Grading the class

#1
S

sjt18

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
51,173
Likes
51,223
#1
DB's- A+, would be higher if possible. Unfortunately this was the area of least need for the Vols. An already great group got alot better with 2 or 3 potential immediate impact guys.

LB's- C-. Got some nice players and potential sleepers but nothing to crow about. Not an area of immediate need though.

DE- B+. Only two but potentially great players.

DT- F+. Lost Herbert and Hollins who could have helped immediately. Did not grab anyone late. Ended up with two risks... one guy no one but UT has ever believed in and one guy coming off knee surgery.

This was a HUGE need that for the third straight year went unfilled.

OL- F--. The two guys they got look solid but they needed closer to 5 than two. Losing Phillips was huge since he wasn't replaced.

RB- Incomplete I hope but to this point D-. Williams is a real nice player but he's unlikely to be a star in the SEC and could still end up at LB. Area of significant need. **From the "hey yank my chain again dept"... Vereen back to RB?

WR- B-. Upgraded speed and athleticism but missed on the big WR that CLK covets and needs for his system. Area of moderate need.

TE- N/A. Didn't get Mason but not an area of immediate need either.

QB- N/A.... A. IMO a very good strategic decision not to chase QB's this year.

K/P- ?. IMO they should have signed one but they didn't seem to think it was important this time.

Overall, D. The quality of players they got mitigates to a degree their failure to fill their biggest needs and land their self proclaimed #1 target.
 
#2
#2
sjt18 said:
DB's- A+, would be higher if possible. Unfortunately this was the area of least need for the Vols. An already great group got alot better with 2 or 3 potential immediate impact guys.Agreed A+

LB's- C-. Got some nice players and potential sleepers but nothing to crow about. Not an area of immediate need though.
I'd say more like B-
DE- B+. Only two but potentially great players.
Agreed
DT- F+. Lost Herbert and Hollins who could have helped immediately. Did not grab anyone late. Ended up with two risks... one guy no one but UT has ever believed in and one guy coming off knee surgery.
I'd go more with C-, Walls is playing DT here
This was a HUGE need that for the third straight year went unfilled.

OL- F--. The two guys they got look solid but they needed closer to 5 than two. Losing Phillips was huge since he wasn't replaced.
D since we got a few
RB- Incomplete I hope but to this point D-. Williams is a real nice player but he's unlikely to be a star in the SEC and could still end up at LB. Area of significant need. **From the "hey yank my chain again dept"... Vereen back to RB?
I'd say more like C, he will be good for us in the power back role
WR- B-. Upgraded speed and athleticism but missed on the big WR that CLK covets and needs for his system. Area of moderate need.
Agreed, Marlon would have jumped this to an A
TE- N/A. Didn't get Mason but not an area of immediate need either.
Not a huge need
QB- N/A.... A. IMO a very good strategic decision not to chase QB's this year.

K/P- ?. IMO they should have signed one but they didn't seem to think it was important this time.
One of the top K's in the country is from Tennessee in next years class
Overall, D. The quality of players they got mitigates to a degree their failure to fill their biggest needs and land their self proclaimed #1 target.
Click to expand...

I think given the time of how long the coaches had to recruit and form relationships this class is at least a B-.
 
#4
#4
An F+....what is that exactly? And I would totally disagree with the linebackers grade all those guys are better then a C-. Oh ya and marlon walls will probably be a DT as well. Solid B for the whole class
 
#5
#5
Anybody ever get a F+? I got a F + a ass whipping, that is the only + I can see coming from an F
 
#10
#10
I would have to say C-. There are alot of athletes with speed in this class. Like you I would have loved to have signed 2 more DL and OL. IMO that would have moved us up to a solid B. Oh well it is what it is.
 
#11
#11
Overall D? and we're 17th in the country? Please seek counseling.
 
#12
#12
you guys are not going to believe this but i'm giving us a B-. i think on the defensive side of the ball we did well. would have like to had another DT, but if marlon walls comes along and jeffery's knee is alright we'll be ok. i too am concerned like everybody else on the O-line. douglas seems to be moving over and it will have to be adressed big time next year, but overall he got in late, did a pretty good job pulling some of these kids. he said he went after the best avalible he thought he could get. overall i'm not jumping for joy, but pretty happy with the class.
 
#13
#13
Signing anything on offense that is comparable to the likes of Florida, Georgia, Alabama, or LSU (which are top notch) is no way realistic.

Defense, I can see us having great talent on signing day, but Offense it doesn't surprise me.

I do think that we did better than expected given the circumstances so for that I give CLK at least a B+

Seriously give this guy till next year and with the scholarships he will have available WOAH!!! Plus the need of a QB in our system.. WOAH!!! I think next year is and will be our day of reckoning!!!

Go Vols!
 
#14
#14
rexvol said:
Overall D? and we're 17th in the country? Please seek counseling.
Click to expand...

You have to remember the source. We can take a class of 25 offensive lineman next season and he would give it an A+. He is an extremist. What else would you expect?
 
#16
#16
If you have A's and B's but don't turn in your term project, you at best get a D. If you aren't in the right side of the bell curve... you can't possibly get better than a C.

An F+ plus is just shy of a D-.
 
#18
#18
therickbol said:
You have to remember the source. We can take a class of 25 offensive lineman next season and he would give it an A+. He is an extremist. What else would you expect?
Click to expand...

:eek:k:

Yep. I'm an extremist for seeing a depth chart that includes only 11 total OL's and 6 DT's then concludes that those were needs that went unfilled.

I don't know how else to say it. The guys they got were generally better than what CPF has been bringing in. CLK didn't settle to fill scholarship slots. I respect that. Nonetheless, he wasn't able to fill the two greatest needs.

If seeing reality makes me an extremist then so be it.
 
#19
#19
The sky is falling; KPD opening up a line for jumps off the Henley Street Bridge. Some of you are there. CLK did OK. Give him a break.
 
#20
#20
I think if you grade the recruiting effort, it has to be B+ to A.

If you grade the class, it is closer to a C or C+. We still need big guys. That is simply a fact. I don't think it is as gloomy as many want to make it, but there are still some needs there.
 
#21
#21
sjt18 said:
If you have A's and B's but don't turn in your term project, you at best get a D. If you aren't in the right side of the bell curve... you can't possibly get better than a C.

An F+ plus is just shy of a D-.
Click to expand...

What do you do then when your classmates have 2 years to do that project and you've only got 6 weeks?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#22
#22
I think we did a very good job. Our coaches worked extremely hard. I'm not one to talk about stars, but our average star rating per rivals is 11th in the nation (overall ranking 17th due to other teams signing a lot more players). Sure we didn't fill all the positions we needed to fill, but we didn't bring guys on board that would be replaced by next year's class and waste roster spots for four or five years. We already got a commit for next year, and the best thing about this staff is that they are picky. They will only give spots to the players they know fit snug into their system. Would you like to be Arkansas (30 commits) or Auburn (28) or Ole Miss (37), who just signed so many guys that some of them won't pan out and be taking up valuable roster spots in the future? We also left the door wide open for us to sign a big class next season, and if it is as dense of a class as this year's smaller class is, then it will be a Top 5 class next season.

Ole Miss: 1 5*, 8 4*, 22 3*, 6 2*, 37 Total, Avg 3.11
Arkansas: 1 5*, 8 4*, 20 3*, 1 2*, 30 Total, Avg 3.30
Auburn: 0 5*, 9 4*, 16 3*, 3 2*, 28 Total, Avg 3.21
Tennessee: 1 5*, 8 4*, 10 3*, 2*, 19 Total, Avg 3.53
 
#25
#25
Well as of right now I would have to give our class an I for Incomplete.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top