MSU Red Cedar Message Board

no, its not.

The only thing with this class so far is that we have landed quite few of the 4 star talents we were after and it seems like we are not in serious contention for too many more. Last year it was a little different . We didnt have very many 4 stars early but seemed we were in the running for a bunch of them going into the summer and ended up landing a few. We are still in it for Riley Norman and Elijah Daniels but not sure what other 4 stars that we have made the short list for. There must be at least a couple more. It looks like we are into the diamond in the rough stage of recruiting in this class and are looking in state for some of those diamonds. Looks like another class that will end up 30-40 with the small size consideration. That is ok and has worked before unless we are trying to recruit on the level of OSU, ND and UM who are all having great classes so far. But we are more than holding our own against Iowa, Wisc, Neb, Purdue and Illinios. PSU is having a surpizingly strong class.

I think Norman goes green; that's another 4-star guy. Terry's a 4-star on 2 sites (unranked on Rivals), and Benenoch should get a bump. Throw in Jones and Reschke and you're looking at 5 4-stars pretty much set for a class of 16.

Now, maybe State adds Darian Hicks and Hurst Jr? That'd put the total at 7/16 . . . . and I gotta say, that's pretty good.

FWIW, Powell is 2 spots away from being a 4-star ATH on Rivals.

Edit: We're about 3 months in to a 12 month cycle. These player rankings are going to change; Gholston and Burkland were a 4-star and a 3-star respectively before their HS All-Star games; they received a 5-star and a 4-star bump afterwards. For reference, several of UM's commits (Ojemudia and Kaleb Ringer, off the top of my head) lost their 4th star last year. It's really about where the classes end up; it's stupid for people to argue that KC or Martin were "0 star recruits". A 0-star is just someone that the recruiting services haven't evaluated. If you're going to compare ratings, you need to look at where the services rated players at the end of the cycle, when as much info is available as possible.

If you just accept the line of nonsense that they're trying to spew, which is that our recruiting sucks, our coaches are incompetent and the program is circling the drain you'll yourself a lot of trouble. They're not interested in logical discourse, just pussified potshots.

"Bucknuts LLC $1,795"

Are you going to say that SCum was paying Bucknuts for player infuence rather than recruiting info?

But they do in fact pay the services for info sometimes, which would seem to invalidate the assertion that their efforts are completely without merit as some here are hell bent on insisting.

Apparently, so are their evaluations.

Well I guess he's back to being a rubber-armed bum...