And over that time span - we are the more successful program.
There is a different formula for Mississippi schools than there is for Alabama and Auburn. And really, for South Carolina and Clemson too. First of all, Alabama and Auburn are on a different wavelength. Second, many Georgia and North Carolina players look at Clemson as almost an in-state school, and to a lesser extent South Carolina. I believe it is easier to recruit Florida from there as well - ease of being near Atlanta. Bottom line, they have a better location in which to recruit quality out-of-state players from fertile areas.
In Mississippi, it has always been about who wins the battle instate. Your 2013 recruiting class was the exception to the rule. If you could do that consistently, you would have an argument, but you simply cannot. I truly hope Hugh Freeze opts for out-of-state rather than in-state.
There really is not another comparison out there similar to MSU and Ole Miss. We are pretty unique. Not many states with 3 million people product the football talent that Mississippi does.
More successful than AL, AU, So Car, and Clem? Cause that's who my post was about.
None of those percentages you posted is anywhere near 63%
No one here gives a 17 what you think.
I agree. But in the case of MSU and Ole Miss, the easiest way to get the best players possible is from the state of MS in general. Obviously you will need some out-of-state help, but it is not wise to put the majority of your emphasis there unless it is an extraordinary circumstance, such as Ole Miss' 2013 class (they had the tie to Nkemdiche).I know it's "our state" and all, but I really don't care where our recruits come from. If we can get the top ones in the state, great, take them. But if we need to go next door to get more like Dak, I'm all for that too. I'll just let Dan do his thing though. He seems to have it figured out. Just win with whoever you get and I'm happy.
So the connection was there to say Ole Miss should be as successful as Alabama, Auburn, etc
Actually, if you look at the numbers that way, it works in bear fan's favor. South Carolina has dominated Clemson, and has less in-state players.
Yep. That's the point. The numbers show there's an outlier, and it isn't TSUN, USM, AL, AU, So Car, or Clem.
Unfortunately, MS does not have as ideal of a location and/or population as AL or SC. Both of those states have almost 5 million people
I know it's "our state" and all, but I really don't care where our recruits come from. If we can get the top ones in the state, great, take them. But if we need to go next door to get more like Dak, I'm all for that too. I'll just let Dan do his thing though. He seems to have it figured out. Just win with whoever you get and I'm happy.
So if anything TSUN and MSU should be signing fewer in-state kids than AL, AU, So Car, and Clem because AL and SC have a significantly higher population than MS.
Yep. That's the point. The numbers show there's an outlier, and it isn't TSUN, USM, AL, AU, So Car, or Clem.
What the 17 are you talking about? Where did I say get lesser players? I just said I want the best player we can get, regardless of where they come from. Of course it's important to recruit in State. If the best player we can get is in MS, great. But, if the best player we can get is in North Dakota, I don't give a ****, let's sign him.
But if we need to go next door to get more like Dak, I'm all for that too. I'll just let Dan do his thing though. He seems to have it figured out. Just win with whoever you get and I'm happy.
Maroon and White Basketball
Xavier 81-63 Mississippi State: Distance shooting hurts Bulldogs in Greenbrier defeat
Maroon and White Football
Kickoff Time Change: Mississippi State vs. Auburn
Maroon and White Football
Mississippi State Keys to Victory vs. Auburn
Rivals Basketball Recruiting
4-star center Chris Brown commits to Mississippi State
Maroon and White Football
Mississippi State Week 11 Preview: Auburn Q and A