Started By
Message
re: This class is terrible
Posted on 2/2/17 at 2:23 pm to TigerCruise
Posted on 2/2/17 at 2:23 pm to TigerCruise
It's not terrible but it's not great. There are a fair amount of high 3's that have a lot of potential, which is what we do. When we are top ten good we have had a handful of 4 stars with high development potential (so that's still what we do). We don't have that this time. But let's see what happens in 2018, that's really when we are going to find out a lot about BO's potential.
We are probably never going to be bama or tOsu where we vacuum up a bunch of 4 and 5's and process out all the busts. And I'm OK with that.
We are probably never going to be bama or tOsu where we vacuum up a bunch of 4 and 5's and process out all the busts. And I'm OK with that.
0
Posted on 2/2/17 at 2:24 pm to Wtodd
quote:
12th
Thought we were 13th.
Posted on 2/2/17 at 2:28 pm to the808bass
Depends on the ranking service. I think I've seen them as high as 10. And rankings are shite
Posted on 2/2/17 at 2:30 pm to MIZ_COU
Ive watched on the Hudl videos and I rank us 4th.
Lets all rejoice.
Lets all rejoice.
Posted on 2/2/17 at 2:33 pm to JesusQuintana
Depending on how they develop and how the other classes develop they could finish out any where from 6th to 14th. Probably. Kind a sorta
Posted on 2/2/17 at 2:38 pm to MIZ_COU
Here is the thing. The top classes are just that. The elite players are pretty easy to recognize. Maybe the top 100 or so, maybe less. After that, its at best a somewhat educated guess and in many instances not even that.
The same teams always win because they divide those elite prospects amongst themselves. After that though, yearly you have teams that are better than they are supposed to be and teams that are worse...and its always surprising to people because they take "stars" as gospel.
The same teams always win because they divide those elite prospects amongst themselves. After that though, yearly you have teams that are better than they are supposed to be and teams that are worse...and its always surprising to people because they take "stars" as gospel.
Posted on 2/2/17 at 3:02 pm to MIZ_COU
quote:
Depending on how they develop and how the other classes develop they could finish out any where from 6th to 14th. Probably. Kind a sorta
Sure. But if you're 13th every year in recruiting, over time it's going to be difficult to not be 13th in the WL ranking.
Posted on 2/2/17 at 3:09 pm to TigerCruise
Well, to be honest, didn't everything point to this being an oddly bad year for Missouri high school football? Next year seems to be loaded with talent so this might just be one of those years.
It happens. There might be some real hidden gems in what you got. If not, well hold on till next year when you should have a real bumper crop of talent coming along. Teams like Missouri, Arkansas, and the Mississippi schools live for that big haul year where they can upgrade to the point they threaten the big boys.
I still like your chances to be competitive for the East next year and going forward.
It happens. There might be some real hidden gems in what you got. If not, well hold on till next year when you should have a real bumper crop of talent coming along. Teams like Missouri, Arkansas, and the Mississippi schools live for that big haul year where they can upgrade to the point they threaten the big boys.
I still like your chances to be competitive for the East next year and going forward.
Posted on 2/2/17 at 3:17 pm to the808bass
Not really.
Posted on 2/2/17 at 3:18 pm to JesusQuintana
Really.
Posted on 2/2/17 at 3:20 pm to JesusQuintana
The only position group that pulled up short IMO was WR. J'Mon Moore is the only contributor that runs out of eligibility next year so Hill has some time to reload his room.
Haley and Elarbee both did a great job with their rooms.
Haley and Elarbee both did a great job with their rooms.
Posted on 2/2/17 at 3:35 pm to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
Yeah.
I'd say you're missing a lot. Like 75% of the picture.
But I wouldn't worry about it.
You're not meant to think this through any better than you have.
Someone piss in your cheerios?
I'm simply stating that a 48th ranked class is awful when you sign 25 players. You guys can shite on the recruiting rankings all you want but we had a number of flips at the last second and from what I can see we have ONE 4 star recruit in the entire class.
So we have 24 diamonds in the rough?
I don't buy it.
Posted on 2/2/17 at 3:39 pm to TigerCruise
Had Petry not been down graded from a 4 star to a 3 star in Rivals the ranking for Mizzou would have been 30.
Posted on 2/2/17 at 3:56 pm to the808bass
Disregarding several variables...sure
Posted on 2/2/17 at 4:06 pm to the808bass
I agree with that, but I'm saying rankings aren't gospel. If you finish 13th year after year sure you not going to atlanta. But if you finished 6th or 7th and keep pulling a few 2 and 3's that wind up getting drafted and some others that turn out good you can. What was Pinkel's highest class, and what was his average?
To win the conference is another deal. we'd need to be in the top 5 consistantly and still develop as we have historically. But if we want to be in the top 3 recruiting in the SEC we better upgrade our facilities and athlete's dorms and get our bagmen and car dealerships in line. Cause that's how it's done.
To win the conference is another deal. we'd need to be in the top 5 consistantly and still develop as we have historically. But if we want to be in the top 3 recruiting in the SEC we better upgrade our facilities and athlete's dorms and get our bagmen and car dealerships in line. Cause that's how it's done.
Posted on 2/2/17 at 4:10 pm to JesusQuintana
People that knock star ratings(nothing in life is perfect) why don't you tell that to Bama, Ohio St.,Clemson, Florida St., etc.
LSU, Tennessee, Georgia always have great recruiting rankings, but coaching has killed that at those schools. That's why 2 of them got rid of their coaches and Tennessee needs to be next.
LSU, Tennessee, Georgia always have great recruiting rankings, but coaching has killed that at those schools. That's why 2 of them got rid of their coaches and Tennessee needs to be next.
Posted on 2/2/17 at 4:15 pm to MIZ_COU
I agree. And I didn't say it was impossible.
Posted on 2/2/17 at 4:35 pm to the808bass
I went ahead and looked it up.
From 2002 - 2015 our average class rank was 40.2.
2010 was our highest ranked class at 21. It also turned out to be our best class making up a lot of the 2013 team. However another good chunk of that 2013 team came from the 2011 class which was ranked 48th (Pinkel's worst ranked class).
2007 was another top 5 team and the class rankings for the previous four years (2003 to 2006) were 28, 29, 46, and 39.
A lot of our players in the NFL were in lower ranked classes in the 30's and 40's
Our weakest years don't really correlate with our weaker classes.
So stars are not destiny (our destiny is not in the stars). Under Pinkel we consistently greatly outperformed our rankings. If we can get in the top 20 consistently we could be alright. Just following stars like they tell the whole tale is for the rest of simpletons in the SEC.
This class however is in the mid 50's, below Pinkel's worst class at 48. We need to do better
From 2002 - 2015 our average class rank was 40.2.
2010 was our highest ranked class at 21. It also turned out to be our best class making up a lot of the 2013 team. However another good chunk of that 2013 team came from the 2011 class which was ranked 48th (Pinkel's worst ranked class).
2007 was another top 5 team and the class rankings for the previous four years (2003 to 2006) were 28, 29, 46, and 39.
A lot of our players in the NFL were in lower ranked classes in the 30's and 40's
Our weakest years don't really correlate with our weaker classes.
So stars are not destiny (our destiny is not in the stars). Under Pinkel we consistently greatly outperformed our rankings. If we can get in the top 20 consistently we could be alright. Just following stars like they tell the whole tale is for the rest of simpletons in the SEC.
This class however is in the mid 50's, below Pinkel's worst class at 48. We need to do better
This post was edited on 2/2/17 at 4:45 pm
Posted on 2/2/17 at 4:51 pm to MIZ_COU
Where are you getting mid 50's from?
Really the difference between 30 and 50 is negligible.
Check out the PM podcast with AJ Ofodile today. He talked some about rankings.
Really the difference between 30 and 50 is negligible.
Check out the PM podcast with AJ Ofodile today. He talked some about rankings.
Posted on 2/2/17 at 5:17 pm to wubilli
ESPN has us at 54. 247 has us at 50.
quote:Mostly agree. That's kinda been my point.
Really the difference between 30 and 50 is negligible.
quote:I shall
Check out the PM podcast with AJ Ofodile today.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News