Yeah, I'm not gonna argue this based on a bunch of made up assumptions or premises. All I'm saying is 2002 to 2012 Boise St would've done well in any conference. They were damn good. Good enough to win the SEC? No one will ever know. Good enough to pound the likes of Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Croom MSU, ole miss, etc? It's laughable that that's even a question.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
Completely agree. All I'm saying is that their lack of resources would have caught up with them if they played SEC competition week in and week out.Quote:
Originally Posted by PMDawg
Well ok. So the rest you may be right on, but it depends on a lot of unknowns or assumptions. Maybe their recruiting and facilities pick up from being in the SEC. Maybe not. There's really know way to know but I guess your scenario is as likely as any other.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
You get way too caught up in trying to discredit the web site recruiting gurus. It really doesn't matter how they arrive at their ratings......the point is that by and large, the rating system works. Hell, at SEC Media Days, Steve Spurrier even made a comment about how the recruiting websites get it right for the most part.Quote:
Originally Posted by Political Hack
Steve Spurrier doesn't recruit Mississippi either. I agree that they do a decent job overall, but they suck in Mississippi. They don't even truly evaluate many of our recruits.Quote:
Originally Posted by sandwolf
Anyone with average talent and a good coach can beat anyone else on a neutral site, especially when the opponent is underestimating them. The argument during that time period was never whether or not Boise could get up and beat a single power conference team (which, as you point out, they did several times). It was whether or not they could achieve the same level of success playing week in and week out against the physicality of the SEC, or simply the talent of other power conferences. Keep in mind this is not a deeply hypothetical question of how they would do if they were an actual SEC member for multiple years with all the benefits that would entail; simply how they would do if they were inserted into an SEC schedule for one season, all other things being the same. I just don't see them going 11-1 or 10-2 under that circumstance.Quote:
Originally Posted by PMDawg
I think they generally get the top 20 or so pretty close to right. There may be a higher chance that a recruit or two flies under the radar in MS, but the guys that are being recruited by BCS programs seem to be evaluated pretty fairly.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
Calvin and Stamps don't even have rating yet. Do you think both of those guys are top 20 worthy?Quote:
Originally Posted by sandwolf
discredit them? Five stars are good players. it's like telling you that the White House is white. I don't discredit the guys that work for those sites. Hell, I consider some of them friends. I just think team recruiting rankings and such are stupid. calling a good football player a good football player is a no brainer.Quote:
Originally Posted by sandwolf
Calvin is supposed to go to a 3 star this week (and Scout has really done a poor job on JUCO's for the past few years). And Stamps does have a 3 star rating......but he does not have a ranking. That is because Scout has decided that they are not going to rank every player at every position anymore.....they are only going to rank through a certain number of players. In other words, if there are 400 WR's in their database, they are not going to try to distinguish between the 220th vs. the 221st best WR......they are only going to go through the top 75 or 100 (or whatever number they decide on). So they evaluated Stamps and they decided that he was a 3 star but that he did not meet the cut off to receive a numerical ranking.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
ETA: I am assuming that you are referring to the Scout ratings.
Well you have to consider that if Boise was hypothetically in the sec, they'd have a hell of a lot more money to spend. They'd also be more enticing to recruits. Not saying that they wouldn't struggle, but you can't say that if they joined the sec they wouldn't have the money or the pull to land talent, because those things come with being a part of the sec.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
I just fail to see your point though, either chris jones is a badass that deserved to be a 5* and as high as the #2 player in the country, or his ranking was horseshit based on offers from Bama and other elite programs. He was a late bloomer and didn't camp prior to his senior year, right? It seems like around this time in his recruiting cycle was when the buzz started and just kept growing as he kept kicking ass. Of course the recruiting guys are going to not slap a 5* on an unknown they've only seen 1 weekend in case it was a fluke performance, but the buzz was definitely there. When he proved it wasn't a fluke, his ranking skyrocketed. Either way, sounds like recruiting guys are damned if they do, damned if they don't in your mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Political Hack
True, they would have more money, but they still wouldn't have a good local recruiting base. Oregon is the only perinneal top 30 or so program without a good local recruiting base. Boise woul never have first pick on players. MSU doesn't have first pick on a ton of players, but we do with Mississippi kids, an since Mississippi produces good talent, we find enough to survive. It would be tough for Boise.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgs
Why not rank him a 5 star before he gets all the offers? they didn't see him time and time and time again. they saw him a few times and made the excuse to rate him 1 star higher each time they saw him while he also started getting offers. Bottom line, kids with good offers will be ranked higher. I don't think I've ever seen a guy with numerous legit SEC offers stay at a 2 star, but I guarantee you some of them have played like two stars.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgs
Also, just to clarify, I don't dislike the sites or the guys that run the sites. It's a great business model and they produce a lot of insightful information that fans wouldn't otherwise have access to. I just don't get the "star gazers" and why people give a damn about where our class is ranked versus anyone else's, etc...