Ranking the SEC jobs

[notsofarawaydawg]

Ranking the SEC Jobs

[Smitty]

Stopped reading when I got to Florida

[smootness]

Aschoff. I don't disagree much with those rankings, but the Ole Miss/State jobs are almost identical. Anyone who sees much difference between the two is biased.

I will say, though, that our future looks better than theirs.

[smootness]

Stopped reading when I got to Florida

You don't think that's the best job in the conference?

I would say you're insane if you think it's not.

[GreenheadDawg]

Jesus, how long are they going to ride the coat tail of that 2013 class. It was ONE ****ing class.

[smootness]

Jesus, how long are they going to ride the coat tail of that 2013 class. It was ONE ****ing class.

Yep. But get ready, because people will end up similarly touting their 2016 class, even though it won't have the overall star power.

And that 2013 class was really just based around 4 guys. Yes, it was a great haul for a program like Ole Miss, but it was also clearly a fluke.

[MaxedOutMaroon]

The 2013 class was top heavy and it's going to show this year. I'd rather have a balanced above average class than a top heavy class with a few great players and the rest are average or below average. Plus some of those classes are transferring and such. So I agree, when are they going to stop? But I know the answer, next season. Cause four of those players will jet.

[smootness]

The 2013 class was top heavy and it's going to show this year. I'd rather have a balanced above average class than a top heavy class with a few great players and the rest are average or below average. Plus some of those classes are transferring and such. So I agree, when are they going to stop? But I know the answer, next season. Cause four of those players will jet.

The rest of the class was fine; the problem is that several of the other highly-rated guys in the class have either left or are busts.

Golson - gone
Hooks - bust and now gone
Kailo - bust
Brassell - gone
Dodson - gone
Wilkins - pretty good last year
Buchanan - so promising they had to take a chance on Kelly
Kincade - same as above
Morgan - gone

Those are literally the top 9 guys in that class, according to recruiting rankings, after the Big 4. You have Jordan Wilkins and two QBs that they clearly don't believe in and probably won't ever play. That is it.

They did get Engram and Derrick Jones out of the class, but still - the class that everyone is using to hype up Ole Miss, has literally produced 7 productive players, and only 4-5 of them are above-average. Think about that.

They have to have guys from last year's class, like Taylor, Hampton, Speaks, Sheppard, and Pack, and Swinney from this current class, be really good this year or they're going to have problems.

[chef dixon]

The rest of the class was fine; the problem is that several of the other highly-rated guys in the class have either left or are busts.

Golson - gone
Hooks - bust and now gone
Kailo - bust
Brassell - gone
Dodson - gone
Wilkins - pretty good last year
Buchanan - so promising they had to take a chance on Kelly
Kincade - same as above
Morgan - gone

Those are literally the top 9 guys in that class, according to recruiting rankings, after the Big 4. You have Jordan Wilkins and two QBs that they clearly don't believe in and probably won't ever play. That is it.

They did get Engram and Derrick Jones out of the class, but still - the class that everyone is using to hype up Ole Miss, has literally produced 7 productive players, and only 4-5 of them are above-average. Think about that.

They have to have guys from last year's class, like Taylor, Hampton, Speaks, Sheppard, and Pack, and Swinney from this current class, be really good this year or they're going to have problems.

Kailo Moore. That's a name I haven't seen in a while.

[Smitty]

I would say you're insane if you think it's not.

Bama and Texas A&M ahead of it. Location isn't what it used to be for UF. I'd put the Gators on par with the Tigahhs

[smootness]

Bama and Texas A&M ahead of it. Location isn't what it used to be for UF. I'd put the Gators on par with the Tigahhs

No way. Bama is there now more because of Saban than because it's Bama. Their hires before Saban, to me, prove that.

And heck no on A&M. They haven't proven a thing yet. They have money, and it's in TX, but they have no history to speak of. If you're putting Bama there for their history, you can't put A&M over Florida.

[Smitty]

No way. Bama is there now more because of Saban than because it's Bama. Their hires before Saban, to me, prove that.

And heck no on A&M. They haven't proven a thing yet. They have money, and it's in TX, but they have no history to speak of. If you're putting Bama there for their history, you can't put A&M over Florida.

Why do you think they got Nick Saban in the 1st place.. B/C they are Bama. And who cares about before, the dynamic has changed permanently.

A&M is there because their money is that huge. They are the Saudi royal family of the Southeast. Texas talent at least equals Florida talent especially football development.

[TUSK]

sure, you could switch a few around here and there...

but overall, I agreed with the rankings... I thought the "tiers" were reasonable.

[smootness]

Why do you think they got Nick Saban in the 1st place.. B/C they are Bama. And who cares about before, the dynamic has changed permanently.

A&M is there because their money is that huge. They are the Saudi royal family of the Southeast. Texas talent at least equals Florida talent especially football development.

Sure, they got Saban instead of a place like State. But obviously Florida could have also gotten Saban if they had wanted him. Bama got Saban because they were the best job open at the time, not because he wanted them over any other job in college football.

If you're basing Bama being there solely on the fact that they were able to hire Saban, then what do you do with Mike Shula?

And yes, A&M has money. But Florida has plenty enough themselves; the difference between the two doesn't make an actual difference in what the two programs are able to do. And A&M has yet to prove they're able to translate that into big-time football success, so there's just no way you can put them on the level of a Florida.

At the very least, thinking it's stupid that Florida could possibly be ranked #1 by someone is what is stupid.

You're telling me that if Bama and Florida both had job openings, that Bama could get a guy over Florida? Please.

[TUSK]

Sure, they got Saban instead of a place like State. But obviously Florida could have also gotten Saban if they had wanted him. Bama got Saban because they were the best job open at the time, not because he wanted them over any other job in college football.

If you're basing Bama being there solely on the fact that they were able to hire Saban, then what do you do with Mike Shula?

And yes, A&M has money. But Florida has plenty enough themselves; the difference between the two doesn't make an actual difference in what the two programs are able to do. And A&M has yet to prove they're able to translate that into big-time football success, so there's just no way you can put them on the level of a Florida.

At the very least, thinking it's stupid that Florida could possibly be ranked #1 by someone is what is stupid.

You're telling me that if Bama and Florida both had job openings, that Bama could get a guy over Florida? Please.

Smoot, where (and why) would you rank Bammer if Saban weren't the coach?

[smootness]

Smoot, where (and why) would you rank Bammer if Saban weren't the coach?

If all jobs were open at the same time, I would probably rank the top half of the conference like so:

1. Florida
2. Alabama
3. LSU
4. A&M
5. Auburn
6. Georgia
7. Tennessee

Pretty comparable to ESPN's list; I would just knock UGA down some.

The bottom line on A&M is that there still aren't many kids in TX who grow up hoping to play for A&M. That could change over the next 10-15 years, but as it is, they're just not on that level yet.

And if I could take all the kids in FL or all the kids in TX, I'd choose FL.

ETA: If this were 5 years ago, I would have LSU ahead of Bama. But Bama's recent national title run is huge for selling that program, with or without Saban.

[TUSK]

If all jobs were open at the same time, I would probably rank the top half of the conference like so:

1. Florida
2. Alabama
3. LSU
4. A&M
5. Auburn
6. Georgia
7. Tennessee

Pretty comparable to ESPN's list; I would just knock UGA down some.

The bottom line on A&M is that there still aren't many kids in TX who grow up hoping to play for A&M. That could change over the next 10-15 years, but as it is, they're just not on that level yet.

And if I could take all the kids in FL or all the kids in TX, I'd choose FL.

ETA: If this were 5 years ago, I would have LSU ahead of Bama. But Bama's recent national title run is huge for selling that program, with or without Saban.

I'm down with that.

[maroonmania]

Aschoff. I don't disagree much with those rankings, but the Ole Miss/State jobs are almost identical. Anyone who sees much difference between the two is biased.

I will say, though, that our future looks better than theirs.

I agree, OM and MSU are essentially the same job except that OM has #TheNetwork to assist with their out of state recruiting and we don't. That's pretty much it in a nutshell. I would likely swap Missouri and Ole Miss because even though Missouri may have slightly less talent within their state than we do, they are pretty much THE school in Missouri so they don't have to split that talent with another big time school in the state. I do believe the toughest 4 jobs in the SEC to keep sustained success are Vandy, KY, MSU and OM with Mizzou and SC just slightly ahead of that mix. Will be interesting to see what SC does after the ol' ball coach hangs it up.

[State82]

If all jobs were open at the same time, I would probably rank the top half of the conference like so:

1. Florida
2. Alabama
3. LSU
4. A&M
5. Auburn
6. Georgia
7. Tennessee

This is exactly how I would rank them.

[smootness]

I agree, OM and MSU are essentially the same job except that OM has #TheNetwork to assist with their out of state recruiting and we don't. That's pretty much it in a nutshell. I would likely swap Missouri and Ole Miss because even though Missouri may have slightly less talent within their state than we do, they are pretty much THE school in Missouri so they don't have to split that talent with another big time school in the state. I do believe the toughest 4 jobs in the SEC to keep sustained success are Vandy, KY, MSU and OM with Mizzou and SC just slightly ahead of that mix. Will be interesting to see what SC does after the ol' ball coach hangs it up.

I might put Missouri ahead of State and Ole Miss, but if I did, it would only be because of budget and recent success, not because of in-state talent. Missouri doesn't produce anything close to the level of talent Mississippi does, even if Missouri was able to get everybody.

But even then, they definitely don't get everybody. They lose a pretty high % of the top players in MO to big-time programs every year, like Ohio State and Nebraska. Mississippi kids are for more likely to stay in-state.