Cole Smith

[Tbonewannabe]

If you look at our o-linemen numbers we aren't taking enough as it is if anything from a pure numbers standpoint- I would guess we're only averaging about three high school o-linemen a class. But those three are "projects" because the ones that we aren't getting are the ones that have offers from other schools much of the time, so that's literally all we're left with by default. Otherwise we would have no o-line recruits period. That's why we have to take so many JUCO's- and the bad thing there is often times again we're taking projects like Phillips so there's not really any relief. The highest rated o-linemen we actually have landed the past two cycles from a star standpoint was Martinas Rankin- and not coincidentally it looks like he is our best o-line prospect we've had in awhile.

And when you take three projects a year at a position group that is already difficult to evaluate- you make your margin for error a lot less because the only way that is ever going to work is for us to find three projects and actually have them all pan out.

Rankin also took a year and a half to look like a SEC Olineman. Does the TEs work with the Oline in practice at all? If they do, hopefully Looney can help out there.

[Ari Gold]

Mean OL. Great genetics. Room to grow. Legacy. Good film. Loves State. Yeah let's not take him and see if he can be another Day or Beckwith....so profoundly ****ing stupid I don't know where to begin. Fireable. And by not offering now and slow playing we will have to work harder to tell him but yeah we've always loved you son and convince him to come. Because he hasn't camped yet? Again fireable.

This guy gets it.. Mic 🎤 drop

[dawgday166]

If you look at our o-linemen numbers we aren't taking enough as it is if anything from a pure numbers standpoint- I would guess we're only averaging about three high school o-linemen a class. But those three are "projects" because the ones that we aren't getting are the ones that have offers from other schools much of the time, so that's literally all we're left with by default. Otherwise we would have no o-line recruits period. That's why we have to take so many JUCO's- and the bad thing there is often times again we're taking projects like Phillips so there's not really any relief. The highest rated o-linemen we actually have landed the past two cycles from a star standpoint was Martinas Rankin- and not coincidentally it looks like he is our best o-line prospect we've had in awhile.

And when you take three projects a year at a position group that is already difficult to evaluate- you make your margin for error a lot less because the only way that is ever going to work is for us to find three projects and actually have them all pan out.

I absolutely agree with this. The scenario that is playing out this spring plays out almost every spring. Every damn year. Our depth sucks cause we lose out on recruits and are usually scrambling at the end to get the 3 or sometimes 4 you're talking about. Usually 1 or 2 of those don't pan out at all, so we are left with about 8 or so somewhat ready to play at an average SEC level Olinemen. And in the spring 2 or 3 starters are out due to rehabilitation.

[dawgday166]

Mean OL. Great genetics. Room to grow. Legacy. Good film. Loves State. Yeah let's not take him and see if he can be another Day or Beckwith....so profoundly ****ing stupid I don't know where to begin. Fireable. And by not offering now and slow playing we will have to work harder to tell him but yeah we've always loved you son and convince him to come. Because he hasn't camped yet? Again fireable.

Everything I've read about him this morning backs up what you just said. And in his picture he looks like he may have the body of a body builder, no big gut hanging over ... he's lean but it says he weighs 275 ... and I've read where he's only 16 too. I believe I also read where he's a power lifting champ I believe.

If this is all true ... I can understand why we don't take him. Hev likes major projects to work with and this guy may not fit that mold *****

[NCDawg]

Yeah, he just signed an extension. Dan has done a good job here and I don't think he needs cohen telling him how to coach football

Yeah, I guess you could say Mullen has done a good job here by our standards, although we were 5-7 last year, barely beat Miami, Ohio in the bowl game, and have lost to Alabama every year Mullen has been here. Not sure that deserves another 4 year 4.5M per year contract, one of the highest in the country. I'm disappointed that our new AD apparently wasn't aware of our inferior OL recruiting and performance and demand that Mullen rectify that situation before awarding him with the new contract.

[Political Hack]

There was also a CB with a 40+" vertical who blew up last year that was interested in State. Scheduled an unofficial but had to cancel because he had a basketball game. Staff hasn't reached out since. Since that times he's gotten over 10 offers including 4 ACC offers. He'll be a 4 star after summer camps and we had a chance to be his 1st P5 offer.

I think this can probably be chalked up to the timing of the new defensive staff, but it's still an example of how we're always late to the party. Bama throws out 100 offers with only 10 being committable this early. I'm not sure why we can't do the same.

[HSVDawg]

If you look at our o-linemen numbers we aren't taking enough as it is if anything from a pure numbers standpoint- I would guess we're only averaging about three high school o-linemen a class. But those three are "projects" because the ones that we aren't getting are the ones that have offers from other schools much of the time, so that's literally all we're left with by default. Otherwise we would have no o-line recruits period. That's why we have to take so many JUCO's- and the bad thing there is often times again we're taking projects like Phillips so there's not really any relief. The highest rated o-linemen we actually have landed the past two cycles from a star standpoint was Martinas Rankin- and not coincidentally it looks like he is our best o-line prospect we've had in awhile.

And when you take three projects a year at a position group that is already difficult to evaluate- you make your margin for error a lot less because the only way that is ever going to work is for us to find three projects and actually have them all pan out.

I agree we need to take more OL. No doubt about that. And I also agree that the ones we do take need to be more talented than they have been. But, for a kid to even qualify as a "project", he has to have the measurables to work with. Right now, there is some doubt about those measurables being there with Smith amongst the in-state staffs. Shit, OM's campus is 20 minutes away, so Luke has probably seen him in person a double-digit number of times (plus, he attended their Jr. day). And we all know how much they'd love to stick a thumb in our eye and pull in an MSU legacy that may end up being a really good player. And they haven't even offered yet either. It cannot be emphasized enough that we just cannot offer an in-state legacy in March or a recruiting cycle if there is even a hint that he might not be a bona fide SEC player. If the situation were reversed and he was a Louisiana kid, we absolutely could do it. But not for a MS kid and especially not for a legacy.

[Interpolation_Dawg_EX]

Bama throws out 100 offers with only 10 being committable this early. I'm not sure why we can't do the same.

I get the point, but over the last couple of years we have increased our offers by 100. We were in the 250's in 2014, but last year's class had 360 offers. We already have 230 out right now for 2018, but I understand why Cole is special in this instance.

I'd guess you would know the answer to this...do we recruit by region or by position group?

[HSVDawg]

Bama throws out 100 offers with only 10 being committable this early. I'm not sure why we can't do the same.

We do send out out blanket offers just like Bama and everyone else. But the purpose of blanket offers is to get your foot in the door with out of state kids who may not currently have your school on their radar. You don't send them to in state kids who are very aware of your program unless they are committable offers. And as you said, only 10% are actually committable. LSU also does this same thing and it is very debateable as to how long Smith's offer is commitable if they add more guys. At a minimum, he may have a grayshirt offer coming his way next February.

[Todd4State]

Rankin also took a year and a half to look like a SEC Olineman. Does the TEs work with the Oline in practice at all? If they do, hopefully Looney can help out there.

I still do not believe that Rankin was worse than Rufus Warren. I think if we had allowed him to play in 2015 he probably would have progressed like he did this past year when he was actually given an opportunity to play. I think a lot of the adjustment is actually being out there on the field and playing and experiencing it.

[Todd4State]

I agree we need to take more OL. No doubt about that. And I also agree that the ones we do take need to be more talented than they have been. But, for a kid to even qualify as a "project", he has to have the measurables to work with. Right now, there is some doubt about those measurables being there with Smith amongst the in-state staffs. Shit, OM's campus is 20 minutes away, so Luke has probably seen him in person a double-digit number of times (plus, he attended their Jr. day). And we all know how much they'd love to stick a thumb in our eye and pull in an MSU legacy that may end up being a really good player. And they haven't even offered yet either. It cannot be emphasized enough that we just cannot offer an in-state legacy in March or a recruiting cycle if there is even a hint that he might not be a bona fide SEC player. If the situation were reversed and he was a Louisiana kid, we absolutely could do it. But not for a MS kid and especially not for a legacy.

If he is a good enough prospect for LSU and Oregon, he is a good enough prospect for us to offer right now regardless of whether he is a legacy or not. Slow playing a kid "just because he's a legacy" is equally as bad if not worse than just taking a legacy because he's a legacy and can't play. And even though he is a legacy we still have to recruit them and let them know that we want them. If you think a kid can play- don't *****foot around because you think he will be easy to pick up. Offer him. If Hevesy doesn't think he can play- he better hope he doesn't pan out for LSU is all I have to say about that.

As far as Ole Miss not offering him- they ARE about to be on probation and I would imagine that their numbers are going to be very tight. I think they also would fear us flipping him and basically doing the same thing that happened when they flipped Sean Rawlings from us. If he was an Ole Miss legacy I'm 100% sure they would have offered him right now- and he would probably be in their class.

[Todd4State]

And I'll say this about Mississippi State and legacies in general in all sports....


It seems like if you are a MSU legacy you almost have to be twice as good as a typical prospect to even get an offer from MSU, and that's not right. We have burned so many bridges over the years it's not even funny- John Grisham comes to mind. What does it really hurt if a guy is on our practice squad for five years? I just don't understand it. If there is one thing I am envious of Ole Miss of it's the fact that they treat their legacies well. And while most of those guys end up being Ryan Buchanan's- they also end up being the guys that donate a lot of time and money and have a huge impact on the program in other ways a lot of the time.

And it's even worse if it's a guy that is a legacy that can actually help us out on the field.

[dawgday166]

Just watched the film of Cole. Don't know if his true measureables are 6-4 275, but he moves lot better than any HS OL prospect I believe I've watched other than Lashley. He certainly moves much, much (significantly) better than Eiland did his senior year, and Eiland is playing LT for us right now during spring camp. And Cole looks sculpted like a body builder.

I dunno ... maybe the Dan & Hev know something the rest of us don't. Maybe the drawback is they project him as only being able to play center ... and Hev likes guys that can play anywhere on the line (like Dillon Day ***).

I know we only have about 20 schollys or so to give next year ... so we may not want to waste too many of those on Olinemen *****

[HSVDawg]

If he is a good enough prospect for LSU and Oregon, he is a good enough prospect for us to offer right now regardless of whether he is a legacy or not.

Agreed, but the question is if he is actually good enough for either of them. Him getting a blanket offer that might not still be on the table on signing day does not equate to "good enough for Oregon or LSU". And that is exactly what both of those offers are.

Slow playing a kid "just because he's a legacy" is equally as bad if not worse than just taking a legacy because he's a legacy and can't play. And even though he is a legacy we still have to recruit them and let them know that we want them.

Agreed again, but it is 11 months until signing day. Way too early to say we are "slow playing". We hold just about all of our committable in-state offers until Big Dawg (not just for OL but for everyone) unless the player is 100% elite. This is nothing new. If he shows up at Big Dawg and leaves without an offer and we change our minds and give him one in September or October, then we can say we slow played him.

If you think a kid can play- don't *****foot around because you think he will be easy to pick up. Offer him. If Hevesy doesn't think he can play- he better hope he doesn't pan out for LSU is all I have to say about that.

So what if you think the kid can't play, or don't know if he can play? That is obviously where we are with Cole Smith right now. If we haven't seen him in person yet and that is why we haven't offered yet, that is a problem. But if we have seen him and are in process of gathering more data to make sure he's not a tweener, that is another story.

As far as Ole Miss not offering him- they ARE about to be on probation and I would imagine that their numbers are going to be very tight. I think they also would fear us flipping him and basically doing the same thing that happened when they flipped Sean Rawlings from us. If he was an Ole Miss legacy I'm 100% sure they would have offered him right now- and he would probably be in their class.

Fair point.

[TimberBeast]

Your issue is with Mullen then, not hev. If you have to make a coach fire an assistant, you might as well fire the HC.

Yep, been saying it for years. Go ahead and get it done.

[Dawg61]

Yep, been saying it for years. Go ahead and get it done.

wtf? You don't fire the most successful coach by far in our history because he won't fire a guy you think he should fire. You guys don't get to dictate everything Mullen does. Get over it or become our AD and guess what you still don't get to dictate everything Mullen does. He's not firing Hevesy so stop acting like a bunch of shitty diaper toddlers about it. Posting 7 billion melt posts about it isn't going to change Mullen's mind.

[smootness]

There was also a CB with a 40+" vertical who blew up last year that was interested in State. Scheduled an unofficial but had to cancel because he had a basketball game. Staff hasn't reached out since. Since that times he's gotten over 10 offers including 4 ACC offers. He'll be a 4 star after summer camps and we had a chance to be his 1st P5 offer.

I think this can probably be chalked up to the timing of the new defensive staff, but it's still an example of how we're always late to the party. Bama throws out 100 offers with only 10 being committable this early. I'm not sure why we can't do the same.

We've been first to the party on plenty of kids like this.

[smootness]

wtf? You don't fire the most successful coach by far in our history because he won't fire a guy you think he should fire. You guys don't get to dictate everything Mullen does. Get over it or become our AD and guess what you still don't get to dictate everything Mullen does. He's not firing Hevesy so stop acting like a bunch of shitty diaper toddlers about it. Posting 7 billion melt posts about it isn't going to change Mullen's mind.

100% agreed. Good post, 61.

[NCDawg]

Yep, been saying it for years. Go ahead and get it done.

No, I'm sure most fans don't want Mullen fired. But it is a shame that he's making this personal, not business, as they say in The Godfather. Guess we'll never know how good we could be if we had a good, solid, offensive line.

[dawgday166]

We've been first to the party on plenty of kids like this.

Can you give us a list on OL targets? On D side of ball and at QB or RB I would probably agree with you.