So, how do you feel about the players we signed as a whole?

[myusernamesucks]

Okay, how about the other three SEC West teams

that finished in the top 10, ensuring that the overall talent gap keeps growing. You do know the SEC West right? The 6 teams we play every single year? Yeah, I would say that's a good measuring stick.

 

[engie]

that finished in the top 10, ensuring that the overall talent gap keeps growing. You do know the SEC West right? The 6 teams we play every single year? Yeah, I would say that's a good measuring stick.

While I completely agree with the basic premise of what you are saying -- it's pretty obvious that the equation is missing a couple of variables.

Shouldn't such a large talent gap be obviously visible on the field of play? For the most part this year, we weren't outclassed in our games. You could make the argument for Mettenberger/LSU's 2 stud receivers and Manziel -- but you would be hard pressed to show me any other time we didn't stack up against the teams and players we played. How did we close the gap from 2012 -- when I agree it was very obvious then -- if we were consistently getting outrecruited by these other teams every year? Shouldn't the gap have gotten wider instead of narrower? And why would anyone expect it to get even narrower again next year(like we do)?

 

[Rezpup]

The worst ranked class we ever signed won the SEC West and played in the SEC Championship game as seniors.

Just saying, recruiting well matters but it's a complicated metric to determine.

 

[DreadNought.sixpack]

So, who then should MSU measure themselves against? Some team from a conference that we rarely play like OK State or a team from our own conference that we play every year? Like it or not, MSU is an SEC West team and if we are going to rise to this mythical "next" level, the Bama's, LSU's, AU's, ATM's are who MSU measures themselves against every year. MSU has no other choice but to get better in coaching, recruiting, fund raising and facilities or get left behind in this conference.

 

[DreadNought.sixpack]

On the other hand, we had to beat Arky in OT, and struggled against KY and BGSU at home. I see what you are saying, but that works both ways. Our talent gap should show up on the field against teams like KY and BGSU and a Ark. team that is rebuilding from Petrino's implosion.

 

[State82]

You cannot do it, especially in the freaking SEC.

Is Aeris Williams talented? Is Gerri Green talented? Is Jamoral Graham talented? Is Dak Prescott talented? Is Gabe Jackson talented? Is Elijah Staley talented? Is Tubby Lewis talented? Is Benardrick McKinney talented? etc., etc., etc. I could keep on, but no need.

 

[DreadNought.sixpack]

You have me pegged, but I aspire to much loftier goals, like the Advocare bowl in Shreve(s)port.

 

[engie]

On the other hand, we had to beat Arky in OT, and struggled against KY and BGSU at home. I see what you are saying, but that works both ways. Our talent gap should show up on the field against teams like KY and BGSU and a Ark. team that is rebuilding from Petrino's implosion.

A staple of a young team is playing up and down to competition overall.

To me, your talent level is defined by who you are on your best day -- and your maturity level/discipline level is defined by who you are on your worst...

 

[Digging dog]

I'll tell you in two years. (No ***)
Quay Evans reminded me again why rankings don't always make a good player.

 

[DreadNought.sixpack]

Playing down to our competition has become more common than not in the past few years. La. Tech, Troy, in prior years are just a few examples. Now that Dan has the QB for his system, along with a strong D, let's hope MSU can raise the bar bit by bit become more competitive. With all the money coming into the SEC, there is no reason MSU can't be on par with a lot of other schools in the country, if not in our own conference and division.

 

[thatsbaseball]

The sunshine pumpers that are all over this board now are no different than the old State fans from the 60`s. Just beat Ole Miss......and nothing else matters.

 

[engie]

The sunshine pumpers that are all over this board now are no different than the old State fans from the 60`s. Just beat Ole Miss......and nothing else matters.

Good thing we were consistently beating Ole Miss back in those days**

 

[aTotal360]

Overall, yes. I give the class a C. There simply isn't enough top flight talent in this class to get us in the top 4 of our division, much less conference. There are a couple A's in this class, but there are much more D's and C's. I hope these guys make me eat crow in a couple years.

 

[JungRebel]

Missouri didn't play alabama or LSU, and we saw what they did against auburn, who they also did not play during the regular season. UGA and A&M were their best wins.

ETA: to make this thread related, its hard to grade a class until they have all played their last snap in college. You can get a decent feel after 2-3 years, but there are late bloomers.

 

[myusernamesucks]

The fact that we signed THREE 4 star players doesnt impress you? An unranked 2 star OL that even UT-Martin didnt offer doesnt impress you!? Having the 14th ranked class in the conference doesnt impress you!?!?!? Good God man, what more do you want????

 

[TaleofTwoDogs]

I agree that this year's team was competitive in all of its SEC games but the talent level gap is quite evident in the second half as our opponents are able to go 2 or 3 deep into their bench with equal proformance levels as the 1st string. This is quite apparent on the scoreboard where our
SEC brethren outscored us 125 to 67 (regulation) in the 2nd half. We held our hold in the 1st half (as we have done many times over the years) but can's close the deal in the 2nd half. More stars the deeper you go.

to wit:

SEC	1	2	3	4	OT	Total
MSU	43	55	30	37	14	179
OPP	73	49	66	59	0	247
Non Conf	1	2	3	4	OT	Total
MSU	48	85	28	20	0	181
OPP	16	15	11	10	0	52
All	1	2	3	4	OT	Total
MSU	91	140	58	57	14	360
OPP	89	64	77	69	0	299

<colgroup><col width="70" style="width: 53pt; mso-width-source: userset; mso-width-alt: 2560;"> <col width="64" style="width: 48pt;" span="6"> <tbody>
</tbody>

 

[engie]

I agree that this year's team was competitive in all of its SEC games but the talent level gap is quite evident in the second half as our opponents are able to go 2 or 3 deep into their bench with equal proformance levels as the 1st string. This is quite apparent on the scoreboard where our
SEC brethren outscored us 125 to 67 (regulation) in the 2nd half. We held our hold in the 1st half (as we have done many times over the years) but can's close the deal in the 2nd half. More stars the deeper you go.

to wit:

SEC	1	2	3	4	OT	Total
MSU	43	55	30	37	14	179
OPP	73	49	66	59	0	247
Non Conf	1	2	3	4	OT	Total
MSU	48	85	28	20	0	181
OPP	16	15	11	10	0	52
All	1	2	3	4	OT	Total
MSU	91	140	58	57	14	360
OPP	89	64	77	69	0	299

<tbody>
</tbody>

The problem with this analysis is that it pretends that everyone plays the first string for the first half and then eases their way down the depth chart as the game wears on. We play as deep and as many guys as virtually any SEC team -- and we do it from the very first snap of the game on a drive/series basis throughout the game. Always have under Mullen. Our problem in second halves of games was primarily in playcalling and youthful mistakes on big drives putting/keeping the defense on the field. I never saw a talent issue in those games. In the SEC games you list, which are the only legitimate data set IMO, there was a total of one offensive TD total difference between the first and 4th quarters -- and it appears our D generally adjusted and got better as the game went along. That's hardly indicative of a lack of depth.

Now -- I'd agree that second half production needs to be better -- and that's on everybody -- the greatest of which is Dan Mullen himself with playcalling.

 

[HD6]

Get ready to get left behind then, because we will never have better coaching, better recruiting, more funds raised, or better facilities on a consistent basis than anybody in the West other than Ole Miss, and even with them we'll be even most of the time.

 

[HD6]

Glad to know that all we have to as a fanbase is aspire to do better, and it will come. Get to aspiring, boys, we got us a championship to win!

 

[Palos verdes]

Well I have no idea about our OL commits, but we have an underrated class. The recruiting services look down on MS talent and demonstrate that every year. But we develop raw guys very well. Our most undervalued commit is Staley. Staley is a solid 4* talent that should have been recruited by most of the elite programs in the country. The fact that Scout rated him at #56 is a discredit to themselves. We have about five true 4* type players in this bunch and lots of developmental people. I would venture to say that our overall class should be moved up to around #30 in the ranks. Believe it or not, our school name costs us a position or two in the class rankings every year.

 

[DreadNought.sixpack]

I'm not talking about getting left behind, I'm talking about catching up! A big difference. We.are already behind and are getting lost in the rear view.

 

[MSUDawg25]

If I filled a perfect tournament bracket and won a billion dollars from Warren Buffet and donated every penny to MSU, we then turned Davis Wade into the worlds first 200,000 seat levitating stadium. Each player had their own personal Matt Balis clone following them around. We hired Nick Saban, Bellichick, both Harbaughs, and Irving Meyers all as coaches. If I bought the NCAA and personally butt17ed every school not named MSU. If all of those things happened, Alabama would still sign a higher rated class than us. That is just how it works. Even if our class was better than theirs (it isn't) theirs would be higher rated.

 

[NCDawg.sixpack]

The worst ranked class we ever signed won the SEC West and played in the SEC Championship game as seniors.

Just saying, recruiting well matters but it's a complicated metric to determine.

Thanks to a whole bunch of good Jr College players, and Joe Lee Dunn's good defensive coaching.

 

[NCDawg.sixpack]

On the other hand, we had to beat Arky in OT, and struggled against KY and BGSU at home. I see what you are saying, but that works both ways. Our talent gap should show up on the field against teams like KY and BGSU and a Ark. team that is rebuilding from Petrino's implosion.

I tend to agree. Market's shoe string tackle saved us against Kentucky. The BGSU kid dropped a pass at the end which would have put them in FG range to win the game. Nickoe's great plays saved us against Ark and Ole Miss. Wonder what the mood would be on this board if we hadn't been so fortunate in those games?

 

[msstate7]

I tend to agree. Market's shoe string tackle saved us against Kentucky. The BGSU kid dropped a pass at the end which would have put them in FG range to win the game. Nickoe's great plays saved us against Ark and Ole Miss. Wonder what the mood would be on this board if we hadn't been so fortunate in those games?

Wonder what mood we would be in had we stopped auburn on that last drive. That'd be back-to-back 8 win seasons

 

[oxfordrebel22]

Next Year will be a recruiting war in Mississippi

Next year will be one the best and deepest classes the high school ranks in Mississippi have seen in a long time, maybe ever. Seems State has some ties and natural advantages with some and that Ole Miss does as well. Should be very interesting to watch play out next year.

 

[KurtRambis4]

Nail on the

mother 17ing head. How can anyone look at these players and suggest they aren't talented and capable of competing in the SEC, at this point? That's just being a moron and not knowing what in the hell it takes for athletes to succeed.

 

[tuku 2]

Cory Thomas will be interesting to watch. Kid had a lot of offers.

 

[PineGroveBully]

Not a clue

Ecstatic?
Hopeful?
We could have done a little better, but still a solid group?
This class sucks?
Fire Mueller?

Of the top 100, 200,300 ranked athletes, very few of these players played anywhere near the same competition. I played CF in high school for a 1A team and against other 1A players I looked above average. But the couple of 3 and 4A schools we played, the uncle Charlie's were nastier, the fast balls got on me a split second faster, and balls hit to the gap got down much quicker, thus I looked average at best. I say 17 the stars, if I was a coach id rather have 20 3 stars that fit my philosophy that 15 4-5 stars that didn't. Presently Marshall Henderson would probably be a 4 star, where Randy Stewart was maybe a 3 star. But as a coach who had you rather coach, or as a teammate who had you rather played with?

 

[Chesusdog]

I'm fine with it

From the looks of it we got some guys that really fit our system well. Time, of course, will tell the merit of this class.

 

[Chappy.sixpack]

Is Aeris Williams talented? Is Gerri Green talented? Is Jamoral Graham talented? Is Dak Prescott talented? Is Gabe Jackson talented? Is Elijah Staley talented? Is Tubby Lewis talented? Is Benardrick McKinney talented? etc., etc., etc. I could keep on, but no need.

Dak and Gabe don't answer this thread! Everyone knows that some players can be low ranked and still turn into beasts. However, we're spinning this to say anything other than disappointing. Will the football program go under? Of course not! But we are starting out in the hole yet again against other teams that we have to compete with? Absolutely!!

Green and Graham are 4-star (lowest possible 4-star) but still 4-star. Those players have a great chance of contributing. We have a few others, such as, Aeris, who have the highest rated 3-star rankings that exist. Also, a good chance that they contribute, even in the SEC. But when you get players who are not ranked decent (in the SEC decent means a minimum of the highest rated 3-stars), then they are projects - period! And projects can pan out -- see Dak, P. Willis, Gabe, etc. -- but they usually don't AND many times they don't until their junior or even senior years. Go back and look at these "projects" from almost all schools and the ones that transform into NFL players usually (I emphasize usually so don't bring out a couple of anomalies)... usually do so in their final year or two.

We are starting in a hole against our fellow competition, and we need more than that to move up in this conference. Beating the Rebs cannot be our measuring stick (unless they begin to compete like they certainly believe that they will). We need better resources to work with. One could feel that Mullen is responsible for this hole that we start in. I don't know this for sure. But I know we are starting behind the 8-ball if we truly want to regularly compete in the SEC, especially the SEC West!!

 

[Chappy.sixpack]

I'll tell you in two years. (No ***)
Quay Evans reminded me again why rankings don't always make a good player.

We need good kids who are 4 and 5 stars. Not bad ones. This is why Ole Miss sucked despite their high class rankings in 2008-2011. None of their high ranked guys made it on the field. Or were able to stay on the field (see Brassell for example). This has been our problem with our occasional 5-star. But the bears are starting to get good kids who are ranked high -- that is a real problem down the road. (Although RNkemdiche may not be a good kid).

We are going to fall way behind real fast if we don't get better at crooting quick!

 

[Chappy.sixpack]

Watch out for the little green men coming to get you! Yeah, there is a great conspiracy against us. And Staley too! Although no sane person could come up with one reason to support this. I hear announcers talk about the great talent in Mississippi (compared to our population). Just another excuse in my opinion. The world is out to get Staley and those dang Bulldogs! Let's be serious

 

[Chappy.sixpack]

Agree!

 

[Strike.sixpack]

Dak and Gabe don't answer this thread! Everyone knows that some players can be low ranked and still turn into beasts. However, we're spinning this to say anything other than disappointing. Will the football program go under? Of course not! But we are starting out in the hole yet again against other teams that we have to compete with? Absolutely!!

Green and Graham are 4-star (lowest possible 4-star) but still 4-star. Those players have a great chance of contributing. We have a few others, such as, Aeris, who have the highest rated 3-star rankings that exist. Also, a good chance that they contribute, even in the SEC. But when you get players who are not ranked decent (in the SEC decent means a minimum of the highest rated 3-stars), then they are projects - period! And projects can pan out -- see Dak, P. Willis, Gabe, etc. -- but they usually don't AND many times they don't until their junior or even senior years. Go back and look at these "projects" from almost all schools and the ones that transform into NFL players usually (I emphasize usually so don't bring out a couple of anomalies)... usually do so in their final year or two.

We are starting in a hole against our fellow competition, and we need more than that to move up in this conference. Beating the Rebs cannot be our measuring stick (unless they begin to compete like they certainly believe that they will). We need better resources to work with. One could feel that Mullen is responsible for this hole that we start in. I don't know this for sure. But I know we are starting behind the 8-ball if we truly want to regularly compete in the SEC, especially the SEC West!!

What does it matter if projects are not NFL ready until their 3rd year. That's the soonest they are draft eligible anyway. Keep developing and get two years of SEC ready talent. The majority of the top SEC players are Junior and Seniors.

 

[Chappy.sixpack]

The point was that the "diamond in the rough" talk is getting old. Everyone finds them but you can't build a program on that hope.

 

[NCDawg.sixpack]

The fact that we signed THREE 4 star players doesnt impress you? An unranked 2 star OL that even UT-Martin didnt offer doesnt impress you!? Having the 14th ranked class in the conference doesnt impress you!?!?!? Good God man, what more do you want????

I thought we were 13th. We probably would have been 14th if Franklin hadn't left Vanderbilt.

 

[thf24]

The thing is though, many of the guys we call "diamonds in the rough" aren't projects, they're studs from small schools who were mostly undiscovered. Jonthan Banks, 2 star, pick 6'd Tebow twice in one game as a true freshman. Nickoe Whitley, low 3 star, was an instant beast after redshirting. Gabe Jackson, low 3 star who was an early OL contributor. Dillon Day, 2 star, early OL contributor. Benardrick McKinney, 2 star, instant beast after redshirting. The list goes on. None of these guys were two or three year projects; they were all ready to play immediately or after a redshirt year, which in many cases was due to good depth. Our recruiting rankings aren't relatively low just because we take chances on a ton of project guys, but also because Mullen and co. are very good at identifying obscure, low-rated players who would be 4 or 5 stars if they played at a bigger or more visible high school.

Also, you have to consider the effect heavy in-state recruiting has on our ratings. Many of these guys are just as good athletically as guys from states with excellent high school football programs like Texas, Georgia, Florida, and even Alabama, but are rated lower because they aren't as polished at their positions, when all it takes in many cases is a redshirt year to get them up to speed. A 4-star redshirt freshman from Texas who sits because of depth and a 3-star from Mississippi who sits because he isn't quite ready can easily end up being the same contribution-wise by the time they both step on the field.

 

[Strike.sixpack]

Watch out for the little green men coming to get you! Yeah, there is a great conspiracy against us. And Staley too! Although no sane person could come up with one reason to support this. I hear announcers talk about the great talent in Mississippi (compared to our population). Just another excuse in my opinion. The world is out to get Staley and those dang Bulldogs! Let's be serious

Uh...the reason they say that is because its true. There have been many articles written about how we are one of the top producers of NFL talent per capita. Sporting News wrote about which states has most NFL players just this past fall. In the article noted that we are 3rd in the country behind Louisiana and South Carolina for the number of players per capita. And that's NFL talent. Not every player has to be NFL caliber to be a good solid SEC player. More the better obviously, but their is a lot of talent in this state. But it is raw and not as advanced as other states.

 

[NCDawg.sixpack]

The thing is though, many of the guys we call "diamonds in the rough" aren't projects, they're studs from small schools who were mostly undiscovered. Jonthan Banks, 2 star, pick 6'd Tebow twice in one game as a true freshman. Nickoe Whitley, low 3 star, was an instant beast after redshirting. Gabe Jackson, low 3 star who was an early OL contributor. Dillon Day, 2 star, early OL contributor. Benardrick McKinney, 2 star, instant beast after redshirting. The list goes on. None of these guys were two or three year projects; they were all ready to play immediately or after a redshirt year, which in many cases was due to good depth. Our recruiting rankings aren't relatively low just because we take chances on a ton of project guys, but also because Mullen and co. are very good at identifying obscure, low-rated players who would be 4 or 5 stars if they played at a bigger or more visible high school.

I agree Mullen does a good job with the obscure signees, but just think what he could do with some 4 or 5 star athletes. Maybe then we could occasionally beat some of the SEC top tier teams, and wouldn't have to struggle against the likes of Kentucky and BGSU.