Holy Jesus- Engie put a beatdown on Patdog

[Coach34]

on SPS- talking about our lack of roster room and the smaller numbers we'll sign this Feb. He was totally outclassed

I know myself and some others put it to Patdog pretty severely last Spring during baseball season- but dayummmmm- reading it just made me picture something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_mChJtTAYA

[engie]

Yeah, I don't know why he approached that how he did... When he admitted to not knowing who the players were, it would have made sense to defer on that. Not like I have a problem with processing players or anything. We simply don't have that many left to process, at least not in the form of dead weight or busts.

I've been making a concerted effort to get people to see and realize this -- because I really think we're about to have to start losing a few "good players" that we're going to hate to see go -- OM fans are going to say Mullen is losing control of the program -- and our fans are going to mindlessly lap it up and adopt that viewpoint as their own without ever looking at the realities of our numbers right now. I'm trying to simply get ahead of that by showing people that practically all we've got left to lose are good players.

I initially thought it wouldn't be a problem to process out enough for a fairly full class this year, but my viewpoint actually reversed on this awhile back when I first looked at the roster to attempt to "make space" for 20+ in the incoming class...

[FISHDAWG]

Engie swings size 40 bat !!

[Coach34]

I've been making a concerted effort to get people to see and realize this -- because I really think we're about to have to start losing a few "good players" that we're going to hate to see go -- OM fans are going to say Mullen is losing control of the program -- and our fans are going to mindlessly lap it up and adopt that viewpoint as their own without ever looking at the realities of our numbers right now. I'm trying to simply get ahead of that by showing people that practically all we've got left to lose are good players..


This worries the hell out of me and I'm glad you are going ahead and getting it out there. Never too early to start educating to stem as much of the recruiting shit show as possible

[Esmerelda Villalobos]

Arguing with Engie is like arguing with a woman. You will not win.

[12five98]

I stopped reading patdog's posts when he said Steve Alford would be a terrible hire but Mike Davis would be good.

[MSUDawg4Life]

Meh.

I think they both had good points.

Engie is right in that we only have 7-8 guys that we could realistically lose.

Patdog is right in that many of the players that we're calling "quality depth" really aren't that great.

If we had a recruiting class of 10 5-stars and 15 4-stars, I guarantee you that we could find 15 guys to get rid of. However, the chance of us signing a class like that is slim to none. Thus, we're realistically left with Engie's scenario because, unless you're definitely replacing guys with better talent, it makes no sense to cut guys hoping freshmen will be better.

[Coach34]

Patdog said we were going to sign 25 players this Feb- he was wrong
Patdog said we signed 25 this past Feb- he was wrong
Patdog said- "Even some of the guys on the 2-deep will probably never make a significant contribution."- that's idiotic
Patdog said only 44 players contribute- which was also wrong

Pretty much every sentence he typed-Engie showed him he was wrong. When Patdog admits to not keeping up with it very much- but then trys to chime in like an expert- that is what happens

"Patdog is right in that many of the players that we're calling "quality depth" really aren't that great."

A) Quality depth doesnt mean "great"
B) Where would you say in particular our depth is weak?

I think people are going to be surprised at what Mullen is building

[MSUDawg4Life]

I never said all of Patdog's points were correct.

However, if we are able to find better players ... at any position ... we'll sign them and work everything out later. Believe that. Even up to signing 25 players in this class and having to "process" (as y'all call it) 15 players.

Now, as I said before, I do believe Engie is right in that we'll sign our typical class and 7-8 will work out in some way or another.

However, if we recruited a monster class, don't be foolish and think some of those lesser players you're calling "quality depth" wouldn't make room for better players. It would happen whether that makes you and Engie "right" or "wrong".

What really determines how many stay or go is if we can replace them with a better player. Period.

[mic]

When Patdog admits to not keeping up with it very much- but then trys to chime in like an expert-

This says all you need to know..

[MSUDawg4Life]

When Patdog admits to not keeping up with it very much- but then trys to chime in like an expert-

This says all you need to know..

Not necessarily.

That means he doesn't know the specifics. That doesn't mean he's not right in general.

If we get a very talented class, room will be made for them. That's the bottom line.

It might be difficult. It may be painful. But, it will be done.

If we found 25 Jadeveon Clowney's - players of that skill level - it'll be silly for you all to say we can't sign all 25 because Engie can't figure out how to make room for them. It's a silly argument. Room would be made at almost every school in this country.

Which means the true determinant in signing is the talent and skill of the new player vs. the talent and skill of the player currently on the roster. If the goal is to have the most talented roster possible so you can win as many games as possible ... this is why people hate Nick Saban. And why folks love him because he wins championships.

It's really not that hard fellas. I know folks have their cliques want to be "right", but that doesn't make your opponent automatically wrong. Sorry, it just doesn't.

[Political Hack]

when this class is broken down, this board will have a chance to uphold its name. I don't see many panicked posters here. I think some of the idiots that roam with the herd and the pack will meltdown. I expect civility and some understanding of the process to reign here.

[Coach34]

It's really not that hard fellas. I know folks have their cliques want to be "right", but that doesn't make your opponent automatically wrong. Sorry, it just doesn't.

It's not about any clique or anything like that. Hell, I've met Patdog in person and he is not a bad guy. But he is wrong

Now you can talk about signing 25 Clowney's all you want- but the reality of the situation is that the coaches are trying to project what a HS Junior will turn into (because usually 80% of your class is locked down before the play their Sr seasons whether they publically commit or not) vs what they already have in a 2nd year college player. And that is a very fine line- not a huge gap decision like it would be on a Clowney-type.

We have amassed some quality depth and the redshirting program is working- but it is also making the numbers thin- and the bottom line is that we are not going to sign 25 players this Feb- and probably not as many as 20

[MSUDawg4Life]

Surely you didn't think I literally meant 25 Clowney's. My point is simply when the coaches feel there is a gap in talent and ability, a decision will be made. Up to the class limit of 25.

All along, I've agreed that for most kids that we'll sign that gap won't be discernible and the class will end up like Engie said.

However, let's not forget that any school's ultimate goal is to end up with the best 85 that they can get on the roster. UCLA, Miami, Auburn, Troy, Tulane, Oklahoma ... it doesn't matter who the school is. They want the best 85. That's all I'm saying.

[I seen it dawg]

Oh my god make it stop.

[CadaverDawg]

Arguing with Engie is like arguing with a woman. You will not win.

I laughed. Whether you're right or wrong you never win an argument with ole eng

[engie]

The folly of your position is somehow assuming that we are going to sign 25 players BETTER than what we accumulated in the 4 previous classes even on the bottom end of the classes. You and Pat are dealing strictly in theoreticals while I'm dealing solely in reality...

Yes, we will ALWAYS make room for elite talent. We always have. However, it's ridiculous to think the bottom end of our classes are going to be better than the guys who have 2-3 years in our weight program and have actually seen the field in the SEC.

For your method to even be feasible, we would need to clean up 7-8 ELITE talents on signing day. Otherwise, as the elite guys come on board, they will bump members of their own signing class out instead of good players that have already earned their stripes for us.

[MSUDawg4Life]

The folly of your position is somehow assuming that we are going to sign 25 players BETTER than what we accumulated in the 4 previous classes even on the bottom end of the classes. You and Pat are dealing strictly in theoreticals while I'm dealing solely in reality...

Yes, we will ALWAYS make room for elite talent. We always have. However, it's ridiculous to think the bottom end of our classes are going to be better than the guys who have 2-3 years in our weight program and have actually seen the field in the SEC.

For your method to even be feasible, we would need to clean up 7-8 ELITE talents on signing day. Otherwise, as the elite guys come on board, they will bump members of their own signing class out instead of good players that have already earned their stripes for us.

And your folly is assuming that we cannot recruit 7-8 elite talents.

Otherwise, we agree.

I'll even agree that it's not likely that we recruit that many elite players. However, if we do, room will be made.

That's all.

[ScottyDawg]

I laughed. Whether you're right or wrong you never win an argument with ole eng

Lol ... go get'em eng don't let them do this to ya!

[CadaverDawg]

Lol ... go get'em eng don't let them do this to ya!

That's why I like being on Engie's side....you avoid a lot of typing and grief! I feel for those that disagree with him a lot. He is ruthless and brings tons of stats and info to the table with him.

[Hump4Hoops]

That's why I like being on Engie's side....you avoid a lot of typing and grief! I feel for those that disagree with him a lot. He is ruthless and brings tons of stats and info to the table with him.

He's like the non retarded version of will james.

[ScottyDawg]

That's why I like being on Engie's side....you avoid a lot of typing and grief! I feel for those that disagree with him a lot. He is ruthless and brings tons of stats and info to the table with him.

100% agree, though I have to ask where does he keep all the stats & info he has. No one's brain holds this much information, that or he's the GOAT at googling. Haha.

[CadaverDawg]

100% agree, though I have to ask where does he keep all the stats & info he has. No one brains holds this much information, that or he's the GOAT at googling. Haha.

I think he just wants it more

[Coach34]

I think he just wants it more

good answer

[engie]

And your folly is assuming that we cannot recruit 7-8 elite talents.

Otherwise, we agree.

I'll even agree that it's not likely that we recruit that many elite players. However, if we do, room will be made.

That's all.

NOWHERE have I ever said or implied that we would ever turn away elite talents. Nor have i ever said we couldn't sign 7 or 8 of them. I've said the opposite multiple times in both of these very threads. To do what Patdog implied that we should we would have to sign TWENTY FIVE elite players -- because those 7-8 have spots already.

You looked at half of my statement while ignoring my point, which was in the other half. I NEVER said we couldn't recruit 7-8 elite talents or that we would turn them away. I simply said that the ONLY way the mass processing of the current roster ever becomes reality is for us to get all those elite guys at once ON signing day as we are accepting LOIs from others. Otherwise, the elite commitments simply "process" members of their own signing class that were lower on our board -- rather than actual players on our team. Thus, to "process" a bunch of players on the actual team, the worst member of the class must be better or have potential to be better than those players. Not. Happening. Not large-scale anyway.

[engie]

100% agree, though I have to ask where does he keep all the stats & info he has. No one's brain holds this much information, that or he's the GOAT at googling. Haha.

As I find or am linked to good online databases, I bookmark them and use them extensively. Almost all of my data comes from one of 8-10 places...

The reason I'm "good at arguing" is because I try to let stats and tangible information always define my actual positions on topics. That builds them on a solid foundation that is hard to go against even with valid opposing positions.

I can't tell you how often I "instinctively" disagree with stuff people write -- start to post my disagreement and the statistical foundation of it -- only to realize that the stats actually agree with the OP and my instinct was wrong. Happens literally all the time to me. Hence why the foundation of the disagreement is so important -- because without the extra effort, I would be "wrong" pretty often...