Started By
Message
re: How would you rank these jobs as landing spots for head coaches? Rank within the group.
Posted on 1/26/23 at 9:33 am to AwgustaDawg
Posted on 1/26/23 at 9:33 am to AwgustaDawg
quote:
substantially higher numbers of elite defensive linemen
This, IMO is the biggest reason for the souths domination at the top of college football. It's extremely hard to draw those elite defensive linemen from the south. The other positions can be had in various areas around the country.
0
Posted on 1/26/23 at 9:34 am to koreandawg
quote:
Georgia is also signing a lot of kids out of state
Yeah, I was only referencing Alabama out of familiarity — it's certainly a trend across the board at top programs.
But IMO you're right about elite in-state talent being a big deal, in the sense that you've got to essentially keep it in-state.
Posted on 1/26/23 at 9:37 am to koreandawg
quote:
Michigan: No in-state competition. Blueblood name brand that faded but is being revived. Not much regional talent around, so must recruit nation wide heavily.Only has one school in conference that really can challenge in terms of recruiting. Will soon add one more though that school is a galaxy away in proximity.
Tennessee: No in-state competition. Blueblood name brand that faded but is being revived. Does have a better regional base than the other two. Has to fight with a ton of schools for big time recruits in that base.
Oregon: Not much in-state competition, but not much in state talent. Only has one school that can challenge in terms of recruiting in conference, but will soon be the top dawg. Nike money.
Of these three, Tennessee has more access to elite talent, but there is fierce competition for it.
Oh, and lol at the "no in-state competition" for Michigan comment. Sparty and Michigan are deadlocked at 10-10 over the past 20 meetings and Sparty made the playoff before Big Blue.
This post was edited on 1/26/23 at 9:43 am
Posted on 1/26/23 at 9:44 am to koreandawg
quote:
Oregon
quote:This is what gives them top of that group. They have so much Nike support it's insane, and because of that, they're able to recruit nationally (and well, at that)
Nike money.
The only thing really standing in their way in comparison to others is the uncertainty behind their current conference and their eventual conference affiliation
Posted on 1/26/23 at 9:47 am to dstone12
quote:
this is why Uga can dominate.
It may not happen, but it just seems like GT forgot about football. Almost like the are Stanford, and could care less if they were pushed to Conference USA.
Georgia Tech is a microcosm of Atlanta which was once called the capital of the empire state of the south but Atlanta has outgrown the region and it is not close in the same way Miami is no longer the south but more akin to the NE US. There are HOARDES of college football fans in Atlanta and Atlanta is the epicenter of CFB in the US because of geography but culturally Atlanta is no longer the south and Georgia Tech is culturally tied to Atlanta more than it is to Georgia. GT is a fantastci institution and a national and state treasure but athletics are just not that important at Tech any longer. They don't need the money and they don't care about sports like southerners do. Atlanta is a cultural island surrounded by a sea of southern culture which seldom dampens Atlanta these days.
Posted on 1/26/23 at 9:53 am to XWing atAliciousness
quote:
quote:
Oregon
quote:
Nike money.
This is what gives them top of that group. They have so much Nike support it's insane, and because of that, they're able to recruit nationally (and well, at that)
The only thing really standing in their way in comparison to others is the uncertainty behind their current conference and their eventual conference affiliation
And culture. They simply do not care as much about football at any level on the west coast or the pacific NW as we do in the south. I have lived in both areas and in Texas....none of the compare to what you will see at county recreation departments Monday - Thursday and on county and middle/high school fields on Thursday and Friday nights. Thousands of kids practicing or playing football every day of the week except Sunday. And not in isolated pockets but in every county and every town of any size whatsoever. You do not see this outside of the SE United States any longer, if it ever took place. Oregon will have to buy a natty because there is no way anyone outside of the region between Ohio and FLorida and west to Texas will build an organic national power without a major culture shift in either the south or the rest of the nation. They may be able to buy a natty but they will not build a program ala Ohio State, LSU, Alabama, CLemson or UGA. Not in Oregon, not in California and not in probably 40 of the 50 states. The reaason is simple...the people just aren't that intre
Posted on 1/26/23 at 10:11 am to koreandawg
quote:
Superior in-state talent
That might matter if players were trapped in-state
Posted on 1/26/23 at 10:13 am to koreandawg
I bet if there was only 1 P5 program in MS they'd be one helluva program.
Posted on 1/26/23 at 11:20 am to GoGators1995
quote:
I bet if there was only 1 P5 program in MS they'd be one helluva program.
WIth the right coach and a commitment to the program they'd be unstoppable. No richer recruiting ground in the nation than Mississippi with the added caveat of the functional JC network bringing in even more prospects. They'd be tough. Either school would be with the other existing if they ever got the right coach and administration simultaneously.
Posted on 1/26/23 at 12:36 pm to Porter Osborne Jr
quote:
Have you heard of a small school named Michigan State?
I looked and UM pretty much gets who they want. It's not that much different than Georgia and Tech when Tech actually has a decent team.
Posted on 1/26/23 at 12:38 pm to Old Hellen Yeller
quote:
That might matter if players were trapped in-state
Ask your HC. He thinks it matters.
Posted on 1/26/23 at 8:48 pm to koreandawg
quote:
I looked and UM pretty much gets who they want.
You didn't look very hard. MSU got 3 of the top ten and UM got 2 this year. Last year, MSU got 4 of the top ten and UM got 1.
Posted on 1/26/23 at 8:50 pm to koreandawg
Ohio St.GA.Bama..only legends can win at Bama..small state..deep south..
This post was edited on 1/26/23 at 9:56 pm
Posted on 1/26/23 at 9:50 pm to koreandawg
I agree with everything you say except:
MI State is consistent top 25, and maybe even consistent top 15; plus, the directional schools in MI are typically better than average/competitive
also, add Penn State and Notre Dame to the group 2 list
quote:
Michigan: No in-state competition.
MI State is consistent top 25, and maybe even consistent top 15; plus, the directional schools in MI are typically better than average/competitive
also, add Penn State and Notre Dame to the group 2 list
Posted on 1/26/23 at 10:00 pm to koreandawg
It took the two best coaches of all time to win at Bama
I'd say to just win consistently, OSU
Then UGA
Then Bama
I'd say to just win consistently, OSU
Then UGA
Then Bama
Posted on 1/26/23 at 10:02 pm to koreandawg
Alabama UGA OSU
Tenner Oregon Michigan
Tenner Oregon Michigan
Posted on 1/26/23 at 10:03 pm to lsusteve1
quote:
It took the two best coaches of all time to win at Bama
So you know nothing about the history of college football. Noted.
Posted on 1/26/23 at 10:07 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
I suspect you did not read his post very carefully.
Based off his post, I'm not sure he/she can read.
Posted on 1/26/23 at 10:12 pm to AwgustaDawg
quote:
LSU would have to be in tier one if area recruiting talent and lack of an instate rival for recruits is one measuring stick.
agree
Posted on 1/26/23 at 11:59 pm to Porter Osborne Jr
In Michigan? I mean Harbaugh knows he has to go out of state to beat Ohio State.
I'm not totally sure that tells a whole lot.
247 recruiting rankings wise Michigan is top ten or just outside most years. MSU can be anywhere from low twenties to forties.
Let's be honest here, Michigan is getting the better players by a long shot. I'm not sure if a team wanting to compete for championships wants to win a lot of in-state recruits.
Top Michigan recruits that signed with MSU or Michigan this year and where they rank nationally.
2. Cole Cabana, 4 star RB, Michigan commit, National rank: 167 was offered by MSU
3. Jalen Thompson, 4 star DL, MSU commit, National rank: 228 was offered by Michigan
4.Amir Herring 4 star OG, Michigan commit, National rank: 283 was offered by MSU.
MSU also signed the no. 6 recruit, who did not receive a Michigan offer according to 247.
So they lost one guy to MSU, got two and didn't offer another that MSU took.
This was also a down year for Michigan in recruiting and an up year for MSU.
I'm not totally sure that tells a whole lot.
247 recruiting rankings wise Michigan is top ten or just outside most years. MSU can be anywhere from low twenties to forties.
Let's be honest here, Michigan is getting the better players by a long shot. I'm not sure if a team wanting to compete for championships wants to win a lot of in-state recruits.
Top Michigan recruits that signed with MSU or Michigan this year and where they rank nationally.
2. Cole Cabana, 4 star RB, Michigan commit, National rank: 167 was offered by MSU
3. Jalen Thompson, 4 star DL, MSU commit, National rank: 228 was offered by Michigan
4.Amir Herring 4 star OG, Michigan commit, National rank: 283 was offered by MSU.
MSU also signed the no. 6 recruit, who did not receive a Michigan offer according to 247.
So they lost one guy to MSU, got two and didn't offer another that MSU took.
This was also a down year for Michigan in recruiting and an up year for MSU.
This post was edited on 1/27/23 at 12:20 am
Page 2 of 3
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News