Mizzou Basketball

[Saul Good]

MIZ-ZOU

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by Silock

If you say so. That's still only 1 5-star and 1 4-star. Not saying you guys shouldn't be excited about the guys, but I think it's going to take a lot more to be even *competitive* in the SEC.

Your concern is duly noted.

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Would you rather make a FF and not land DGB than the other way around? I wouldn't unless we won the title.

Final Four and it is not even close. As good as DGB is, a final four easily trumps it. DGB wont win us any NCG and we have to wait till next year to see how much of an impact he has on our recruiting. We have 0 zero final four appearances ever. That will do more good for at least BB recruiting than DGB will do for CFB recruiting.

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by Silock

Even with DGB, it's the 11th rated class in the SEC... why is everyone so pumped? Vanderbilt had a better recruiting class than MU . . .

Mizzou's recruiting class is ranked low because of the quantity of recruits. In terms of quality, they ranked much higher.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Silock

If you say so. That's still only 1 5-star and 1 4-star. Not saying you guys shouldn't be excited about the guys, but I think it's going to take a lot more to be even *competitive* in the SEC.

Don't forget how circular the Rivals ratings are.

When Notre Dame was considered the front-runner for Mauk, it was a given that it was just a matter of time before Mauk ended up a 4-star. He went out there and set the world on fire as a Senior but still didn't get that 4th star after signing with Mizzou. It wasn't because of his performance.

Rivals will concede that they base part of their ratings on what schools are pursuing a player. Every year there are several players that get stars added because they go to Alabama or Oklahoma or whatever. So to a degree, teams like Alabama get 3 or 4 extra 'stars' each year by virtue of the fact that they're chasing the kid.

Ultimately, the difference between the top 1/2 of the 3 stars and the bottom 1/2 of the 4 stars is nominal at best. That's where most classes come from for all but the 'blue-blood' power programs.

Ultimately, I'd rather have 2 5-stars and a ton of 3 high 3-stars, than to have 4 4-stars and a bunch of 3-stars.

Getting that 5-star, a clearly elite talent, is more critical than getting a couple of extra 4-stars (guys who are just a little better than the 3-stars, if better at all).

That's not to say I'm not disappointed with the class, but it has nothing to do with the 'star' ratings. I think we lost on a couple of undervalued DTs and a couple of O-lineman that would've all been very nice players for us. All of them were 3-star kids, but they were kids with projectable frames and nice pedigrees that I expected to outperform those rankings.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by tredadda

Mizzou's recruiting class is ranked low because of the quantity of recruits. In terms of quality, they ranked much higher.

Not really. They only move up to 8 in terms of 'quantity'.

If you're looking at Rivals and trying to judge Mizzou's class by that, you're going to be disappointed. There's not a way to spin the scouting service rankings in a way that helps Mizzou out a great deal.

It was DGB, Mauk, Boehm and a bunch of JAGs according to Rivals. That said, I think a lot of those 4-star guys are no more/less JAGS than a bunch of the 3-star guys.

The rankings are overrated.

[Simplicity]

Why are you guys even comparing FF to landing DGB? Are you serious? You would rather land a kid who is very young and you don't even know if he can even preform in a College atmosphere. Rather then Mizzou representing in the Final Four... Wow...

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Not really. They only move up to 8 in terms of 'quantity'.

If you're looking at Rivals and trying to judge Mizzou's class by that, you're going to be disappointed. There's not a way to spin the scouting service rankings in a way that helps Mizzou out a great deal.

It was DGB, Mauk, Boehm and a bunch of JAGs according to Rivals. That said, I think a lot of those 4-star guys are no more/less JAGS than a bunch of the 3-star guys.

The rankings are overrated.

Agreed. I think Pinkel and his staff have shown that they know how to find guys that fit their system and coach them up. This was evident back when we were getting 2 and 3 star guys. Now, we only recruited a single 2 star while getting a 4 star and the best player in the country. That's in a year in which we lost several of our recruits, as we had pitched them on playing in Texas.

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Not really. They only move up to 8 in terms of 'quantity'.

If you're looking at Rivals and trying to judge Mizzou's class by that, you're going to be disappointed. There's not a way to spin the scouting service rankings in a way that helps Mizzou out a great deal.

It was DGB, Mauk, Boehm and a bunch of JAGs according to Rivals. That said, I think a lot of those 4-star guys are no more/less JAGS than a bunch of the 3-star guys.

The rankings are overrated.

Moving up 8 spots in quality is actually pretty significant. It gives us a top 25 recruiting class. I prefer quality over quantity. When I say quality I do not necessarily mean 5 star talent. I am happy with a bunch of solid 3 stars. If you look back on some of our old rankings you might be surprised at how some of our players were ranked. One that sticks out that I remember is Weatherspoon who had zero stars and was rated as a 40 overall. He turned out very good and ended up being a first round pick. HCGP does a good job with under the radar players which is why class rankings don't mean a whole lot to me. He will need to prove it if we are going to achieve sustained success in the SEC. We should compete this year and possibly next, but after that we will see.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by Simplicity

Why are you guys even comparing FF to landing DGB? Are you serious? You would rather land a kid who is very young and you don't even know if he can even preform in a College atmosphere. Rather then Mizzou representing in the Final Four... Wow...

Because football matters a lot more to me than basketball. Take a look at the #1 overall recruits in the past decade. You'll find guys like Vince Young, Matt Barkley, and Adrian Peterson.

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Because football matters a lot more to me than basketball. Take a look at the #1 overall recruits in the past decade. You'll find guys like Vince Young, Matt Barkley, and Adrian Peterson.

Look at the programs they played for and the recruiting classes they came in with. Mizzou is not at their level in any way as of right now.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by tredadda

Moving up 8 spots in quality is actually pretty significant. It gives us a top 25 recruiting class. I prefer quality over quantity. When I say quality I do not necessarily mean 5 star talent. I am happy with a bunch of solid 3 stars. If you look back on some of our old rankings you might be surprised at how some of our players were ranked. One that sticks out that I remember is Weatherspoon who had zero stars and was rated as a 40 overall. He turned out very good and ended up being a first round pick. HCGP does a good job with under the radar players which is why class rankings don't mean a whole lot to me. He will need to prove it if we are going to achieve sustained success in the SEC. We should compete this year and possibly next, but after that we will see.

You misunderstand me, or perhaps I did a poor job of explaining.

We move from 11 in the conference to 8 based on the average 'strength of stars' ranking. Our average recruit is something like a 3.11 star; only nominally better than Vanderbilt and Kentucky. From a 'stars' standpoint, the quality isn't even really that spectacular.

Don't look at the rankings if you're wanting to defend this class. There are ways to do it, but it ain't with Rivals or Scout.

It's by pointing out that a guy like L'Damian Washington, 2-star recruit, is likely to be better when all is said and done than Bud Sasser or Jimmy Hunt, the 4-star studs we got in 2010. Or even that 4-star recruit we got out of Texas. Or yeah, by pointing out that Spoon was a 1-star 'athlete' that we simply coached into a stud.

But it's also fair to be honest - the class was underwhelming outside of DGB and Mauk. If you got the coaching staff in a moment of candor, I think they'd say the same.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by tredadda

Look at the programs they played for and the recruiting classes they came in with. Mizzou is not at their level in any way as of right now.

What's your point? You don't think having a Calvin Johnson type WR on our team will come in handy?

[O.city]

With what Mizzou already had on the roster they added a potential Calvin Johnson type prospect, I'd say it was a good offseason. Not great in that they lost some guys that could have really turned out but solid.

I'm of a different breed. Grew up in a split househould in that mom was a KU fan and dad is a MU guy.

I went the KU way because of basketball but I have alot of respect for the Tiger football program and tend to hope for them to have success.

Funny story in that I think dad had a chance to go to the game today in Columbia and asked if I was interested. I politely declined as I don't think I would have been accepted in Mizzou arena with my Hawk apparel very well. I think mom and dad are gonna make the trip up to KC and go to AFH for the OK. State game. Dad's not too excited about it but he said he could suffer thru it.

ANyway back to the subject. Dorial is a great get for the TIger program.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

You misunderstand me, or perhaps I did a poor job of explaining.

We move from 11 in the conference to 8 based on the average 'strength of stars' ranking. Our average recruit is something like a 3.11 star; only nominally better than Vanderbilt and Kentucky. From a 'stars' standpoint, the quality isn't even really that spectacular.

Don't look at the rankings if you're wanting to defend this class. There are ways to do it, but it ain't with Rivals or Scout.

It's by pointing out that a guy like L'Damian Washington, 2-star recruit, is likely to be better when all is said and done than Bud Sasser or Jimmy Hunt, the 4-star studs we got in 2010. Or even that 4-star recruit we got out of Texas. Or yeah, by pointing out that Spoon was a 1-star 'athlete' that we simply coached into a stud.

But it's also fair to be honest - the class was underwhelming outside of DGB and Mauk. If you got the coaching staff in a moment of candor, I think they'd say the same.

I think the staff really likes this class. I'm sure they'd have liked a couple more players, but there are some nice pieces in there.

We got studs at Guard/Tackle, QB, and WR. That alone makes it a nice haul.

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Because football matters a lot more to me than basketball. Take a look at the #1 overall recruits in the past decade. You'll find guys like Vince Young, Matt Barkley, and Adrian Peterson.

You guys actually think your recruits are gonna turn your program around... LOL...
Your program is garbage right now... Couple freshman is not going to change much.. But anyways good luck.