Tennessee No. 13 in Sporting News preseason poll

[VFL-82-JP]

To the guy on foot, a sixty mile hike is a two- or three-day undertaking.

To the guy in a car, sixty miles is a one-hour trip.

To the guy in the space station, sixty miles is less time than it takes to brush your teeth ("tooth" for our Bama friends).

Stupid analogy, probably, but it's all about perspective.

Some on here can't fathom the Vols being Top 10 yet. They see the program's progress at "walking speed," so to speak.

Others are flabbergasted we're not already in the Top 5. They're out in space riding the ISS.

The ones who say #13 is "about right," those are the guys in a car. They're in between the two extremes.

Which are correct? Only time will tell. Any of the above outcomes is literally possible: we could end up 9-4 or 10-3 and somewhere in the #11-20 ranking post-season. We could end up 15-0 and #1. Or we could end the season 12-2 or 11-3, with a ranking about where we started (#8-12 range).

I'm hoping for the space station improvement, of course.


p.s. Starting pre-season at #13 ain't bad; almost as many teams ended last year in the top 10 after starting #11-20 (three teams) as ended top 10 after starting top 10 (four teams). So it's still a very good place to be. :good!:

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Got thinking about trendlines, thanks to this great ongoing conversation.

Vols trendline in the CBJ era is +2/year. 5 wins, 7 wins, 9 wins. Post-season included. So if that trendline holds serve, 2016 is an 11-win year. Post-season included.

Two possible ways of getting to 11 wins in 2016:

11-2 (12 regular season, 1 bowl), which means we did not get to the SEC championship game. That likely means both those 2 losses came to SEC opponents in the regular season. Which means Florida and/or Georgia beat us, along with possibly Bama or A&M. And then we end the season winning a bowl.

11-3 (12 regular season, Atlanta, and bowl). Getting to Atlanta probably means we only lost one game in the regular season. The bad news is, that means we then lose the SEC CG, and our bowl game as well. Not a great way to end the year.

It's funny, but of those two 11-win scenarios, I actually prefer the first one. Yeah, we don't get to Atlanta, but we don't LOSE in Atlanta, either. And we win our bowl, ending the season on a positive note.

Having said all that, here's hoping 2016 we break the +2 trendline in a positive way. :good!:

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

If you are basing your entire hypothesis on recruit rankings and who won the NCG, you really are clueless.

You say the Big 12 is a weak conference. Back that up with some actual data. C'mon football guru, back it up.

Recruiting rankings are the most accurate a predictor of who will win the national title.

Top Ten Recruiting Classes Win National Titles | FOX Sports

You can cry about it but stars matter. Recruiting rankings matter.

 

[UT-Rex]

"capped with an impressive 45-6 win in the Outback Bowl." -- this should include "over the then-rated Northwestern Www-wiiild Cats."

"There’s offseason turmoil resulting from a Title IX lawsuit," -- Butch Jones & Company will be bigger, faster and stronger after all the facts come clear up, imo.

Go VOLS !

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

Conference Strength -- using teams with a realistic chance to get to the playoffs:

SEC (8): Bama, Tennessee, LSU, Georgia, Ole Miss, Florida, Auburn, A&M.
B12 (4): Oklahoma, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma State.
B10 (3): Ohio State, Michigan State, Michigan.
ACC (2): Clemson, FSU.
PAC (2): Stanford, Oregon.

That's how I rank them in my head. The funny thing is, results on the field the past several years have said that the PAC is better than that, they're actually the #2 conference. Just funny that they don't have a lot of schools with a realistic shot of getting through the season with 0 or 1 losses.

So I'd personally put B12 in the middle, after SEC and PAC but before B10 and ACC. I think they're a pretty good conference.

Just because 4 teams can win the Big 12 and make the playoff doesn't make it a strong conference. It's like being the tallest midget. You're still short.

Oklahoma State might win the Big 12. But they are not a playoff caliber team. The best of the ACC like Clemson or Florida State would slaughter them. And if they played in the SEC West, they might not win 6 games.

That's why I call it the weakest conference. They don't have any LEGIT title contenders. Any team they put in the playoff will be expected to lose.

The ACC has Florida State and Clemson that can win it all. The big 10 has Ohio State and possibly Michigan. The SEC has 4 or 5 teams. The Pac 12 has maybe USC.

The Big 12 is the weakest conference.

 

[allvol17]

I'm not trying to pump sunshine here, but a little historical perspective:

In 1998, we started the season ranked 13...

Just sayin'

 

[orangeluvr]

#13 in the poll, #1 in our hearts :wub: Kinda korny.

 

[UT-Rex]

Vols trendline in the CBJ era is +2/year. 5 wins, 7 wins, 9 wins.

Yessir, these 120 VOLS and 1-120 Volnation are patient, re-building our TENNESSEE PROUD back to it's national prominence, once again. Go VOLS !

 

[Grand Vol]

Recruiting rankings are the most accurate a predictor of who will win the national title.

Top Ten Recruiting Classes Win National Titles | FOX Sports

You can cry about it but stars matter. Recruiting rankings matter.

Okay, explain Ole Miss...USC...LSU...UGA...UCLA...

All with repeated top 10 classes that haven't won squat. Some haven't even come close.

This is the point where you should stop before you make yourself look more foolish.

 

[Grand Vol]

Just because 4 teams can win the Big 12 and make the playoff doesn't make it a strong conference. It's like being the tallest midget. You're still short.

Oklahoma State might win the Big 12. But they are not a playoff caliber team. The best of the ACC like Clemson or Florida State would slaughter them. And if they played in the SEC West, they might not win 6 games.

That's why I call it the weakest conference. They don't have any LEGIT title contenders. Any team they put in the playoff will be expected to lose.

The ACC has Florida State and Clemson that can win it all. The big 10 has Ohio State and possibly Michigan. The SEC has 4 or 5 teams. The Pac 12 has maybe USC.

The Big 12 is the weakest conference.

Good grief...

 

[Orange_Crush]

I respect your opinion. I also agree with your statement about preseason polls. However, we can't act like teams don't look at those polls. I really hope we come out this year with a "prove it" mentality. Yes, this team is undoubtedly stacked. Subjectively, I think we are one of the three best teams in the SEC, with no specific order. Objectively, I HAVE to look at what we have done over the past two seasons. Last year the SEC East was basically laid in our laps but we just weren't able to take advantage of it. The OU and Florida games were also primed for us to make some noise nationally, and many thought we would with the talent we had (which was pretty dang good last year too). All I am saying is, let the chips fall as they may, but a top 10 ranking from ANY pollster is just not warranted IMHO.

I respect you opinion as well.

I inferred from the late game collapses last year both depth problems as well as defensive coaching problems. My hope/expectation is that both of those have taken steps forward. If that is the case, we should prove ourselves worthy of a top 10 ranking this year, in hindsight, after we win games. But that's what will matter more than any preseason polls. Did we win the games? I think we will.

Another big thing to consider is this: I read several articles last year, and heard a couple of commentators discussing, the fact that one of the big problems last year was shedding the recent historical losing culture. The teams collapsed late because they didn't know how to win, didn't expect to win, and played 'tight' late in close games. Rumors were that the staff worked hard to shed that culture and teach them how to win.

Now, if the team sees themselves in a preseason top 10 poll, either they will become overconfident, or just play confidently. As long as it doesn't go too far to their head, I think that confidence could be a good thing and not a bad thing. I like the though of this talented Vols team taking every field this year feeling like they can play with anyone, and expecting to beat them.

Play loose and with passion...


Anyway... :hi:

 

[KBVol]

Just because 4 teams can win the Big 12 and make the playoff doesn't make it a strong conference. It's like being the tallest midget. You're still short.

Oklahoma State might win the Big 12. But they are not a playoff caliber team. The best of the ACC like Clemson or Florida State would slaughter them. And if they played in the SEC West, they might not win 6 games.

That's why I call it the weakest conference. They don't have any LEGIT title contenders. Any team they put in the playoff will be expected to lose.

The ACC has Florida State and Clemson that can win it all. The big 10 has Ohio State and possibly Michigan. The SEC has 4 or 5 teams. The Pac 12 has maybe USC.

The Big 12 is the weakest conference.

Did you forget that Oklahoma, a final 4 playoff team who returns a ton of talent, including two Heisman candidates in Mayfield and Perine, is a Big 12 team? Interesting that you chose to discuss Oklahoma State while omitting the Sooners.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

Just to play devil's advocate.....we return "practically everybody" who went 1-4 in their 5 most important games last year (Oklahoma, Florida, Georgia, Arky, Alabama)....were 3-4 until rattling off 5 straight wins vs teams like North Texas, SCar, Mizz, Ky and Vandy, 5 teams that were a collective 18-42. We get full marks for destroying an overmatched NW team, but we boat raced Iowa the year before and that had no effect on our 2015 team to win big games vs our best competition. There are still questions about a talented Tennessee team that's long on potential but short on results to date. Not sure why a team that barely finished in the top 25 last year should justifiably jump 15-20 spots.....about 10 or so spots to #13 seems about right. Just playing devil's advocate.

Maybe because that team that went 1-4 in those 5 important games was oh so close to being 5-0. Hell it took epic collapses to lose 2 of those 4 games. And they did that with a very young team.

There is a reason the analytics (like ESPN's FPI) love the Vols. They look at more than just your wins/losses. They look at how you played. And what the analytics can see that folks like you can't is that this team is close to breaking out.

Interesting stat from last year. During the final reveal of the playoff rankings, Reece Davis let this little tidbit slip. According to ESPN's GAME CONTROL stat, the 2015 Vols finished 4th in the country. The 3 teams that finished ahead of Tennessee were Clemson, Alabama, and Oklahoma. All 3 made the playoffs.

That's how close the 2015 Vols were to being an elite team. And that's why the analytics love the 2016 Vols. Plus computers are not biased by superstitions (like a myth we can't beat Florida because of mental roadblocks) or ancient history (like the fact Tennessee has been garbage the last 7 years). All they're doing is trying to predict who will be good in 2016. And by the numbers, Tennessee is a top 5 team in 2016. At worst top 10.

 

[Rudy123]

Will be number 1 after the Third Saturday in October.

Third Saturday in October? Heck, I will be surprised if we even beat Florida this upcoming season. We haven't beaten them in 10 season's, even when we were clearly the better team and playing the game at home.
Two loss team this season. One loss to Florida and one loss to Alabama.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

Did you forget that Oklahoma, a final 4 playoff team who returns a ton of talent, including two Heisman candidates in Mayfield and Perine, is a Big 12 team? Interesting that you chose to discuss Oklahoma State while omitting the Sooners.

I thought Oklahoma was good too. Till Clemson made easy work of them. Now I believe they're just a paper tiger.

I should've trusted the recruiting rankings. Oklahoma is a top 15 caliber team recruiting wise. They're not a top 5-8 caliber team which you need to be to be a legit title contender IMO.

 

[VOL 4 Life 83]

I respect you opinion as well.

I inferred from the late game collapses last year both depth problems as well as defensive coaching problems. My hope/expectation is that both of those have taken steps forward. If that is the case, we should prove ourselves worthy of a top 10 ranking this year, in hindsight, after we win games. But that's what will matter more than any preseason polls. Did we win the games? I think we will.

Another big thing to consider is this: I read several articles last year, and heard a couple of commentators discussing, the fact that one of the big problems last year was shedding the recent historical losing culture. The teams collapsed late because they didn't know how to win, didn't expect to win, and played 'tight' late in close games. Rumors were that the staff worked hard to shed that culture and teach them how to win.

Now, if the team sees themselves in a preseason top 10 poll, either they will become overconfident, or just play confidently. As long as it doesn't go too far to their head, I think that confidence could be a good thing and not a bad thing. I like the though of this talented Vols team taking every field this year feeling like they can play with anyone, and expecting to beat them.

Play loose and with passion...


Anyway... :hi:

I agree with everything you are saying. Now it's time to go out and earn the right to be in the top 10 or 5 or whatever it is that these predictions have us at.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

Got thinking about trendlines, thanks to this great ongoing conversation.

Vols trendline in the CBJ era is +2/year. 5 wins, 7 wins, 9 wins. Post-season included. So if that trendline holds serve, 2016 is an 11-win year. Post-season included.

Two possible ways of getting to 11 wins in 2016:

11-2 (12 regular season, 1 bowl), which means we did not get to the SEC championship game. That likely means both those 2 losses came to SEC opponents in the regular season. Which means Florida and/or Georgia beat us, along with possibly Bama or A&M. And then we end the season winning a bowl.

11-3 (12 regular season, Atlanta, and bowl). Getting to Atlanta probably means we only lost one game in the regular season. The bad news is, that means we then lose the SEC CG, and our bowl game as well. Not a great way to end the year.

It's funny, but of those two 11-win scenarios, I actually prefer the first one. Yeah, we don't get to Atlanta, but we don't LOSE in Atlanta, either. And we win our bowl, ending the season on a positive note.

Having said all that, here's hoping 2016 we break the +2 trendline in a positive way. :good!:

Or you could look at it this way.

Each season Butch has increased the number of regular season wins by an increasing margin.

2013: 5-7
2014: 6-6 (+1 regular season win)
2015: 8-4 (+2 regular season wins)
2016: 11-1 (+3 regular season wins)

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

Okay, explain Ole Miss...USC...LSU...UGA...UCLA...

All with repeated top 10 classes that haven't won squat. Some haven't even come close.

This is the point where you should stop before you make yourself look more foolish.

No one said elite recruiting was SUFFICIENT to win a title. But it does appear to be NECESSARY.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

I thought Oklahoma was good too. Till Clemson made easy work of them. Now I believe they're just a paper tiger.

This is a prime example of trying to be too precise in a sport that is terribly inexact.

Every team in the country slides up and down in ability on a week-to-week basis. Good weeks and bad weeks, all at the whim of 100+ 18-24 year old men and their 10-12 coaches.

So you shouldn't look at any team as riding a line along the season, like, "Bama is on the #1 line" and "Vols are on the #13 line". No, it's more like a range of possibilities for who each team is.

Bama is on a #1-8 band ... the Vols will be riding a #5-15 band ... and so on. That's why it's entirely reasonable that we could beat Bama. if they're performing in the bottom half of their band on the Third Saturday in October, and we're peaking near the top of our band, we'll whup them.

So don't think of Oklahoma as a legit team that then proved to be a paper tiger. Instead, think of them as a #3-15 band team that was riding high for much of the season, but let themselves down in their last game.

That's a more accurate way of measuring teams against each other over time in college football.



p.s. In fact, using this "band" method makes it much easier to understand how Florida fell apart.

The width of any team's band is primarly a function of discipline. The more discipline the coaches are able to instill, the more predictable the players' performances become...and the tighter their band.

I showed Bama's band, above, as #1-8 (range of 8), and ours as 5-15 (range of 11 spots). That means I think Bama's a slightly better disciplined team than our Vols. Not that we're bad, just that they're that good at discipline...it's a matter of Nick Saban's relentless focus on that aspect of the team.

Florida, on the other hand, was quite possibly one of the least-disciplined teams in the SEC last fall (alongside Auburn and Arkansas). Like a #8-30 width band kind of undisciplined. That's why their results were all over the map. That, far more than a doping QB, explains the odd trajectory of their season. They were a hot mess with a new coach who is normally very laid back and lax on the discipline side of things.

And will likely be just the same in 2016 and beyond...so watch for continued wild swings in that team, week to week.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Or you could look at it this way.

Each season Butch has increased the number of regular season wins by an increasing margin.

2013: 5-7
2014: 6-6 (+1 regular season win)
2015: 8-4 (+2 regular season wins)
2016: 11-1 (+3 regular season wins)

That's another possibly-accurate model, agreed. I hope it's the right one, in fact.

 

[VOL 4 Life 83]

I thought Oklahoma was good too. Till Clemson made easy work of them. Now I believe they're just a paper tiger.

I should've trusted the recruiting rankings. Oklahoma is a top 15 caliber team recruiting wise. They're not a top 5-8 caliber team which you need to be to be a legit title contender IMO.

Clemson has had lower recruiting rankings than us the last few years yet they made the playoffs and won their conference championship. So by your recruiting ranking logic, how are we in the same sentence as Clemson right now who "made easy work" of a team that beat us, but has a lower recruiting ranking? And don't give me the schedule was easier bull crap. Clemson played some dang good teams on their way to the NC game.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

I respect you opinion as well.

I inferred from the late game collapses last year both depth problems as well as defensive coaching problems. My hope/expectation is that both of those have taken steps forward. If that is the case, we should prove ourselves worthy of a top 10 ranking this year, in hindsight, after we win games. But that's what will matter more than any preseason polls. Did we win the games? I think we will.

Another big thing to consider is this: I read several articles last year, and heard a couple of commentators discussing, the fact that one of the big problems last year was shedding the recent historical losing culture. The teams collapsed late because they didn't know how to win, didn't expect to win, and played 'tight' late in close games. Rumors were that the staff worked hard to shed that culture and teach them how to win.

Now, if the team sees themselves in a preseason top 10 poll, either they will become overconfident, or just play confidently. As long as it doesn't go too far to their head, I think that confidence could be a good thing and not a bad thing. I like the though of this talented Vols team taking every field this year feeling like they can play with anyone, and expecting to beat them.

Play loose and with passion...


Anyway... :hi:

No. They lost because we lacked depth. They got TIRED.

Most of these kids came from winning high school programs. They were elite 4 and 5 star recruits. It wasn't lack of confidence. We just lacked the depth to compete for 60 minutes against the best teams.

 

[JC61]

when KB and D4H go at it....I feel like I'm witnessing a VN version of Highlander

 

[VOL 4 Life 83]

No. They lost because we lacked depth. They got TIRED.

Most of these kids came from winning high school programs. They were elite 4 and 5 star recruits. It wasn't lack of confidence. We just lacked the depth to compete for 60 minutes against the best teams.

Wait, earlier in thread you stated that out team last year was largely made of sophomores and freshman that didn't have experience, yet now you say we lost because they were tired and lacked depth?? So which is it D4H...

 

[KBVol]

I thought Oklahoma was good too. Till Clemson made easy work of them. Now I believe they're just a paper tiger.

I should've trusted the recruiting rankings. Oklahoma is a top 15 caliber team recruiting wise. They're not a top 5-8 caliber team which you need to be to be a legit title contender IMO.

So the team that beat us on our homefield and made the 4 team playoffs is a "paper tiger"...but we are clearly a top 5 team worthy of national title talk. Lol. Figures.