Started By
Message
re: LSU's 2026 Class - Not That Great
Posted on 1/21/26 at 11:53 am to BengalShark
Posted on 1/21/26 at 11:53 am to BengalShark
Oof
0
Posted on 1/21/26 at 12:02 pm to vidtiger23
quote:
Someone else who doesn’t understand how averages work and how having more recruits brings it down.
quote:
It’s cool if you have the opinion that you would trade. You’d just be relinquishing the same number of 5 stars and 8 less 4 stars.
I said I wouldn't trade.
These are no longer the days when you are capped to 25 recruits a year, so the rankings don't mean what they use to. It comes down to overall roster, and when you're at 56 recruits, that means the majority of your team is going to be guys who are there for their first year.
Now, with it being Kiffin's first year also that's not the hugest deal. However, it's no where near the ideal situation and what we know of Kiffin is that he's basically going to do this year after year because he lacks the ability to develop players.
Meanwhile, Alabama and other teams are lower in the rankings because we did not need 56 recruits. We retained all but 1 or 2 of the DeBoer recruits, so we kept the important parts of our roster.
I wouldn't mind us picking up a bunch of lower ranked 3 stars since we can put 105 on scholarships, which would lower our average rankings(not just more players, lower rated players bring it down). But that's only to fill in the positions that were former walk-ons. That's not what LSU is doing.
So yeah, no way in the world would I trade.
Besides, I'm pretty much over overpaid players at this point to be honest. Their production doesn't seem to match what they are making, and that's across college football with only a few exceptions.
Posted on 1/21/26 at 12:16 pm to 3down10
quote:
These are no longer the days when you are capped to 25 recruits a year, so the rankings don't mean what they use to. It comes down to overall roster, and when you're at 56 recruits, that means the majority of your team is going to be guys who are there for their first year.
I agree with all of this. However it wasn’t an LSU fan that started this shitty thread talking about the ratings. So get at him and not everyone else for calling out a shitty thread lol. But that’s cool. I wouldn’t trade either so we’re good. You put a lot of words down all based on assumptions with zero facts. It’s hard to have any kind of logical discussion with that non sense.
This post was edited on 1/21/26 at 12:32 pm
Posted on 1/21/26 at 12:38 pm to SECCaptain
Tried. Kelly would never have flown to Knoxville to meet with a player visiting another school to seal the deal.
Posted on 1/21/26 at 12:44 pm to John somers
I hope that somewhere in the 55 replies you got that someone pointed out that the source you used penalized Kiffin for players lost to the portal. If you look just at who Kiffin brought in, it’s the best portal class of all time or close. It’s #1 this year. They also have the #1 overall (portal+HS) class when not penalizing for players lost. This is what’s being celebrated.
Posted on 1/21/26 at 12:46 pm to vidtiger23
quote:
I agree with all of this. However it wasn’t an LSU fan that started this shitty thread talking about the ratings. So get at him and not everyone else for calling out a shitty thread lol. But that’s cool. I wouldn’t trade either so we’re good. You put a lot of words down all based on assumptions with zero facts. It’s hard to have any kind of logical discussion with that non sense lol.
LSU fans have started plenty of them yourselves, so I don't see much difference.
In time people will understand what I'm talking about. The entire ranking models for these things are going to have to change. It's no longer about recruiting, it's about roster.
When I was young, recruiting meant everything because that was going to be your guy for the next 3-5 years. You had to develop him, and then later he would play. Losing a few scholarships was a huge deal because it created a large gap in your roster.
And that's what our current models and the way we look at things are done now as well. But it doesn't really apply anymore because you can recruit an entire team every year if you want.
But where is the development? Does this really mean the way in the future is to bring in your entire team every year? I don't think so. I think your best best is still to get guys out of high school and develop them, assuming you can develop them. Which also requires you to keep them and to find guys looking for development, rather than a paycheck.
At the end of Saban's career we mostly got a bunch of guys who looked more for a paycheck than development. Which is why he retired. We had the top classes and all that shite still, but all anyone cared about was the paycheck, not getting better. And the lack of development showed on the field as well. Just weren't elite anymore.
Just don't really see recruiting and all this stuff the way I use to after the past few years. Especially with what Indiana just did.
Posted on 1/21/26 at 12:51 pm to Buck Futter
I was just coming here to bump this thread.
Posted on 1/21/26 at 12:51 pm to John somers
John Somers keep lying to yourself if it makes you feel better. LSU now has the number 1 all around class and when Seaton signs it will go higher.
Posted on 1/21/26 at 1:05 pm to John somers
But do the rankings even mean anything anymore? I mean....Indiana's overall class was ranked 39th by 24/7 last year. 
Sure seems like the ability to evaluate specific talent that best fits the system a staff runs is playing a much larger role in success these days than ever before.....
Sure seems like the ability to evaluate specific talent that best fits the system a staff runs is playing a much larger role in success these days than ever before.....
Posted on 1/21/26 at 1:56 pm to John somers
This thread delivers. 
Page 11 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News