247 Composite Talent Rankings

[615dawg]

Ask yourself how bad our coaching has to be to take a top 20 talented team and the best we are hoping for collectively is 6-6/7-5.

 

[greenbean.sixpack]

Not when considering the number of our opponents above us in that ranking.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

We gonna find out all we need to know in week 2 in Minneapolis. If this team is as talented as the sheep say, it should be on display that day.

 

[CoastTrash]

who is our coach one yer from now?

 

[ZombieKissinger]

Not when considering the number of our opponents above us in that ranking.

Yeah, talent alone would have us 4-8

 

[QuadrupleOption]

8 of our opponents have higher talent ratings than us. So yeah - 6-6 would be a great year.

 

[Faustdog]

That list says we should go 4-8.

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

This is not the same college football that we had 10 years ago

 

[mcdawg22]

Ask yourself how bad our coaching has to be to take a top 20 talented team and the best we are hoping for collectively is 6-6/7-5.

As bad as Auburn’s or South Carolina’s?

 

[She Mate Me]

This is nothing but a ranking of the HS ratings of every player on a roster.

What it doesn’t tell you is that many of the 26 4 stars on our roster are on our roster because they weren’t getting enough playing time at their 1st choice school.

What you really want are the three stars who have overachieved (like Fluff and Kelley Jones), not a bunch of guys who were overrated out of HS.

Notice how many 4 stars we have who are not projected to be starters or even major contributors…

https://247sports.com/college/mississippi-state/team/mississippi-state-bulldogs-football-180/roster/

 

[QuaoarsKing]

If we're really #20, we wouldn't be expected to go 0-3 against 17, 18, and 19, all at home.

 

[CascillaCountryClub]

Ask yourself how bad our coaching has to be to take a top 20 talented team and the best we are hoping for collectively is 6-6/7-5.

12 SEC Teams are more talented.

 

[patdog]

Two things. #20 is a bit high. More like #30-40. And even at #20, we play 8 teams ranked higher than us, although a few of those are overrated too.

 

[She Mate Me]

Two things. #20 is a bit high. More like #30-40. And even at #20, we play 8 teams ranked higher than Eve us, although a few of those are overrated too.

The real issue to me is that if we really have Top 25ish talent, we should play somewhere close to that level.

Data driven ratings say we were about #60 last season. So, there’s a problem somewhere……..

 

[Howiefeltersnstch]

We were not top 20 last year. Plus, as everybody already stated, we regularly play half of the top 20 every year. Meaning every team we play, other than about 3, are higher ranked. Visual example would be #1,3,4,7,8,11,12,24,15,17,18, and 19

 

[OopsICroomedmypants]

Ask yourself how bad our coaching has to be to take a top 20 talented team and the best we are hoping for collectively is 6-6/7-5.

Ask yourself what Washington’s record would be with our schedule.

 

[Prediction? Pain.]

This isn't new. The 247 composite roster rankings have been around since 2015, and every year most of the SEC teams we play have more talented rosters.

What's new is our results.

In Mullen's last three years here, he went 8 - 12 against teams with higher composite roster ranks.

Morehead went 3 - 8, though he was 0 - 5 in his last year.

Leach's three years were almost the same as Mullen's final three: 7 - 12.

Arnett? 0 - 6

Lebby? 1 - 15. (Somehow Arkansas's roster talent was higher ranked than ours last year.)