. I am the type that takes criticism and makes it a chip on my shoulder. I think our football players are the same way. I don't think they will clam up and be jealous of others. If that's their response then best to know that now because they aren't going to be monsters on the football field.

[smootness]

Gotta be honest. This list makes me a little uneasy. We are quite possibly about to field one of the best all-around teams we have had in decades, and at the same time the SEC West may be more open for the taking then ever before. We have a golden opportunity if this team comes together and develops a real chemistry, and a real, "team-first" approach.

IMO, lists like this are only going to make the few players at or near the top feel good, and has the potential to make players farther down the list resentful or jealous. While it's easy to say our players shouldn't or won;t take much notice of what we say or print, I'm not so sure that's true in this day & age of immediate and easy access. And these are young kids who probably do actually give a damn what the public's perception is of them, especially their own fans.

Count me as one who is not wild about publishing any article that paints so many of our players in a relatively negative light. (And yes, being lower on the list IS a RELATIVELY negative thing, like being one of the last kids picked at a football pick-up game.)

ETA - Just to be clear, I generally like your stuff CroomD, just not this one, even though I find it interesting, Just don't like even the possibility it could make some of our players feel slighted in a time we really want them focused and hungry to kick ass as a team.

I couldn't agree more. To me, the only positive from it is that a State fan will read it and go, 'Hmmm, ok'. But the potential negative is that the players see this, and I just don't see any good coming from that.

It's not about them being jealous of each other, it's about them seeing State fans rank them low on the totem pole. I just don't see how that could be a positive thing.

[WinningIsRelentless]

Surprised to see Nelson Adams didn't make the list. Really underrated player and very consistent.

[The Croom Diaries]

I couldn't agree more. To me, the only positive from it is that a State fan will read it and go, 'Hmmm, ok'. But the potential negative is that the players see this, and I just don't see any good coming from that.

It's not about them being jealous of each other, it's about them seeing State fans rank them low on the totem pole. I just don't see how that could be a positive thing.

Gee, I wonder how these guys will feel when Mullen doesn't even put them on the field. When the man they know so well believes someone else on the team is better. That might put them on suicide watch...this is just fans and reporters they don't know.

My sunshine pumper 3000 hasn't come in yet. But when it does it will be trophies and pats on the back for everyone.*

[smootness]

Gee, I wonder how these guys will feel when Mullen doesn't even put them on the field. When the man they know so well believes someone else on the team is better. That might put them on suicide watch...this is just fans and reporters they don't know.

My sunshine pumper 3000 hasn't come in yet. But when it does it will be trophies and pats on the back for everyone.*

It's just my opinion on it. I instantly had a negative reaction when I saw something about ranking our football roster.

Obviously some guys play and others don't. But the coaches don't sit there and individually rank players; that would be an awful idea.

Think about the way State fans, or fans of any school, react when they see a ranking involving their team. Even if we only think we are below one team we shouldn't be, we lash out at the person doing the rankings and try to discredit them. There's something about seeing a listed individual ranking, and then seeing yourself near the bottom, that automatically draws a negative reaction out of most people. I just don't know why we would want to put something out there with even the slight chance of producing this in our players. Do you think they're going to say, 'Oh, gosh, these fans are so funny', or do we honestly think most would say, 'Well, this is going to make me work even harder to prove to these fine folks what I can do!'?

The reality is, if someone sees a ranking made by their own fans and they're listed as one of the worst backups on the team, they're likely not going to like that and it probably won't make them have great thoughts about State or its fans. Again, that's just my opinion on it; just seems to be somewhat interesting as a best-case scenario and damaging to player morale as a worst-case scenario.

[WinningIsRelentless]

It's just my opinion on it. I instantly had a negative reaction when I saw something about ranking our football roster.

Obviously some guys play and others don't. But the coaches don't sit there and individually rank players; that would be an awful idea.

Think about the way State fans, or fans of any school, react when they see a ranking involving their team. Even if we only think we are below one team we shouldn't be, we lash out at the person doing the rankings and try to discredit them. There's something about seeing a listed individual ranking, and then seeing yourself near the bottom, that automatically draws a negative reaction out of most people. I just don't know why we would want to put something out there with even the slight chance of producing this in our players. Do you think they're going to say, 'Oh, gosh, these fans are so funny', or do we honestly think most would say, 'Well, this is going to make me work even harder to prove to these fine folks what I can do!'?

The reality is, if someone sees a ranking made by their own fans and they're listed as one of the worst backups on the team, they're likely not going to like that and it probably won't make them have great thoughts about State or its fans. Again, that's just my opinion on it; just seems to be somewhat interesting as a best-case scenario and damaging to player morale as a worst-case scenario.

They individually rank them starting in the recruiting process until they graduate by the form of a depth chart.

[preachermatt83]

They individually rank them starting in the recruiting process until they graduate by the form of a depth chart.

BOOOM!

[smootness]

They individually rank them starting in the recruiting process until they graduate by the form of a depth chart.

First, there's a clear difference between, 'You haven't earned starter status yet,' and, 'You're the 43rd best player on the team.'

Second, our coaches intentionally de-emphasize depth charts.

[WinningIsRelentless]

First, there's a clear difference between, 'You haven't earned starter status yet,' and, 'You're the 43rd best player on the team.'

Second, our coaches intentionally de-emphasize depth charts.

What about the guy who doesn't make the top two because that is all that is on the depth chart. And all the poll did was rank who those people thought we could most depend on. Just the same damn thing a depth chart does.

And honestly if this hurts them, then they aren't tough enough to play college football.

[The Croom Diaries]

First, there's a clear difference between, 'You haven't earned starter status yet,' and, 'You're the 43rd best player on the team.'

Second, our coaches intentionally de-emphasize depth charts.

This statement clearly shows that you did not read the post. Why you would want to comment on something you didn't read is beyond me.