Tommy Champion is now a 4 star per Paul Jones. Congrats to him!!. That makes 9 4 *

[PMDawg]

I don't think they would be a bottom feeder at first, but they would over time. They simply don't have the local recruiting base to keep up, and, once they started losing games, they wouldn't be able to draw kids from southern California.

Boise has less resources than any SEC school, a worse local recruiting base than any SEC school, and less money than any SEC school. Give me one reason why they wouldn't be an SEC bottom feeder within 5 years of joining our conference. There must be a bridge, because winning doesn't happen by accident.

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.

[ShotgunDawg]

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.

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.

[PMDawg]

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.

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.

[sandwolf]

still chicken or the egg though... are they a 5 because Bama evaluated and offered or because some recruiting website identified them early and made them a five and then Bama offered? I say the Bama offer comes first.

It's like Chris Jones. I got drilled for being jacked up about a 2 star commit. The star services wouldn't give him a bump... then State offered, then OM, then Bama, etc... and all of a sudden he's a five star.

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.

[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.

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.

[thf24]

You mean like the year they pounded SECE champion Georgia? Yeah, they would've been ok. Or the 2006 team that went undefeated and beat Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl? Or the 2009 team that went undefeated and won Fiesta Bowl over TCU? Between 2008 and 2012 they went 61-5. So yeah I'm gonna guess they would've been better than 35-25 over that same period had they been in the SEC.

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.

[sandwolf]

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.

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.

[ShotgunDawg]

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.

Calvin and Stamps don't even have rating yet. Do you think both of those guys are top 20 worthy?

[Political Hack]

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.

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.

[sandwolf]

Calvin and Stamps don't even have rating yet. Do you think both of those guys are top 20 worthy?

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.

ETA: I am assuming that you are referring to the Scout ratings.

[dawgs]

Completely disagree. The SEC would bleed them over time. They wouldn't have to the resources to not be a bottom feeder. The reason they are able to attract players right now is because they win, and kids in Southern Cal go there because they are a good option after USC, UCLA, and Stanford fill up. Once Boise began losing games in the SEC, 10-2 becomes 8-4, 8-4 becomes 6-6, etc... The kids from Southern Cal would no longer be interested in going there. After 5 years in the SEC, Boise wouldn't be able to compete.

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.

[dawgs]

still chicken or the egg though... are they a 5 because Bama evaluated and offered or because some recruiting website identified them early and made them a five and then Bama offered? I say the Bama offer comes first.

It's like Chris Jones. I got drilled for being jacked up about a 2 star commit. The star services wouldn't give him a bump... then State offered, then OM, then Bama, etc... and all of a sudden he's a five star.

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.

[ShotgunDawg]

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.

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.

[Political Hack]

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.

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.

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...