Are we the Penn State of the SEC?

#52
#52
Maybe the exact $ numbers aren't publicly available, but the amount can be inferred from where we end up in recruiting rankings each year.

And this year, despite winning 10 games and making the playoffs, we didn't land a top 10 class.

Not to split hairs ..... but on 247's Class of 2025, Composite Team Rankings, Tennessee was #10.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GAV4L
#54
#54
How do you know what we spend? Is it publicly available information? I don't know what it was, but somehow Tennessee fended off Ohio State, to keep David Sanders in the fold. I doubt it was done with chump change.
It's not close to 20 million on one years roster. Ours was probably half that. If you didn't see Lamborghini's vs Geo Metro's last night I don't know what to tell you. The only way that happens is serious money. Us beating them out for one David Sanders is more the exception and not the norm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GAV4L
#55
#55
It's not close to 20 million on one years roster. Ours was probably half that. If you didn't see Lamborghini's vs Geo Metro's last night I don't know what to tell you. The only way that happens is serious money. Us beating them out for one David Sanders is more the exception and not the norm.
That's a silly over-simplification.
 
#56
#56
No we have not beat elite teams , take off your SEC conference koolaid goggles. Elite teams are elite in every aspect of their team. Name of team don’t make them elite . OSU, GA, Texas and Oregon right now are the elite. And we are waaaay below them . Every time we play Georgia should tell you just how elite we are. Not playing a Alabama that is no longer elite, Florida not elite , Ark not elite, Miss State not elite etc etc etc
Agree.
 
#57
#57
You are correct at this moment but Flarada is likely going to sign Dallas Wilson from Oregon and that will push them above us
By a negligible margin. Too much significance is paid to the numerical rankings rather than player averages and individual analysis of the prospects. It's a superficial way to evaluate recruiting. I wouldn't trade our class for theirs by a long shot.
 
#58
#58
By a negligible margin. Too much significance is paid to the numerical rankings rather than player averages and individual analysis of the prospects. It's a superficial way to evaluate recruiting. I wouldn't trade our class for theirs by a long shot.
You can't evaluate recruiting by 1 year, I'm talking about the bigger picture.

Yet they have 52 Blue chip players, we have 41.

And yes, the fact that they beat us by a "negligible margin" is correct. I also will say your point about preferring our class to theirs is valid.

My point is we went 10-2 and made the playoffs and they have been a tire fire for 4 straight seasons and their class is, on paper, very comparable to ours.

That is concerning that we aren't leveraging the on field success to get CLEARLY better classes in a year like this.

tl;dr
We should be recruiting closer to Texas/Ohio State/UGA/Bama/Oregon levels with out success than being in the ranks of lowly broken programs like the Gators.
 
#59
#59
Too much significance is paid to the numerical rankings rather than player averages and individual analysis of the prospects. It's a superficial way to evaluate recruiting.
Those rankings played out on the field last night against Ohio State.
 
#60
#60
Good program that will win 9-10 games a year but can't beat the elite programs in big games?
Haven't checked it in a while, but UT used to be an 7-8 win per year level program. We've never averaged 9-10 wins per year. Don't think PSU is a good comparison either. They have a .690 all-time winning percentage. UT is .671. We're closer to Indiana(.676) and Nebraska(.677) in that regard.
 
#62
#62
You are correct at this moment but Flarada is likely going to sign Dallas Wilson from Oregon and that will push them above us
Florida will start a new streak against us next year....and the game won't be close.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GAV4L
#63
#63
How do you know what we spend? Is it publicly available information? I don't know what it was, but somehow Tennessee fended off Ohio State, to keep David Sanders in the fold. I doubt it was done with chump change.
Maybe I'm just imagining things, but I would swear there was a topic on this within the last week?

UT was somewhere kinda far down the list lol. I don't remember the exact number but I think it was $10-$12 million. There were a few ahead that surprised me.

Edit, oh well I tried to link but it didn't work1734055451558.png
 
Last edited:
#66
#66
Maybe I'm just imagining things, but I would swear there was a topic on this within the last week?

UT was somewhere kinda far down the list lol. I don't remember the exact number but I think it was $10-$12 million. There were a few ahead that surprised me.

Edit, oh well I tried to link but it didn't workView attachment 708731
Thanks for sharing that

However I think that only represents how much certain collectives are worth right?

Not necessarily how much is being spent. Oregon has a small collective but we all know that's not who's funding their NIL operations like other programs may be relying on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BowlBrother85
#67
#67
Thanks for sharing that

However I think that only represents how much certain collectives are worth right?

Not necessarily how much is being spent. Oregon has a small collective but we all know that's not who's funding their NIL operations like other programs may be relying on.

While I agree I believe does give a relatively good indication of where things are in the pecking order.

I would expect a collective to be spending a very high % of incoming funds direct to sports programs each year. No offense, but I'm not donating to Spyre for a staffer to have 3 martini lunches at the Waldorf Astoria. KnowhutImean Verne?


As you said, there are always gonna be the Phil Knights at Oregon and how T Boone Pickens was with Oklahoma St. You kinda know who those teams are though and know they are gonna be all funded.

Clemson and Virginia being that far up there surprised me.

Ditto Michigan St and Indiana, but I would wager most of their funds are being spent on basketball.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GAV4L
#69
#69
That's a really dumb comparison. Tennessee was just in the CFP. That is being a contender. The emotional reactions on here are so stupid and childish.
Let's be honest. Going to a 12 team playoffs is mostly a participation trophy especially when you don't even make it to the conference championship. At least half the teams have no business being there and we just seen why
 
  • Like
Reactions: GAV4L
#70
#70
Let's be honest. Going to a 12 team playoffs is mostly a participation trophy especially when you don't even make it to the conference championship. At least half the teams have no business being there and we just seen why
Honestly speaking ..... I don't agree with this perspective.

Going to the "Gasparilla Bowl" is much more in line with getting a participation trophy, than being a participant in the actual tournament being played to decide the National Championship.

If you are suggesting that Tennessee didn't belong in the 12 team field? I disagree with that as well. Some posters like to think that their perspective is the only one which is reasonable. Let's be honest .... it's not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ty4Vols
#71
#71
Honestly speaking ..... I don't agree with this perspective.

Going to the "Gasparilla Bowl" is much more in line with getting a participation trophy, than being a participant in the actual tournament being played to decide the National Championship.

If you are suggesting that Tennessee didn't belong in the 12 team field? I disagree with that as well. Some posters like to think that their perspective is the only one which is reasonable. Let's be honest .... it's not.
As a newcomer to the program, I just checked and didn’t realize Tennessee has been National Champions SIX times ! State Penn has two.
 
#72
#72
As a newcomer to the program, I just checked and didn’t realize Tennessee has been National Champions SIX times ! State Penn has two.

IMO, Tennessee should have 4 total Championships: 1938, 1939, 1950, 1998

They claim 1967 but we had 2 losses that year. Bowl Games prior to 1960s were crap shoots so they probably shouldn't count. You can also argue 1951. We were an ELITE program with Neyland but haven't been near that level since the 1950s. We have had 2-3 year runs when we were Elite like 1997-1999 but not anything like the Neyland era.

Meanwhile Alabama has the Saban and Bryant runs (only Neyland comes close). Heck, even Gene Stallings teams weren't that bad (about on par with Fulmer).

Basically, Tennessee, as a program, has struggled to match the Neyland era. 50% of our success is from that era and it is a long time ago now. Tennessee wins a lot of games (mostly against inferior teams like OOC, UK, Vandy, Miss State, South Carolina, etc.) historically but typically doesn't win Championships kind of like an Iowa, Wisconsin level program (Penn State might be a great comparison).
 
  • Like
Reactions: GAV4L
#75
#75
We beat elite teams but they are coincidentally not elite when we do it.
Alabama was most definitely not elite this year, and they weren’t really elite in 2022. They were close but that wasn’t one of Saban’s better teams. LSU wasn’t elite either. Nor was Clemson.

We have beaten a few big names, but none of the teams were elite when we beat them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GAV4L

VN Store



Back
Top