In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 146
Online now 147 Record: 7264 (3/12/2012)
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Thanks for putting this together. It's amazing how many fans and media members completely ignore the actual facts, and instead just buy into the hype. I think the best example of that was in the 2006 season. Because Florida beat Ohio State, there was suddenly this man vs. boys difference in talent, and football games were suddenly won or lost solely based on which team was faster (by the way, how many times will you hear someone say the Ravens are better than the Patriots because they're faster, or the 49ers are better than the Rams because they're faster? You won't, and that's because there are dozens of factors that determine who wins a football game. Speed is one of those factors, but nowhere near the only factor). Never mind the fact that the B1G actually had a winning record against the SEC in bowl games that year.
And the following year, when Michigan beat Florida at the end of a down year for the Wolverines, everyone just swept that aside because "Michigan played hard because it was Carr's last game." But when the SEC wins games, no excuses are made for the B1G, and it's just because the SEC is so fast. Definitely a huge pet peeve of mine.
oh but if you listen to the tv analysts there is no competing with the sespeed. Quite sick of hearing this myself, aparently everyone outside that conference is very slow. Do they really believe there is no speed outside their conference? They can make any excuses they want but a big plodding Michigan team took down one of the fastest in the sec.
So, you can just give stars to a guy? Sorry, I look up Kovacs recruiting profile on Rivals, you're using Rivals right, and I see an unranked kid. Plenty of kids play above or below their recruiting ranking, but if you are looking at raw recruiting numbers, Kovacs doesn't have any. He is a great story, but you are moving the goalpost again. If you use raw recruiting data for everybody else, it has to be used for Kovacs. Using those numbers would show that MSU haf a higher * average defense last year, and it looks like will start the season with one this year.
To add, I think this further proves the point that a poster was making that while initially RR had good looking classes, attrition killed them.
I agree that it gets old, but we will continue to hear it until a B1G team wins a natty.
Michigan will win it in 2015 or 16
Why? I did not see anything special in this one. Of course, MD 'coaches up' everyone, so ..... MSU has had a complex since I can remember (80s), and it still has not changed. Their drop in recruiting classes will show it in 2 years.
“Those who stay will be champions”
― Bo Schembechler
I wouldn't expect them to trash the kid or coach for picking up a 2*, they just had back to back 11 win seasons. If they weren't winning, then people would be bitching about grabbing another 2* kid.
The ratings for this kid should be as accurate as this process can be. Plays for a big school that is heavily scouted, and he has went to the big regional camps. A 2*- low 3* recruit.
Forget Miami, UF and FSU. Salmon does not have even offers from any of the second or third tier in-state schools. No USF or UCF or FIU or FAU. Maybe he's an ultrasleeper, but it's like he's like a MAC-rated kid who even the MAC schools would have passed on if he was from the Midwest. Something just seems odd about this one.
Damn, didn't notice that. That is odd and says a ton, imo.
Leading the witness.
What drop in recruiting?
Just because you've seen an uptick in UM's recruiting, doesn't correlate to MSU's being worse...
Avg star per recruit (per Rivals)
2013- 3.10 (to date)
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by CaliSpartan0606 21 months ago
Has MSU had a class as good as the 2009 class? Didn't think so.
UM's 2010 class was ranked #20 and had an average star per recruit of 3.19
The 2011 class was ranked #21 with average star per recruit of 3.25
Simply pointing out that just because UM's on its way to two straight solid top 10 classes, doesn't mean that directly correlates to MSU's classes becoming worse and based simply on the 2012 and 2013 classes for UM (both highly rated), Dantonio's brought in his two highest rated classes outside 2009
This post was edited by CaliSpartan0606 21 months ago
he said in two years.
No he said "Their drop in recruiting classes will show it in 2 years"
To me- that means the OP thinks MSU has a drop in recruiting and that will show on the field in 2 years
And I'm simply showing the OP that MSU's recruiting hasn't dropped at all which is what he said when he stated "Their drop in recruiting classes will show it in 2 years. "
I think you mean 2013-2016 when we win 4 straight.
We are college football
Well, since they peaked in 2009, fell in 2010, fell in 2011, gain in 2012, and fell to date in 2013, I have to say he is on to something. Thanks for the data to show that.
Wow, it has dropped in 3 of the last 4 years based off of data that you provided, and you still claim that it "hasn't dropped at all".
Your class will be more like 3.03 when NSD day comes. You still have needs to fill and no 4 stars are left on the board for you.
This post was edited by Brady Hoke 21 months ago
Now, can only assume, but when the OP said he expects MSU to drop off on the field in 2 years, I don't think he's talking about the 2009 class (since, unless they are RS SR's, they'll be gone). 2 years would be 2014, meaning he's highlighting the drop in recruiting MSU has had since UM started to recruit well again (2012 and 2013) and that's simply not the case.
Twist the words any way you want- but the OP is claiming MSU's current drop in recruiting will show on the field beginning in 2014 and since 2010, Dantonio's recruiting has been consistent and has actually improved in '12 and '13 compared to 2010 and 2011- which would be the 4 classes impacted in two years.
Yea, think anywhere from 3.00 to 3.10 is where MSU will end up, of course there's opportunity for current commits to add a 4th star (ESPN shows MSU has 4 4stars, the other 3 show no more than 2)
Rivals also has MSU at three 5.7 kids (5.8 is 4star)
But yep- anywhere in that range is probably expected
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports