a net gain of -1 commits. Reading that Isaac Gross decommitted, can one of you bear azzwipes tell us if this is true?
So it looks Like the Ole Miss senior camp got them
- Thread starter smellmyfinger
- Start date
- Status
a net gain of -1 commits. Reading that Isaac Gross decommitted, can one of you bear azzwipes tell us if this is true?
a net gain of -1 commits. Reading that Isaac Gross decommitted, can one of you bear azzwipes tell us if this is true?
hate on Ole Miss for only getting one recruit.
I'd rather start a thread talking crap about Delta State, MGCC, and PRCC about how we stole their commits. What now boyz? This is Our State!!!11!
I'd rather start a thread talking crap about Delta State, MGCC, and PRCC about how we stole their commits. What now boyz? This is Our State!!!11!
Save the recruiting smack for January, where it belongs. Then we can all freak out and accuse each other of cheating, like we usually do.
EAVdog said:
That's about the attention this deserves at this time. I was listening to the radio the other day when Will Gross, the QB out of Melrose was on Chris Vernon and chose to commit to Memphis. He was decommitted by lunch time the next day. Turns out he was just feeling Memphis that day, but the next day decided he didn't want to lock down to anyone.
On the recruiting note, I am interested to see how this new 25 rule plays out. I'm guessing someone will have a slip up, end up with more players signed than spots and then have to release a player or two from their LOI. That, and I'm betting you'll see coaches push for more confirmations early in the process and we'll probably see fewer true signing day surprises.
I'm not sure yet if it helps or hurts State/Ole Miss. It could keep the Bama's, Auburns, LSU's, and Tenn's from reaching into the state and grabbing a couple of players that they might not with 3 less scholly's. Also take a state like Louisianna that seems to be loaded this year and they now have 3 less spots.
But on the flipside we'd better not have a high rate of attrition from grades risks which is tough with the way Mississippi High Schools operate. And it might open the door for USM to sneak a couple players away as well.
What get's me the most about this time of year is the folks screaming about a kid not having stars or offers. They have not even started workouts for their Senior Year! If we can grab a kid before they get in the national spotlight then I see that as great. (assuming they've been evaluated in multiple camps, which is the MO these days) Sure Mississippi gets a few 5 stars every year but as the Clarion Ledger pointed out there is a very high rate of flame out from the 5 stars from Mississippi.
But on the flipside we'd better not have a high rate of attrition from grades risks which is tough with the way Mississippi High Schools operate. And it might open the door for USM to sneak a couple players away as well.
What get's me the most about this time of year is the folks screaming about a kid not having stars or offers. They have not even started workouts for their Senior Year! If we can grab a kid before they get in the national spotlight then I see that as great. (assuming they've been evaluated in multiple camps, which is the MO these days) Sure Mississippi gets a few 5 stars every year but as the Clarion Ledger pointed out there is a very high rate of flame out from the 5 stars from Mississippi.
Actually it's a net of +1 thus far.
Some folks don't know the difference in Isaac Gross & Will Gross.
Signed,
Archimedes
Some folks don't know the difference in Isaac Gross & Will Gross.
Signed,
Archimedes
There is probably a pretty high rate of flame out from the 2 and 3 stars too. You just don't notice it as much because there are more of them, and you aren't expecting them to be All-Americans. I doubt it really has anything to do with star ratings.
On the 25 rule, I see where people would make an argument that it could help Ole Miss or MSU, but the way I see it, it helps USM and Memphis and other CUSA schools WAY more than it helps us. Every year there are grade risk players that each of us, and other SEC schools, sign thinking that worst case scenario, they'll place them in a Juco, and if they pull a miracle, then you get that player. Now those players will sign with the local CUSA schools, or maybe some of the ACC or Big 12 schools nearby, and many of them will pull the miracles and get in.
I really hate Mike Slive, can't reiterate that enough, and I see this and the 28 rule before it as completely unnecessary. All it does is put our conference at a competitive disadvantage.
On the 25 rule, I see where people would make an argument that it could help Ole Miss or MSU, but the way I see it, it helps USM and Memphis and other CUSA schools WAY more than it helps us. Every year there are grade risk players that each of us, and other SEC schools, sign thinking that worst case scenario, they'll place them in a Juco, and if they pull a miracle, then you get that player. Now those players will sign with the local CUSA schools, or maybe some of the ACC or Big 12 schools nearby, and many of them will pull the miracles and get in.
I really hate Mike Slive, can't reiterate that enough, and I see this and the 28 rule before it as completely unnecessary. All it does is put our conference at a competitive disadvantage.
seriously 17'd. We may as well just close up shop and focus on Baseball.
We may be fine with the 25 rule just because a player may still rather do 2 years at JUCO/SEC teamthan go to a CUSA school. It's only 3 spots. If the limitations were like 22 of something I'd really be worried. The grades thing really is terrifiying because we've got tons of kids who barely get in with 2.0's. And to think there will also be some sort of partial qualifier group that will I'm sure benefit the big boys somehow and screw us over too!
You know Slive works like that. Everytime either one of us find a loophole to our advantage the Conference makes sure to shut it down. The Nutt Rule, the Nutt/Masoli rule, the Jackie Juco rule, and soon to be the upped grades req's. Pretty soon they'll just make us kick off from our own endzone.
We may be fine with the 25 rule just because a player may still rather do 2 years at JUCO/SEC teamthan go to a CUSA school. It's only 3 spots. If the limitations were like 22 of something I'd really be worried. The grades thing really is terrifiying because we've got tons of kids who barely get in with 2.0's. And to think there will also be some sort of partial qualifier group that will I'm sure benefit the big boys somehow and screw us over too!
You know Slive works like that. Everytime either one of us find a loophole to our advantage the Conference makes sure to shut it down. The Nutt Rule, the Nutt/Masoli rule, the Jackie Juco rule, and soon to be the upped grades req's. Pretty soon they'll just make us kick off from our own endzone.
olemissbydamn said:
I wasn't sure though since he added he's always been a long time state fan. I mean if that doesn't make you commit to OM in the summer only to say "Sike!" then I don't know does.
that his 2.5 gpa requirement comment was concerning all of college athletics, not just the SEC. Its still stupid but at least it would be applied to everybody (potentially).
They may as well call the 2.5 GPA rule the "make the Big 10 competitive again" rule. The only people I could see being excited about a 2.5 GPA rule are schools like Vandy, Florida, Stanford, and most of the Big 10. I sure hope they don't pass that.
Anything that gets some of the lower academic neanderthals off the field helps those schools. In Mississippi, we'd both have to become extremely reliant on the Juco system, which stinks, because usually even with good Jucos, they don't hit their stride until the second half of the year many times, so you're looking at maybe 1.5 years of good football.
Anything that gets some of the lower academic neanderthals off the field helps those schools. In Mississippi, we'd both have to become extremely reliant on the Juco system, which stinks, because usually even with good Jucos, they don't hit their stride until the second half of the year many times, so you're looking at maybe 1.5 years of good football.
Sounds like you got bad info...how about going on the record and give us an idea who said it.
Who knows, now days, you could eventually be right.
Either way. That isn't one I'll ever worry about too much.
Who knows, now days, you could eventually be right.
Either way. That isn't one I'll ever worry about too much.
was/is decommitting from Memphis. We think the OP heard Gross was decommitting and assumed it was our Gross.
Mississippi kids aren't less intelligent they just have lower grades. City of Atlanta, DeKalb County, Clayton County, and some other districtsare all facing losing their accreditation due to massive cheating on standardized tests by the Teachers, Principals, Administrators, et al.
Bottom line is the kids who play ball and need to make grades will get whatever grades they need to play.
The SEC or NCAA changing it's rules won't change our educational system.
Bottom line is the kids who play ball and need to make grades will get whatever grades they need to play.
The SEC or NCAA changing it's rules won't change our educational system.
Geoff Calkins mentioned it in this column...
http://www.commercialappe...her-thoughts-on-the-sec/
In effect, he takes one of Petrino's comments about it and infers that coaches don't like the idea because it takes things out of their control. They can handle making sure players have their grades once they get in school by enrolling them in the right classes, getting them tutors, or just flat out making sure they are given grades, but if they have to have higher grades to get in, the coaches have much less control over that.
The whole David Saunders Game Plan type program would become that much more important, and I'd bet that coaches and boosters would do a very good job of donating to the cause to make sure players meet those minimum requirements.
It's never about smarts though. You're correct about that. It's about the schools and the backgrounds of the players. If they don't come from a background where education is emphasized, they could have the mental capacity to pull a 3.5 easily, but they could have a 2.0.
http://www.commercialappe...her-thoughts-on-the-sec/
In effect, he takes one of Petrino's comments about it and infers that coaches don't like the idea because it takes things out of their control. They can handle making sure players have their grades once they get in school by enrolling them in the right classes, getting them tutors, or just flat out making sure they are given grades, but if they have to have higher grades to get in, the coaches have much less control over that.
The whole David Saunders Game Plan type program would become that much more important, and I'd bet that coaches and boosters would do a very good job of donating to the cause to make sure players meet those minimum requirements.
It's never about smarts though. You're correct about that. It's about the schools and the backgrounds of the players. If they don't come from a background where education is emphasized, they could have the mental capacity to pull a 3.5 easily, but they could have a 2.0.
would be to adjust to a 10-point grading scale. Most colleges maintain this grading scale and believe a significant number of other states do the same.
- Status