Last Year's Talent

#101
#101
Hamptonvolfan said:
Please educate me, who played the tougher schedule and when ?
Click to expand...

How do you want that measured? IIRC, UT did not have the top rated SOS according to the published measures last year much less the most difficult of all time. Sagarin had UT's schedule ranked 10th. He had Auburn at 13... and they came off the deck under a new coach to win the SEC and make the NC game.

Here's a link to several post season rankings of SOS. UT wasn't 1st in any of them... for 2013... much less all of history. Final 2013 College Football Strength of Schedule Rankings
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#102
#102
Vol8188 said:
Oregonvol asked what happened to all the 4 stars on our roster last year. Were they all busts or did the coaching staff not develop our talent. So here's a break down of last years 4 stars by position:

QB:
Josh Dobbs: came out and started multiple games a true freshman and held his own.

RB:
Lane: played the role of backup to an overachieving 3 star RB, still had a very decent season.

WR:

North: 4 star who played like a 5.

Pig: played like a 4 star should.
Croom: played decently for a redshirt freshman.

Bowles: I have a hard time calling a player a bust after his redshirt freshman year, but he may end in that category.

Paul Harris: couldn't crack the depth chart as a true freshman so he transferred.

TE: none

OL:

Tiny: 4 star player, started at LT as a sophmore and junior.

Jackson: started as a true freshman, and then redshirted last season. He should be one of our better linemen this season.

Stone: 4 year starter.

James: 4 year starter

Dline:

O'brien: last year was his redshirt freshman year, too early to tell.

Carr: transferred out after freshman year.

McCullers: two year starter.

Couch: played well as a junior, would have probably had a decent season if he had played.

Smith: played a lot, but probably a bust


LB:

AJ: 4 year starter, plays like a 5 star.

Maggitt: injured last season, but a dynamic player

Reeves-Maybin: made huge special teams plays as a true freshman, and has a chance to break the lineup this season.

DB:

Coleman: 4 year starter, but has a tendency to get burned.

McNeil: started as a sophmore, wasn't phenomenal.
Click to expand...

when you have only 1 player drafted in the first 5 rounds- that says it all about the talent level last year. VERY LOW
 
#105
#105
sjt18 said:
How do you want that measured? IIRC, UT did not have the top rated SOS according to the published measures last year much less the most difficult of all time. Sagarin had UT's schedule ranked 10th. He had Auburn at 13... and they came off the deck under a new coach to win the SEC and make the NC game.

Here's a link to several post season rankings of SOS. UT wasn't 1st in any of them... for 2013... much less all of history. Final 2013 College Football Strength of Schedule Rankings
Click to expand...

Let's just take 1 of these, the NCAA final SOS rankings....they have Purdue #1, UT #2.....

based on this, the best teams on each school's schedule, who in their right mind would say Purdue had a more difficult schedule?? These are their final AP Top 25 rankings and records

Purdue-
#3 Michigan 13-1
#12 Ohio St. 12-2
#20 Notre Dame 9-4
#22 Wisconsin 9-4

UT-
#2 Auburn 12-2
#4 SCar 11-2
#5 Mizzou 12-2
#8 Alabama 12-2
#9 Oregon 11-2
#24 Vanderbilt 9-4

Tennessee- 6 teams in the Top 25; Purdue- 4
Tennessee- 5 teams in the Top 10; Purdue- 1
 
#106
#106
KBVol said:
Let's just take 1 of these, the NCAA final SOS rankings....they have Purdue #1, UT #2.....

based on this, the best teams on each school's schedule, who in their right mind would say Purdue had a more difficult schedule?? These are their final AP Top 25 rankings and records

Purdue-
#3 Michigan 13-1
#12 Ohio St. 12-2
#20 Notre Dame 9-4
#22 Wisconsin 9-4

UT-
#2 Auburn 12-2
#4 SCar 11-2
#5 Mizzou 12-2
#8 Alabama 12-2
#9 Oregon 11-2
#24 Vanderbilt 9-4

Tennessee- 6 teams in the Top 25; Purdue- 4
Tennessee- 5 teams in the Top 10; Purdue- 1
Click to expand...

It is accurate to say that UT had a very difficult schedule. It is hyperbole to say that UT had the most difficult schedule in the history of college football.
 
#107
#107
Vol8188 said:
That's leaves us playing with 12 veteran 4 stars.

Of which 1 was suspended for the season (Couch), 1 was redshirted due to an injury (Maggitt), and 1 was redshirted for this season (Jackson).

That leaves 9 4 star players for our staff to work with last season. And some of you don't understand why we had a losing season.
Click to expand...

I just noticed this thread and since it was addressed to me in the OP, I figured I would respond.

I don't know where you got your info or how you did your math, but it seems a little off.

Merely going by rivals' rankings, I count 13 4 stars who we STARTED against Vanderbilt last year. I'm not counting 4 stars who were injured (like Maggit). I'm not counting 4 stars who were true freshmen/redshirts and didn't really contribute (like Carr, or O'Brien). I'm not even counting 4 stars who played quite a bit and backed up the starters (like Croom and Lane). I'm strictly talking about STARTERS IN THE VANDERBILT GAME. And I count 13 as listed by Rivals.

They are Neal, Howard, North, Richardson, Bullard, Stone, James, Smith, McCullers, Walls, Johnson, Coleman, and McNeil. The majority of these were upper-classmen as well. So, I don't see where you're getting that our staff only had 9 4 stars in total to work with last season, when they started 13 in one game alone.

How many 4 stars did Vanderbilt start in that game? How many did they have on their whole roster? Maybe by answering those questions, you'll understand why some of us don't simply blame the players (or the lack of 4 stars) for the miserable results last season.
 
Last edited:
#108
#108
oregonvol said:
I just noticed this thread and since it was addressed to me in the OP, I figured I would respond.

I don't know where you got your info or how you did your math, but it seems a little off.

Merely going by rivals's rankings, I count 13 4 stars who we STARTED against Vanderbilt last year. I'm not counting 4 stars who were injured (like Maggit). I'm not counting 4 stars who were true freshmen/redshirts and didn't really contribute (like Carr, or O'Brien). I'm not even counting 4 stars who played quite a bit and backed up the starters (like Croom and Lane). I'm strictly talking about STARTERS IN THE VANDERBILT GAME. And I count 13 as listed by Rivals.

They are Neal, Howard, North, Richardson, Bullard, Stone, James, Smith, McCullers, Walls, Johnson, Coleman, and McNeil. The majority of these were upper-classmen as well. So, I don't see where you're getting that our staff only had 9 4 stars in total to work with last season, when they started 13 in one game alone.

How many 4 stars did Vanderbilt start in that game? How many did they have on their whole roster? Maybe by answering those questions, you'll understand why some of us don't simply blame the players (or the lack of 4 stars) for the miserable results last season.
Click to expand...

I was going off consensus numbers. And last years results weren't miserable. We should have finished 5-7 an we did.
 
#109
#109
Vol8188 said:
I was going off consensus numbers. And last years results weren't miserable. We should have finished 5-7 an we did.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I guess if you never expected your new coach to do any better than the worst record of the worst coach in your program's history, then you got what you deserved. Congratulations.
 
#110
#110
oregonvol said:
Yeah, I guess if you never expected your new coach to do any better than the worst record of the worst coach in your program's history, then you got what you deserved. Congratulations.
Click to expand...

Look at that schedule and find 6 wins for me.
 
#113
#113
sjt18 said:
It is accurate to say that UT had a very difficult schedule. It is hyperbole to say that UT had the most difficult schedule in the history of college football.
Click to expand...

I think it's also accurate to say Tennessee had a more difficult than Purude, who the NCAA claimed had the most difficult schedule in the country.

On the face of it though, surely UTs 2013 could place somewhere among the most difficult schedules of all time, whether it's top 10 or top 20, or top 5. How many teams have ever played 5 of the top 9 teams in one season?

Hyperbole to say THE most difficult schedule of all time? Yes. But one of the most difficult? Surely it's accurate.
 
Last edited:
#114
#114
Vol8188 said:
Look at that schedule and find 6 wins for me.
Click to expand...

A well-coached team should have been expected to pull at least one upset (which they did). A well coached team should have been able to beat Vanderbilt at home (which they did not do).

I don't get why people like you are so content to praise mediocrity. You should expect the team to overachieve. You should expect them, at the very least, to get better as the season moves on. If that never happens, then your team will never go from bad to good. You understand that, right?

Sometimes, I think the majority of people here aren't actually interested in becoming good again. I sometimes think that they just want to keep setting the bar as low as possible, so they can keep idolizing a coach at the expense of the program.
 
#115
#115
Vol8188 said:
I was going off consensus numbers. And last years results weren't miserable. We should have finished 5-7 an we did.
Click to expand...

Nope. It was a 6-7 win roster. It is OK to say someone did not meet expectations. It is not equivalent to saying they "are" a failure. Jones may end up with streets named after him in K'ville... but he didn't win as many games last year as the roster was good for.
 
#116
#116
KBVol said:
I think it's also accurate to say Tennessee had a more difficult than Purude, who the NCAA claimed had the most difficult schedule in the country.
Click to expand...
I would agree with that too.

Hyperbole to say THE most difficult schedule of all time? Yes. But one of the most difficult? Surely it's accurate.
Click to expand...

Thanks for agreeing. :good!:
 
#117
#117
KBVol said:
I didn't say that.
Click to expand...

No? You responded against a post that I made in response to a challenge to my calling that claim "hyperbole". So did you agree with that person or are you just looking for a reason to argue with me? :)
 
#118
#118
oregonvol said:
And where are these consensus numbers listed? I would be interested in looking at them.
Click to expand...

From the large bowel it moves into the rectum and through the transitional zone into the anal canal before being plucked out and presented as "evidence".
 
#119
#119
KBVol said:
I think it's also accurate to say Tennessee had a more difficult than Purude, who the NCAA claimed had the most difficult schedule in the country.

On the face of it though, surely UTs 2013 could place somewhere among the most difficult schedules of all time, whether it's top 10 or top 20, or top 5. How many teams have ever played 5 of the top 9 teams in one season?

Hyperbole to say THE most difficult schedule of all time? Yes. But one of the most difficult? Surely it's accurate.
Click to expand...

Last year was the most difficult schedule in school history. That's saying a lot. Now if we have only had a football program for the last 40 or 50 years then last years schedule would not be as relevant. When last season ended we easily played a much stronger schedule than Purdue.
 
#120
#120
sjt18 said:
No? You responded against a post that I made in response to a challenge to my calling that claim "hyperbole". So did you agree with that person or are you just looking for a reason to argue with me? :)
Click to expand...

Not trying to argue. Wasn't disagreeing with you, but rather questioning the veracity of those sites rating SOS. How in the world does Sagarin have Tennessee #10 last year. What methodology is that guy using? And, iirc, one guy didn't have them on his list at all. What did I miss?
 
#121
#121
oregonvol said:
A well-coached team should have been expected to pull at least one upset (which they did). A well coached team should have been able to beat Vanderbilt at home (which they did not do).

I don't get why people like you are so content to praise mediocrity. You should expect the team to overachieve. You should expect them, at the very least, to get better as the season moves on. If that never happens, then your team will never go from bad to good. You understand that, right?

Sometimes, I think the majority of people here aren't actually interested in becoming good again. I sometimes think that they just want to keep setting the bar as low as possible, so they can keep idolizing a coach at the expense of the program.
Click to expand...

Let's get this right:

1. If we were well coached we should have been able to pull off at a minimum 1 upset....

2. But if we are a well coached team we should never drop a game to a 9 win Vanderbilt team while playing our 3rd or 4th string qb...is that correct?

Sounds like a bit of a double standard to me.
 
Last edited:
#122
#122
sjt18 said:
Nope. It was a 6-7 win roster. It is OK to say someone did not meet expectations. It is not equivalent to saying they "are" a failure. Jones may end up with streets named after him in K'ville... but he didn't win as many games last year as the roster was good for.
Click to expand...

Name those 7 wins. Because IMO it was a 5 win roster, we simply switched Candy and USCjr.
 
#124
#124
oregonvol said:
And where are these consensus numbers listed? I would be interested in looking at them.
Click to expand...

Are you expecting me to link each players recruiting profile from each of the recruiting services? No thanks.

If you want to argue about a guy I left off, please let me know who that is. I specifically stated in the second post of this thread that if I missed someone to let me know.

So I have no clue what you an st18 are complaining about
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#125
#125
oregonvol said:
I just noticed this thread and since it was addressed to me in the OP, I figured I would respond.

I don't know where you got your info or how you did your math, but it seems a little off.

Merely going by rivals' rankings, I count 13 4 stars who we STARTED against Vanderbilt last year. I'm not counting 4 stars who were injured (like Maggit). I'm not counting 4 stars who were true freshmen/redshirts and didn't really contribute (like Carr, or O'Brien). I'm not even counting 4 stars who played quite a bit and backed up the starters (like Croom and Lane). I'm strictly talking about STARTERS IN THE VANDERBILT GAME. And I count 13 as listed by Rivals.

They are Neal, Howard, North, Richardson, Bullard, Stone, James, Smith, McCullers, Walls, Johnson, Coleman, and McNeil. The majority of these were upper-classmen as well. So, I don't see where you're getting that our staff only had 9 4 stars in total to work with last season, when they started 13 in one game alone.

How many 4 stars did Vanderbilt start in that game? How many did they have on their whole roster? Maybe by answering those questions, you'll understand why some of us don't simply blame the players (or the lack of 4 stars) for the miserable results last season.
Click to expand...

So the way I figure it, all of these alleged four star recruits were better than 2 star recruit Jordan Mathews? And our cline was better than vandys because of star ratings? Learning entirely different systems on both offense and defense, new strength guy had nothing to do with development or lack thereof? It's all about the infallible rivals ratings? Got it!:eek:lol:
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top