Saw recently where 61 of Mississippi St.'s players are in state guys. LSU right now has commitments from 6 of the top 20 guys in the state of Louisiana for 2015. Understandably, the top 20 is overloaded with WRs and DBs and there are only so many of those that you can take, but it raises the question of how important it is to recruit players locally who care about your state and your school.

How much does that matter? LSU usually does a great job at it and the top players from Louisiana who have gone elsewhere were recruited hard by LSU. But, would LSU be better served to go after more local players who were not as high on the recruiting lists but who stayed 4 years and developed, or to go after higher rated out of state players?

Or, does it really matter at all?

In State or Out of State? Does it make a difference in college football?

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by VermilionTiger

Member since Dec 2012

37562 posts

Posted on 10/17/14 at 4:19 pm to AlaTiger

If the players are of equal talent, always go with the instate talent

Other than that..get the best player.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by ProjectP2294

South St. Louis city

Member since May 2007

70070 posts

Posted on 10/17/14 at 4:22 pm to VermilionTiger

quote:
If the players are of equal talent, always go with the instate talent

I feel the same way too.

I would concede to taking a lesser player in state if the difference isn't great and the external factors (is the OOS guy going to be a headache, etc) are in the in-state guys favor.

ETA: I was trying to find an in-state LB from 2011 to compare to Trevon Randle as an example of who I would have preferred over him, but damn that was a bad year for linebackers in-state.

This post was edited on 10/17/14 at 4:27 pm

Page 1