New Regime Concerns...

[engie]

Prefaced by saying I'm totally on board with the hire -- extremely excited about seeing the offense in the SEC -- and believe that it will be a talent level neutralizer and big advantage for us for at least a couple of seasons. That said:


- I'm concerned about the Big10 approach we seem to be using in recruiting toward numbers and chasing committed players. Looks like we are not going over 85 period, not even for a second. We should be at 89-90 going into the spring here. I don't think that's severe oversigning at all in a regime change. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe we've got to actually be at 85 until the start of fall practice. Some natural attrition is about to take place at TE and RB as the depth charts shake out in the spring. And it never fails that a new coach doesn't gel with an entire team. I think we see 5ish guys leave on their own. Seems likely that in only going to 85 at most right now -- we will likely spend our 4th straight(I believe) football season below 80 overall scholarship players when natural attrition occurs. It's been an extended self-inflicted probation basically.


- If we aren't going to go to 88-90, let's at least use the available scholarships in the class and sign/place a bunch of talented guys that aren't going to qualify. Huff and Moorhead surely know dozens of those types from the B1G area that can't make those(very high) academic standards and that would potentially love to play in the SEC -- that are probably headed down here or Kansas/Arizona for JUCO anyway. I imagine those guys fly way under the radar up there -- even if they are elite. Hud has to know a bunch of those guys in Louisiana and MS. However it appears Moorhead is totally against sign and place in a year that IMO he should be all for it. We should exploit the heck out of it this year with the amount of available schollies we have without the actual roster room.


- I think it likely we end up in a recruiting battle for Patterson in two years because we didn't let him sign a piece of paper that -- at the end of this class -- we are going to light on fire and waste from not using. We will lose every one of those LOIs that we don't use this year with the new rule coming into place next year(25 period no more countbacks) -- and it looks like we are going to have around 10 spares that we don't use in this class.


- The OM loyalties on staff. This has been beaten to death and is not as big of deal to me as it is to some. But I sure hope we were smart enough to put 1-2 year non-competes in the contracts not to harm those guys, but to protect ourselves. If we could get confirmation that those exist, I would have zero issue here.

- Coaches apparently hired but not here yet. I get it with NFL position coaches sticking through the end of the season. Assistant position coaches(Lukabu) if they are hired not so much. But maybe they are keeping us in the dark on that stuff intentionally and the people that actually need to know already know. Will give benefit of the doubt there.

That said, none of these are a huge deal just yet, but just my thoughts on things I've noticed. Was always going to be a new, different batch of concerns with the regime change. Will be interesting to see how they adjust.

 

[Felonious Junk]

They seem like smart guys. I feel confident that they’ll start to employ more SEC recruiting tactics as they get comfortable with what they’re up against every year.

 

[Maroonthirteen]

I agree on the scholarship numbers. After this signing class we have a ton of pass catchers in the (to be) freshman and sophomore classes. Someone is likely to transfer. We could have found room for Reed to make sure we sign Lovett.

 

[57stratdawg]

I think you make good points, especially regarding the scholarship numbers.

But today was a pretty big win for the staff, IMO. I know we have a couple needs left at OL and DL, but we filled some offensive holes. Holding onto Pat Austin and company were probably bigger W's for MSU football than we realize. Who knows how much of those guys passing on UF was related to MSU, Mississippi and/or Morehead. Whatever their motivations - If you're Morehead, getting a little lucky never hurt anyone.

 

[philduckworth]

Fair concerns. Recruiting in the SEC is not a gentlemen's game, it's all out war. If Joe didn't know this already, I think he does now.

We are 20 under 85 so we are only going to sign 20, makes no sense at all. Only signing 2 Juco's? Maybe there wasn't much out there this year, but we need to be signing 4-5 JUCO's imo.

Now please JOMO, go find a corner and and an OT.

 

[Jeffreauxdawg]

I accidentally gave this an upvote. The whole Ole Miss loyalty thing is not rational. You think Akron would pass up on Saban because he went to Kent State?

 

[bruiser.sixpack]

I am sure you are aware that there is another signing period in February. So any concern you have about processees or attrition should be alleviated by then. We will probably sign 5-7 and remember in the last few years we have signed a player or two after the Spring signing period. Enjoy Christmas with your family and remember this. Baseball season is only 7 weeks away!

 

[engie]

I am sure you are aware that there is another signing period in February. So any concern you have about processees or attrition should be alleviated by then. We will probably sign 5-7 and remember in the last few years we have signed a player or two after the Spring signing period. Enjoy Christmas with your family and remember this. Baseball season is only 7 weeks away!

He said 4-5 more in his press conference.... which = us essentially taking the total of OM’s sanctions in one signing class based on available schollies against the single year limit. I don’t understand his trepidation about signing elite kids that won’t make it in the circumstance when we’ve got so many to burn. If the kids don’t develop in juco you just don’t sign them the second time....

 

[engie]

I accidentally gave this an upvote. The whole Ole Miss loyalty thing is not rational. You think Akron would pass up on Saban because he went to Kent State?

It’s very rational. Like I’ve already explained a bunch of times — I don’t mind that they went to Ole Miss. My concern is their ability to leave us directly for a lateral move to Ole Miss and how such a move could totally 17 us in recruiting if it happened.

So if one of these guys is elite and lights the state on fire in recruiting — you are fine with him jumping straight to OM for the same job? I’m not.

Those contracts needed a short term non-compete. Hope they got them.

 

[5049]

He said 4-5 more in his press conference.... which = us essentially taking the total of OM’s sanctions in one signing class based on available schollies against the single year limit. I don’t understand his trepidation about signing elite kids that won’t make it in the circumstance when we’ve got so many to burn. If the kids don’t develop in juco you just don’t sign them the second time....

It is known that he has chosen not to process any current players, because he doesn't know them yet, so he had to make tough decisions with this class. As far as the sign and place, I am guessing that it just takes a little time to figure out the JUCO in's and out's. He needs to figure that out real quick and in a hurry though, if he wants to be successful here.

 

[engie]

I think you make good points, especially regarding the scholarship numbers.

But today was a pretty big win for the staff, IMO. I know we have a couple needs left at OL and DL, but we filled some offensive holes. Holding onto Pat Austin and company were probably bigger W's for MSU football than we realize. Who knows how much of those guys passing on UF was related to MSU, Mississippi and/or Morehead. Whatever their motivations - If you're Morehead, getting a little lucky never hurt anyone.

Agree. It was a very good day for us overall. Absolutely as good as we could have hoped when Mullen jumped ship.

 

[5049]

It’s very rational. Like I’ve already explained a bunch of times — I don’t mind that they went to Ole Miss. My concern is their ability to leave us directly for a lateral move to Ole Miss and how such a move could totally 17 us in recruiting if it happened.

So if one of these guys is elite and lights the state on fire in recruiting — you are fine with him jumping straight to OM for the same job? I’m not.

Those contracts needed a short term non-compete. Hope they got them.

I hope going forward, that JoeMo's system will be the catalyst for recruiting success, not this ******** southern boy crap

 

[engie]

It is known that he has chosen not to process any current players, because he doesn't know them yet, so he had to make tough decisions with this class.

Im aware of this. But we don’t have to be at 85 tomorrow, next month, or even in July. We have to be at 85 at the beginning of next fall.

No team would ever have a full roster if they didn’t go a couple over the 85 limit right now...

 

[UpTheMiddlex3Punt]

It seems to me that a guy who has been a Cutcliffe disciple would have at best lukewarm loyalty to Ole Miss. The way they fired him for going 5-6 one year after Eli left was as dumb as it would have been to fire Don after going 6-7 last year.

 

[Big Sheep81]

I think most SEC fans forget that there are players outside the SEC footprint that are good players and would fit in well at State. I would argue that Moorhead's experience in recruiting up that-a-way was harder in some ways. Not just Penn States' past woes. But per capita, they have fewer DI players than in the south. Lot's of competition up there for the number of D1 players. He may not know the head coach at Clarksdale or Laurel, or Magee just yet but a couple of guys in the football office do. Hell, the man's only been here less than a month. He's had to hop on the recruiting trail and put a staff together.

I say the man knows he has some solid guys to coach in 2018 and talent was not his top worry. Getting his staff into place with the people he wants to work with. if his staff turns out to be a bust, then Cohen hired the wrong guy. We've been so accustomed to fighting for recruits that having some success makes a lot of you guys hollerg "YES, BUT".

All things considered, he did a helluva job holding this class together. Sure, he has some OL needs but how in the name of Sweet Baby Jesus can he be expected to come in in less than a month to recruit and fix what has been an issue for 10 years? Give the man some space and time for Pete's sake.

The next class will be all his and his staff's. And so far as the UM coaches, we've had several come and go. Tony Hughes played at USM, coached there, UM and State. There are very few players who played at one school and secretly planned to torpedo the schools they worked for. Most of them work to pad their resume for the next job. It that's at UM so be it. But I think to worry about losing them to UM and hauling our recruits with them is just finding something to worry about. I think Moorhead (and most other head coaches) take a much more professional view of that.

Flame away....LOL

 

[BulldogBlitz]

They should have consulted you first. Clearly.

 

[engie]

They should have consulted you first. Clearly.

Thanks for your usual valuable input.

 

[engie]

And so far as the UM coaches, we've had several come and go. Tony Hughes played at USM, coached there, UM and State. There are very few players who played at one school and secretly planned to torpedo the schools they worked for. Most of them work to pad their resume for the next job. It that's at UM so be it. But I think to worry about losing them to UM and hauling our recruits with them is just finding something to worry about. I think Moorhead (and most other head coaches) take a much more professional view of that.

Where does this "professionalism"/"secretly trying to torpedo the class" thing come into this? That's not what I said nor what have I implied at all.

But if one of these guys turns out to be an elite recruiter, we are kidding ourselves to think OM wouldn't come after them. And we are kidding ourselves to think they wouldn't recruit their former State commitments to OM if they took that job. Chances are that it never becomes a thing. But it would have been dumb for us not to have protected ourselves from that possibility during contract negotiations given the particular circumstance.

 

[Big Sheep81]

It comes in when you say it's a concern. Why? I mean if what you say is true, then not just the coaches with a UM tie but EVERY coach should be required to sign a non-compete clause. That way you get total protection, not just from the ones with UM ties.

What I'm saying is don't try so hard to dig up something to worry over...you'll wind up with one eyebrow higher than the other.......

 

[ShrubDog]

I accidentally gave this an upvote.

No worries man because it looks like someone else did the same thing.

 

[wsjmsu75]

They seem like smart guys. I feel confident that they’ll start to employ more SEC recruiting tactics as they get comfortable with what they’re up against every year.

"SEC recruiting tactics". Is there a manual somewhere that explains just exactly what those tactics are, and how they differ from recruiting tactics used in the rest of the P5 conferences? And I'm referring to NCAA legal tactics, not tcun tactics.

 

[engie]

It comes in when you say it's a concern. Why? I mean if what you say is true, then not just the coaches with a UM tie but EVERY coach should be required to sign a non-compete clause. That way you get total protection, not just from the ones with UM ties.

So you disagree that having OM graduates on the coaching staff of the competing in-state school is a special circumstance that requires addressing a little differently than your average coaching situation? You'd obviously never be able to hire a coach period if working for you at any point meant they would have to sit out the profession for a period of time when their time with you was over.

BTW, pointed non-competes happen all of the time. I wouldn't be surprised if it's included in almost every contract between immediate geography rivals. You never hear of guys making that type of jump in a lateral move anymore. A non-compete involving us played a large role in Hud pulling his name from consideration on the OM job before they hired Hugh Freeze. Hud was their first interview and obviously made it into pretty advanced discussions for that to come up. That was a smart move by OM.

 

[Todd4State]

Moorhead gets a pass for this class. His job right now is to hold the class together- which he mostly has, and learn the lay of the land for next year.

Dan jacked up this class from a numbers standpoint and Moorhead has had to clean it up.

 

[HD6]

I hope going forward, that JoeMo's system will be the catalyst for recruiting success, not this ******** southern boy crap

Well you got about zero chance of that happening. Money will always rule recruiting in this state.

 

[Bulldogg31]

So you disagree that having OM graduates on the coaching staff of the competing in-state school is a special circumstance that requires addressing a little differently than your average coaching situation? You'd obviously never be able to hire a coach period if working for you at any point meant they would have to sit out the profession for a period of time when their time with you was over.

BTW, pointed non-competes happen all of the time. I wouldn't be surprised if it's included in almost every contract between immediate geography rivals. You never hear of guys making that type of jump in a lateral move anymore. A non-compete involving us played a large role in Hud pulling his name from consideration on the OM job before they hired Hugh Freeze. Hud was their first interview and obviously made it into pretty advanced discussions for that to come up. That was a smart move by OM.

Half the people that work for my company came from our largest competitor. When it's us signing their checks they want our team to win.

 

[BulldogBlitz]

Thanks for your usual valuable input.

Thanks for being your normal know it all douche.

 

[engie]

Dan jacked up this class from a numbers standpoint and Moorhead has had to clean it up.

I agree that Dan did have the numbers messed up this year after always having them messed up the other way in all of the previous years. Here's the gist of my problem with the math shown below. Not being hard on the 85 number in August in this particular season will essentially amount to an ~ 18 scholarship reduction over 3 years for us with our current roster makeup along with the new 25 hard signing cap and natural attrition.

- Say we sign to 85(class of 25 this season). Natural attrition will leave us with ~ 80 guys total in the fall.

- We'll lose at least 20 guys next season to graduation(and Simmons early). We'll have to sign the full 25 allotment to be back at 84-85 on NSD. And then we'll be back to 79-80 with natural attrition entering that season.

- Then we'll lose at least 23 the following season assuming neither of the incoming JUCOs redshirt and no one goes to the NFL early. Sign 25 and we're looking at a maximum of 81-82 that likely ends up more like 76-77 by kickoff of the 2020 season.

If we don't go north of 85 this February, we could very well be looking at 8 seasons in a row with opening day rosters below 80 before we have a chance to fix it. In my scan through I could be miscounting, but I'm pretty sure Mullen hasn't had us over 80 on opening day since 2012 when we started with a true 85.

I'm fine with not being willing to cut anyone on the team before they get their chance. And I'm fine with cutting loose guys in the recruiting class that you don't think are SEC players.

 

[engie]

Half the people that work for my company came from our largest competitor. When it's us signing their checks they want our team to win.

Is your largest competitor the virtual equivalent of a cult? Are their children named after your competitor? Do they celebrate championships from their time there?

It's not remotely the same thing. If it was dealing in proprietary info or techniques -- or if taking a new job had position to hurt the old job -- they would have signed a non-compete as well...

 

[engie]

Thanks for being your normal know it all douche.

You are welcome.

Remind me specifically when I pissed your cheerios? Sorry -- it wasn't memorable.

 

[shotgunDawg]

Engie,

Great thoughts here and I agree with you so long as your assumptions are correct.

- Are we sure that you only have to be down to 85 by the Fall or is the rule that you can only have 85 players on scholarship at one time?

See, your relating everything to roster size, but it isn’t really roster size. It’s scholarships that are real money and count against Title 9. It’s why you can’t bring in an unlimited amount of mid year signees and can only bring in the amount of graduates.

When you look at it this way, having 90 guys on scholarship in the Spring and Summer would completely 17 up Title 9.

Perhaps you are right but I’d check the rule here about scholarship limits because it’s the basis upon which all your great points are built.

 

[Big Sheep81]

Yes I disagree. In fact I have 6 months left on a noncompete clause on a prior position. It has not hindered my old clients from moving over to me. In Mississippi it is hard to enforce. You are essentially trying to prevent someone from working in their profession. Geographical limitations are somewhat more enforceable but there are ways around it. It’s a waste of effort for the most part in this state. If UM dropped HUD that was not the only reason I can assure you. My noncompete was reviewed by 3 attorneys who all said the only thing that could be at least partially enforced was the geographical limitation

And you are correct no coach in his right mind would sign a contract with that in it. Sorry Enge but this is not an area that you apparently have much experience. That’s why I think that there’s no merit in it. You’re going to have a hard time in court trying to treat one set of employees differently than you treat others with the same job. Let me ask you this, why wouldn’t you do that with a coach that played at Alabama when he could do the same thing?

 

[engie]

The difference is that Alabama doesn't try to flip half our class every year for ***** and giggles. And we don't cross paths with Alabama in recruiting except for 2-3 guys per year. It's not the same level of destructive impact on a guy making that move. Meanwhile, I'd venture to guess that 10 or 11 of the 15 that signed with us were recruited by OM and could have signed with them had they chose to. That said, if there were extenuating enough circumstances, I would absolutely be in favor of a pointed non-compete there.

A non-compete might not hold up in a court of law in MS -- but when you get sued by a multi-million dollar corp -- you run a pretty good risk of going broke in the process of beating it depending on how much of a point the old company wants to prove and how valuable you or your knowledge are.

 

[engie]

Engie,

Great thoughts here and I agree with you so long as your assumptions are correct.

- Are we sure that you only have to be down to 85 by the Fall or is the rule that you can only have 85 players on scholarship at one time?

See, your relating everything to roster size, but it isn’t really roster size. It’s scholarships that are real money and count against Title 9. It’s why you can’t bring in an unlimited amount of mid year signees and can only bring in the amount of graduates.

When you look at it this way, having 90 guys on scholarship in the Spring and Summer would completely 17 up Title 9.

Perhaps you are right but I’d check the rule here about scholarship limits because it’s the basis upon which all your great points are built.

You have to be at 85 enrollees by the start of fall camp or the start of fall classes, whichever comes first. 100%. You can't go over 85 enrollees in the spring either but it's never an issue because the vast majority of the high school guys don't enroll until June. The summer can be a free-for-all numberswise.

I'm unsure of the exact clause that makes it work how it does. Bama is usually well over 90 until their August processing.

The truth is -- we can sign to 88-89 -- and this discussion never need to be had. Because a handful of guys are on their last ditch effort to climb the depth chart and going to leave after the spring anyway before the highschool guys get here.

I'm still in the same place I always was with Mullen. 87-88 goal on NSD every year. We will not win every battle we're counting on at the last minute anyway.

 

[conundrum.sixpack]

"SEC recruiting tactics". Is there a manual somewhere that explains just exactly what those tactics are, and how they differ from recruiting tactics used in the rest of the P5 conferences? And I'm referring to NCAA legal tactics, not tcun tactics.

Yes their is a book on how to land big time recruits it’s called Flim Flam!! Buy one today!!

 

[Yellowbob]

I noticed that of Alabama's 14 signees, only one was from within the state. Florida had 5 out of 13 in-state. Auburn 5 out 15. LSU 9 out of 17. Only Georgia and A&M stayed big time in their respective states.
Coach Bobbie Collins once said years ago, at Southern, that he could visit more quality offensive linemen within a a 50 mile of radius of Pittsburgh than he could in the whole state of Mississippi. Coach Joe is going to crank up with a great haul from in-state next year and really show us something from pastures farther afield. I am looking forward to it with great anticipation.

 

[Big Sheep81]

In regard to Alabama that is generally true. The perfect answer is to not hire ANY coach with UM ties. But what you are worrying over is one school which you’ve made clear that you despise. I feel the same way about UM. BUT AGAIN, you have a solution in search of a problem. I’ll just say we agree to disagree. I’ve spent 25 years around coaches and coaching staffs. There are some who might do what you think is possible. But those are few and very far between. Mullen turned a couple from us when he left. And he assuredly has no ties to UM.

 

[8dog]

Do non qualifiers now count against the 25 and could that be a factor?

 

[philduckworth]

Do non qualifiers now count against the 25 and could that be a factor?

No, that's starts next year. And it appears we are going to sign well under 25 anyway.

 

[engie]

There are some who might do what you think is possible. But those are few and very far between. Mullen turned a couple from us when he left. And he assuredly has no ties to UM.

Had Mullen been an OM grad and left for OM -- how many do you think he would have flipped? He would have taken the whole class...

 

[8dog]

Right but it would impact EE back counters if in play so it would still have impacted us even signing under 25. I read a 247 blurb that acted lile it was effective but couldnt confirm anywhere

This article indicates its effective:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/articl...tball_2018_early_signing_period_explainer.amp