ADVERTISEMENT

Didnt know we are currently dead last

Judson1

Well-Known Member
Jul 31, 2008
15,070
11,759
113
in SEC recruiting. 91st.
The closest to us is Ole Miss at 53.
Im aware of the defections but WOW!
Please find us a great coach!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: SOSUSC
in SEC recruiting. 91st.
The closest to us is Ole Miss at 53.
Im aware of the defections but WOW!
Please find us a great coach!!!
We lost like 6 recruits in the past week or so and have no idea who our coach will be next year. This is not surprising to me..

It IS surprising Lane is 53rd though! I though he was a “can’t miss hire” and top skill position talent would “flock to Ole Miss to play for him”... At least that is what folks around here said last year when they were clamoring for Muschamp to be fired and campaigning for Lane to be hired... He has been there this whole cycle... What is Ole Miss’ excuse?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TAV31
We lost like 6 recruits in the past week or so and have no idea who our coach will be next year. This is not surprising to me..

It IS surprising Lane is 53rd though! I though he was a “can’t miss hire” and top skill position talent would “flock to Ole Miss to play for him”... At least that is what folks around here said last year when they were clamoring for Muschamp to be fired and campaigning for Lane to be hired... He has been there this whole cycle... What is Ole Miss’ excuse?
He just waxed our tails pretty good with his scrubs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redrogers
Well, we had to fire a coach who already wasn't recruiting very well. We've lost a few commits who might be swayed when we have a new coach. And you never know who the incoming coach might bring. But it's probably just going to be a lean class. Hopefully, we get some bodies at the positions of most need (WRs, DBs and LBs)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gamecockben1979
Well, we had to fire a coach who already wasn't recruiting very well. We've lost a few commits who might be swayed when we have a new coach. And you never know who the incoming coach might bring. But it's probably just going to be a lean class. Hopefully, we get some bodies at the positions of most need (WRs, DBs and LBs)

Bodies is right. Thats about all they are going to get.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 76MACC
Even if we didn’t lose recruits, who really thinks we would rank much higher than 93rd based on the product currently being put out there?
We were in the 40s before the defections... Not impressive at all but better than the 90s. I think most expected us to hold onto most of what we had without a change.. Who knows right? Our recruiting was certainly not going well and certainly was a contributing factor to the change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gamecockben1979
We lost like 6 recruits in the past week or so and have no idea who our coach will be next year. This is not surprising to me..

It IS surprising Lane is 53rd though! I though he was a “can’t miss hire” and top skill position talent would “flock to Ole Miss to play for him”... At least that is what folks around here said last year when they were clamoring for Muschamp to be fired and campaigning for Lane to be hired... He has been there this whole cycle... What is Ole Miss’ excuse?
You talking about the lane that put half a hundred on us? That lane?
 
in SEC recruiting. 91st.
The closest to us is Ole Miss at 53.
Im aware of the defections but WOW!
Please find us a great coach!!!

This is why we should have fired Muschamp at the end of the season. Or, given a mid season firing, have the next HC wrapped up ASAP. What a stupid move. Everything is done in such a stupid fashion. Doesanyone think about consequences intended (and unintended).

Add to that looks like Beamer is at the front of the pack. Never been an OC, never been a DC, never been a HC. Talk about a crap pile of decisions. No one else wants him. Maybe Beamer’s agent might orchestrate something to dupe gullible Raymond.

You think Hyman would have let this deteriorate to this point!!
 
Maybe it’s typical to drop in that ranking when a team is going through a staff change. Recruits essentially have no clue who the new head coach here will be or if any of the assistants they have a relationship with will be. There is probably no one assuring these guys that an offer is stil on the table so they are making other arrangements.

I mean was Muschamp bring in many world breakers or getting many recruits that would without question start at programs that are doing really well? No.

When we have a staff we will get recruits and move up in the chart.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Robhawk29 and F-86F
Truth be told, we were guinea pigs for Muschump because McClendon and T-Rob were both rookies put into there respective positions and received over $1 million each. But that is just me

USCALUMNI
Why would WM promote two totally unqualified rookies in the tough SEC? Was against the BMac promo from start. Thought WM would help rookie DC. RT must have given WM a heads up about the undeserved buyout he was gonna get so WM's attitude was-Why should I work hard when I can get fired and be a multi-millionaire?

When you have an AD and HFBC such as we had/have it's no wonder the pgm failed.
 
We lost like 6 recruits in the past week or so and have no idea who our coach will be next year. This is not surprising to me..

It IS surprising Lane is 53rd though! I though he was a “can’t miss hire” and top skill position talent would “flock to Ole Miss to play for him”... At least that is what folks around here said last year when they were clamoring for Muschamp to be fired and campaigning for Lane to be hired... He has been there this whole cycle... What is Ole Miss’ excuse?
He wont be at Ole Miss in 5 years. If he is losing they will fire him. If he is winning he will leave for another job.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redrogers
He wont be at Ole Miss in 5 years. If he is losing they will fire him. If he is winning he will leave for another job.

Both Ole Miss, and USC, are quite alike. Both are stepping stones jobs. Or stepping out jobs, depending on the situation
 
According to 247, we are:
  • Last in the SEC
And, we would be
  • Last in the ACC
  • Last in the Big 10
  • Next to last in the Big-12
  • Next to last in the Pac-12
So, we are ahead of only 2 teams in the entire Power 5 (TCU and Oregon State).

We would also be
  • #8 in the AAC
  • #8 in the M-West
  • #7 in the MAC
  • #5 in the Sun Belt
  • #4 in C-USA
Firing the HC mid-season was a dumb move, IMO.
 
According to 247, we are:
  • Last in the SEC
And, we would be
  • Last in the ACC
  • Last in the Big 10
  • Next to last in the Big-12
  • Next to last in the Pac-12
So, we are ahead of only 2 teams in the entire Power 5 (TCU and Oregon State).

We would also be
  • #8 in the AAC
  • #8 in the M-West
  • #7 in the MAC
  • #5 in the Sun Belt
  • #4 in C-USA
Firing the HC mid-season was a dumb move, IMO.
I don't know why people who were coming for the coach would be any less likely to bail if the coach was let go following the final game. That's still before the early signing day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: uscnoklahoma2
According to 247, we are:
  • Last in the SEC
And, we would be
  • Last in the ACC
  • Last in the Big 10
  • Next to last in the Big-12
  • Next to last in the Pac-12
So, we are ahead of only 2 teams in the entire Power 5 (TCU and Oregon State).

We would also be
  • #8 in the AAC
  • #8 in the M-West
  • #7 in the MAC
  • #5 in the Sun Belt
  • #4 in C-USA
Firing the HC mid-season was a dumb move, IMO.
Sure, and we weren't very high before the firing. It was a no winner either way. Sign a class that wasn't going to get it done or change coaches and take a gamble.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dizzy01
I don't know why people who were coming for the coach would be any less likely to bail if the coach was let go following the final game. That's still before the early signing day.
They can time the firing and hiring more closely (assuming they have their ducks in a row... big assumption given this administration...) so the recruits can see who the new coach is before they choose to bail.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SOSUSC
The problem we've had with recruiting - since forever - is that, following a turnover at HC, we get killed with defections and poor quality pre=firing signees. We then proceed to be unable to recover with good signees brought in by the new coach and staff ending up with virtually a missed year of recruiting - which translates into mediocre teams for the next 2-3 years.
 
They can time the firing and hiring more closely (assuming they have their ducks in a row... big assumption given this administration...) so the recruits can see who the new coach is before they choose to bail.
If recruits like the hiring part well enough, they will give us a serious chance. If they don't, they ain't coming anyway. Whatever helps the hiring part the most is what ought to concern us the most.
 
ADVERTISEMENT