D
I try not to worry about Ole Miss
- Thread starter AlCoDog
- Start date
- Status
D
Dollabillz
Guest
Do you not remember when we all bemoaned having Northern Arizona on our schedule? Our AD dropped the ball that season. Seems I remember MSU losing to both Maine and Louisiana Tech in the past decade. That begs the question is it better to lose to Maine, Louisiana Tech, and Houston or to beat Memphis, UAB, and SE Louisiana?
Last year UF played Florida Int, Troy, and Charleston Southern. Why don't you ***** at them some too?
Last year UF played Florida Int, Troy, and Charleston Southern. Why don't you ***** at them some too?
D
Dollabillz
Guest
Dollabillz said:
They're not that far off. I'm not sure how you're comparing them, but we've brought in good talent, and we're on track to bring in another class of good talent. What is your measure for our recruiting?
ETA: I'm not saying we'll average 9 wins a season over Nutt's tenure. I'm saying we're recruiting well enough to put ourselves in position for 9 or 10 win seasons in the not so distant future, and I think we'll have a couple in that range. I don't think that's unrealistic. Apparently you do, because I know you think any recruits we sign from other states are no good.
Also, to clear up any confusion, when I'm talking about 3 good classes in a row, I'm talking about our last two and this one we're about to sign. Those are the type of classes that are going to put us in good position. Nutt's first class was a transition class. As far as transition classes go, it wasn't a bad class, but it was below par in comparison to the ones he signed with a full year to recruit.
D
Dollabillz
Guest
You can debate it all day if it's accurate, but it's all we got. Take out the guys that don't get in, and there you go.
You guys don't add up, man. Just keeping it real. I'm not comparing ours to yours in this instance, so don't try that route.</p>ETA: response to your edit.If we just recruiting to get ourselves in a "position" to win some games, then I'm more than happy with Mullen's recruiting. We almost went to a bowl last year withno name players andno depth. What happens when he get solid players in with depth? And that's what our classes are, solid, nothing spectacular. And I'm fine with that.
You guys don't add up, man. Just keeping it real. I'm not comparing ours to yours in this instance, so don't try that route.</p>ETA: response to your edit.If we just recruiting to get ourselves in a "position" to win some games, then I'm more than happy with Mullen's recruiting. We almost went to a bowl last year withno name players andno depth. What happens when he get solid players in with depth? And that's what our classes are, solid, nothing spectacular. And I'm fine with that.
Until we both get much, much better, we need to get 4-0 in OOC and then worry about the SEC games. When we both start winning more than 50% of our SEC games yearly, then we can start getting those awesome OOC games. I know Ole Miss plays TX in a couple years, and I'm actually looking forward to that. But I don't want the other 3 games to be even moderately difficult until we surpass the Ole Miss standards of the past 30 years.
And if you start looking at attrition and use recruiting rankings as your judge, Nutt's recruiting has gone better than Orgeron's did.
I don't buy the rankings that much, but if that's your measure, signing 2 Top 20 classes in a row is pretty good with a 3rd likely on the way. The 2009 class was Top 20 in the enrolled rankings as well, and the 2010 class will most likely be Top 20 in the enrolled rankings too, so I don't get that point.
Rankings aside, we've done, what I think, is a very good job on recruiting the important positions the last two classes, the trenches. I'm happy with the way that's gone. It's going to be a couple years before those guys take over, but I feel like it's a solid group that's going to win a lot of games for us.
If you are using the rankings, I still don't see your evidence for our recruiting being sub-par or weak recently. It hasn't been.
I don't buy the rankings that much, but if that's your measure, signing 2 Top 20 classes in a row is pretty good with a 3rd likely on the way. The 2009 class was Top 20 in the enrolled rankings as well, and the 2010 class will most likely be Top 20 in the enrolled rankings too, so I don't get that point.
Rankings aside, we've done, what I think, is a very good job on recruiting the important positions the last two classes, the trenches. I'm happy with the way that's gone. It's going to be a couple years before those guys take over, but I feel like it's a solid group that's going to win a lot of games for us.
If you are using the rankings, I still don't see your evidence for our recruiting being sub-par or weak recently. It hasn't been.
- Status