This has always been a ridiculous talking point. Especially from the reeruned aspect of our EMAW brethren.

Coaching IS recruiting. Mack Brown gets a ridiculous amount of criticism because he recruits well and doesn't win the Big XII every year. Same with Rick Barnes. They are both great coaches. And the argument that coach x could do so much more with others talent, discounts the aspect recruiting plays in making a great coach.

Saban is great because he gets a ton of talent on campus and closes the deal. Snyder doesn't recruit well, nor do his staff. But there is still a TON of talent at key positions. The best talent has come through transfers. Plus, EMAW has a real leader at the most important position.
Several weeks ago one of the phogtards said the talent level between KU and KSU was virtually the same. That the entire difference was coaching. Needless to say, that person just regugitates a talking point that has been repeated so often, it's taken as gospel.

Can the EMAW make it through to the MNC? Sure. But we are also just good enough to lose anywhere along the way. I'm here for the ride.

To the 'ship!

Exactly. And it PROVES Snyder is the better coach.

Think Hawaii vs. Georgia a few years ago. K-State's offense doesn't work when they can't get offensive line push, and they wouldn't. Klein would also get the snot beat out of him trying to run.

Now KState is Hawaii? Good grief.

I think they can only do so much.

I mean, who would choose Manhattan over Austin?

K-State has a surprising amount of talent this year, more than usual.

Tough to comprehend, I know.

I agree recruiting is an important part of a coach's job, but that doesn't happen during the hypothetical game. Not unless one is drawing extended points of connection. Snyder might get "out-athleted" in such a game, but I doubt he's getting "out coached".

On top of that, there isn't a "level playing field" in recruiting. Some schools have built in advantages other schools won't, most prominently, location. A school also can't "invent" a tradition/history. That's why certain schools will always be at the top of the pecking order, and others are flash in the pans. State population and the number of Division1 athletes (also regionally), is another huge factor.

So, the simple fact Saban recruits better than Snyder isn't all from a level opportunity in the recruiting game. Snyder and KSU are fighting an uphill battle there. That's not to say Saban doesn't have to work hard to maintain that level, he absolutely does, and should be commended for it.

Wouldn't Les Miles then be the George Siefert of college football? He took Saban's last two recruiting classes to his only National Championship and is pretty much known as a stupid mother****er by everyone that isn't an LSU fan.

Someone carried this thread out of an aids forest in a bucket.

I picked Bama simply because they are on a whole plain in college football right now. Not sure anyone is even close.

I do think K-State would give them a helluva run though, and it would a good, watchable matchup....Bama would win, but they would have to show up and play sharp.

Alabama wins this game probably 8 times out of 10.

There's a lot of schools that are in towns like Manhattan and still recruit well.

Bama blows KSTATE out. Wins 10 of 10 times

I think Alabama wins 7 of 10 match UPS
Posted via Mobile Device

LSU got dominated by Florida much more than the final score shows. Florida held LSU to 42 yards rushing (1.7 ypc) and put up 176 yds on the ground. Florida had the ball 15 more minutes than LSU, had 22 first downs to LSU's 8, ran 25 straight running plays to close out the game, and shut LSU out in the 2nd half. LSU got destroyed by Florida. Florida didn't even attempt a pass in the 4th qtr.

KSU's advantage over teams that are more talented than them is coaching. I am no KSU fan, but I respect Snyder. Against most teams that superior coaching works in KSU's favor. Problem is Alabama is equally well coached and are CLEARLY more talented from top to bottom. Bama wins and it would not even be close.