Why is everyone saying that this year's MS class is so loaded?

[Dollabillz]

By the numbers, I checked the past couple of classes, 3* or better, from MS high schools...

2011: 25 players, no 5*, eight 4*
2010: 23 players, no 5*, eight 4*
2009: 32 players,one 5*, five 4*
2008: 28 players, one 5*, five 4*
2007: 22 players, no 5*, seven 4*

I know, I know, this isn't the end all method for determining talent. But it's a decent gauge. Appears to me that it's fairly equal throughout. If the players are better, the ratings don't really show it. That's OK, but it's the guys on the sites (that determine ratings) that say this class is deep. My question is, why?

 

[majors42]

to gauge it would be to look at offers. There are going to be some two stars that have sec offers and there are going to be re-evaluations once the season starts.

 

[patdog]

There has been some discussion of this on Nafoom, and someone checked into it and found that the number of 4-star and 5-star players nationwide is significantly greater now than it was 5 years ago. Rivals and Scout know that their business depends on them generating hype and they have to produce more and more of it each year. I fully expect one of them to introduce a new 6-star rating in the next few years.</p>

 

[Dollabillz]

and only reason I ask it's the Scout and Rivals crowd saying it's deeper than normal, but I just don't see it. A lot of tall athletes classified as WR, but that's it. Guys like Moncrief and Arrington could play any backfield position on the field, LB or TE for that matter.

 

[rebelrouseri]

than losing stars as everyone gets evaluated.

 

[ckDOG]

They have to sell subscriptions somehow. The only way to do that is to produce something fans want to read.

I'd also be curious as to what percentage of those 4/5 stars come from major metro areas. I know the numbers aren't in Mississippi's favor as far as capability in producing loads of SEC talent. But, the likelihood that the talent we do have gets overlooked or is inherently devalued is much greater than would the talent around major metro areas would be.

It's simply much harder to find the talent in MS than it would be in Atlanta or some other major city simply because of logistics. There are likely a lot of players/programs in MS that don't get much attention because it just takes too much time to send a scout out to Podunk, MS to look at one recruit that might be SEC talent. You could send the same scout out to one corner of Atlanta and knock out the evaluations of 20 potential 3/4/5 star recruits in the same weekend. The evaluations of those 20 are going to do more for you to sell subscriptions than would that 1 looked over MS kid.

That's not to say I wouldn't rather have those Atlanta kids and their hype. But, until Mullen or any staff proves their abilities in evaluating talent is terrible (i.e. the on-the-field talent and depth gap closes), I can't get caught up in ratings. At this point, I'll trust Mullen over Rivals/Scout. He would know the local talent much better than they would.

 

[olemissbydamn]

than losing stars as everyone gets evaluated.

Damn, you were the only other person who noticed this.

Rivals and Scout haven't even finished evaluating the classes. I don't say this to defend them, because there are some good points being made.

However, Goat is taking data from July and comparing it to the finished product in January.

Several players will be rated that haven't yet. Several guys will go up in stars, but very few, if any, will go down from this point on.

It is fun to watch fanbases embracetheir stars and rankings when they are doing well, only to discredit them when they get their asses handed to them. The Ark fans are a perfect example. One of their biggest reasons forfiring Nutt was his recruiting rank. Yet under Petrino they are averaging a 34th class nationwide and 9th in the SEC, which isabout exactly what Nutt did at Ark. But now the spin is that the recruiting services don't respect them. If that's the case, why wouldn't the same excuse apply to Nutt's time there. The other spin is that Petrino evaluates earlier than any other SEC coaches andgets early commits before they have other offers. Thenall the other coaches are scared to come after his recruits with no other offers. They don't understand that coaches like Meyer, Miles, and Saban don't back off for the most part.

 

[Dollabillz]

and definitely more based on facts, instead of speculation. Some may go down, how would you know that? I'm not trying to argue, I'm really just curious. Who says some of these guys won't have a bad year? Why are they so much better? Every year it's based on the same system. What would you gain from now until January, 5 more players? Still pretty much in line with my data.

 

[rebelrouseri]

one reason for this is probably because the subject fan base will **** a brick if their guy does and they will complain about it. The services are all about hype and that general moves in one direction (up not down). Also, many players have "nr" or 2star status meaning no evaluation has been done yet. The number of those guys gaining stars will greatly outweigh the number of guys losing stars.

 

[Fletch Fletcher]

By the numbers, I checked the past couple of classes, 3* or better, from MS high schools...

2011: 25 players, no 5*, eight 4*
2010: 23 players, no 5*, eight 4*
2009: 32 players,one 5*, five 4*
2008: 28 players, one 5*, five 4*
2007: 22 players, no 5*, seven 4*

Ummmm... You didn't list the 3 stars for any of those years. Only the 5 & 4 stars. Maybe the answer to your questions is the 3* players.

 

[TheStateUofMS]

By the numbers, I checked the past couple of classes, 3* or better, from MS high schools...

2011: 25 players, no 5*, eight 4*
2010: 23 players, no 5*, eight 4*
2009: 32 players,one 5*, five 4*
2008: 28 players, one 5*, five 4*
2007: 22 players, no 5*, seven 4*

Ummmm... You didn't list the 3 stars for any of those years. Only the 5 & 4 stars. Maybe the answer to your questions is the 3* players.

Take the total number of players listed......subtract the number of 5 star players and 4 star players given...and...you have the number of 3 stars. Let me help you out. <div>
</div><div>CLASS of 2011: TWENTY FIVE 3 STAR OR BETTER PLAYERS - ZERO 5 STARS - EIGHT 4 STARS = SEVENTEEN 3 STARS(ans.)</div>

 

[TheStateUofMS]

To respond to the original post....I think as a whole this class is better than last years by a pretty big margin than the star ratings show, but I think it's considered such a deep class by many is the number of skill players. OL and DL players are very hard to project....usually skill players aren't as hard. It would be hard to believe Singleton, Moncrief, Whitehead, Brassell, Arrington, ect won't have good college years. Many great OL come from really small schools because they are over looked. To be a great OL, you have to work really hard. Some players who are All-Americans out of HS don't work as hard as others and they get beat out when it really matters...Templeton Hardy is a great example. He was hyped, I know he wasn't an All-American, but he obviously didn't/hasn't worked hard. You would think you would at least hear about how hard he works if was in fact doing so.

 

[Fletch Fletcher]

Completely missed that column. Thanks.

 

[RebelBruiser]

Look at the number of players with offers from both Ole Miss AND MSU this year in comparison to previous years.

That number should be up.

Or at least look at the ones with offers from one of the in-state programs and a major BCS out of state program or two.

Year to year there are a handful of guys who have an Ole Miss or an MSU offer and their next best offer is USM. There are more players with better offer sheets than that this year.