THE 2020 MSU Football Recruiting Talk Thread

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

07-29-2019, 12:29 AM
Jarius

Quote:

Originally Posted by justwin

If we take 5 wrs, you think we get both Adams & walley from diberville to go with ducking, Heath, and griffin?

I really think walley is a college wr star. How do you feel about him?

Adams is now a 3 star. Seems like if we throw 30+ tds this year to convince him to come, he was commuted once before. Needs to witness us throw successfully

We need Adams to not qualify and go to Co-Lin. That's our best shot at ending up with him.
07-29-2019, 06:20 AM
timotheus

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyDawg

When did I miss Cole Smith transferring?

few weeks ago
07-29-2019, 07:54 AM
KOdawg1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Irondawg

Alright so how concerned are we that J. Brown went to the OM cookout instead of ours when he's a commit?

Slightly. However, there are plenty of other options at LB should he flip.
07-29-2019, 08:33 AM
Covercorner2

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg

Expecting vs hoping for are 2 different things.

I think everyone wants to know the barometer it takes to be a "contender" and that is the barometer.

If we are going to take the next step, that is the step. 10 4/5 recruits every year

And FYI, in the 2018 there were 11 teams with that profile

So... you want us to consistently be a top 12 recruiter? I am sorry, man, but that is just not going to happen.

Bama
Clemson
UGA
LSU
Ohio State
Florida
Texas A&M
Texas
Oklahoma
Florida State
Michigan
Auburn

Those are just schools on the top of my head that have significant advantages over us. It's just not realistic to expect to outrecruit or recruit on those teams' levels consistently.

What we need to do is consistently have top 20 classes with good players at key positions that fit what a good coaching staff wants to do.

The only way to have half of our roster be 4 stars or better is to go full Hugh Freeze.
07-29-2019, 08:35 AM
ShotgunDawg

Quote:

Originally Posted by Covercorner2

So... you want us to consistently be a top 12 recruiter? I am sorry, man, but that is just not going to happen.

Bama
Clemson
UGA
LSU
Ohio State
Florida
Texas A&M
Texas
Oklahoma
Florida State
Michigan
Auburn

And so. It's just not realistic to expect to outrecruit or recruit on those teams' levels consistently.

You don't want us too?
07-29-2019, 08:38 AM
MetEdDawg

Quote:

Originally Posted by Covercorner2

So... you want us to consistently be a top 12 recruiter? I am sorry, man, but that is just not going to happen.

Bama
Clemson
UGA
LSU
Ohio State
Florida
Texas A&M
Texas
Oklahoma
Florida State
Michigan
Auburn

And so. It's just not realistic to expect to outrecruit or recruit on those teams' levels consistently.

Exactly. It's not like we don't want to be one of these teams. But realistically we aren't even remotely close to the prowess of these teams.

The dollars required to get into this territory are far beyond what our university has and what our alumni are willing to shell out. People on here have said repeatedly that it's not a money issue. That's a damn lie to make themselves feel better. We will always have a ceiling unless we can find a way to put $20-30 million more into athletics per year. That's just the way it works.

Realistically we can aim for Top 20 at our current level. But it gets very exponential from that point on. The growth required to go from 20 to 15 is a lot more than the growth from 40 to 25. We are never going to recruit at those levels until we get substantial, sustainable, yearly capital investment far beyond what we do now.
07-29-2019, 08:41 AM
Covercorner2

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg

You don't want us too?

Yes, but there are a lot of things in this world I want that I am realistic and understand I will probably never obtain.
07-29-2019, 08:44 AM
Covercorner2

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetEdDawg

Exactly. It's not like we don't want to be one of these teams. But realistically we aren't even remotely close to the prowess of these teams.

The dollars required to get into this territory are far beyond what our university has and what our alumni are willing to shell out. People on here have said repeatedly that it's not a money issue. That's a damn lie to make themselves feel better. We will always have a ceiling unless we can find a way to put $20-30 million more into athletics per year. That's just the way it works.

Realistically we can aim for Top 20 at our current level. But it gets very exponential from that point on. The growth required to go from 20 to 15 is a lot more than the growth from 40 to 25. We are never going to recruit at those levels until we get substantial, sustainable, yearly capital investment far beyond what we do now.

It's not just money, though. We don't have the tradition, clout, town, state, etc. to compete. It's not a "poor old State" take, it's simply an honest take. Obviously you don't just accept those facts and throw in the towel. You work harder than the others to try to even the playing field, but you also have to be realistic. Otherwise you will never be satisfied or you end up on probation.

You can win big at Mississippi State without having top 10 classes every year. It happened in 2014. I know we lost to Ole Miss and Bama, but damn we went to the Orange Bowl and didn't nuke the program in the process...
07-29-2019, 09:08 AM
Cowbell

Quote:

Originally Posted by Covercorner2

It's not just money, though. We don't have the tradition, clout, town, state, etc. to compete. It's not a "poor old State" take, it's simply an honest take. Obviously you don't just accept those facts and throw in the towel. You work harder than the others to try to even the playing field, but you also have to be realistic. Otherwise you will never be satisfied or you end up on probation.

You can win big at Mississippi State without having top 10 classes every year. It happened in 2014. I know we lost to Ole Miss and Bama, but damn we went to the Orange Bowl and didn't nuke the program in the process...

Dude you deserve some rep! Really good take. 100% agree.
07-29-2019, 10:05 AM
Pipedream

Quote:

Originally Posted by Covercorner2

It's not just money, though. We don't have the tradition, clout, town, state, etc. to compete. It's not a "poor old State" take, it's simply an honest take. Obviously you don't just accept those facts and throw in the towel. You work harder than the others to try to even the playing field, but you also have to be realistic. Otherwise you will never be satisfied or you end up on probation.

You can win big at Mississippi State without having top 10 classes every year. It happened in 2014. I know we lost to Ole Miss and Bama, but damn we went to the Orange Bowl and didn't nuke the program in the process...

So we have to define what winning "big" is here because I think that disconnect is what is driving this conversation. Can we win 10 games recruiting like we have in the past 10 years and look to be for the immediate future (i.e. top 25 average class)? Absolutely. No question about it. Can we win the West recruiting like that? Absolutely not. It's just that simple. If everyone is ok with the fact that there is a hard ceiling on the program because of the recruiting aspect then I think that's a healthy way to view things, but if you're like me and others who strive and hope and want for more than that then it's really difficult to accept that 10 wins is the absolute best we can be. If the question is posed-"how does State win the west?"-the answer is-you have to have a roster comprised of 43+ 4/5* recruits. This isn't some crazy number people are just making up out of thin air-there's science behind it.
07-29-2019, 10:26 AM
Covercorner2

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pipedream

So we have to define what winning "big" is here because I think that disconnect is what is driving this conversation. Can we win 10 games recruiting like we have in the past 10 years and look to be for the immediate future (i.e. top 25 average class)? Absolutely. No question about it. Can we win the West recruiting like that? Absolutely not. It's just that simple. If everyone is ok with the fact that there is a hard ceiling on the program because of the recruiting aspect then I think that's a healthy way to view things, but if you're like me and others who strive and hope and want for more than that then it's really difficult to accept that 10 wins is the absolute best we can be. If the question is posed-"how does State win the west?"-the answer is-you have to have a roster comprised of 43+ 4/5* recruits. This isn't some crazy number people are just making up out of thin air-there's science behind it.

Absolutely not? We were 6 points from winning the West in 2014....

But, with that said, yes, I would be OK with 10 win seasons and NY6 bowl games....
07-29-2019, 10:26 AM
msstate7

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pipedream

So we have to define what winning "big" is here because I think that disconnect is what is driving this conversation. Can we win 10 games recruiting like we have in the past 10 years and look to be for the immediate future (i.e. top 25 average class)? Absolutely. No question about it. Can we win the West recruiting like that? Absolutely not. It's just that simple. If everyone is ok with the fact that there is a hard ceiling on the program because of the recruiting aspect then I think that's a healthy way to view things, but if you're like me and others who strive and hope and want for more than that then it's really difficult to accept that 10 wins is the absolute best we can be. If the question is posed-"how does State win the west?"-the answer is-you have to have a roster comprised of 43+ 4/5* recruits. This isn't some crazy number people are just making up out of thin air-there's science behind it.

Or you could get incredibly lucky with pretty much all your 4-stars hitting and get guys like slay, banks, McKinney, sweat, dak, Preston smith, Jenkins, etc, on the same team. Even then, we'd need need some stars to line up. So, yeah, your path is much more likely, but I think both are extreme long shots
07-29-2019, 10:31 AM
Covercorner2

Quote:

Originally Posted by msstate7

Or you could get incredibly lucky with pretty much all your 4-stars hitting and get guys like slay, banks, McKinney, sweat, dak, Preston smith, Jenkins, etc, on the same team. Even then, we'd need need some stars to line up. So, yeah, your path is much more likely, but I think both are extreme long shots

At State you have a better chance of getting "lucky" with top 20-25 classes than having multiple consecutive years of top 10-12 classes (without going on probation).
07-29-2019, 10:33 AM
Pollodawg

Why, oh why, can our fans never be happy? Why do we hate ourselves?
07-29-2019, 10:42 AM
msstate7

I think Mullen had a great idea to offset the talent disadvantage with experience, red shirting. I hope we keep it
07-29-2019, 10:57 AM
Turfdawg67

Quote:

Originally Posted by yjnkdawg

He will never figure out what you are referring to, Ari. Some people wonder why there was another recruiting thread created.. The reason was because a few posters hijacked this thread for their own personal agenda, and you had to scroll through so much unrelated crap to get to the actual pertinent information on 2020 MSU football recruiting.

Where is this "other recruiting thread" you speak of? That sounds like the one I'd like to read.
07-29-2019, 11:48 AM
Jarius

We don’t have to recruit in the top 12. We have to hit on our targets at the right position. We have to have a good quarterback. We have to have good receivers. We have to be good up front on defense and adequate up front offensively. Everyone else can be masked to an extent if you are good at those positions in today’s game.
07-29-2019, 12:01 PM
msstate7

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jarius

We don’t have to recruit in the top 12. We have to hit on our targets at the right position. We have to have a good quarterback. We have to have good receivers. We have to be good up front on defense and adequate up front offensively. Everyone else can be masked to an extent if you are good at those positions in today’s game.

Even then, we'd have to hope auburn, aTm, LSU, and Bama miss on those positions bc they'll have much better supporting casts and depth bc of recruiting success
07-29-2019, 12:17 PM
BrunswickDawg

Quote:

Originally Posted by msstate7

Even then, we'd have to hope auburn, aTm, LSU, and Bama miss on those positions bc they'll have much better supporting casts and depth bc of recruiting success

Again, our play against 3 of those 4 schools over the past 5 years shows that they don't have a better supporting cast because of their recruiting success. They have been continually ranked higher, and yet we are 4-1 against A&M, 3-2 against Auburn and 2-3 against LSU (with 2 losses that could have been wins). So, where is this mythical proof that they are so far beyond us that we can't compete with our current recruiting? Can we improve our recruiting? Always. And Moorhead has been showing that so far.
07-29-2019, 12:18 PM
Pipedream

Quote:

Originally Posted by msstate7

Even then, we'd have to hope auburn, aTm, LSU, and Bama miss on those positions bc they'll have much better supporting casts and depth bc of recruiting success

Yes, you can be a really good team with this formula, but you aren't winning the SEC West unless you have a certain number of blue chip prospects. It hasn't been done since 2006 Arkansas and only 3 times in almost 30 years. Lighting would have to strike the same spot about 6 times in a row. The fact that everything lined up for us so well in 2014 and we still couldn't get it done just shows how near impossible it is (with the current recruiting performance). I think we are recruiting well and taking some chances on guys that have great upside, but the math/science is indisputable on what kind of raw talent it takes to win the West and if anyone is arguing against it they're essentially shaking their fist at the sun.
07-29-2019, 12:25 PM
msstate7

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg

Again, our play against 3 of those 4 schools over the past 5 years shows that they don't have a better supporting cast because of their recruiting success. They have been continually ranked higher, and yet we are 4-1 against A&M, 3-2 against Auburn and 2-3 against LSU (with 2 losses that could have been wins). So, where is this mythical proof that they are so far beyond us that we can't compete with our current recruiting? Can we improve our recruiting? Always. And Moorhead has been showing that so far.

LSU 0-1
Auburn 1-0
aTm 1-0

Not sure what Mullen's record has to do with it. So far, Moorhead is 2-1 vs that group... hopefully he can keep it up
07-29-2019, 12:36 PM
DancingRabbit

Seems like this thread is getting off track again.
07-29-2019, 12:38 PM
Jarius

Quote:

Originally Posted by msstate7

Even then, we'd have to hope auburn, aTm, LSU, and Bama miss on those positions bc they'll have much better supporting casts and depth bc of recruiting success

We are beating Auburn, LSU, and A&M on a regular basis right now without doing what I mentioned. Alabama is the problem and to beat them you need what I just mentioned and some luck. We aren’t ever recruiting in the top 12 consistently so that plan can be thrown out the window. You have to find a different way and get lucky. Go all in on the most important positions.
07-29-2019, 12:45 PM
BrunswickDawg

Quote:

Originally Posted by msstate7

LSU 0-1
Auburn 1-0
aTm 1-0

Not sure what Mullen's record has to do with it. So far, Moorhead is 2-1 vs that group... hopefully he can keep it up

Two reasons - it goes to the overall state of the program, and 5 years encompasses the eligibility window for most of the players currently on the roster. But, hey, if you want to just focus on Moorhead fine - he's 2-2 against the teams we apparently can't compete with. Still doesn't help your argument.
07-29-2019, 12:49 PM
msstate7

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg

Two reasons - it goes to the overall state of the program, and 5 years encompasses the eligibility window for most of the players currently on the roster. But, hey, if you want to just focus on Moorhead fine - he's 2-2 against the teams we apparently can't compete with. Still doesn't help your argument.

What's your record prediction against that group for 2019? Just curious... I say 0-4
07-29-2019, 01:24 PM
Irondawg

So back to a question I asked before we got off topic. How concerned should we be about J. Brown going to the Ole Miss cookout last weekend instead of ours when he's committed to MSU?
07-29-2019, 01:31 PM
BrunswickDawg

Quote:

Originally Posted by msstate7

What's your record prediction against that group for 2019? Just curious... I say 0-4

2-2 - I think we take A&M and LSU. And no, I'm not going to bet you.
07-29-2019, 01:36 PM
msstate7

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg

2-2 - I think we take A&M and LSU. And no, I'm not going to bet you.

Haha. I think that's awfully optimistic though. I think we'll be a touchdown (or more) dog in all. I think all 4 are head and shoulders better, but the lesser 2 are road games.
07-29-2019, 02:04 PM
BuckyIsAB****

Quote:

Originally Posted by msstate7

Haha. I think that's awfully optimistic though. I think we'll be a touchdown (or more) dog in all. I think all 4 are head and shoulders better, but the lesser 2 are road games.

None of those teams are head and shoulders better than us except Bama. And that one is at home. So even you analytics guys have to say that helps us in that game. Other teams have problems too. LSU cant throw, A&M is a constant underachiever and Auburn is a wild card with a bad OL.
07-29-2019, 02:14 PM
msstate7

Quote:

Originally Posted by BuckyIsAB****

None of those teams are head and shoulders better than us except Bama. And that one is at home. So even you analytics guys have to say that helps us in that game. Other teams have problems too. LSU cant throw, A&M is a constant underachiever and Auburn is a wild card with a bad OL.

Same site on main board (#15 thread) that says we have outstanding LBs and secondary says auburn has #5 oline in oline strength.

We can argue in that thread, Bucky... sorry recruiting guys
07-29-2019, 02:22 PM
Pipedream

Quote:

Originally Posted by BuckyIsAB****

None of those teams are head and shoulders better than us except Bama. And that one is at home. So even you analytics guys have to say that helps us in that game. Other teams have problems too. LSU cant throw, A&M is a constant underachiever and Auburn is a wild card with a bad OL.

I'm just kind of confused-is the question "can we be competitive with the top schools in the division with our current recruiting profile"-that answer is yes outside of Bama, but to win the West you have to beat all or all but 1(sometimes) and we haven't shown we can do that. If y'all wanna talk about how recruiting rankings can overrate traditional powers, have at it. There's a plethora of examples of that happening every year. Recruiting at an elite level isn't a sure fire ticket to winning your league, but it does get you in the room. It's prerequisite. We can't get in the room bc of where we recruit, which is part of the reason we are always underrated.

BTW-early average spread projections for the games mentioned(per S&P+ & Massey Composite)
Aub -3.85
LSU -1.95
A&M -1.9
Bama -11.25

On average you'd expect to win 1.45 of these 4 games which means there's a 45% chance of going 2-2. I'd probably bet on 1-3.
07-29-2019, 02:26 PM
Ifyouonlyknew

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pipedream

I'm just kind of confused-is the question "can we be competitive with the top schools in the division with our current recruiting profile"-that answer is yes outside of Bama, but to win the West you have to beat all or all but 1(sometimes) and we haven't shown we can do that. If y'all wanna talk about how recruiting rankings can overrate traditional powers, have at it. There's a plethora of examples of that happening every year. Recruiting at an elite level isn't a sure fire ticket to winning your league, but it does get you in the room. It's prerequisite. We can't get in the room bc of where we recruit, which is part of the reason we are always underrated.

BTW-early average spread projections for the games mentioned(per S&P+ & Massey Composite)
Aub -3.85
LSU -1.95
A&M -1.9
Bama -11.25

On average you'd expect to win 1.45 of these 4 games which means there's a 45% chance of going 2-2. I'd probably bet on 1-3.

Bama skews the division so bad. Take out Bama in the West & we'd have a legit chance 1 out of every 3-4 years to realistically compete for the West. With Bama running the way they are winning the division is just damn near impossible.
07-29-2019, 02:27 PM
msstate7

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ifyouonlyknew

Bama skews the division so bad. Take out Bama in the West & we'd have a legit chance 1 out of every 3-4 years to realistically compete for the West. With Bama running the way they are winning the division is just damn near impossible.

Which is why the realistic goal should be NY6, not sec imo
07-29-2019, 02:30 PM
Ifyouonlyknew

Quote:

Originally Posted by msstate7

Which is why the realistic goal should be NY6, not sec imo

I don't disagree.
07-29-2019, 02:40 PM
Pipedream

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ifyouonlyknew

Bama skews the division so bad. Take out Bama in the West & we'd have a legit chance 1 out of every 3-4 years to realistically compete for the West. With Bama running the way they are winning the division is just damn near impossible.

I agree and I also agree that a NY6 bowl is the ceiling of the program right now, but I don't think you can hope/assume for a Bama dropoff when Saban leaves. Last 30 seasons they've lost 2 or fewer games 13 times. The 30 seasons before that it happened 20 times. 33 of their last 60 seasons have ended with 2 or fewer losses. They're going to be a national title contending team AT LEAST every other year. That spans 8 different coaches for them. It's just who they are. They've been remarkably consistent under Saban, but I don't think they're going to drop back to being A&M or Auburn when he leaves.
07-29-2019, 02:48 PM
Ifyouonlyknew

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pipedream

I agree and I also agree that a NY6 bowl is the ceiling of the program right now, but I don't think you can hope/assume for a Bama dropoff when Saban leaves. Last 30 seasons they've lost 2 or fewer games 13 times. The 30 seasons before that it happened 20 times. 33 of their last 60 seasons have ended with 2 or fewer losses. They're going to be a national title contending team AT LEAST every other year. That spans 8 different coaches for them. It's just who they are. They've been remarkably consistent under Saban, but I don't think they're going to drop back to being A&M or Auburn when he leaves.

Depends on the coach. From Stallings to Saban they ran through 3 mediocre coaches. You can't just assume anybody can keep the train rolling.
07-29-2019, 03:03 PM
1bigdawg

It took Dabo Swinney years to build Clemson. In his first several years, they were near the bottom of ACC recruiting. Then he had a couple of good seasons and recruiting picked up. Then he had a couple of great seasons and recruiting followed so that now they compete with Alabama.

Mullen was following a similar trajectory and could have succeeded except for 1) his constant job seeking and 2) his loyalty to the "country club" coaches. If JoeMo picks up where he left off as a recruiter and if he is a great coach, we could follow Clemson's progression and be competitive for the SEC.

BTW: I don't have the figures for Clemson's athletic budget, but they were not listed in the top 25 in a 247 sports article. We were number 32, so there is not that big a difference in financial resources. Also, they are a similarly sized school in a better, but not that much better, location.
07-29-2019, 03:10 PM
Ifyouonlyknew

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1bigdawg

It took Dabo Swinney years to build Clemson. In his first several years, they were near the bottom of ACC recruiting. Then he had a couple of good seasons and recruiting picked up. Then he had a couple of great seasons and recruiting followed so that now they compete with Alabama.

Mullen was following a similar trajectory and could have succeeded except for 1) his constant job seeking and 2) his loyalty to the "country club" coaches. If JoeMo picks up where he left off as a recruiter and if he is a great coach, we could follow Clemson's progression and be competitive for the SEC.

BTW: I don't have the figures for Clemson's athletic budget, but they were not listed in the top 25 in a 247 sports article. We were number 32, so there is not that big a difference in financial resources. Also, they are a similarly sized school in a better, but not that much better, location.

The biggest problem with the Clemson model for MSU is that we're fighting 4 Top 12 recruiters in our division & 6 Top 15 recruiters in our conference. Clemson only have 2 other Top 20 recruiters in their entire conference. That makes it a lot easier to slow climb up the recruiting rankings while still being able to win big on the field. What clemson did to offset the lack of top 5-10 recruiting was hit on elite college QB's the last decade. They went from Tahj Boyd to Desean Watson to Trevor Lawrence & will have DJ Uiagalelei waiting in the wings after him.
07-29-2019, 03:16 PM
Pipedream

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ifyouonlyknew

Depends on the coach. From Stallings to Saban they ran through 3 mediocre coaches. You can't just assume anybody can keep the train rolling.

They've lost 2 or less games every other year for 60 years. Hard for me to imagine that train is coming off the tracks.
07-29-2019, 03:26 PM
Ifyouonlyknew

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pipedream

They've lost 2 or less games every other year for 60 years. Hard for me to imagine that train is coming off the tracks.

Yes & between 97 & 07 they lost more than 2 games every year. Again they better hire the right coach or the machine won't just keep running. Bama is a premiere program but all premiere programs need premiere coaches or they won't run properly.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:14 AM.