‘23 GA S Jack Luttrell (Tennessee transfer)

#740
#740
BigOrangeTrain said:
As usual you are wrong. I never said that and you know it. Maybe you need some reminding of the facts

View attachment 526060
Click to expand...
Yeah. That is a DIRECT implication of what you have consistently claimed.

Just be consistent. If you are going to put that much faith in "stars" then stop trying to say that UT's 3* are the exception. Have the stones to say that UT's class sucks and makes championship hopes futile. If you are right then most of the players UT signed suck. Just have the courage to say it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smokey19rt, Wolfeman_Vol, rgvol and 1 other person
#741
#741
sjt18 said:
Yeah. That is a DIRECT implication of what you have consistently claimed.

Just be consistent. If you are going to put that much faith in "stars" then stop trying to say that UT's 3* are the exception. Have the stones to say that UT's class sucks and makes championship hopes futile. If you are right then most of the players UT signed suck. Just have the courage to say it.
Click to expand...
I don't see the quote but I already know who you're replying too haha.

Dude is clueless haha
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smokey19rt, rgvol and sjt18
#742
#742
BigOrangeTrain said:
As usual you are wrong. I never said that and you know it. Maybe you need some reminding of the facts

View attachment 526060
Click to expand...

Weird. I don’t see Tennessee or TCU or Kansas State or USC on that graphic. Yet those are 4 of the top 10 teams (1 in the playoff, 3 more in NY6 bowls), and all 4 of those are better than Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Auburn, Miami, aTm, Notre Dame, and others on that graphic.

Hell, at least 4 teams on that graphic have a losing record. 😂

That graphic is a pretty solid argument against the notion that recruiting rankings are the end-all-be-all.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol, Smokey19rt, sjt18 and 5 others
#743
#743
GregAmsler said:
Weird. I don’t see Tennessee or TCU or Kansas State or USC on that graphic. Yet those are 4 of the top 10 teams (1 in the playoff, 3 more in NY6 bowls), and all 4 of those are better than Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Auburn, Miami, aTm, Notre Dame, and others on that graphic.

Hell, at least 4 teams on that graphic have a losing record. 😂

That graphic is a pretty solid argument against the notion that recruiting rankings are the end-all-be-all.
Click to expand...
Yep
 
#744
#744
GregAmsler said:
Weird. I don’t see Tennessee or TCU or Kansas State or USC on that graphic. Yet those are 4 of the top 10 teams (1 in the playoff, 3 more in NY6 bowls), and all 4 of those are better than Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Auburn, Miami, aTm, Notre Dame, and others on that graphic.

Hell, at least 4 teams on that graphic have a losing record. 😂

That graphic is a pretty solid argument against the notion that recruiting rankings are the end-all-be-all.
Click to expand...
Interesting that @BigOrangeTrain won't respond to these ironclad facts. He will ignore them... then come back later and make the same claims again.

His own graph demonstrates that his claim is wrong. The 3 or 4 teams he points to have coaches who can find and sign talent then coach it to success. That doesn't prove the recruiting sites accurate... it proves those coaches operate at an elite level... which they'd do if the recruiting sites didn't exist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UTJoe and butchna
#745
#745
sjt18 said:
Interesting that @BigOrangeTrain won't respond to these ironclad facts. He will ignore them... then come back later and make the same claims again.

His own graph demonstrates that his claim is wrong. The 3 or 4 teams he points to have coaches who can find and sign talent then coach it to success. That doesn't prove the recruiting sites accurate... it proves those coaches operate at an elite level... which they'd do if the recruiting sites didn't exist.
Click to expand...

I’m a firm believer there’s tons of talented football players out there that get overlooked due to playing at small schools and not going to camps.

It’s true that 4 & 5 stars have a “better chance” of contributing at the next level but to say the recruiting experts get it right most of the time is completely false.

We went 10-2 this year with maybe the 6th talented roster in the SEC behind Bama, Georgia, LSU, A&M, and Florida.

Heupel has earned our trust in his evaluations as a HC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jlawso21, orangebloodgmc, Stacmot and 1 other person
#746
#746
Vol8188 said:
A former offensive coordinator I worked with taught me the "white kid rule". If they had a white guy in their secondary, we would throw at him in the first quarter. He said "He might be John Lynch, but if he is, I'm going to find out early"
Click to expand...
Most GOOD OC's know before they play if a kids good or not.
 
#747
#747
Mccage said:
Most GOOD OC's know before they play if a kids good or not.
Click to expand...

A lot of factors go into that claim. In HS ball we only get 2 games worth of film. That’s a small sample to base an opinion on. Plenty of games I’ve went into thinking a player was better or worse than they actually are.

The same happens with your own team. Plenty of games I’ve went into expecting a kid to perform better or worse than he actually ends up playing.
 
#748
#748
Stars are not perfect, but if half of your roster or more are highly rated, you stand a better chance at winning a natty. The 4/5 stars push the 3 stars in practice.

The fact is, in the past 10 years, only 2 teams with less than 50% of their roster being made up of 5 and 4 stars have made the playoffs. Cincinnati last year, and TCU this year. They both came out of weak conferences, where they did not have to play more talented teams every week.

Cincy could only muster 2 field goals vs bama, we will see how tcu does in a few days, but I think they are outmatched vs Michigan.

Just to be clear, our class this year is 50/50. Stack a few of those together, get rid of some dead weight, and fill with portal kids, and we are on the right path.

With this current class, we should be on that graphic for 2023!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol8188
#749
#749
sjt18 said:
Interesting that @BigOrangeTrain won't respond to these ironclad facts. He will ignore them... then come back later and make the same claims again.

His own graph demonstrates that his claim is wrong. The 3 or 4 teams he points to have coaches who can find and sign talent then coach it to success. That doesn't prove the recruiting sites accurate... it proves those coaches operate at an elite level... which they'd do if the recruiting sites didn't exist.
Click to expand...
The best programs managed very well before these eggheads got a stage. Fulmer established himself as a recruiting closer before star rankings existed. How…exactly? 🤔 Will remain convinced that his true fall began when he began recruiting towards the sites more than his own resources on the staff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SugarCC, VOLSONLY and LittleVol
#750
#750
sjt18 said:
Interesting that @BigOrangeTrain won't respond to these ironclad facts. He will ignore them... then come back later and make the same claims again.

His own graph demonstrates that his claim is wrong. The 3 or 4 teams he points to have coaches who can find and sign talent then coach it to success. That doesn't prove the recruiting sites accurate... it proves those coaches operate at an elite level... which they'd do if the recruiting sites didn't exist.
Click to expand...

If the recruiting sites existed or not has nothing to do with the conversation. Some teams would have more talent and some would have less with or without the services.

No one has ever claimed that talent is the entire equation (Jimbo proved that this year). But you have to have the talent. You won’t win consistently at a high level without it
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top