In partnership with CBSSports.com
The largest and most active MSU Spartans board on the web
The place to ask questions to SpartanTailgate's recruiting experts
"The Duff" is dedicated to Michigan State football recruiting discussion
"The Bres" is dedicated to Michigan State basketball recruiting discussion
This is your pulpit to preach to the masses about everything from politics to religion
The place to buy, trade or sell Michigan State tickets
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.
From tBB, comments by everyone's favorite national rod, Kitemac:
"Quite frankly, if we didn't have faith your staff could coach him up and he was a great fit for scheme, it would be a joke if Johnson were in there. You should let this kid develop and stop trying to make him into something he's not before he's ready." JC Shurburtt
When Mr Perfect asked:
"So where a player commits to can impact his ranking/rating somewhat?
I did not know this."
JC responded with:
"Quarterback as it relates to scheme? Absolutely"
When I asked:
"So if JJ was committed to Bama he would be ranked lower?"
JC responded with:
Always heard that kids didn't get "bumps" and were ranked on talent, not where they had comitted to. 247 is now at least open about it. Since all the staff here is the good staff from Rivals, it's probably safe to assume this has been happening as long as rankings have been around.
Got to say I strongly disagree with that practice.
"As far as the downvotes. It's a gnat biting an lion"
-- A member of tRCMB Justice League, taking the internet WAY WAY too seriously.
Parents lie to their kids about Santa Claus.
I would reply but that particular mod banned me from that board until 2113.
35,600 posts and counting since 09-09-2002. tRCMB Dead Pool Commissioner.
I would agree to some extent....if Ryan Mallett had committed to, say, Oregon, he probably would have been ranked a lot lower. Not that Oregon would recruit him, but just an example.
Rankings, not that they matter much, should be on talent for their position. Suppose Naruzzi gets a HC gig next year and takes DR with him as OC. We hire a top notch OC and replace Nardawg with an average DC. All of the sudden, the rankings for every player on our team are irrelevent, because we're running a different system on both sides of the ball.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports