New football commitment...Torrey Bell, 6'5" 230 LB from John Curtis HS
- Thread starter TilloDawg
- Start date
- Status
but if you don't Dan Mullen's trust yet, something is wrong with you.
Who gives a **** what coach34 has to say about the kid... if Dan Mullen wants him, I want him.
</p>
Who gives a **** what coach34 has to say about the kid... if Dan Mullen wants him, I want him.
</p>
moved way up the DE board. Don't worry though, Ward and probably Jefferson will have a spot come signing day if they choose us.
Would have been offered at LSU but the crop of DE/LB's this year in LA. is huge and they have their numbers already. (that State is just soloaded with great Defensive players every year)
But further to the point he got an offer after performing in front of our staff. I'd take an eyeball evaluation by Mullen/Wilson and co. over a recruitnik's opinion any day.
Welcome aboard Mr Bell!
But further to the point he got an offer after performing in front of our staff. I'd take an eyeball evaluation by Mullen/Wilson and co. over a recruitnik's opinion any day.
Welcome aboard Mr Bell!
Staff saw him first hand perform drills. And it's not like it's a week before signing day and just trying to fill a spot. 6'5", 220, with a 4.65 is pretty stout.
be theend of all thelast minute drama,hopefully guys are going to feel compelledto secure a spot and secure it early with everyone filling up their slots much quicker than before. I would like nothing more to see Yancy become irrelevant not that he isn't already. Mullen and company know what they are doing.
bemoaning (i guess that is what you would call it) the fact that there were so many high level D1 prospects in louisiana this year and LSU, because of numbers were not going to be able to sign a full 25. There should be alot of really good players leave that state this year that normally wouldn't.
and let the confeds cheat their asses off while we "do it the right way"?
how long will we let this bull **** go on? "diamonds in the rough" will get you so far...
true.. our coaching is far superior right now.. great... our 3 stars have kicked the **** out of their 4 stars based on just having a better organization and leadership...
we've already seen what happens when we start playing ball like they do.. they can't handle it... private investigators...whores.. you name it...
it's time we nut up and put an end to this bull ****...
how long will we let this bull **** go on? "diamonds in the rough" will get you so far...
true.. our coaching is far superior right now.. great... our 3 stars have kicked the **** out of their 4 stars based on just having a better organization and leadership...
we've already seen what happens when we start playing ball like they do.. they can't handle it... private investigators...whores.. you name it...
it's time we nut up and put an end to this bull ****...
G
Goat 4 Eva
Guest
other state's leftovers. <div>
</div><div>If I had a choice between an equally talented instater, I'd go with the MS pride. But you can't pass up an opportunity to get a talented recruit from somewhere else that the home state overlooked.</div>
</div><div>If I had a choice between an equally talented instater, I'd go with the MS pride. But you can't pass up an opportunity to get a talented recruit from somewhere else that the home state overlooked.</div>
I think they were just giving lip service and you can bet your sweet *** that those cheating lawyers at Ole Miss will figure that out and the SEC will not touch LSU or Alabama. They are two schools theybank on everyyear to get into the BCS championship.
Most players have not been evaluated y recruiting sites, some have only attended a couple of camps so exposure is limited, some players have already committed to State so other schools will not waste their offers on them, we will not get the 5 star players most big schools want, at MS State you have to have several 3 star players to fill a class and then let Mullen & Co be the ones who judge football talent and not some jock sniffing recruiting site amateurs like Yancy, Neil, Steve, Logan, etc.
Jaime Newberg from ESPN who is a very active recruiter is also impressed with Torrey Bell. Here's his tweet on the subject.
@ JNewberg: Saw Torrey Bell practice last month. Miss State got a guy with tremendous upside. He's long, very athletic, can run.
As far as the offers list it's only June!
@ JNewberg: Saw Torrey Bell practice last month. Miss State got a guy with tremendous upside. He's long, very athletic, can run.
As far as the offers list it's only June!
Of course, just the fact that Mullen offered him early was all I needed. If you pick up a commitment this early, it's obviously a player your coach really wanted. With some coaches we've had in the past that wouldn't have given me any assurance at all (I'm looking at you Polk, Crxxm, Boyd). But with Mullen, that's plenty for me.
Personally, I'M disappointed that ya'll got Torrey Bell, wanted him to go to LSU. A lot of people don,t know that LSU, Auburn,Arkansas and Fla. wanted him not to mention that he made the ALL Saban team as a TE at the Alabama camp. He has 4.65 /40 speed and a9'3" broad jump, and 33" vertical leap. last yr. was used as DE and LB was used a lot in pass coverage, had one pass completed over him and made tackle for -4 yards. All District Basketball player,and Football player Soph. & Jr. Year. had 9 Sacks and four CBL's according to JC Stats. Iguess Mullen is as good as we heard at recognizing Talent. That's our loss, but he's not signed yet.
It makes it nearly impossible for you to be able to sign a full compliment of 25 players unless you luck into a situation where your all of your recruits are willing to officially make a decision well before signing day.
Every year, almost every school has at least 4 or 5 players at a minimum that are making signing day decisions. I remember some years where we had as many as 10 or 15 players we were still recruiting who hadn't made an official decision until either signing day or the day or two before signing day.
Even without the 25 rule, we had years where we nearly struck out on all of those remaining players and ended up with a well-undersigned class, and we had years where we cleaned up on those final players and ended up well-oversigned for the class.
The only solution I can think of is that teams are going to have to leave a lot of spots open and take a big risk of undersigning every year, or they're going to have to go ahead and fill up their spots and have to turn guys away that want to make signing day decisions.
The only other option, and I see this happening, is that we'll see players be asked to not sign on signing day. Where you might normally sign 28-30, before the completely asinine rules were put in place, planning on 3-5 of them not making it to campus and/or one or two of them grayshirting, you'll see only 25 signed, and 3-5 players will be asked to just not sign with anyone and plan on coming if a spot opens up or grayshirting if a spot doesn't open up.
If you're Florida and you have the luxury of cherry-picking somewhat and knowing you don't have to sign academic risks and you can force players to make early decisions, you don't have to worry about this rule. For the majority of the SEC, these signing rules are awful.
Every year, almost every school has at least 4 or 5 players at a minimum that are making signing day decisions. I remember some years where we had as many as 10 or 15 players we were still recruiting who hadn't made an official decision until either signing day or the day or two before signing day.
Even without the 25 rule, we had years where we nearly struck out on all of those remaining players and ended up with a well-undersigned class, and we had years where we cleaned up on those final players and ended up well-oversigned for the class.
The only solution I can think of is that teams are going to have to leave a lot of spots open and take a big risk of undersigning every year, or they're going to have to go ahead and fill up their spots and have to turn guys away that want to make signing day decisions.
The only other option, and I see this happening, is that we'll see players be asked to not sign on signing day. Where you might normally sign 28-30, before the completely asinine rules were put in place, planning on 3-5 of them not making it to campus and/or one or two of them grayshirting, you'll see only 25 signed, and 3-5 players will be asked to just not sign with anyone and plan on coming if a spot opens up or grayshirting if a spot doesn't open up.
If you're Florida and you have the luxury of cherry-picking somewhat and knowing you don't have to sign academic risks and you can force players to make early decisions, you don't have to worry about this rule. For the majority of the SEC, these signing rules are awful.
I really think this will hurt the SEC in it's football dominance. I forsee this being a horrible rule for the conference as a whole.
the big 10 only allows you to sign 3 more players than scholarship available. so if only 15 guys graduate, then only 18 can be signed. say what you will about the big 10, cause we all poke fun, but they are still the 2nd most consistent and probably the 2nd best conference in CFB over the last couple of decades. big 12 and pac 12 can rise up and have better individual seasons, but on the whole, big 10 seems to be more consistent.
imo if you can't fill out an 85 man roster with 125 signees over a given 5 year period, then you need to reevaluate the way you recruit.
and while yeah, msu and ole miss tend to have to take more academic risks, no one considers that if bama and lsu and aub sign 4 or 5 less players per year, that's 12-15 players each year that will filter down to msu or ole miss and not get stuck on a depth chart at bama and cut their jr year for some 18 year old with potential. some of those guys will blossom with attention and PT. some of those guys (the last couple guys signed in a class) end up being the super stars and the higher rated guys bust. what happens when saban and miles pick the higher rated guy, while the future superstar falls down to msu or ole miss?
i think in the end, this is a net win for msu and ole miss. i'll take quality over quantity, and i think the rule will improve our quality instead of having us fill out a 30 man signing class with lightly recruited 2*.
imo if you can't fill out an 85 man roster with 125 signees over a given 5 year period, then you need to reevaluate the way you recruit.
and while yeah, msu and ole miss tend to have to take more academic risks, no one considers that if bama and lsu and aub sign 4 or 5 less players per year, that's 12-15 players each year that will filter down to msu or ole miss and not get stuck on a depth chart at bama and cut their jr year for some 18 year old with potential. some of those guys will blossom with attention and PT. some of those guys (the last couple guys signed in a class) end up being the super stars and the higher rated guys bust. what happens when saban and miles pick the higher rated guy, while the future superstar falls down to msu or ole miss?
i think in the end, this is a net win for msu and ole miss. i'll take quality over quantity, and i think the rule will improve our quality instead of having us fill out a 30 man signing class with lightly recruited 2*.
the drama. it will simply hurt more when you miss out on the last minute decision and when somebody changes their mind on signing day. it may be that somehow the lsu's and bama's of the world may be able to 'enforce" their committments, but even for them there is risk. for ole miss and msu, the risk is greater cause whether we like it or admit it or not, there are going to be kids who committ to us while hoping for a bama slot.the stuff will roll downhill and it will cause us headaches. there will also always be kids who are going to wait till the last minute that we want.
personally i think this is perhaps the single dumbest thing the sec has done recently. as long as the coaches are up front about the pecking order on schollies with recruits, i don't see 'modest" oversigning as a problem. i'll agree 37 might be more than "modest".... the new rule is going to hurt everybody including the kids.
as for yancy, i'm not sure how this will make him irrelevant?? this does not mean recruiting will be over in january and really will may the recruiting writers more relevant it seems to me since the last minute drama will be more critical. yancy butchers the english language and drives me nuts sometimes but especially over the last few recruiting cycles, his info has been pretty dead on. now if you want to talk irrelevant, let's talk rosebowl...........
personally i think this is perhaps the single dumbest thing the sec has done recently. as long as the coaches are up front about the pecking order on schollies with recruits, i don't see 'modest" oversigning as a problem. i'll agree 37 might be more than "modest".... the new rule is going to hurt everybody including the kids.
as for yancy, i'm not sure how this will make him irrelevant?? this does not mean recruiting will be over in january and really will may the recruiting writers more relevant it seems to me since the last minute drama will be more critical. yancy butchers the english language and drives me nuts sometimes but especially over the last few recruiting cycles, his info has been pretty dead on. now if you want to talk irrelevant, let's talk rosebowl...........
tenureplan said:
But you misread what I said. You had more 4 stars on field than we did.
On offense we had Summers and Massie. You had Bumphis and Sherrod. On defense we had Powe and Shack. You had McPhee, White, Cox, and Boyd. You beat us with 4 stars and Croom's Relf, not Mullen's diamonds. Your point hold true in regards to attrition, but don't think you beat a lot of 4 stars with Mullen's 2's and 3's
Masoli wasn't ranked by scout or Rivals. And why you may not care whose 2 stars you beat OM with, the rest of your fanbase is under the impression that it's Dan's 2 stars that are beating OM's. But back to our convo... You still had more 4 stars on the field than we did. So your original statement should have been "I don't really care as long as our 4 stars continue to beat their 3's"
They should have left it at 28, but replaced grey shirts with transfer waivers. If a tea
has to GS you then you should have the option to transfer to a D1 school without sitting out a year
has to GS you then you should have the option to transfer to a D1 school without sitting out a year
It's all because Slive is weak and reactionary.
If a bunch of media outlets started putting out that they thought the SEC's color scheme on their logo was wrong and sent the wrong message, for whatever reason, Slive would have the colors changed at the next SEC meeting.
My solution is the 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' rule. SEC football is a business. I prefer it when we don't pretend that it's about something other than winning.
I understand the thinking behind some of these rules, but they just aren't practical in the South.
To the poster that posted about the Big 10, the Big 10 has become a joke in large part because they want to always play the moral/academic high road card so much. They still haven't figured out that you don't get points for that. The Big 12 and the Pac-10 have both been better and deeper than the Big 10. The SEC is number 1. That's clear. The Big 12 and Pac 10 are number 2 and 3. With the move of teams, I'd say the Pac-10/12 is now better than the Big 12-2, but they are both still better than the Big 10, which is No. 4 right now, and I think the Big 10 is on the verge of being closer to the Big East and ACC than they want to be.
If a bunch of media outlets started putting out that they thought the SEC's color scheme on their logo was wrong and sent the wrong message, for whatever reason, Slive would have the colors changed at the next SEC meeting.
My solution is the 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' rule. SEC football is a business. I prefer it when we don't pretend that it's about something other than winning.
I understand the thinking behind some of these rules, but they just aren't practical in the South.
To the poster that posted about the Big 10, the Big 10 has become a joke in large part because they want to always play the moral/academic high road card so much. They still haven't figured out that you don't get points for that. The Big 12 and the Pac-10 have both been better and deeper than the Big 10. The SEC is number 1. That's clear. The Big 12 and Pac 10 are number 2 and 3. With the move of teams, I'd say the Pac-10/12 is now better than the Big 12-2, but they are both still better than the Big 10, which is No. 4 right now, and I think the Big 10 is on the verge of being closer to the Big East and ACC than they want to be.
And I thought fraternity rush was miserable...
Kids would basically be going to whatever school they officially visited first...or whichever team visited them first.
Imagine a coach like Orgeron in that kind of situation....He would be even more bat-**** crazy if LOIs could be signed at ANY time and where totally BINDING. I imagine that he would be completely cool with threatening kids physically in order to get them to sign their LOI.
On the flip-side, We probably would have gotten Cam 2.0 though...
Kids would basically be going to whatever school they officially visited first...or whichever team visited them first.
Imagine a coach like Orgeron in that kind of situation....He would be even more bat-**** crazy if LOIs could be signed at ANY time and where totally BINDING. I imagine that he would be completely cool with threatening kids physically in order to get them to sign their LOI.
On the flip-side, We probably would have gotten Cam 2.0 though...
And I'm pretty sure Dorsey was a 4 star, but he was our 4th DE. Bumphis counts if he counts because he didn't play
- Status