Recruiting Breakdown - the objective viewpoint

[tm3]

Hopefully those systems are making projections similar to yours re UT.

Even better if said systems were employed in pre-hire evaluation of certain coaches ...

 

[patrick]

I have beat my head against a wall trying to add some objectivity to this board, and I guess I will try one more time.

First, it seems that so many people are having a breakdown about team A's supposed great class, and team B's supposed terrible class. No roster is completed with a team of one recruiting class. In fact, a roster is (more or less) an average of roughly 4 years of players. Without going into great detail in the methodology, which I have done on here many times before, a great predictor of success is a teams 4 year trailing recruiting average.

Using this paradigm, here is the SEC ranked in order of average recruiting classes over the past four years, including the 2013 class as it stands today.

1. Alabama (2)
2. Florida (5.25)
3. Auburn (7.25)
4. LSU (9)
5. Georgia (11)
6. Tennessee (14.75)
7. Texas A&M (17.25)
8. South Carolina (19.25)
9. Ole Miss (21)
10. Arkansas (33.25)
11. Mississippi State (34.25)
12. Missouri (34.75)
13. Vanderbilt (44.75)
14. Kentucky (50.25)

Now compare that to last year (2012):

1. Alabama (2)
2. Florida (7)
3. LSU (8)
4. Georgia (9.5)
5. Auburn (10)
6. Tennessee (12.25)
7. South Carolina (18.25)
8. Texas A&M (20.25)
9. Ole Miss (23.75)
10. Arkansas (30.75)
11. Mississippi State (34.25)
12. Missouri (35)
13. Kentucky (53.5)
14. Vanderbilt (57.75)

Do you notice how far we moved? We have the 6th most talented team in the SEC, when comparing rosters, same as last year. Notice we are the 3rd most talented team in the east. I have read more than once posters on this site lamenting how far we are sliding in the SEC because we were *gasp* 11th this year in recruiting. How does that effect our overall talent? It didn't.

Again, I have gone into great depth and detail in several earlier threads about this very topic, so I will not go into every counter argument as to why this "supposedly" doesn't work. It does. Yes, I know that Vanderbilt beat UT last year with a huge dearth in talent. Rest assured that UT, under Dooley, was the largest under performing team in the SEC (Auburn actually was slightly worse last year, but that was not a long term trend). Vanderbilt was the highest over performing team in the SEC (Petrino's Arkansas teams were previously). In essence, trust me, talent (assuming simply a competent coaching staff, which we have not had in years) is the greatest indicator of success on the field. All of this talk about new schemes, coaching changes, et al when viewed numerically and objectively rarely effect the outcome. It is simply talent v. talent over 70% of the time.

The bottom line is this: even with our attrition (which is not atypical when viewed along the whole SEC) we still have a team full of very talented players. We are set, along with Auburn, to make the biggest jump in success. I think that the numbers indicate that we can have the best year that we have had since 2009.

Butch Jones has NEVER performed lower than his talent based evaluation, and typically is a talent +2 game coach. Even when he won 4 games at his first year at Cincinnati, that is exactly what his talent predicted. He went on to a 9 and 10 win season, which averaged +3 games more than his talent would indicate.

This evaluation works in the SEC as it does in every other conference. All of this talk about the SEC being built on defense, or being superior because of coaches doesn't mesh with the numbers. Typically, even out of conference games are won by the more talented roster. Even this year's national championship game was no exception. Notre Dame's talent was basically on par with UT. Isn't it funny how the score was almost identical to the UT v. Bama score?

Finally, do you want something that will really "cook your noodle?" UT's average is 14.75, and we will go into Autzen stadium next year to play an Oregon team that averages...wait for it...14.75.

First I appreciate the work and analysis that has gone into your thread.

But how does this compare with UT's record over the past four years???

2012 5 & 7 6th SEC East
2011 5 & 7 6th SEC East
2010 6 & 7 4th SEC East
2009 7 & 6 3rd SEC East

While your analysis indicated that the Tennessee was/is supposedly the third most talented team in the SEC East that is not proven out in the wins and losses column.

So either -

1. the players did not measure up to their rankings;
2. UT has had lack luster coaching (no debate here);
3. the premise is flawed;
4. a combination of all the above to one degree or another.

 

[daj2576]

First I appreciate the work and analysis that has gone into your thread.

But how does this compare with UT's record over the past four years???

2012 5 & 7 6th SEC East
2011 5 & 7 6th SEC East
2010 6 & 7 4th SEC East
2009 7 & 6 3rd SEC East

While your analysis indicated that the Tennessee was/is supposedly the third most talented team in the SEC East that is not proven out in the wins and losses column.

So either -

1. the players did not measure up to their rankings;
2. UT has had lack luster coaching (no debate here);
3. the premise is flawed;
4. a combination of all the above to one degree or another.

The analysis is flawed, it only works 60-70% of the time, but I have gone back within the SEC from 2005 forward (that is the point at which you can do a 4 year analysis with rivals recruiting data starting at 2002), and what you find is that UT under Dooley was always an anomaly. Other anomalies were Petrino/Spurrier/Franklin, at one time or another. Before that point, generally UT performed within a game or so of the talent prediction.

 

[daj2576]

Hopefully those systems are making projections similar to yours re UT.

Even better if said systems were employed in pre-hire evaluation of certain coaches ...

The most interesting thing that this new information has shown me is an historical viewpoint to reconsider previous coaches, ie Fulmer v. Majors.

 

[tm3]

The most interesting thing that this new information has shown me is an historical viewpoint to reconsider previous coaches, ie Fulmer v. Majors.

sounds like data from VV. iirc his numbers show that UT did not really catch fire until PF became OC.

i'm really curious what VV's dissection of CBJ would indicate.

 

[tm3]

patrick combined with all of the other news that has come out i think that daj's analysis simply confirms that CDD was a pathetic excuse for a coach.

 

[Volosaurus rex]

sounds like data from VV. iirc his numbers show that UT did not really catch fire until PF became OC.

i'm really curious what VV's dissection of CBJ would indicate.

That would be true. During Fulmer's tenure as offensive coordinator, the Vols set school records for total offensive yardage three years in a row (1989-91), progressing from 4,493 yds. total offense to 4,933 and then 5,145 yds. See Player Bio: Phillip Fulmer - UTSPORTS.COM - University of Tennessee Athletics. During the transitional year of 1993, they again eclipsed the previous record by amassing 5,286 yds. in 11 games. If I remember correctly, the per-game ave. of 480.5 yds. for the '93 team remained the all-time single-season record for Tennessee until last year.

 

[daj2576]

FYI, there are a couple of you that I "friended." I don't really know what good it does here, but why not?

 

[patrick]

The analysis is flawed, it only works 60-70% of the time, but I have gone back within the SEC from 2005 forward (that is the point at which you can do a 4 year analysis with rivals recruiting data starting at 2002), and what you find is that UT under Dooley was always an anomaly. Other anomalies were Petrino/Spurrier/Franklin, at one time or another. Before that point, generally UT performed within a game or so of the talent prediction.

But for the record I am impressed with your OP. I have always said Fulmer wasn't a great X's and O's coach but by goodness when he won the Natl Championship in 1998, UT had the best talent in the AA or very near it! So stars (aka talent) do matter.

 

[daj2576]

But for the record I am impressed with your OP. I have always said Fulmer wasn't a great X's and O's coach but by goodness when he won the Natl Championship in 1998, UT had the best talent in the AA or very near it! So stars (aka talent) do matter.

Talent matters. No doubt. Every BCS champion has had a more talented team than their opponent using this system (as far back as rivals data would allow me to review). What that says is that system coaches, like petrino, Kelly at ND and the other one at Oregon (Jones fits in this caregory) can over perform enough to get to a very big game but usually will not win in that scenario. That is another discussion for another time. Don't read this as me saying Jones WILL get us to a championship, only that he WILL over perform long-term.

 

[patrick]

Talent matters. No doubt. Every BCS champion has had a more talented team than their opponent using this system (as far back as rivals data would allow me to review). What that says is that system coaches, like petrino, Kelly at ND and the other one at Oregon (Jones fits in this caregory) can over perform enough to get to a very big game but usually will not win in that scenario. That is another discussion for another time. Don't read this as me saying Jones WILL get us to a championship, only that he WILL over perform long-term.

I hope you are correct. He def. has an uphill task ahead of him.

 

[daj2576]

I hope you are correct. He def. has an uphill task ahead of him.

The only real uphill battle that I see from Jones is the expectations of the fan-base.

Imagine for a minute if UT beats Oregon this year. Fans will go nuts, but the teams are actually evenly stacked on paper. Without Kelly, it is difficult to predict if Oregon will continue to over-perform. Regardless, my point is that if that happens, it will feel awful if UT loses to UF, UGA, Auburn and Bama who actually have far superior rosters to UT.

The pitchfork wielding mob will be out, and Jones would have actually met any reasonable expectation for his first year on the job considering the talent on hand.

6-6 to 8-4 would be the range of reasonable expectations considering talent with 7-5 being most likely. I believe that will allow a huge bump for recruiting and long term success, but do the fans have the patience for that?

 

[photovol]

Great post, is the Curse UT's problem or is UT's talent as bad as our record?

 

[darkgable]

The only real uphill battle that I see from Jones is the expectations of the fan-base.

Imagine for a minute if UT beats Oregon this year. Fans will go nuts, but the teams are actually evenly stacked on paper. Without Kelly, it is difficult to predict if Oregon will continue to over-perform. Regardless, my point is that if that happens, it will feel awful if UT loses to UF, UGA, Auburn and Bama who actually have far superior rosters to UT.

The pitchfork wielding mob will be out, and Jones would have actually met any reasonable expectation for his first year on the job considering the talent on hand.

6-6 to 8-4 would be the range of reasonable expectations considering talent with 7-5 being most likely. I believe that will allow a huge bump for recruiting and long term success, but do the fans have the patience for that?

What is the possibility that Butch turns this thing around next year and beats Bama, Uscand Georgia? Didn't A&M defy the odds last year. What are our chances. We have a group of kids buying in and are actually being coached. Is it possible to defy the odds and shock the football world and what would it take?

 

[99gator]

ut's talent is has been good enough to win more than they have.

i really have long believed that (when tennessee doesn't have a great team) the front loaded schedule hurts the team psychologically.

in 2012 (even with the handicap that was the coaching staff), the team that played florida, georgia, and south carolina was not the same team that played troy, missouri and vandy

 

[oregonvol]

The only real uphill battle that I see from Jones is the expectations of the fan-base.

Imagine for a minute if UT beats Oregon this year. Fans will go nuts, but the teams are actually evenly stacked on paper. Without Kelly, it is difficult to predict if Oregon will continue to over-perform. Regardless, my point is that if that happens, it will feel awful if UT loses to UF, UGA, Auburn and Bama who actually have far superior rosters to UT.

The pitchfork wielding mob will be out, and Jones would have actually met any reasonable expectation for his first year on the job considering the talent on hand.

6-6 to 8-4 would be the range of reasonable expectations considering talent with 7-5 being most likely. I believe that will allow a huge bump for recruiting and long term success, but do the fans have the patience for that?

I sincerely doubt that if UT were to beat both Oregon and South Carolina, as well as beating the other teams they have more talent than (according to your criteria) and go 8-4, that there would be any pitchfork wielding mob. To claim so is utterly ludicrous.

The fans are out of patience, true, and as well they should be after what they've had to put up with for the last 3 years. Any major college fanbase would react the same way (actually, I was in Florida during the Zook years, there was alot more anger there). But, like most fanbases, they're eager to embrace progress. They just need to see some.

 

[griffdog14]

cool stuff.

 

[Batman1948]

I really believe this coaching staff is going to make all the difference in the world. Dooley had to replace his staff almost each year he was here. The majority of this staff has been together for years and that is gonna be the difference for us this year.

I also believe we have the core players to compete with everyone on our schedule.

 

[sjt18]

The fans are out of patience, true, and as well they should be after what they've had to put up with for the last 3 years.

Why? You would have a point if Fulmer or Dooley were still the UT HC. They aren't. UT canned both of them and have now hired the 4th coach in five years. So do you want a continuing demand that the HC regardless of who he is perform as measured over 2 or 3 years or else be replaced? That's exactly what you've gotten. Do you want them to stick with a coach that isn't performing? That would be what you HAVEN'T had to put up with.

To give a HC less time than Fulmer then Dooley got before firing them would be stupid. WHEN UT finally finds the right guy, the first year or two may not be pretty. Jones will deal with transition this year and youth next year. If he does not make a big splash this year then you are probably looking at '15 before he has a decent shot to do so again. If you fire him after year one or two... you likely never see what he's capable of.

Any major college fanbase would react the same way (actually, I was in Florida during the Zook years, there was alot more anger there). But, like most fanbases, they're eager to embrace progress. They just need to see some.

Define progress. Dooley took over a train wreck that was going to take any coach UT could have hired a couple of years to fix. His defining year always had to be '12. But there were many who wanted him gone after 2... and are now in "I told you so" mode... in spite of still being WRONG.

Jones starts at a better place than Dooley did. He has a better resume than Dooley had. He seems to be a better "coach" (sans "head") than Dooley (he can actually coach his own offense). But expectations and especially if they are HIGH must be measured over a reasonable timeframe.

I am less confident the loudest UT fans will give Jones that time than I am that he's a great coach... but I am not sure he's even a good coach until he proves it.

 

[Pope John Vol VI]

ut's talent is has been good enough to win more than they have.

i really have long believed that (when tennessee doesn't have a great team) the front loaded schedule hurts the team psychologically.

in 2012 (even with the handicap that was the coaching staff), the team that played florida, georgia, and south carolina was not the same team that played troy, missouri and vandy

I agree with this.

 

[tm3]

IF CBJ is really defined by his platitudes (4 championships in 6 years, wins wherever he goes, improved recruiting over Kelly, punches above his weight, solid staff that works well together), then we should see results rather quickly ala Hoke, Freeze, ND under Kelly, and even Chizik. 7-8 wins this year and a top 10 USA, top 5 SEC recruiting class is not unreasonable.

If on the other hand CBJ goes 4-8 and pulls another 10th ranked SEC class, then we are back to making Dooleyesque arguments (mentored under Saban, got LAT to a bowl game, daddy was an SEC winner, wears orange britches, etc).

 

[darkgable]

IF CBJ is really defined by his platitudes (4 championships in 6 years, wins wherever he goes, improved recruiting over Kelly, punches above his weight, solid staff that works well together), then we should see results rather quickly ala Hoke, Freeze, ND under Kelly, and even Chizik. 7-8 wins this year and a top 10 USA, top 5 SEC recruiting class is not unreasonable.

If on the other hand CBJ goes 4-8 and pulls another 10th ranked SEC class, then we are back to making Dooleyesque arguments (mentored under Saban, got LAT to a bowl game, daddy was an SEC winner, wears orange britches, etc).

So 4 championships in 6 years and getting the most out of his talent than why not 9 wins? McCullers and the rest of the Dline have the green light to go for the QB instead of taking up space. No one player can hold him. I just don't see this team taking the long way to rebuild.

 

[daj2576]

So 4 championships in 6 years and getting the most out of his talent than why not 9 wins? McCullers and the rest of the Dline have the green light to go for the QB instead of taking up space. No one player can hold him. I just don't see this team taking the long way to rebuild.

I would like to agree that we should see substantial jumps in year one, but I am hesitant to go beyond the predictions already made. A jump of plus 2 games over the past two seasons is an improvement of almost 50%. That is substantial enough to prove he can coach, while being realistic enough to account for the intangibles. UT has had far more talent than our recent performance would indicate, but to consistently compete for an SEC championship against the likes of Bama, Florida and UGA will require substantial bumps in recruiting. Like it or not,Butch is certainly doing the right things in that department.

Is it possible to see an aTm like performance (lets not overplay what they did, like the national media has done)? It is, but also a bit unlikely. A&M lost to florida and LSU before beating Bama. Saban is good for a once a year meltdown that is inconsequential to his national title chances- and that happens almost every year. In other words, A&Ms victory over Bama was utterly meaningless (if you dont count the heisman trophy that gave them). A&M, like Vanderbilt, benefited from a transitional period with many of their new divisional rivalries, especially with Arkansas performing far below Petrino standards and the wheels coming off at Auburn. Vanderbilt, similarly, benefited from UT and Auburn having terrible seasons compared to their talent, failed to play the conference big boys from the west, and had an out of conference schedule that every SEC team could handle in similar fashion. I believe both schools look better than they really are, and next year we will begin to see those types of peaks flatten.

 

[daj2576]

I agree with this.

As do I. Everyone likes to quote Neyland's Maxims, but few ever cite one of his most important lessons: that is that you should go to great lengths to put easy games ( I believe he called them "breathers" ) between the hard games. I believe he would scoff at the tangled mess our schedule has become. I have a feeling that he knew that morale was almost as consequential to victory as skill.