Is Dan Mullen a ninja at developing players? MSU-LSU Recruiting Comparison

probably just better at recruiting for his system + very good at qb development

He recruits size (he has said this on the past). It doesn't take as much development when you are bigger than someone. He runs into problems when facing a team with similar size.

Talent evaluation with overlooked guys. He has a bit of Tuberville in him. Just take Dak and Fitz as perfect examples. Georgia and LSU passed on them as QBs. They became elite QBs, embarrassing especially to LSU who can't seem to buy a decent one.

He finds guys that are overlooked, and mixes in elite talent typically from MS.

He's just a smart coach with a very good offensive system and builds his team properly. He's also at a school that has allowed him to stick around long enough to learn on the job and build a program.

quote:

---

He recruits size (he has said this on the past). It doesn't take as much development when you are bigger than someone. He runs into problems when facing a team with similar size.

---

Not so much size as the frame. McKinney is a good example. Everyone else saw a skinny 6'4" two star QB, Mullen saw the frame and athleticism for an elite MLB. He emphasizes recruiting the things you can't teach. So you can teach a guy how to tackle, or how to throw. You can't teach a frame, or leadership, etc...

Mississippi has a lot of high schools that don't have fantastic S&C programs. It allows him to really consider where a guy could be in 2-3 years instead of looking at where they are as a senior in high school.

It's not something that works for every program, and it really takes time to get it rolling. We redshirt probably 80-90% of incoming players.

I think one other thing is stability. Each year he has seemingly inched his recruiting slightly higher. Not much that it shows up on a radar screen but now our team has more talent than people realize. Maybe a little below the so called big boys but I think we have cut the difference so that on the field we can compete with every body except Bama (just another level there). Anybody else, we can ball with now.

5 stars are probably gonna play early and be good usually. LSU gets a lot of them and 4 stars who may be ready and may not. State uses out of necessity, red shirting more than most elite programs. High 3 stars and four stars have redshirted and developed over a couple years before they become starters. This year and next as in 2014 we have the right amount to field a team with experienced depth and seasoned quality starters. They've been in the same system for a few years for the most part. Of course there are exceptions. But the majority of the team has been built this way. Seasoned, conditioned, experienced high 3 stars and four stars are better than young 5 stars sometimes. LSU is a young team with elite talent. It's tough to build a team like State has but it works out every few years if done right.

Pretty sure there's more 3* players in the NFL than 4*+5* players combined. Eventually you're going to figure out that you're getting sold a bag o goods by recruiting sites looking to make money off of the larger fanbases by ranking the players you sign higher than the rest. Sorry to break it to ya but outside of the top 50 players each year the next 300 of them are all 3* in reality.

quote:

---

Pretty sure there's more 3* players in the NFL than 4*+5* players combined.

---

But the number of players ranked as 3 stars is exponentially higher than the total for 4 & 5 stars. The percentage of 4 & 5 stars that make the NFL is higher.

But aren't there also more 3* players than 4&5* players? How do they do tiers? Seems like it would be like a curve

The right guys for his system, no doubt.

Anytime you have a change in staff, like LSU, the players may not fit the new philosophy and schemes. That transition doesn't always work so well. Think that was a big part of why LSU looked like such a mess. A lack of execution.