A few things Leach needs to do to be successful

[R2Dawg]

1. Recruit like MSU has in the past at minimum. Get top Mississippi kids especially on D. Get the top JUCO players. Go get some key transfers in the portal.

2. Keep Arnett for several years at least to get the D re-established as one of best in SEC to help #1. He isn't going to stay forever but at least get some momentum.

3. Mix the run with the air raid. We saw what that can do vs Mizzou. We must be able to run the ball - get a short first down, run some clock with a lead, open up the passing game, keep D guessing (not jumping passing crossing routes or long screens).

[KOdawg1]

Yep, yep, and yep.

[Jacksondevildog]

You missed the most important one:

4. Read EliteDawgs for more coaching strategy!

[HoopsDawg]

I haven't really seen it discussed but Mizzou really helped us out by playing some man to man. That was shocking.

[Homedawg]

I haven't really seen it discussed but Mizzou really helped us out by playing some man to man. That was shocking.

So did Auburn, so did Vandy, so did Bama.

[R2Dawg]

You missed the most important one:

4. Read EliteDawgs for more coaching strategy!

Ha, good one.

Long time Dawg fans and ED posters know a thing or two when you have followed the program, from Miss, etc. for 40-50 years.

Also nothing I said is different that the "experts" have said since so many will not listen to ED posters. I just happen to agree with the "experts" on this.

I'm no expert but I've seen what has worked when MSU has been successful. Also football ain't complicated when you simplify it down to key principals.

[Westdawg]

I'm of the mindset that Arnett is a bit of a different kind of guy than many in the profession. He was coached by Rocky Long at New Mexico - Rocky was at UNM for 10 years when Arnett played for him.
Rocky Long was at SanDiego State for a decade when Arnett came and joined him on staff.
What I'm saying is that Arnett has been around, coached by, and learned from a coach who had a great grasp of being at a place and building longevity and sustained success. On the the surface, at least, it seems that Arnett has been around these guys for years and truly enjoys being around them. I CAN tell you from experience that DCs love having full reign of their side of the ball and let them do what they feel needs to be done - and it does seem that Arnett found that in Leach - a HC that trusts him fully. That makes a huge difference for a lot of coaches.
He runs an unconventional defensive scheme and philosophy than a lot of ppl at the P5 level. There's not a lot of HCs that want to risk making that switch to a 3-3-5.

UNM doesn't win much, but if you look at that state, there's not much in terms of talent to win with within an 8+ hr drive for a P5/G5 program.
having coached in New Mexico, those coaches in the HS/college ranks are phenomenal talents because they do more with less. And they are very loyal.

[HoopsDawg]

So did Auburn, so did Vandy, so did Bama.

They played some man on the outside, zone in the middle. Mizzou actually played some full out man.

[Todd4State]

Leach simply needs to keep doing what he is doing.

We're on the same path currently as Texas Tech and Washington State.

Just keep bringing in the players that fit the system on both sides of the ball. So, we just need to finish recruiting this class well- especially in the secondary and win the bowl game.

Our run/pass ratio will settle in at 70/30 pass as our players master Leach's system.

[Todd4State]

So did Auburn, so did Vandy, so did Bama.

Didn't you hear? The three man rush always works against Leach?**

We started to beat the rush 3 drop 8 and teams were forced to try something else. Natural progression for Leach's system.

[Jacksondevildog]

Once our offensive line started protecting better, our offense started moving the ball more effectively. Obvious point here, but our WR talent has to improve drastically before we take the next step. We throw the ball more than anyone in the SEC, and maybe the nation, and we have bottom-3 WR talent in the conference. That will get better.

[ShotgunDawg]

I haven't really seen it discussed but Mizzou really helped us out by playing some man to man. That was shocking.

According to Matt Wyatt, Mizzou tried zone & we whacked them for a few big plays & then they went to man to man.

We've grown since early in the season. The 3-8 is no longer the answer to stopping this offense. In fact, the thing that's been most successful at stopping this offense since the UGA game is bullying our WR off the line, playing man to man, & getting a pass rush

[ShotgunDawg]

I'm of the mindset that Arnett is a bit of a different kind of guy than many in the profession. He was coached by Rocky Long at New Mexico - Rocky was at UNM for 10 years when Arnett played for him.
Rocky Long was at SanDiego State for a decade when Arnett came and joined him on staff.
What I'm saying is that Arnett has been around, coached by, and learned from a coach who had a great grasp of being at a place and building longevity and sustained success. On the the surface, at least, it seems that Arnett has been around these guys for years and truly enjoys being around them. I CAN tell you from experience that DCs love having full reign of their side of the ball and let them do what they feel needs to be done - and it does seem that Arnett found that in Leach - a HC that trusts him fully. That makes a huge difference for a lot of coaches.
He runs an unconventional defensive scheme and philosophy than a lot of ppl at the P5 level. There's not a lot of HCs that want to risk making that switch to a 3-3-5.

UNM doesn't win much, but if you look at that state, there's not much in terms of talent to win with within an 8+ hr drive for a P5/G5 program.
having coached in New Mexico, those coaches in the HS/college ranks are phenomenal talents because they do more with less. And they are very loyal.

This is true.

Rumor is that Jimmy Sexton came after Arnett recently & he told him to go kick rocks.

[Homedawg]

[QUOTE=HoopsDawg;1297633]They played some man on the outside, zone in the middle. Mizzou actually played some full out man.[/QUOTE

Auburn played man free and some cover 2 it w man under for 75% of the plays. Missouri did the same exact thing

[Homedawg]

According to Matt Wyatt, Mizzou tried zone & we whacked them for a few big plays & then they went to man to man.

We've grown since early in the season. The 3-8 is no longer the answer to stopping this offense. In fact, the thing that's been most successful at stopping this offense since the UGA game is bullying our WR off the line, playing man to man, & getting a pass rush

Missouri came into the game saying they played man and that's what they do. And they did. They didn't go zone until we whipped them in man. And we kept whipping them basically.

[Homedawg]

Didn't you hear? The three man rush always works against Leach?**

We started to beat the rush 3 drop 8 and teams were forced to try something else. Natural progression for Leach's system.

Yep. Started w candy who tried to zone us. Didn't work and they mixed the rest of the game. With that said, running it vs Missouri is the best thing we've done to help everything IMO.

[R2Dawg]

Leach simply needs to keep doing what he is doing.

We're on the same path currently as Texas Tech and Washington State.

Just keep bringing in the players that fit the system on both sides of the ball. So, we just need to finish recruiting this class well- especially in the secondary and win the bowl game.

Our run/pass ratio will settle in at 70/30 pass as our players master Leach's system.

To keep doing what you did 30 years ago is a recipe for failure in any field. He has never been in SEC. If he don't adapt a little he will not ultimately raise the bar any at MSU and likely lowers it.

As far as running the ball, MSU has known how to run the ball for decades. We don't have to learn the air raid to run the ball. He could have run the ball early in the year. j Actually would make sense to run it more if the excuse is we didn't have the players or had not learned the new O but we didn't do that. He had the SEC leading rusher on his team and we threw the ball all the the time.

[R2Dawg]

According to Matt Wyatt, Mizzou tried zone & we whacked them for a few big plays & then they went to man to man.

We've grown since early in the season. The 3-8 is no longer the answer to stopping this offense. In fact, the thing that's been most successful at stopping this offense since the UGA game is bullying our WR off the line, playing man to man, & getting a pass rush

Here we go again. Same thing after a half of UGA and the OleMiss game. We think we have solved something. Until we do it for a bunch of games in a row, we ain't proved nothing. Like Olemiss, I'm not convinced Mizzou is really any good.

[R2Dawg]

I'm of the mindset that Arnett is a bit of a different kind of guy than many in the profession. He was coached by Rocky Long at New Mexico - Rocky was at UNM for 10 years when Arnett played for him.
Rocky Long was at SanDiego State for a decade when Arnett came and joined him on staff.
What I'm saying is that Arnett has been around, coached by, and learned from a coach who had a great grasp of being at a place and building longevity and sustained success. On the the surface, at least, it seems that Arnett has been around these guys for years and truly enjoys being around them. I CAN tell you from experience that DCs love having full reign of their side of the ball and let them do what they feel needs to be done - and it does seem that Arnett found that in Leach - a HC that trusts him fully. That makes a huge difference for a lot of coaches.
He runs an unconventional defensive scheme and philosophy than a lot of ppl at the P5 level. There's not a lot of HCs that want to risk making that switch to a 3-3-5.

UNM doesn't win much, but if you look at that state, there's not much in terms of talent to win with within an 8+ hr drive for a P5/G5 program.
having coached in New Mexico, those coaches in the HS/college ranks are phenomenal talents because they do more with less. And they are very loyal.

I could see that being the way he is. I kinda like it as long as he is getting it done, which he is. The I'm out for me mindset is never good for the locker room or culture of any organization. You gotta have some foundation guys that are the bedrock of who you are. I like what Arnett brings.

[Homedawg]

Here we go again. Same thing after a half of UGA and the OleMiss game. We think we have solved something. Until we do it for a bunch of games in a row, we ain't proved nothing. Like Olemiss, I'm not convinced Mizzou is really any good.

Fact is, we need better players and better execution and better coaching to ever beat teams in the sec. it's unforgiving. We will never consistently beat the blue bloods we won't.

[chef dixon]

Arnett literally left Syracuse after 2 weeks. He got no problem leaving if the right opportunity comes.

[Todd4State]

Yep. Started w candy who tried to zone us. Didn't work and they mixed the rest of the game. With that said, running it vs Missouri is the best thing we've done to help everything IMO.

The biggest adjustment for us was with the offensive line. They were confused most of the year and I think our running backs took a big step forward against Missouri.


To keep doing what you did 30 years ago is a recipe for failure in any field. He has never been in SEC. If he don't adapt a little he will not ultimately raise the bar any at MSU and likely lowers it.

As far as running the ball, MSU has known how to run the ball for decades. We don't have to learn the air raid to run the ball. He could have run the ball early in the year. j Actually would make sense to run it more if the excuse is we didn't have the players or had not learned the new O but we didn't do that. He had the SEC leading rusher on his team and we threw the ball all the the time.

So far he has done everything that he has done at other stops and it has worked well there. I'm going to continue to side with him until it actually doesn't work after three years. He has earned that right from me as a fan because of his track record. Results don't always happen immediately. Especially when a coach picks up a team that is built completely the opposite of what Leach wants to do.

Read his book. And if you have read it again because you clearly don't understand the method behind his madness. He teaches his team the plays and forces them to master them. That only comes with reps. That also means that short term the results may not be pretty. It's a process approach but once the plays are mastered it looks a lot more like what we saw against Missouri.

We weren't running the ball because our offensive line was struggling badly. That's why our YPC pre-Missouri was abysmal. And Kylin wasn't helping us because he was tapping out after every carry. Not sure how much our line would have blocked for him after Kentucky anyway after the way he allegedly acted after the game. I think we're doing the right thing by not trying for another 6-7 type season so that we can have a potential 9-10 win season two-three years from now and then build from there.

[R2Dawg]

The biggest adjustment for us was with the offensive line. They were confused most of the year and I think our running backs took a big step forward against Missouri.



So far he has done everything that he has done at other stops and it has worked well there. I'm going to continue to side with him until it actually doesn't work after three years. He has earned that right from me as a fan because of his track record. Results don't always happen immediately. Especially when a coach picks up a team that is built completely the opposite of what Leach wants to do.

Read his book. And if you have read it again because you clearly don't understand the method behind his madness. He teaches his team the plays and forces them to master them. That only comes with reps. That also means that short term the results may not be pretty. It's a process approach but once the plays are mastered it looks a lot more like what we saw against Missouri.

We weren't running the ball because our offensive line was struggling badly. That's why our YPC pre-Missouri was abysmal. And Kylin wasn't helping us because he was tapping out after every carry. Not sure how much our line would have blocked for him after Kentucky anyway after the way he allegedly acted after the game. I think we're doing the right thing by not trying for another 6-7 type season so that we can have a potential 9-10 win season two-three years from now and then build from there.

I've said on many threads, I am willing to give Leach time but he didn't have to nuke our potential this year in my opinion. His very isolated success this year was by no means turning any corner as many have claimed.

Every coach preaches and practices repetition for execution excellence. Mullen, Saban, etc. That is nothing new, Leach didn't invent that. At the same time, any team that plays a perfect game is going to win. The key is not playing a perfect execution game and still winning because too many variables will ever let the stars line up too many times.

Well running the ball takes practice too and Leach obviously wasn't willing to invest in that pretty much all year and his track record says he is not going to invest much in running but my conviction is he has to in order to bring MSU to another level. I'm concerned we can't even maintain Moorhead win level after this year but as I said, we'll see what develops next year.

[ShotgunDawg]

Here we go again. Same thing after a half of UGA and the OleMiss game. We think we have solved something. Until we do it for a bunch of games in a row, we ain't proved nothing. Like Olemiss, I'm not convinced Mizzou is really any good.

This is certainly true, but, with a bunch of FR & all first year players in this offense, it's not surprising that we're fairly inconsistent. That being said, the offense has been competent for 3 of the last 4 games. So it's coming

[Coach34]

1. Recruit like MSU has in the past at minimum. Get top Mississippi kids especially on D. Get the top JUCO players. Go get some key transfers in the portal.

2. Keep Arnett for several years at least to get the D re-established as one of best in SEC to help #1. He isn't going to stay forever but at least get some momentum.

3. Mix the run with the air raid. We saw what that can do vs Mizzou. We must be able to run the ball - get a short first down, run some clock with a lead, open up the passing game, keep D guessing (not jumping passing crossing routes or long screens).

I think everyone is pretty much in agreement with this. The 75-80% pass Air Raid is not going to work in the SEC. Getting the run game to 35-40% is key to making it work.

[Todd4State]

Yep. Started w candy who tried to zone us. Didn't work and they mixed the rest of the game. With that said, running it vs Missouri is the best thing we've done to help everything IMO.


To keep doing what you did 30 years ago is a recipe for failure in any field. He has never been in SEC. If he don't adapt a little he will not ultimately raise the bar any at MSU and likely lowers it.

As far as running the ball, MSU has known how to run the ball for decades. We don't have to learn the air raid to run the ball. He could have run the ball early in the year. j Actually would make sense to run it more if the excuse is we didn't have the players or had not learned the new O but we didn't do that. He had the SEC leading rusher on his team and we threw the ball all the the time.


I've said on many threads, I am willing to give Leach time but he didn't have to nuke our potential this year in my opinion. His very isolated success this year was by no means turning any corner as many have claimed.

Every coach preaches and practices repetition for execution excellence. Mullen, Saban, etc. That is nothing new, Leach didn't invent that. At the same time, any team that plays a perfect game is going to win. The key is not playing a perfect execution game and still winning because too many variables will ever let the stars line up too many times.

Well running the ball takes practice too and Leach obviously wasn't willing to invest in that pretty much all year and his track record says he is not going to invest much in running but my conviction is he has to in order to bring MSU to another level. I'm concerned we can't even maintain Moorhead win level after this year but as I said, we'll see what develops next year.

You're acting like he took over MSU 2018 instead of a 6-7 team with major culture issues. We won the same amount of SEC games that we won last year and would have been 6-6 with our OOC schedule so we're already at Moorhead level.

If you don't start to rebuild now then when do you rebuild? Leach didn't tell Kylin to puss out. Our players were given a choice to follow the program and some didn't want to do it for a variety of reasons. A big reason why Dan was successful was because he built the right culture here.

I never said that Leach "invented" high rep practices. My point is by adding extraneous plays that our players have to learn it takes away from the core plays of the offense which they have to master first. If they don't master it and we start adding things it hurts us in the long run and it probably wouldn't have worked anyway since the line struggled with both pass pro and running the ball. Except for game ten. And I'm not going to argue with Leach on how he is doing it when he is doing it the same way that has worked other places multiple times. Odds are based on history we will see a jump next year on offense. Let's see if it happens. We averaged 27 points per game our last four games bringing our totals up to 20.7 PPG on the season. In 2009 Dan averaged 22 PPG in SEC games.

[FISHDAWG]

I think everyone is pretty much in agreement with this. The 75-80% pass Air Raid is not going to work in the SEC. Getting the run game to 35-40% is key to making it work.

Yep but IMO he should have started with a more conventional offense with what we had and then slowly worked towards implementing his air raid gradually... instead he just tore down what we had for an immediate and complete rebuild... he didn't have to do it that way

[Todd4State]

Yep but IMO he should have started with a more conventional offense with what we had and then slowly worked towards implementing his air raid gradually... instead he just tore down what we had for an immediate and complete rebuild... he didn't have to do it that way

I'd rather him go ahead and run what he does. It will help us out more in the long run.

[R2Dawg]

Yep but IMO he should have started with a more conventional offense with what we had and then slowly worked towards implementing his air raid gradually... instead he just tore down what we had for an immediate and complete rebuild... he didn't have to do it that way

Totally agree Fish. Especially in a Covid year with no spring ball. Doing what he did in season was a suicide mission. It didn't have to be that way.

[R2Dawg]

You're acting like he took over MSU 2018 instead of a 6-7 team with major culture issues. We won the same amount of SEC games that we won last year and would have been 6-6 with our OOC schedule so we're already at Moorhead level.

If you don't start to rebuild now then when do you rebuild? Leach didn't tell Kylin to puss out. Our players were given a choice to follow the program and some didn't want to do it for a variety of reasons. A big reason why Dan was successful was because he built the right culture here.

I never said that Leach "invented" high rep practices. My point is by adding extraneous plays that our players have to learn it takes away from the core plays of the offense which they have to master first. If they don't master it and we start adding things it hurts us in the long run and it probably wouldn't have worked anyway since the line struggled with both pass pro and running the ball. Except for game ten. And I'm not going to argue with Leach on how he is doing it when he is doing it the same way that has worked other places multiple times. Odds are based on history we will see a jump next year on offense. Let's see if it happens. We averaged 27 points per game our last four games bringing our totals up to 20.7 PPG on the season. In 2009 Dan averaged 22 PPG in SEC games.

He took over a team that had talent, something to work with. Yes we had culture issues and considering the year he did good addressing that but you don't sacrifice a season/games doing practice hoping they pick it up in 18 months? The rebuild started as soon as Leach got here same as with Mullen, Jackie, etc. But Jackie and Mullen didn't nuke the good that was here and throw the baby out with the bathwater just to install "his offense".

Install your offense but do it as the players can digest it. Well actually Leach said he did and that it wasn't hard or long to install so that goes against what you are saying.

[Todd4State]

He took over a team that had talent, something to work with. Yes we had culture issues and considering the year he did good addressing that but you don't sacrifice a season/games doing practice hoping they pick it up in 18 months? The rebuild started as soon as Leach got here same as with Mullen, Jackie, etc. But Jackie and Mullen didn't nuke the good that was here and throw the baby out with the bathwater just to install "his offense".

Install your offense but do it as the players can digest it. Well actually Leach said he did and that it wasn't hard or long to install so that goes against what you are saying.

Are you seriously suggesting that Leach wasn't trying to win when you say "sacrifice the season"? That's incredibly ludicrous. You have to be the most incredibly short sighted fan in our fanbase to suggest that we should go all out with our "talented" team that went 6-7 the year before. Especially since a fair amount of that "talent" appears to have been a big part of the culture issue. But hey! Let's run the ball more because that fixes everything.**

Dan and Jackie didn't have to deal with the culture issues that Leach has has to deal with. And even without those issues Dan only produced an offense that averaged 2 more PPG than Leach in year one. With the same amount of SEC wins.

Leach has installed it as much as they can digest it. There is a difference between install and mastering the offense. We know the plays. We're learning the intricacies of it. Heck- we're just now getting the blocking assignments down. The mastering part comes with reps and live reps of the plays in his offense so no that doesn't go against what I am saying at all because you don't master this offense by randomly adding plays that you aren't going to use after one year.

[Todd4State]

And I don't get our fans that are surprised that it has taken Leach a year to get off the ground. It's literally happened at both places he has been as a head coach.

Why don't some of our fans get it? It's literally out there in black and white. And we've improved as the season has gone on- as Leach has done at other stops.

Same thing happened with some of our fans when Cohen was our baseball coach.

[Leeshouldveflanked]

If I?m Leach, I would let Arnett fire/hire some of his own staff... McBath was a disaster on the recruiting trail this year.

[tcdog70]

To beat the 3-8. We must have WRs we trust for 50-50 balls. For Leach to win we must have better wide outs and QB that as Mike says ?can see the field?

[NCDawg]

Fact is, we need better players and better execution and better coaching to ever beat teams in the sec. it's unforgiving. We will never consistently beat the blue bloods we won't.

This is basically correct. We can't compete with the likes of Alabama since they have many more better players. We used to be able to compete with them when they had Perkins, Stallings, etc. but when Saban came in with his great recruiting, everything changed.

[Dogbone]

This is basically correct. We can't compete with the likes of Alabama since they have many more better players. We used to be able to compete with them when they had Perkins, Stallings, etc. but when Saban came in with his great recruiting, everything changed.

There is no parity in college football. NCAA has made a complete mess of things.

[Coach34]

There's never been parity in college football.

[HoopsDawg]

There's never been parity in college football.

gap seems bigger now b/c of the playoff. Our goal used to be a bowl game. Beat Mississippi and make a bowl and your season is a success. The playoff has made bowls more irrelevant than ever.

[BrunswickDawg]

There's never been parity in college football.

I think a lot of people confuse parity with hope. People remember the Jackie era as parity because we seemed to be able to get to November a few years and still mathematically be in the running for an SECW title. It kept us interested and engaged. The closest there was to parity may have been the SEC from 1995-2002. In that span you had 7 different teams play in the SECC game and 5 different teams win it. However, it was something of a mirage since only MSU and Arkansas made it from outside the "Big 6", and no one other than one of the "Big 6" won it.

[Hambone]

Once the playoff is expanded to 8 teams I think we will then have a shot at once in a blue moon getting that 8th spot.

[Coach34]

I dont see it that way. It has always been the goal to be in the top 4 of the country and make it to the Sugar, Rose, Orange, or Fiesta Bowl. Those bowls usually had the same teams in them that they do now. Only difference now is the way Bama and Clemson arent having any down years as opposed to years past.

We had a chance to win the SEC in 1980 but Georgia pulled off the 92 yard TD pass against Florida
We had a chance in 1999 but lost on the road at Bama
We had a chance in 2014 but lost on the road against Bama and OM.

Every 15-20 years we have a team good enough to be in the mix. Thats the case for most schools. But every conference has its group of a few teams that win it every season. Just look at the SEC:

South Carolina hasnt won a conference title since 1969
State? 1941
Vandy? 1922
A&M? 1998
OM? 1963
Kentucky- 1950
Mizzou? 1969
Tenn? 1998

[Dawgfan77]

This school is who we can be with the right hire. One who is committed to MSU for the long haul...Here is their Recruiting ranking the last 10 classes
2010- 27
2011- 10
2012- 20
2013- 15
2014- 16
2015- 9
2016- 11
2017- 16
2018- 7
2019- 10
2020- 3

This is Clemson

[HoopsDawg]

44% of the teams in the NFL make the playoffs. 3% of teams in college football make the playoffs.

I was thrilled with the Peach Bowl growing up. That's no longer the case.

[Lord McBuckethead]

Yeah, but each year they get 4 star guys that absolutely produce on the next level. There is a gigantic difference between a top 10 class and a top 25 class though. So for 8 years straight they are pretty much in the top 15. That is pretty dang good.
Also note, it depends on how their classes work together. Mullen screwed us on OL, DBs, and WRs. That is what hurt us, we missed on literally every OL prospect his last two years.

[Dawgfan77]

Yeah, but each year they get 4 star guys that absolutely produce on the next level. There is a gigantic difference between a top 10 class and a top 25 class though. So for 8 years straight they are pretty much in the top 15. That is pretty dang good.
Also note, it depends on how their classes work together. Mullen screwed us on OL, DBs, and WRs. That is what hurt us, we missed on literally every OL prospect his last two years.

If we had a Mullen esq hire that had the leadership behind him and wasn't job hunting as was committed to MSU we could have similar recruiting classes. Maybe not too 3 or 10 for that matter. Crazy thing is has Mullen committed after 14 who knows where we would be.

[HoopsDawg]

This school is who we can be with the right hire. One who is committed to MSU for the long haul...Here is their Recruiting ranking the last 10 classes
2010- 27
2011- 10
2012- 20
2013- 15
2014- 16
2015- 9
2016- 11
2017- 16
2018- 7
2019- 10
2020- 3

This is Clemson

Pretty bad example. Clemson gets pretty much whoever they want. They have probably the lowest attrition rate in the Power 5. So some of those classes have 17 kids it in. Even last year, they only signed 23. That effects their overall team ranking. They had 14 signees in 2017.

[Dawgfan77]

Pretty bad example. Clemson gets pretty much whoever they want. They have probably the lowest attrition rate in the Power 5. So some of those classes have 17 kids it in. Even last year, they only signed 23. That effects their overall team ranking. They had 14 signees in 2017.

Disagree. Clemson was average until they got a Transcendent QB. Dabo rode Watson all the way to a NC. We also had low numbers in classes don't act Clemson is the only program to sign less than 25.
Point is had Mullen capitalized in Dak and was totally bought in like Dabo who knows what would have happened

[thf24]

Disagree. Clemson was average until they got a Transcendent QB. Dabo rode Watson all the way to a NC. We also had low numbers in classes don't act Clemson is the only program to sign less than 25.
Point is had Mullen capitalized in Dak and was totally bought in like Dabo who knows what would have happened

A totally bought in Mullen still isn't a fraction of the recruiter at MSU that Dabo is at Clemson.

[maroonmania]

There's never been parity in college football.

Exactly, and that is what makes it the worst major sports product out there in my view. And yes, the better programs have always been the better programs but the gulf has just widened at least on the field and the product keeps getting worse. And part of that is because offenses have become more prolific. But Bama was a 30+ point favorite in multiple SEC games this year (at least 3 or 4). Something is very, very wrong when a team is playing in its own league and game after game is that non-competitive. I bet the Alabama-Florida game this year was the only time I watched a second of the 2nd half of any Bama game this year except maybe when they played Georgia. The best college games are normally when two of the 'non-elite' teams play. Nothing interesting about watching the elite teams play until they play another top ranked elite team. And nobody is willing to do anything to address the core problem which is the glut of scholarships football programs have that allow the elite programs to gobble up all the elite talent. Heck, the 85 scholarship rule may have fit back when essentially no freshmen were playing but it doesn't fit the product any more. 85 players actively playing on a team is WAY more than a team needs and is the primary culprit that allows the elite programs to build dynasties. They oversign elite talent and then process out the ones that don't live up to their recruiting hype. Everyone else gets the leftovers. Just this recruiting cycle Bama signed 20 or more of the ESPN Top 300 recruits.

[Dogbone]

Exactly, and that is what makes it the worst major sports product out there in my view. And yes, the better programs have always been the better programs but the gulf has just widened at least on the field and the product keeps getting worse. And part of that is because offenses have become more prolific. But Bama was a 30+ point favorite in multiple SEC games this year (at least 3 or 4). Something is very, very wrong when a team is playing in its own league and game after game is that non-competitive. I bet the Alabama-Florida game this year was the only time I watched a second of the 2nd half of any Bama game this year except maybe when they played Georgia. The best college games are normally when two of the 'non-elite' teams play. Nothing interesting about watching the elite teams play until they play another top ranked elite team. And nobody is willing to do anything to address the core problem which is the glut of scholarships football programs have that allow the elite programs to gobble up all the elite talent. Heck, the 85 scholarship rule may have fit back when essentially no freshmen were playing but it doesn't fit the product any more. 85 players actively playing on a team is WAY more than a team needs and is the primary culprit that allows the elite programs to build dynasties. They oversign elite talent and then process out the ones that don't live up to their recruiting hype. Everyone else gets the leftovers. Just this recruiting cycle Bama signed 20 or more of the ESPN Top 300 recruits.

This!!!!!!!!

[Coach34]

Exactly, and that is what makes it the worst major sports product out there in my view. And yes, the better programs have always been the better programs but the gulf has just widened at least on the field and the product keeps getting worse. .

Has it changed?

Bama won the NC 3 times in the 70's while going 96-11 during that time. They had a 28 game winning streak we broke in 1980.
Oklahoma and Nebraska used to beat people by 40-50 in the Big 8 every season under Switzer and Osbourne
Ohio State or Michigan won the Big Ten every year
Penn State and ND won every year
USC and Washington ran the West Coast with UCLA being good at times.

Same shit is going on now- just Clemson and Oregon jumped in the mix as Michigan and USC has dropped off

[BrunswickDawg]

Has it changed?

Bama won the NC 3 times in the 70's while going 96-11 during that time. They had a 28 game winning streak we broke in 1980.
Oklahoma and Nebraska used to beat people by 40-50 in the Big 8 every season under Switzer and Osbourne
Ohio State or Michigan won the Big Ten every year
Penn State and ND won every year
USC and Washington ran the West Coast with UCLA being good at times.

Same shit is going on now- just Clemson and Oregon jumped in the mix as Michigan and USC has dropped off

I think it has changed in the sense that even fewer teams are capable of making a move into competing for conference or national titles. Conference consolidation has set that up to a degree. In the 80s and 90s you still had the Big 8; the SWC, the Big East, the WAC all produce National Championships or what would be Play-Off teams. Not to mention Independents like ND, Pitt, Penn State, Miami, and FSU. The upside is the conferences now weed out the "lesser" teams on their own. the downside is that you have fewer teams in the argument.

[maroonmania]

Has it changed?

Bama won the NC 3 times in the 70's while going 96-11 during that time. They had a 28 game winning streak we broke in 1980.
Oklahoma and Nebraska used to beat people by 40-50 in the Big 8 every season under Switzer and Osbourne
Ohio State or Michigan won the Big Ten every year
Penn State and ND won every year
USC and Washington ran the West Coast with UCLA being good at times.

Same shit is going on now- just Clemson and Oregon jumped in the mix as Michigan and USC has dropped off

In my view, absolutely yes, individual games are overall less competitive and talent gap continues to widen. The recruiting footprint for elite programs continue to broaden and because of all the recruiting websites and analysts out there it seems there are no recruits you can hide from the elite programs finding anymore like you could do in the past sometimes. And even if changes are made like I am talking about it will still continue to be most of the same teams winning championships because as long as recruits can choose where they go the best programs will rise to the top and continue to attract the top recruits just like in basketball and baseball. All I am saying is if you took 5 players off the Bama, Clemson, Ohio State, Georgia, Oklahoma, etc. signing class every year and spread them out to everyone else you could close the talent gap a little to make college football a more competitive product to watch. From the macro level you would still have the best programs remain the best programs and win most of the championships. That is not really the issue it would address. Biggest problem right now is that when the elite programs play teams that aren't also in the elite category the game is pretty much unwatchable. Does anyone but Bama fans even watch the second half of these CBS Bama games where Bama is beating teams to a pulp? I'm sure not. I would say even most Bama fans would rather see a competitive game most of the time. I rarely even watch the first half of games where there is zero doubt of who will win. There is no entertainment value to me in that just like I get very little entertainment value when State plays Jackson St. or Stephen F. Austin or some other FCS team.

[FISHDAWG]

Has it changed?

Bama won the NC 3 times in the 70's while going 96-11 during that time. They had a 28 game winning streak we broke in 1980.
Oklahoma and Nebraska used to beat people by 40-50 in the Big 8 every season under Switzer and Osbourne
Ohio State or Michigan won the Big Ten every year
Penn State and ND won every year
USC and Washington ran the West Coast with UCLA being good at times.

Same shit is going on now- just Clemson and Oregon jumped in the mix as Michigan and USC has dropped off


Was UCF whining then also ** That's pretty much the way I remember ... Texas had a NC and seemed a little more consistent then than now

[R2Dawg]

Pretty bad example. Clemson gets pretty much whoever they want. They have probably the lowest attrition rate in the Power 5. So some of those classes have 17 kids it in. Even last year, they only signed 23. That effects their overall team ranking. They had 14 signees in 2017.

Clemson does now; it wasn't that way for a long time. The fall of Tenn has also helped Clemson. The top recruits went to the big orange for a long time, now it is the other orange.

Things can change over time too as others have mentioned. MSU can be the next one, we almost were with Mullen if he had committed. Funny he tried lecturing the fan base about being committed but in the end he was the one not committed.

[Coach34]

I think it has changed in the sense that even fewer teams are capable of making a move into competing for conference or national titles. Conference consolidation has set that up to a degree. In the 80s and 90s you still had the Big 8; the SWC, the Big East, the WAC all produce National Championships or what would be Play-Off teams. Not to mention Independents like ND, Pitt, Penn State, Miami, and FSU. The upside is the conferences now weed out the "lesser" teams on their own. the downside is that you have fewer teams in the argument.

Good post and great point.

[ShotgunDawg]

I think it has changed in the sense that even fewer teams are capable of making a move into competing for conference or national titles. Conference consolidation has set that up to a degree. In the 80s and 90s you still had the Big 8; the SWC, the Big East, the WAC all produce National Championships or what would be Play-Off teams. Not to mention Independents like ND, Pitt, Penn State, Miami, and FSU. The upside is the conferences now weed out the "lesser" teams on their own. the downside is that you have fewer teams in the argument.

I think recruiting rankings, combins, HUDL, and the internet in general has spread information so much that it's far less likely that elite players will slip through the blue blood's crasp. Thus a consolidation of talent.

[RougeDawg]

This is true.

Rumor is that Jimmy Sexton came after Arnett recently & he told him to go kick rocks.

Did Arnett ask Sloppy Joe before telling Sexton that?