'24 OK EDGE Danny Okoye (OK commit)

[strkr]

View attachment 578362

Heck just made a statement. Geez. Can't all of them just stated we have lost out on some that we wanted not end of the world.

 

[norrislakevol]

We're fine. We have a 3.85 star average this cycle. That's the highest in many years. JH is upgrading this roster every year. Just think back to his first season and what he had available.....particularly at linebacker. Night and day.

 

[JacketVol]

Let’s wait and see who we sign but fans booing like I heard some this Saturday doesn’t help.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

yep and looks like a few more will go elsewhere

Lol. Based on what? And who?

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

Tenn has sure lost out on some recruits of late.

Sure have hit on some good ones as well

 

[Jackcrevol]

Lol. Based on what? And who?

Based on emotions after a flat game versus an inferior opponent

 

[Glitch]

Let’s wait and see who we sign but fans booing like I heard some this Saturday doesn’t help.

I heard that on the TV. That was not a good look at all.

 

[SSVol]

I heard that on the TV. That was not a good look at all.

The only booing I heard was at the refs. I don't think anyone was thrilled with the offensive performance, but I didn't hear any booing I thought was related to it.

Now the refs OTOH, I was worried(/hoping) they were gonna get kilt.

 

[LouderVol]

The amount of recruits we’ve supposedly led for this cycle and then missed out on is definitely concerning. Hopefully it is just a transition effect of being in on more high profile recruits and we can up our closing percentage next cycle.

according to the voices in everyone's heads that tells them we "lead" for a recruit, we have lead for at least 40 guys. If you can't see the very basic problem with that math, I don't know what to tell you. and that list of 40 doesn't even include every one of our recruits.

leading doesn't mean what everybody seems to think it means.

Is it meaningful, to the point of thinking our coaches can't recruit, to "lead" for a recruit for a week after he visits, 2 months before he commits? 3 months, 6 months?

Is it meaningful to "lead" for a recruit who hasn't visited our school? Does it make our coaches bad recruiters if we never get him? Or what if that recruit has yet to visit our rival?

Is it meaningful to "lead" for a recruit who doesn't have a commitment date set?

Is it meaningful to listen to some talking heads who don't even know if all the recruits they "analyze" are even real? Why would we take THEIR word as gospel to the point of downplaying our coaches who have shown that they can win? Just because you pay $9.99 for it, doesn't mean its a quality service or good.

heck these are highschoolers, some of whom probably change their leader board more than they do their underwear. no reason to think that any "lead" is set in stone, and thus a "loss".

Heupel has even come out and said it that we have straight up stopped recruiting some players because they don't fit our culture, we probably lead for some of them until the point we dropped their recruitment. Are those misses? Because I would love to hear how people supposedly "KNOW" what is going on in a recruitment.

 

[Glitch]

The only booing I heard was at the refs. I don't think anyone was thrilled with the offensive performance, but I didn't hear any booing I thought was related to it.

Now the refs OTOH, I was worried(/hoping) they were gonna get kilt.

Come to think of it, it is very likely that it was directed at the refs.

 

[sjt18]

The amount of recruits we’ve supposedly led for this cycle and then missed out on is definitely concerning. Hopefully it is just a transition effect of being in on more high profile recruits and we can up our closing percentage next cycle.

So being in play for heavily pursued recruits is now a problem? No one gets all of them. Everyone misses on many. Look at the class and take note of the ones they've gotten... including a few that were supposedly headed elsewhere.

You've been around long enough not to be "concerned" about this.

 

[VolFreakJosh]

I heard that on the TV. That was not a good look at all.

To be fair, it was mostly directed at the officials.

It’s one thing to miss a call, but they were simply going by their own rules further the game went along.

Fans were frustrated with AUP breaking the rules with no consequences attached.

 

[SSVol]

Come to think of it, it is very likely that it was directed at the refs.

Loudest and longest I've ever heard in Neyland. They were not pleased.

 

[Orange.]

To be fair, it was mostly directed at the officials.

It’s one thing to miss a call, but they were simply going by their own rules further the game went along.

Fans were frustrated with AUP breaking the rules with no consequences attached.

Those officials should all be fired immediately, along with whoever was participating remotely from the Birmingham office as part of the replay decisions and "we don't have time to review" decision.

 

[vol_in_ga]

according to the voices in everyone's heads that tells them we "lead" for a recruit, we have lead for at least 40 guys. If you can't see the very basic problem with that math, I don't know what to tell you. and that list of 40 doesn't even include every one of our recruits.

leading doesn't mean what everybody seems to think it means.

Is it meaningful, to the point of thinking our coaches can't recruit, to "lead" for a recruit for a week after he visits, 2 months before he commits? 3 months, 6 months?

Is it meaningful to "lead" for a recruit who hasn't visited our school? Does it make our coaches bad recruiters if we never get him? Or what if that recruit has yet to visit our rival?

Is it meaningful to "lead" for a recruit who doesn't have a commitment date set?

Is it meaningful to listen to some talking heads who don't even know if all the recruits they "analyze" are even real? Why would we take THEIR word as gospel to the point of downplaying our coaches who have shown that they can win? Just because you pay $9.99 for it, doesn't mean its a quality service or good.

heck these are highschoolers, some of whom probably change their leader board more than they do their underwear. no reason to think that any "lead" is set in stone, and thus a "loss".

Heupel has even come out and said it that we have straight up stopped recruiting some players because they don't fit our culture, we probably lead for some of them until the point we dropped their recruitment. Are those misses? Because I would love to hear how people supposedly "KNOW" what is going on in a recruitment.

40 seems like an incredibly high number and not realistic at all. I think there’s probably close to 10 this cycle that were presumed or quoted to have lead for or had committed that were big time recruits that we either missed or stopped pursuing for an undisclosed reason. Nwaneri, Fountain, Bates, Franklin, reddell, Ify, Rico Jones, Harrell, mazeo, okoye (verdict still out), wingo (verdict still out) are the ones that come to mind.

Still a GREAT class. Could have been a Uga/Bama esque class.

 

[JacketVol]

The only booing I heard was at the refs. I don't think anyone was thrilled with the offensive performance, but I didn't hear any booing I thought was related to it.

Now the refs OTOH, I was worried(/hoping) they were gonna get kilt.

Some for the refs that was loud but a splattering of boos on the bad passes and drops. Not as loud as at refs but did happen.

 

[LouderVol]

40 seems like an incredibly high number and not realistic at all. I think there’s probably close to 10 this cycle that were presumed or quoted to have lead for or had committed that were big time recruits that we either missed or stopped pursuing for an undisclosed reason. Nwaneri, Fountain, Bates, Franklin, reddell, Ify, Rico Jones, Harrell, mazeo, okoye (verdict still out), wingo (verdict still out) are the ones that come to mind.

Still a GREAT class. Could have been a Uga/Bama esque class.

there was Russell, the Arkansas LB (simmons?), Cole. Amari Jefferson, O'Connell. Rushing, Pringle. people were straight up mad when we didn't get those guys too.

 

[vol_in_ga]

there was Russell, the Arkansas LB (simmons?), Cole. Amari Jefferson, O'Connell. Rushing, Pringle. people were straight up mad when we didn't get those guys too.

Good memory. Russell, AJ, and OConnell were the only ones of those I’d say we legitimately lead for. And imo they are smaller misses than the ones I mentioned. You expect to miss and shuffle some. I think it’s the quality of the ones we missed that has people upset and thinking “what if”.

 

[tricky13]

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

Some for the refs that was loud but a splattering of boos on the bad passes and drops. Not as loud as at refs but did happen.

Further proof of the axiom that every program has THEM. I would like to be different. Of course they are free to be THEM.

 

[butchna]

Heck just made a statement. Geez. Can't all of them just stated we have lost out on some that we wanted not end of the world.

 

[butchna]

there was Russell, the Arkansas LB (simmons?), Cole. Amari Jefferson, O'Connell. Rushing, Pringle. people were straight up mad when we didn't get those guys too.

We had no awareness of Simmons until Wristwatch started creating threads and demanding apologies. Russell had previously been committed to Arkansas and then reupped. Never heard us leading for O’Connell, but ask Clemson fans if they’d rather have him or Satterwhite AND Matthews.

 

[vol_in_ga]

Great. He gone.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

according to the voices in everyone's heads that tells them we "lead" for a recruit, we have lead for at least 40 guys. If you can't see the very basic problem with that math, I don't know what to tell you. and that list of 40 doesn't even include every one of our recruits.

leading doesn't mean what everybody seems to think it means.

Is it meaningful, to the point of thinking our coaches can't recruit, to "lead" for a recruit for a week after he visits, 2 months before he commits? 3 months, 6 months?

Is it meaningful to "lead" for a recruit who hasn't visited our school? Does it make our coaches bad recruiters if we never get him? Or what if that recruit has yet to visit our rival?

Is it meaningful to "lead" for a recruit who doesn't have a commitment date set?

Is it meaningful to listen to some talking heads who don't even know if all the recruits they "analyze" are even real? Why would we take THEIR word as gospel to the point of downplaying our coaches who have shown that they can win? Just because you pay $9.99 for it, doesn't mean its a quality service or good.

heck these are highschoolers, some of whom probably change their leader board more than they do their underwear. no reason to think that any "lead" is set in stone, and thus a "loss".

Heupel has even come out and said it that we have straight up stopped recruiting some players because they don't fit our culture, we probably lead for some of them until the point we dropped their recruitment. Are those misses? Because I would love to hear how people supposedly "KNOW" what is going on in a recruitment.

I guess some folks suffer from latent nega tendencies and reflexively throw agenda supporting posts out on the boards.

 

[NighthawkVol]

We had no awareness of Simmons until Wristwatch started creating threads and demanding apologies. Russell had previously been committed to Arkansas and then reupped. Never heard us leading for O’Connell, but ask Clemson fans if they’d rather have him or Satterwhite AND Matthews.

True. Although we can add Bates to that list. Don’t recall leading for Pringle.

Some had us leading for Wingo at one time, but that was probably speculative.