Can we become Clemson light

[Dawgfan77]

Boring games but watching the clepsum game I was reminded that Clemson was founded as a carbon copy of MSU. So question can we become a Clemson light

[Ifyouonlyknew]

We moving to the ACC?

[msstate7]

We moving to the ACC?

And getting the best WRs in college football

[MetEdDawg]

No. Clemson got the perfect scenario. A weak conference with no challengers and the majority of the conference cares more about basketball than football.

To be honest, I think best case scenario for us over any decade of football is to average 8.5 wins. SEC is too cyclical where we are. If we took in 30-40 million dollars more in revenue per year and got in the top half of the conference in that regard I would alter my opinion. But until then we can only realistically expect to barely pass what Mullen did over his 9 years.

[HoopsDawg]

And getting the best WRs in college football

that's what we are lacking. the big time skill guys at WR. and of course Lawrence is a stud. Our Defense and O-line was on par with them this year.

[Dawgfan77]

We moving to the ACC?
I see your point but was thinking about our potential in the next 5 years

[Dawgfan77]

that's what we are lacking. the big time skill guys at WR. and of course Lawrence is a stud. Our Defense and O-line was on par with them this year.
Getting Torbor and hopefully Mingo with Heath next year we are gaining ground

[Ifyouonlyknew]

Getting Torbor and hopefully Mingo with Heath next year we are gaining ground

Compared to what Clemson has not really.

[Todd4State]

I think that what we need to do is keep winning 9 games a year. We have a staff that is much better at recruiting and that will add to our talent. Which means we will be able to compete even more with the top of the league. We need to keep ourselves in good shape for the time when Saban leaves. Then we will have an opportunity to have more 1998-1999 type seasons.

Looking ahead by 2021 we are going to have a lot more 4-5 star players throughout the lineup based on who we have on the team now and who has signed scholarship papers. And obviously I'm sure we will get even more. The difference is by 2021 we will have more 4 star players on offense than we do now.

[MetEdDawg]

Compared to what Clemson has not really.

But it's better than what we've done in the past. If we want to win a title we have to get significantly better at the offensive skill positions and OL. We could even afford to regress defensively from this year and still win a natty. But only if we recruit way better on offense.

Last offensive 5 star signed by MSU is who? Omarr? Until we sign a couple blue chip OL and WRs we aren't sniffing 10-11 wins on average per year. But that WR class next year plus Mingo, Torbor, Cross, and a few others gets us closer.

[Todd4State]

But it's better than what we've done in the past. If we want to win a title we have to get significantly better at the offensive skill positions and OL. We could even afford to regress defensively from this year and still win a natty. But only if we recruit way better on offense.

Last offensive 5 star signed by MSU is who? Until we sign a couple blue chip OL and WRs we aren't sniffing 9-10 wins on average per year. But that WR class next year plus Mingo and Torbor gets us closer.

I think the last 5 star guy we signed was Simmons. We definitely need to keep those rare 5 star players from Mississippi in state. We are still a developmental program but if we're developing our 4 star guys that's quite a bit different than developing a bunch of three star guys. Our ideal situation would be to have about 16-18 four star guys that are juniors and seniors and then 1-2 five star guys that can come in and contribute right away like Simmons and Chris Jones did. And then 5-6 3 star guys that were laughably underrated like Dantzler and Erroll Thompson.

[MetEdDawg]

I think the last 5 star guy we signed was Simmons. We definitely need to keep those rare 5 star players from Mississippi in state. We are still a developmental program but if we're developing our 4 star guys that's quite a bit different than developing a bunch of three star guys. Our ideal situation would be to have about 16-18 four star guys that are juniors and seniors and then 1-2 five star guys that can come in and contribute right away like Simmons and Chris Jones did. And then 5-6 3 star guys that were laughably underrated like Dantzler and Erroll Thompson.

Big thing is everyone you've mentioned is defensive. Offensively we just don't get blue chip guys. I think Cross is the highest rated offensive guy we've gotten in the last 15 years.

But what you said is right. We need some of our 3 stars to hit, but we have to have the majority of our 4 stars hit and need our 5 stars to do what Simmons and Jones did.

[Bully13]

No. Clemson got the perfect scenario. A weak conference with no challengers and the majority of the conference cares more about basketball than football.

To be honest, I think best case scenario for us over any decade of football is to average 8.5 wins. SEC is too cyclical where we are. If we took in 30-40 million dollars more in revenue per year and got in the top half of the conference in that regard I would alter my opinion. But until then we can only realistically expect to barely pass what Mullen did over his 9 years.

No

[Bully13]

Compared to what Clemson has not really.

No. Because I just feel like saying so.

[MetEdDawg]

No

I'm confused by this response. You saying my thoughts are incorrect?

[ShotgunDawg]

And getting the best WRs in college football

And moving to within 1.5 hours from Atlanta

[Jack Lambert]

We do play Bama every year. That's a start.

[RougeDawg]

And getting the best WRs in college football

You have repeated stated that WR talent does not matter. You have stated many times that Fitz would not be a better QB and have better QB statistics if we had 4+ star receivers instead of the 3 star guys we have. You have refuted that the top SEC QB?s would not have statistical drop off if given our receivers over their future NFL receivers.

So for the 28th time I?ll ask this simple question. Why are you worried about bringing in better WR talent, if you are he?ll bent on the idiotic thought process that better receivers would not have improved Fitz?s passing stats?

Will you pick one side of the argument? Probably not but I will keep asking you until an answer or admittance of being wrong is given.

[deadheaddawg]

hunter renfroew says yes

[msstate7]

You have repeated stated that WR talent does not matter. You have stated many times that Fitz would not be a better QB and have better QB statistics if we had 4+ star receivers instead of the 3 star guys we have. You have refuted that the top SEC QB?s would not have statistical drop off if given our receivers over their future NFL receivers.

So for the 28th time I?ll ask this simple question. Why are you worried about bringing in better WR talent, if you are he?ll bent on the idiotic thought process that better receivers would not have improved Fitz?s passing stats?

Will you pick one side of the argument? Probably not but I will keep asking you until an answer or admittance of being wrong is given.

Here's your DA quote that started this...


"Another Fitz bashing thread. Give Fitz the receivers if just about any other SEC team and he is right up there with anyoothee SEC qb. Our lack of receivers has more to do with his passing than he did. Why are some so dense on this subject."

https://www.elitedawgs.com/showthrea...rom-Notre-Dame

...
I've never said WRs don't matter. That's stupid. I have said repeatedly though that WRs aren't the only difference in fromm, Tua, and fitz's passing level. Here's their national ranking in passer rating...

Tua #2
Fromm #3
Fitz #86

Fitz passer rating by year...
2016 = 124.33 (9th in sec)
2017 = 117.55 (11th in sec)
2018 = 121.35 (13th in sec)

In 2016, fitz had his best WR. Fred Ross was coming off an all sec year with a 1000 yds receiving. It helped him... it bumped his passer rating almost 3 points from this season. To get to fromm, fitz would need a 54.5 point bump. To get to Tua, fitz would need an 80.9 point bump. If you think that's all WRs creating that difference, fine, but be a dumb homer all your life.

Now if you wanna compare rushing, fitz is head and shoulders better... not even close. You said passing though, and it's just nonsense.

I'm done with this argument...

[BrunswickDawg]

I'm done with this argument...

Does this mean you will quit talking about it in every tread when someone mentions QBs, WR, passer rating, Fitz, or the sport of football? Cause it's gotten tiresome over the past couple of days.

[msstate7]

Does this mean you will quit talking about it in every tread when someone mentions QBs, WR, passer rating, Fitz, or the sport of football? Cause it's gotten tiresome over the past couple of days.

The comparing fitz to the best qb passers in the country, yeah. It's dumb and only 1 person could possibly think it's true.

Wonder why you don't do these for rouge. He has started another thread on this same topic. He hasn't quit and all I've done is respond

[BrunswickDawg]

The comparing fitz to the best qb passers in the country, yeah. It's dumb and only 1 person could possibly think it's true.

Wonder why you don't do these for rouge. He has started another thread on this same topic. He hasn't quit and all I've done is respond
Because it's more fun poking at you than him.**

That, and I hadn't seen that thread.

[msstate7]

Because it's more fun poking at you than him.

Haha

[smootness]

Boring games but watching the clepsum game I was reminded that Clemson was founded as a carbon copy of MSU. So question can we become a Clemson light

Maybe. But we'd have to find the next Dabo. Good luck with that.

Anyone thinking we can do it because they did it and evaluates the program based on that is doomed to be miserable forever.

[Dawg-gone-dawgs]

Compared to what Clemson has not really.

I missed where he said instantly by saying gaining ground with Torbor, Heath and Mingo.....I read "can we BECOME Clemson light"