2024 MSU FOOTBALL RECRUITING

[Goldendawg]

It's going to take our fans raising hell to change the fact that this consistently happens to us every year.

Gene was too soft in that regard but Steve might be able to change it.

They seem to have also changed to using 24/7 ratings only instead of composite in their team rankings.

[Tater]

They seem to have also changed to using 24/7 ratings only instead of composite in their team rankings.

Worry about rankings to tell you how good a kid is, is a losing proposition now. The money is in the clicks, and the clicks come when the higher fan volume teams get rated higher. Is what it is. Why else would we consistently outperform our rankings?

[MetEdDawg]

Worry about rankings to tell you how good a kid is, is a losing proposition now. The money is in the clicks, and the clicks come when the higher fan volume teams get rated higher. Is what it is. Why else would we consistently outperform our rankings?

This is the 100% correct answer.

If we had more fan viewership and subscriptions to ranking services, we would be consistently higher rated in recruiting. Period.

[TaleofTwoDogs]

This is the 100% correct answer.

If we had more fan viewership and subscriptions to ranking services, we would be consistently higher rated in recruiting. Period.

That is our lot in life and it is frustrating but at the end of the day the most important ranking is earned on the field. Keep winning and have a 2014 season (or better) every 5 years or so and the respect will come.

[msu15]

Worry about rankings to tell you how good a kid is, is a losing proposition now. The money is in the clicks, and the clicks come when the higher fan volume teams get rated higher. Is what it is. Why else would we consistently outperform our rankings?

Ding Ding Ding

[99jc]

Who cares about about rankings. Wins and loses are that matters.

[bulldawg28]

Who cares about about rankings. Wins and loses are that matters.

1000% correct

[Commercecomet24]

Worry about rankings to tell you how good a kid is, is a losing proposition now. The money is in the clicks, and the clicks come when the higher fan volume teams get rated higher. Is what it is. Why else would we consistently outperform our rankings?

Great post!

[Commercecomet24]

I will also be stunned if Hibbler remains an 87 and Lindsey an 84. Both are criminally underranked by 24.

It's hard to believe those 2 have that low a ranking, but we all know why. As you said they are criminally underrated.

[msu15]

It's hard to believe those 2 have that low a ranking, but we all know why. As you said they are criminally underrated.

Yep. GUARANTEED if they would've committed to Bama Hibbler would be a 93 and Lindsay an 88 in an INSTANT.

[Commercecomet24]

Yep. GUARANTEED if they would've committed to Bama Hibbler would be a 93 and Lindsay an 88 in an INSTANT.

Absolutely no doubt about it!

[Maverick91]

My issue with this thought that ratings are trash, is that if they were true then why do the top dogs continue to win. We cannot say on one hand ratings dont matter and then on the other hand make the comments about the bamas of the world get all the talent and thats why they always win.

I feel like more often than not ratings are pretty accurate. If they werent bama, Georgia, Ohio State etc. they wouldnt basically cream their entire schedule ever year.

[DEDawg]

My issue with this thought that ratings are trash, is that if they were true then why do the top dogs continue to win. We cannot say on one hand ratings dont matter and then on the other hand make the comments about the bamas of the world get all the talent and thats why they always win.

I feel like more often than not ratings are pretty accurate. If they werent bama, Georgia, Ohio State etc. they wouldnt basically cream their entire schedule ever year.

Its a poor argument. It does have some truth behind it because MS kids historically ARE underrated and that is our biggest pool, but yeah just straight up saying stars dont matter is silly.

[MrCoachKlein]

MS kids are underrated a bit. Dismissing rankings is nonsense.

"Put simply, to win the national championship, college football teams need to sign more four- and five-star recruits (AKA ?Blue Chips?) than two- and three-star players over the previous four recruiting classes.

This has been true basically as far back as modern internet recruiting rankings have existed."

https://247sports.com/article/blue-c...ly--211217111/

ETA: it's a tool like any other. If over half your roster isn't 4-5* then you have no chance for a title. The rankings are wrong at times, but we're arguing over a high 3 vs 4. In my opinion it's a good tool to gauge team talent level. Someone said it earlier, top 10-15 are elite and 15-40 are a lot closer than #20 is to #5.

[Tater]

247 used to be predictive but now it's just lazy. The assumption is that whoever Bama / Georgia /A&M buy must be worth it. The reality is that they may not be.

More often than not they're gonna hit on their recruits because Bama typically does good scouting. 247 just ain't got the man power to keep up. So they take the lazy route.

[Todd4State]

247 used to be predictive but now it's just lazy. The assumption is that whoever Bama / Georgia /A&M buy must be worth it. The reality is that they may not be.

More often than not they're gonna hit on their recruits because Bama typically does good scouting. 247 just ain't got the man power to keep up. So they take the lazy route.

Exactly. And no one can say that Mississippi kids are underrated when they're rated four stars out of the gate and then all of a sudden in the offseason they're dropped to a three star.

[Goldendawg]

I agree with everything y'all have posted regarding clickbait for competing schools with larger fan bases, wanting more subscribers from them, MS players being under rated and rerated if they commit to us. I am not a star chaser. I just report here what I have read on 24/7 (free articles), but you can't tell me our commits don't follow and know when they are dropped from a 4 star to a high three and how happy most of our fans are to finish in the top 25 or so as we usually do. This is unfair to MSU and all involved. Rant over. Now, my connected source tells me probably no new commits until end of month cookout. Any of you guys got any insight, news or even rumors? Sure would like to flip a couple of guys committed to Arky or a DL going OOS. Hail State!

[DEDawg]

Exactly. And no one can say that Mississippi kids are underrated when they're rated four stars out of the gate and then all of a sudden in the offseason they're dropped to a three star.

It is not the 4 stars. The criminal under ranking is a kid who is an 83 at a tiny school with no film is really an 88. That happens ALL the time

[Todd4State]

I agree with everything y'all have posted regarding clickbait for competing schools with larger fan bases, wanting more subscribers from them, MS players being under rated and rerated if they commit to us. I am not a star chaser. I just report here what I have read on 24/7 (free articles), but you can't tell me our commits don't follow and know when they are dropped from a 4 star to a high three and how happy most of our fans are to finish in the top 25 or so as we usually do. This is unfair to MSU and all involved. Rant over. Now, my connected source tells me probably no new commits until end of month cookout. Any of you guys got any insight, news or even rumors? Sure would like to flip a couple of guys committed to Arky or a DL going OOS. Hail State!

I don't consider myself "connected" but I could definitely see Noreel White and maybe we push for SanFrisco Magee to commit?

Wouldn't completely surprise me to see some other player show up that no one is expecting and all of a sudden it ends up like Jimothy Lewis.

[PMDawg]

247 used to be predictive but now it's just lazy. The assumption is that whoever Bama / Georgia /A&M buy must be worth it. The reality is that they may not be.

More often than not they're gonna hit on their recruits because Bama typically does good scouting. 247 just ain't got the man power to keep up. So they take the lazy route.

Yep, two things can be true at once.

The top 5 to 10 rated classes can be loaded with talent compared to the rest of us.

Immediately moving a kid's rating up b/c he committed to a certain school and immediately moving a kid's rating down b/c he committed to a certain kid can still happen and still be total BS.

Both of these things can be true at the same time.

Of course stars and class rankings matter. But maybe not so much past the top 10 or 15 classes. We end up around 30th in recruiting every year, and then the media folks always predict us to finish near the bottom of the SEC and cite our "lack of talent". Then, they're surprised those years we finish inside of the top 20 on the actual field. Then we do it all over again. No one is claiming our classes would be elite if the recruiting sites did their job right. But maybe we'd finish around 18th or so more often, and then people may actually predict us to not completely suck and/or act like it's a miracle when we go 9-4 or whatever.