can Mullen and staff ever garner enough talent at MSU in recruiting for us to be any more than a mid-tier SEC team? I mean its just a question, I'm not throwing temper tantrums about it if we can't because I realize what we are up against recruiting in this dog eat dog league where we still try to play things mostly above board. Its just that if we still can't get a Top 20 type class with the 3 straight bowls, umpteen sellouts, major upgrades in facilities, etc. then I'm not sure we ever will. And we even signed many more out of state guys this year than usual but they were still all 3 star type recruits except for Ross and Sandberg and its VERY iffy on whether Sandberg even makes it to school. I mean OM signed a Top 10 class this year without needing bowl games, sellouts or even a proven HC but I also know in general OM and their boosters will go to many more extremes to sign a talented player than we will. Would be interested in others' thoughts on this? And maybe we can but, if so, its likely going to take quite a long time to break above middle of the pack if we ever do based on what I can see.
OK, now that recruiting is fully over, I have to ask...
- Thread starter maroonmania
- Start date
MSU is poised for great success. Awesome recruiting + best facilities + coaching
Will yield better and better teams each year moving forward. We kicked *** in recruiting this year. Don't let others convince you other wise. Be glad we don't have an rss type on this team. That type can absolutely destroy a program.
I'm more optimistic now than I have ever been regarding our football program.
Will yield better and better teams each year moving forward. We kicked *** in recruiting this year. Don't let others convince you other wise. Be glad we don't have an rss type on this team. That type can absolutely destroy a program.
I'm more optimistic now than I have ever been regarding our football program.
I don't think we will ever, in our lifetimes, be able to out recruit Bama, Georgia, LSU, aTm, and Florida. However, the question then becomes, can we acquire enough talent to beat them? I think the answer to that is yes.
My reason for thinking this is because I think there are diminishing returns for each 4 and 5 player acquired after you have 40 to 50 4 and 5 star players on your roster. I think there are diminishing returns because most teams don't play more than 40 or 50 players in a game. So really, any 4 or 5 star players after that are on the roster to play on scout team, challenge the players above them, and basically make the coaching staff "evaluation proof" which means that Alabama can mis-evaluate about 50% of their recruiting class and still be awesome, due to the amount of big time players they sign.
Due to all this, the south's population is going up, more kids are playing high school football than ever before, the SEC has a national profile which gives us the chance to recruit nationally. Therefore, there should be more good players to go around.
Right now, we have about 21 or 22 4 or 5 star recruits on our roster. If we can continue to put up top 20 classes, then we will be close to 40-50 4 and 5 star recruits that I mentioned. I am not sure if 40 or 50 4 and 5 star recruits is the line, but at some point there has to be diminishing returns.
What we really need is 1 Johnny Manziel or transcendent player at the QB position. That changes the ball game
My reason for thinking this is because I think there are diminishing returns for each 4 and 5 player acquired after you have 40 to 50 4 and 5 star players on your roster. I think there are diminishing returns because most teams don't play more than 40 or 50 players in a game. So really, any 4 or 5 star players after that are on the roster to play on scout team, challenge the players above them, and basically make the coaching staff "evaluation proof" which means that Alabama can mis-evaluate about 50% of their recruiting class and still be awesome, due to the amount of big time players they sign.
Due to all this, the south's population is going up, more kids are playing high school football than ever before, the SEC has a national profile which gives us the chance to recruit nationally. Therefore, there should be more good players to go around.
Right now, we have about 21 or 22 4 or 5 star recruits on our roster. If we can continue to put up top 20 classes, then we will be close to 40-50 4 and 5 star recruits that I mentioned. I am not sure if 40 or 50 4 and 5 star recruits is the line, but at some point there has to be diminishing returns.
What we really need is 1 Johnny Manziel or transcendent player at the QB position. That changes the ball game
Not holding my breath
When you can have a top 10 national class and still be in the bottom half of your conference division that is a tall mountain to climb...especially if your boosters don't know how to operate an ATM machine. About the best you can hope for is to find those diamonds in the rough like Banks but let's be honest...how many of those are there out there really? He was one, Patrick Willis comes to mind, and then you have to start thinking pretty hard. When a team like Alabama can place 3 and 4 stars on the practice squad and you are working your rear end off to sign those same players in hopes that they can compete after a RS season then it is going to be hard to compete. Even if Alabama has a slight downturn you still have LSU and now A&M to contend with. By the time one of those is due for a down year Alabama is back to national prominence. It is going to be very difficult to break through to the top in the SECW from here on out. I honestly think it is going to take two of the top teams being down and then being able to pull together one of those"any given Satruday" games to knock off the current NC contender for us to do it.
When you can have a top 10 national class and still be in the bottom half of your conference division that is a tall mountain to climb...especially if your boosters don't know how to operate an ATM machine. About the best you can hope for is to find those diamonds in the rough like Banks but let's be honest...how many of those are there out there really? He was one, Patrick Willis comes to mind, and then you have to start thinking pretty hard. When a team like Alabama can place 3 and 4 stars on the practice squad and you are working your rear end off to sign those same players in hopes that they can compete after a RS season then it is going to be hard to compete. Even if Alabama has a slight downturn you still have LSU and now A&M to contend with. By the time one of those is due for a down year Alabama is back to national prominence. It is going to be very difficult to break through to the top in the SECW from here on out. I honestly think it is going to take two of the top teams being down and then being able to pull together one of those"any given Satruday" games to knock off the current NC contender for us to do it.
I don't think any realistic MSU fan thinks we are going to "out recruit" or "evenly recruit" with the SEC powers year in and year out at least on paper. The question is can we stay close enough to them talent wise to have a legitimate chance to compete with them on any given Saturday? We certainly can't yet, the only time so far under Mullen that we can compete with an SEC "power school" is when they are having a down year (ie, like GA and FL 2010).
Bottom line is we will never be able to recruit better than the Bama's, Uga, Lsu, Florida, Texas A&M or even Auburns because they are all in, but if Mullen keeps recruiting top 25 talent and Redshirts the majority of the class then we can definitely be more than a mid-tier Sec Team. I think that helps us close the gap and that's the reason I think next season we will be a decent team but I think our year to really make a run will be 2014. If Mullen doesn't have us fighting for the SEC West in 2014, then I don't think he ever will.
I think we have a great chance to get around the top 15-20 range next year.. sure that'd still be like 8th in the SEC, but we're not that far removed from being a doormat. MS has some good talent coming up for next year, especially at WR, DE, and LB. Although it appears we're in good position with a lot of those guys right now, I think we'll see more guys go out of state than we have the past few years just because of the depth of the class. Louisiana is loaded too, hopefully having R. Brown, Dak, etc will help us there.
The OG from Callaway seems to be a Bama lean. If we can sway him, that would be huge.
The OG from Callaway seems to be a Bama lean. If we can sway him, that would be huge.
i think programs like msu would greatly benefit from finally getting to the 16 team super conferences, and breaking the conference into 4 pods. then having the 4 pod winners play a semi-conf final > winners play conf CG. not only would this set up perfectly for a national playoff of 4 super conferences (4 conf champs play national semis > winners play for title), but it would make the mountain a lot easier to climb for mid-tier programs like msu.
as previously stated, right now even if saban left bama and they regressed a bit (it'll happen eventually), we still have a&m, lsu, and aub who are all mega-programs right there waiting to take their turn at the top of the mtn. aub just had an awful season, but they'll be back, and in the mean time there are still 3 mega programs winning 10+ games every year.
by going to a pod system, the sec would be broken down like this:
west: lsu, a&m, ark, mizzou
south: msu, om, bama, aub
east: fla, uga, vandy, usce
north: tenn, ky, 2 new acc programs
obviously the details could be changed depending on who was added and the best way to balance the north/east programs since you'd probably want ky and vandy to be separated unless we added 2 incredibly weak acc programs.
but the point is that msu and om would have been competing for 2nd place in our pod this year. catch lightning in a bottle and one of us beat bama, and suddenly we are in the fabric of the playoff. it's just a lot easier to win something when there aren't as many mega programs to climb over. when the mega programs have a down year, there aren't 3 or 4 other mega programs on an upward trend to take their place, while the mid tier programs stay in the mid tier.
as previously stated, right now even if saban left bama and they regressed a bit (it'll happen eventually), we still have a&m, lsu, and aub who are all mega-programs right there waiting to take their turn at the top of the mtn. aub just had an awful season, but they'll be back, and in the mean time there are still 3 mega programs winning 10+ games every year.
by going to a pod system, the sec would be broken down like this:
west: lsu, a&m, ark, mizzou
south: msu, om, bama, aub
east: fla, uga, vandy, usce
north: tenn, ky, 2 new acc programs
obviously the details could be changed depending on who was added and the best way to balance the north/east programs since you'd probably want ky and vandy to be separated unless we added 2 incredibly weak acc programs.
but the point is that msu and om would have been competing for 2nd place in our pod this year. catch lightning in a bottle and one of us beat bama, and suddenly we are in the fabric of the playoff. it's just a lot easier to win something when there aren't as many mega programs to climb over. when the mega programs have a down year, there aren't 3 or 4 other mega programs on an upward trend to take their place, while the mid tier programs stay in the mid tier.
You can see how much of an impact Brewster made in about 6 months. Give him 2 years to recruit kids and IN ADDITION add Townsend's and Gonzales' recruiting powers? Hell yeah I think we can recruit at an elite level.
We don't recruit the same type of player on offense Bama or LSU recruits, and it needs to stay that way.
And as far as defense, shoot for the level-headed and country guys. You saw how Partytown, USA worked for Richie Brown and Chris Jones.
We don't recruit the same type of player on offense Bama or LSU recruits, and it needs to stay that way.
And as far as defense, shoot for the level-headed and country guys. You saw how Partytown, USA worked for Richie Brown and Chris Jones.
I don't know if Mullen and staff can. I do believe it is possible at MSU. Whatever you think about Croom, we were in the conversation with numerous national, program-changing recruits almost every year when he was coach. We didn't land any. One huge problem was that we were a horrible football team, that was the worst in the SEC in 2003, maybe 2002 as well, and on probation, etc. We were equally horrible in 2004 and 2005. By 2006, it was clear the talent was improved drastically and we were now at least competitive in the SEC. That has continued ever since despite some blowout losses like Ole Miss 2008 and 2012, Texas A&M 2012, Alabama 2012. Recruiting improved as well as the team improved.
I don't know what it is going to take, but we have to get in the conversation with national recruits. Ole Miss has done it. We can too. We have to get the best in MS but we also have to get some stars regionally and nationally. The problem is not that we are losing out of them. The problem is that we are not even in the conversation with them. That has to change. Being a mid-tier SEC team, with 2 or 3 SEC wins against Kentucky and whoever else sucks that year) and winning four cupcake OOC games - like Coach 34 is satisfied with and says is the best we can expect - is not good enough. I'd rather swing for the fences and miss rather than be content with walks and singles.
I hope Sandberg is that type of recruit but honestly we need to get better than him and many more of them.
I don't know what it is going to take, but we have to get in the conversation with national recruits. Ole Miss has done it. We can too. We have to get the best in MS but we also have to get some stars regionally and nationally. The problem is not that we are losing out of them. The problem is that we are not even in the conversation with them. That has to change. Being a mid-tier SEC team, with 2 or 3 SEC wins against Kentucky and whoever else sucks that year) and winning four cupcake OOC games - like Coach 34 is satisfied with and says is the best we can expect - is not good enough. I'd rather swing for the fences and miss rather than be content with walks and singles.
I hope Sandberg is that type of recruit but honestly we need to get better than him and many more of them.
To quote Bear Bryant-
“I think the most important thing of all for any team is a winning attitude. The coaches must have it. The players must have it. The student body must have it. If you have dedicated players who believe in themselves, you don’t need a lot of talent.”
“I think the most important thing of all for any team is a winning attitude. The coaches must have it. The players must have it. The student body must have it. If you have dedicated players who believe in themselves, you don’t need a lot of talent.”
Un17ingreal. We went 1-7 in the SEC that year. We lost to a Tulane team that was a whisker away from dropping D1 football. We lost to Ed Orgeron. We were blown out in most SEC games.
To me, the next real step over a "mid-tier" SEC team is a "top-tier" SEC team; A "top-tier" SEC team is a team that has expectations to win a National Championship in many preseasons. When you're talking "top-tier" SEC team, you're really just saying "one of the best teams in the country". Obviously, this is ridiculously hard to accomplish.
A "mid-tier" SEC team, though, should still be able to compete for a National Championship when the stars align, and I think we fall in that category. We were probably a player away from having a chance at that type of season with Cam Newton.
However, I still think we can become a "top-tier" SEC team, but it will have to be something like Spurrier has done at South Carolina, but possibly even slower. We have to grow a little at a time. It took him 6 seasons to have his first 10 win season. Now he has 3, with two of those being 11 win seasons, and all 3 being in the past 3 years.
A "mid-tier" SEC team, though, should still be able to compete for a National Championship when the stars align, and I think we fall in that category. We were probably a player away from having a chance at that type of season with Cam Newton.
However, I still think we can become a "top-tier" SEC team, but it will have to be something like Spurrier has done at South Carolina, but possibly even slower. We have to grow a little at a time. It took him 6 seasons to have his first 10 win season. Now he has 3, with two of those being 11 win seasons, and all 3 being in the past 3 years.
In short, no. We have improved, and continue to, but it's not enough to compete with the big boys in the division. While we are still building walls, the elite teams in the west simply refortify the fortesses that have been built long ago. There are no Cinderella teams in this league. What a K-State or Boise St.,etc can do in their leagues couldn't be done in the SEC, let alone the west.
But people underestimate how destructive 2001-2008 (except 07) was for our football program. We were cast into obscurity to the point that everything we did in the late 90's was forgotten. The league is tougher now and it will be difficult to remain a mid-tier team in this environment. It should be our realistic goal to be #4 #5 in the division as often as possible. Now I do think there are a couple of coaches around that could elevate us a couple of spots and bring unprecedented success, in terms of win totals and bigger bowls.
But people underestimate how destructive 2001-2008 (except 07) was for our football program. We were cast into obscurity to the point that everything we did in the late 90's was forgotten. The league is tougher now and it will be difficult to remain a mid-tier team in this environment. It should be our realistic goal to be #4 #5 in the division as often as possible. Now I do think there are a couple of coaches around that could elevate us a couple of spots and bring unprecedented success, in terms of win totals and bigger bowls.
You didn't watch MSU football then
It's not the point - the point is that if we are EVER going to be competitive for an SEC Championship, we have to recruit much, much better. We have to get in the conversation with national recruits. Do you argue that Mullen has never had MSU in the conversation with pretty much any national recruits except Cam Newton (who chose Auburn over his former position coach?) We are never going to win the SEC that way - it is impossible. In the SEC West, we are now out-recruited by Bama, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss, and Texas A&M. It don't expect that to change. We are only ahead of Arkansas, which has little in-state talent.
As to the 2006 team's improvement, did you watch the 2003 team, one of the worst in SEC history? How about 2004 and 2005? in 2004, LSU coached Saban's team was like watching the Ravens play a MS private school high school team. We looked like that in many games with our lack of talent.
As to 2006, I'll quote the good 'ol Wikipedia: The 2006 MSU "squad showed signs of improvement in 2006: they were outgained by just 51.9 yards per game [lowest in many years], fewer than conference foes Ole Miss and Kentucky, who won the 2006 Music City Bowl; in their 24–27 loss at Georgia, they reached UGA's 31-yard line but lost a fumble with 0:03 remaining in the game; they outgained Arkansas, the 2006 SEC West Champs, by 99 yards in a 14–28 loss; and the Bulldogs also lost close games to Tulane (29–32), Kentucky (31–34) and rival Ole Miss in the 2006 Battle for the Golden Egg (17–20).
As said above - in 2006 MSU was much more competitive in the SEC than it had been in a long time. It was clear that we had closed the talent gap with Ole Miss, Kentucky, Georgia, Alabama, and Arkansas. After the mid-way point in the season, it was clear that we were getting much better.
It's not the point - the point is that if we are EVER going to be competitive for an SEC Championship, we have to recruit much, much better. We have to get in the conversation with national recruits. Do you argue that Mullen has never had MSU in the conversation with pretty much any national recruits except Cam Newton (who chose Auburn over his former position coach?) We are never going to win the SEC that way - it is impossible. In the SEC West, we are now out-recruited by Bama, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss, and Texas A&M. It don't expect that to change. We are only ahead of Arkansas, which has little in-state talent.
As to the 2006 team's improvement, did you watch the 2003 team, one of the worst in SEC history? How about 2004 and 2005? in 2004, LSU coached Saban's team was like watching the Ravens play a MS private school high school team. We looked like that in many games with our lack of talent.
As to 2006, I'll quote the good 'ol Wikipedia: The 2006 MSU "squad showed signs of improvement in 2006: they were outgained by just 51.9 yards per game [lowest in many years], fewer than conference foes Ole Miss and Kentucky, who won the 2006 Music City Bowl; in their 24–27 loss at Georgia, they reached UGA's 31-yard line but lost a fumble with 0:03 remaining in the game; they outgained Arkansas, the 2006 SEC West Champs, by 99 yards in a 14–28 loss; and the Bulldogs also lost close games to Tulane (29–32), Kentucky (31–34) and rival Ole Miss in the 2006 Battle for the Golden Egg (17–20).
As said above - in 2006 MSU was much more competitive in the SEC than it had been in a long time. It was clear that we had closed the talent gap with Ole Miss, Kentucky, Georgia, Alabama, and Arkansas. After the mid-way point in the season, it was clear that we were getting much better.
I've said it 100 times and I'll say it again:
As long as the SEC has 3 and 4 teams in the top 10- then NO- State is not going to have a chance to win the SEC. We wont ever be that good. Neither will OM, Vandy, UPig, Missouri, or Kentucky. And now that SC has passed Tennessee by- you can cancel out Tennessee as well.
All of us I just mentioned are trying like hell to do what we can to get to 10 wins- 12-0 is a pipe dream
As long as the SEC has 3 and 4 teams in the top 10- then NO- State is not going to have a chance to win the SEC. We wont ever be that good. Neither will OM, Vandy, UPig, Missouri, or Kentucky. And now that SC has passed Tennessee by- you can cancel out Tennessee as well.
All of us I just mentioned are trying like hell to do what we can to get to 10 wins- 12-0 is a pipe dream
Please, please make one 17in post without mentioning croon. Christ on a bike....It pains me to say this but I pity you more than goat and will james. You're j-sizzle reincarnate.
I don't know. I think if you get two dominant players on each side of the ball, and a good kicking game, you have a chance in every and any game.
First of all to answer your question NO, we won't be able to evenly or break through where we've been in recruiting since Mullen has been here. That's going to be about it. But that doesn't mean we can't beat them on the field. In order for that to happen we HAVE GOT TO be a physical football team (similar to Jackie's good teams). We have got to trim down the game's possessions, play solid defense and shorten the game. We are getting guys to do this NOW. We don't need pocket passers and line up 4/5 wide and chuck it 30 times. That isn't the strength of our staff. Guys like Shumpert, Griffin, Day, Dak, and physical tough kids will allow us that type of tempo and will turn into wins. Which will give us a shot.
^^^^^^ THIS^^^^^^^ (except for the Manziel/ Heisman trophy winner comment ).
Recruiting for academics has certain similarities with recruiting for football. Which students will excel? The high SAT/ACT scores definitely offer the probability for a student to succeed. But life issues, curriculum, and motivation also play a factor.
Having said that, recruiting better students/athletes make your program more competitive internally. But if the professors or coaches are not adding abilities to their student athletes, then the program will go nowhere.
Another question: can we develop the talent to compete with the Top-Tier SEC annually? When we get to the point where we are producing 5 draftees per year with one player in contention for the first round annually, we will also show results on the field.
Recruiters are great and necessary. But we also need talent evaluators: those who also find the Day's, McKinney's, Banks', Ballard's, and to a certain extent C. Jones'. If we don't have X's and O's coaches (I'm looking at you Koenning) and talent developers , then we're not going to win games. Unfortunately, for all the hype that Mullen has brought, he has cost us more games strategically than he's won for us.
And finally, as the MSU enrollment increases, so does the reach of the State brand. Having more alumni will put our fans in more influential places around the South. We should exceed TSUN by 10K graduates annually by the end of this decade. That's more eyes on the tele, more rears in the seats, and a larger revenue stream.
Recruiting for academics has certain similarities with recruiting for football. Which students will excel? The high SAT/ACT scores definitely offer the probability for a student to succeed. But life issues, curriculum, and motivation also play a factor.
Having said that, recruiting better students/athletes make your program more competitive internally. But if the professors or coaches are not adding abilities to their student athletes, then the program will go nowhere.
Another question: can we develop the talent to compete with the Top-Tier SEC annually? When we get to the point where we are producing 5 draftees per year with one player in contention for the first round annually, we will also show results on the field.
Recruiters are great and necessary. But we also need talent evaluators: those who also find the Day's, McKinney's, Banks', Ballard's, and to a certain extent C. Jones'. If we don't have X's and O's coaches (I'm looking at you Koenning) and talent developers , then we're not going to win games. Unfortunately, for all the hype that Mullen has brought, he has cost us more games strategically than he's won for us.
And finally, as the MSU enrollment increases, so does the reach of the State brand. Having more alumni will put our fans in more influential places around the South. We should exceed TSUN by 10K graduates annually by the end of this decade. That's more eyes on the tele, more rears in the seats, and a larger revenue stream.
I think its somewhere in between.
2010 was the perfect example. We were physical all over the field. Offense. Defense. Both O-line and D-line. But we did this by going 3 and 4 wide most of the time. We used Ballard and Relf and got the plus one advantage against spread out defenses.
Problem was we couldn't throw it for **** against a decent defense/secondary (see Florida, Alabama, LSU, etc.). You can't out physical LSU, Bama and Florida in most years. You do have to grind it, but when you get the chance you stretch the field and make it count. Then you go back to the grind and keep them off balance.
If you average 3 yards a play every play and have good field position, you move the ball. Its not flashy but it works. When you get the chance, you go for the jugular.
2010 was the perfect example. We were physical all over the field. Offense. Defense. Both O-line and D-line. But we did this by going 3 and 4 wide most of the time. We used Ballard and Relf and got the plus one advantage against spread out defenses.
Problem was we couldn't throw it for **** against a decent defense/secondary (see Florida, Alabama, LSU, etc.). You can't out physical LSU, Bama and Florida in most years. You do have to grind it, but when you get the chance you stretch the field and make it count. Then you go back to the grind and keep them off balance.
If you average 3 yards a play every play and have good field position, you move the ball. Its not flashy but it works. When you get the chance, you go for the jugular.
You realize I could edit that Wikipedia post to say whatever I wanted it to, right? And we were in the conversation this year with Tony Conner, Elijah Daniel, Mackensie Alexander, Toby Johnson, Lavon Hooks, and others. We were a lot closer to signing those guys than we ever were to signing Marlon Lucky or Ndamakong Suh.
I actually think we have another intermediate step before we can reach "top-tier". I think we are "mid-tier" which I would define as a 6 to 8 win type team where 8 wins is pretty much the ceiling depending on luck of the draw on the schedule. I believe right now we are just trying to get to "upper-tier" which would be an 8 to 10 win type team where again 10 wins would be the upper ceiling depending on breaks in close games and schedule. To get to "top-tier" I believe you have to be a 10 to 12 win type team where, of course, if everything falls just right you have an outside shot at going undefeated or maybe one close loss and be in the NC picture. Right now, for us, that seems worlds away, I'm just trying to see if we can possibly move a step up to that "upper-tier" status over the next several years. And to be "upper-tier" you have to be able to compete and beat some teams that are already at that level and so far we haven't been able to do that. In our 3 bowl years our best SEC win was over a 7-5 FL team in Gainesville that, at least for that year, was definitely "mid-tier". That's where we have to see if we can realistically get to. Our current recruiting level absolutely prevents us from being anywhere near the "top-tier" which has only consistently been Alabama and LSU lately with Florida having fallen back but came back some this year and then Georgia sort of being right there on the cusp and of course Auburn with the fluky year due to Cam Newton. But anyway, that level team is generally going to be a legitimate BCS bowl type team which we are nowhere close. Can we move another notch up? If we do I don't think it will be this year because the schedule is a killer and we still don't have enough upper level talent on the field but if we can add another good recruiting class next year maybe in 2014 to 2015 we can see if the program can move upwards a little. Given the stiff competition in the SEC I'm not convinced we can even then but it will be interesting to see. And you still need to be "upper-tier" to have the stars align to be able to compete for a NC, it would take more than stars aligning for us to do that right now.
He's good, but I don't think he's as quick and as fast as Manziel. I don't think I've ever seen a QB as fast as Manziel. He left our defense like we were stuck in molasses (but you can argue we weren't all that fast to begin with).
Loaded question. Division and schedule will keep Mullen's ceiling as mid-tier more than talent. A&M is loaded with talent and finished 3rd in the West. UGA,less talented than A&M, won the East and made it to the SECCG. Pre-Expansion (well 2nd expansion) we'd be 3rd in the SEC West and that's pretty damn good. Sure, Mullen needs to keep building the level of talent , but more importantly other teams need to suck more despite superior talent (e.g. UPIG).
Yes. Dak is THAT guy. I love Chris Relf he gave us everything he possibly could. But he isn't NEAR the passer Dak is. Dak is faster too. We need QBs like THAT. Cord is about where Dak was when he came in as well. I just think in order for us to be successful that's what type of QB we need. Nothing against Tyler, he is a good kid. But those types of QBs are what it will take us to truely have a shot.
best comparison is UM this year in basketball
they land a guy who can shoot the lights out(regardless of his ego, etc) that has transformed them into a solid team BUT 12/14 teams in the SEC are down this year/UF is the only legit team in the conference. UM improved with a couple additions this year and last year and everyone but UF is stinking it up = UM looks good when in reality they are slightly above average.
this is the equivalent of what we need to get back to ATL.
they land a guy who can shoot the lights out(regardless of his ego, etc) that has transformed them into a solid team BUT 12/14 teams in the SEC are down this year/UF is the only legit team in the conference. UM improved with a couple additions this year and last year and everyone but UF is stinking it up = UM looks good when in reality they are slightly above average.
this is the equivalent of what we need to get back to ATL.
If we had a grove, a square, the library, and more slutty white chicks, then MSU would be a recruiting juggernaut!