In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 2352
Online now 2344 Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)
We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.
Where the madness isn't just in March.
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.
One thing to keep in mind with the "MD is going to have to fill his class out with diamonds in the rough" thought process is that the current recruiting rankings are far from final. There were several previously unheralded recruits at the SMSB camp this past weekend who are in for significant ratings boosts, for instance.
Even accepting recruiting rankings as the gospel truth, who's to say that several of MSU's commits don't end up getting 4-star bumps?
I remember the 2010 class, where Burkland and Gholston entered the All-Star games as a 3-star and a 4-star respectively. They ended up each getting an extra star.
UM's recruiting cycle has been accelerated, but that doesn't change the fact that the final recruiting rankings don't come out till after the HS All-Star games.
Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.
When Dantonio puts on the field a team that can't compete with the power teams in conference like Wisconsin, OSU, Penn State, Nebraska I'll start worrying. Till then, anyone who knows one bit about football knows MSU has the team able to compete with any of the top teams in the league. I don't see tha falling off next year. I remember the days when we'd go to OSU and just think, man, here it comes. Not anymore and not in the near future.
If we have duds we'll revisit this in two years. But the team I'm looking at in practice in the spring, and the depth chart I see, I have no worries for the next two years. Will they win against the Wisconsin or Nebraska? Who knows, but they will be able to compete. Days of 4-8 are over for now.
I started a B1G thread earlier and there seems to be a lot of competition between your two teams. Lot's of back and forth, which surprised me that OSU and Mich weren't in that position, but I digress.
I was wondering if some fans from each team could list the top 30 or so players between both rosters. It's obviously not an exact science but would like to see where you think your individual players stack up against each other. Eager to hear back and enjoy your fathers day!
I'll keep it in mind, but, overall, people are as likely to fall as rise. MSU's current commits could fall and the rankings could be even lower. The only certain thing is that guys that shined like diamonds and Dantonio went after, he mostly missed on. He can keep looking, but most elite athletes have been discovered by this point, some exceptions will happen and a few kids will rise nationally, but State won't be able to fill their class out with that small group of late bloomers, especially while power programs still have spots.
So, beating one OSU team with suspended players, first game starting QB and interim coach means MSU is never going to get beat down by OSU again in the near future? I appreciate your enthusiasm, but two good years does not a juggernaut make, especially with Dantonio losing all the in-state recruiting wars in his tenure.
If your going to believe that a team with relativlely low level recruits can be a perennial contendor, history says that is almost never the case. Of course, the one program to really do it over the last ten years comes into EL this year and you guys think Dantonio is more proven than Peterson.
I can only image how confident you would be if MSU won an outright B10 title, a Rose or other BCS Bowl or even made it out of a season without getting blown out in at least a couple games. If any of those were true, you would probably start thinking Dantonio could win a national title or something (despite the fact no one wins one with that level of recruits).
You know anger gets in the way of consructive thought. As I have said and your anger doesn't allow you to see, MSU will have a team capable of competing against any team in our conference. I dint see that falling off this year or, watching a couple practices this spring, next year either. Guaranteeing victoories is for fan boys who read magazines. We don't know what the weather will be like let alone how they will play. But MSU will have a very competitive team for at least two years that I can see. I'll revisit this then.
Beatdowns won't happen. They're rare and too many things have to happen. Sure we inflicted two in a row on Michigan but that's just rare as hell.
You do realize that the SEC gets to recruit 5 classes for ever 4 classes the B1G gets to recruit, right? I doubt that has given them any competitive advantage over other conferences though...
Now knowing what 1995 is like all over again! Thank you 247 technology!!
Oversigning is overrated. Ole Miss was one of the biggest culprits and they sucked. The real reason they are so good is that like Michigan they pull in 5 star and high 4 star recruits.
Stealing Sparty's recruits and owning them on the field since 1898
UM has had 3 5star commits the past 5 years and you act like it's the standard at UM..
And FYI, those three 5 stars..
Will Campbell- huge bust to this point
Kalis and Pipkins- both will be true frosh this season
Well, i suppose we should be flattered that all Michigan fans have is "Well, you guys may be good next year...and the year after that...but oh man watch out in a few years!" Despite having already proved that MSU is recruiting as well as they ever have.
Just because we didn't get Hurst or something doesn't mean his spot won't be filled with a good player some time in the next 7 months.
And yeah, I know. "we'll see at signing day." Well i don't anticipate filling our remaining spots with GLIAC castoffs.
Of course MSU is gonna ebb and flow throughout the years like any team but I wouldn't hold your breath for the John L Smith years to return while Dantonio is here.
Actually 7 5 stars.
Who the hell is hurst?
Do you see the ridiculous amount of kids that get drafted from small schools? Your posts are a joke. You have this assumption that only kids that are good get ranked well by these sites. When those kids commit, the talent is gone. However, the glaring weakness in your argument is the crazy amount of kids that are missed in the recruiting world.
Take a look at this spreadsheet. Took me about 20 minutes to whip up. It shows the great deal of ambiguity involved in the recruiting process.
I'm not sure but did you just compare modern Michigan program with top sec programs?
You guys don't like it, but it is easy to compare what we are doing recruiting wise with them.
1 in 13 5 stars become all americans
1 in 53 4 stars become all americans
1 in 172 3 stars become all americans
1 in 744 2 stars become all americans
When you have a shit load of 2 and 3 stars some will fall through the cracks, but I'd rather take a 5/4 star anyday.
With Mississippi State?
No, I think Mississippi State is outrecruiting Michigan State.
I totally agree with you that you're more likely to become an all-american based on your star ranking but the problem is that you don't have a team filled with those types. The bulk of teams are the good, solid recruits. Whether he has 3 or 4 stars next to his name from 3-5 years prior doesn't mean much.
Using your logic makes it difficult to explain the extreme variances in recruit rankings and team rankings at the end of the year. Take a look at MSU, OK State, Oregon, Wisconsin, Va Tech, Stanford, and others. Meanwhile, ND has according to these sites, far more talent than just about every other team in college football. Do you think that maybe it's because they have a huge fan base and can generate much more traffic than some schools with much smaller fan bases? Hmmm... something to think about. This whole issue of revenue...
Probably, because ther coach sucks. Otherwise, CMU filled with 3 star recruits could compete with Alabama or LSU.
12 of 13 five stars don't
52 of 53 four stars dont
What are the odds the four and five star kids on a team won't? That sucks.
Right. Perhaps it has more to do with the amount of recruits and the lack of analysts to accurately rank all of these kids. Maybe they can't look at each kid or have the ability to rank them in order so they rely on offer sheets. Inevitably, there are a ton of kids that are busts and it's nearly impossible to hit on every single kid.
Recruiting rankings help give a projection of the future but it is so far from accurate that it's a joke. Just look at that spreadsheet I made. If you were to give something like that as a business forecast to a CEO, he'd tell you to go sit back down and figure out a better way to give an accurate forecast.
Everyone can see that Alabama, USC, and LSU are getting great kids. But it's much more difficult the further down you go. I don't blame the guys working here or anything, their task is just too difficult.
Yeah, but 171/172 won't. That's worse than 12/13 or 51/52.
The only ones that are disappointments with a majority of 4/5 star recruits that I can think of are ND and Texas. It's too early with most of FSU's # 1 class being underclassmen for me to consider them underachieving.
So, I guess we really need to look at what the coaches do with these kids. if my coach can win a conference with the kids he has, be they ranked 38th, or 12th, or 3 star or 5 star, that's an important first step. We'll go from there.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports