Quote:
Originally Posted by HSVDawg
We didn't place Gooden
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by HSVDawg
We didn't place Gooden
Now that is a separate discussion. I would be fine excluding them from rankings out of HS, thought that would be a little tough. You can remove them from your own list, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg61
We have to remember that all of this recruiting stuff...literally all of it...is for fans. These sites have no reason to change what they're doing. Fans eat it up and debate it forever.
The thing is most recruiting sites do put out final rankings in July or August once guys are enrolled or not. Fans just don't care then. 1st Tuesday in February is all fans care about. So the updated rankings don't get any attention.
Quote:
Originally Posted by smootness
Don't you think it masks the ability to sign a full class? You get 25 spots. Sign 25 guys that will play the next year not 25 but only 20 actually play the next year. Or if you're going to sign 5 place guys sign 30 to the class not 25 but we don't ever seem to do that. We never sign a max amount that play for us the next year. I want 25 guys added every year that play every year. Stop counting sign and place guys as signees like every other guy on our signee list that is going to play for us next year. Their roster spot is still available.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ifyouonlyknew
I agree that we want a full roster of 85 and, for whatever reason, we have done a terrible job of being at or very near that number, particularly last year. As you point out, we could sign 30 expecting 25 to show. It is a matter of roster management and I hope we get better at it. However, it has nothing/little to do with sign and place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg61
It does when we act like a sign and place guy is the same as a signee that plays this year. We treat them like regular signees and let our coaches get away with not signing a full class. Sign 25 guys that will play for us this year. Then do that next year and next year and on and on. Stop signing less than what we are allowed and masking that with sign and place players.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1bigdawg
Wait, did you bump a 3 minute old thread?Quote:
Originally Posted by FISHDAWG
Yes, maybe the funniest bump I have ever seenQuote:
Originally Posted by RiverCityDawg
And know you see why this thread made the list ..Quote:
Originally Posted by RiverCityDawg
https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/dict...n-22156570.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Ari Gold
That's ur walk off. Trust me you won't have a better post than that.. "we'll" doneQuote:
Originally Posted by Dawg61
When was the last time we signed more than 1 or 2 sign and place guys? I can't think of year under Mullen when we had more than 2 - 3 at most. Sign and place guys aren't taking spots from signing classes. Now, I'll agree that our scholarship management has been off, but I don't think this has been a contributing factor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg61
Just didQuote:
Originally Posted by Ari Gold
http://visionnoventa.com/wp-content/...-tumblrcom.jpg
Damn Smoot, You don't have to pound every 61 post. His point is a good one and ok for discussion. For an ex Croom and Rick Ray lover you are rough on some people. Sign and Place Jucos are worth it , no doubt in my mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by smootness
I value lots of people but I also can see their limitations and wouldn't ask them to do things they are not good at.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg61
61, we get 85 scholarships. If we sign 25 every single year we would have 5 classes on campus and that's 125 players. Take away the ones that quit and/or leave early for the draft/play as a true freshman and leave in 4 years and you are still nowhere near the 85 man limit. Unless we start processing people out the ying yang we can't sign 25 qualifiers every year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg61
Trimming the fat is never easy but is a necessary evil if we ever want to play for a Championship. You aren't trimming 40 scholarships over night. We should already be doing this so every year you are trimming roughly 10-15 of your fat not 40.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarius
"Processing" or trimming the fat is great in theory but it can really burn bridges with coaches who do not forget what you did to their player. Unlike others in this state Mullen operates with a certain level of morals. He doesn't like having to drop kids that really aren't sec talent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg61
At the same time you can definitely make the case that we have not recruited well enough to fill all our classes with real sec talent. But I think that has to do with what Mullen is looking for. It seems to me that Mullen is big on intangibles and just as I would be he is esp wary of sign and place guys. Justin Cox was probably the riskiest signand place and I can remember and we see how that turned out. Mullen is big on maintaining a good culture among his players.
We would suck without the Mississippi juco system but we have to use it litigiously or we will have the same thing happen that happened at the end of JWS' tenure: the inmates were running the asylum. I remember. I was there. It was bad.
**** whatever coach would get butthurt over that anyways. They obviously didn't give a shit about MSU when they sold us on their player being an SEC talent when he wasn't. Trying to keep that guy happy only ensures Alabama and LSU stay ahead of us. You think Alabama/Saban gives a shit about cutting a player that has no business being on their roster? That coach needs to worry about next time we come around being straight up with us instead of acting better than our program when we cut his CUSA player. We are the State's University. We don't let the Po Dunk High football coach dictate who we keep on our roster. Ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reason2succeed
I believe their recruiting footprint and brand are slightly larger.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg61