Recruiting Forum Football Talk III

Status
Not open for further replies.
#214,052
#214,052
Is there still some faction of our fanbase like LWS and a few other posters that think UT will never be successful because the administration doesn’t care about having a winning program?

Do we really think the Alabama administration did something miraculous in hiring Nick Saban at a time where they were scrambling for a coach and had him fall into their laps when he wanted out of the NFL? This after they had failed countless time with abysmal hires…

The UT administration main failure was hiring worthless AD’s that had no business being our AD just because they had ties to UT or had success at Bama…Now they have finally went out of the family tree and hired a competent and somewhat proven AD in White willing to make hires with a blank check book whether or not he gets the guy or not at least we tried but we still have fans that question their commitment to success. Make it make sense?

Sometimes programs get lucky and while our Admin made some terrible AD hires you have to believe they got this one right considering his past success and the fact they were not willing to let Fulmer further trash the program by holding on to Pruitt for another year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolsDoc81TX, Brillovol, backdoorcutvol and 3 others
#214,055
#214,055
Volitaire said:
Is there still some faction of our fanbase like LWS and a few other posters that think UT will never be successful because the administration doesn’t care about having a winning program?

Do we really think the Alabama administration did something miraculous in hiring Nick Saban at a time where they were scrambling for a coach and had him fall into their laps when he wanted out of the NFL? This after they had failed countless time with abysmal hires…

The UT administration main failure was hiring worthless AD’s that had no business being our AD just because they had ties to UT or had success at Bama…Now they have finally went out of the family tree and hired a competent and somewhat proven AD in White willing to make hires with a blank check book whether or not he gets the guy or not at least we tried but we still have fans that question their commitment to success. Make it make sense?

Sometimes programs get lucky and while our Admin made some terrible AD hires you have to believe they got this one right considering his past success and the fact they were not willing to let Fulmer further trash the program by holding on to Pruitt for another year.
Click to expand...
If we had one or more actually good coaches with proven track records that failed here, I would be more pessimistic long term. Dooley and Pruitt were both over their heads, Jones was able to make some headway, but he'd inherited Cincinnati and is now at Arkansas State after little interest for two years. Kiffin may be a consistently good HC someday, but was very immature with us and had some success before he bolted.

I really do think it is just a matter of getting the right guy in here and rebuilding our brand. Everything else is there for us to be a player again. Hope Heupel is that guy, as are Boyd and White.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolsDoc81TX, SweetasSoda and UTJoe
#214,056
#214,056
He will be waiting a long time for a resolution to that investigation…the ncaa still hasn’t concluded with LSU and a few other programs ahead of us and it has been years already… The media in Knoxville need to find a different topic to spew and let it happen when it happens aside from asking kids what they think about it
 
  • Like
Reactions: minorvol, VOLINVONORE, bigl3327 and 2 others
#214,060
#214,060
Reading an insider on another board who says the current thinking is the SEC stays in two big divisions, not pods, with UA/AU moving to East and Mizzou to West with the newcomers. 9 game conference schedule. Play everyone in your division plus one cross-division permanent opponent and the other rotating each year.

If that comes to pass, who would we want as our permanent opponent from the West now that Bama would be in the East? Ole Miss is the only one that has any history behind it for us, from the pre-1992 expansion days. Would they want an annual “Battle of the UT’s?”
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheRain
#214,062
#214,062
Dudley Smith said:
Reading an insider on another board who says the current thinking is the SEC stays in two big divisions, not pods, with UA/AU moving to East and Mizzou to West with the newcomers. 9 game conference schedule. Play everyone in your division plus one cross-division permanent opponent and the other rotating each year.

If that comes to pass, who would we want as our permanent opponent from the West now that Bama would be in the East? Ole Miss is the only one that has any history behind it for us, from the pre-1992 expansion days. Would they want an annual “Battle of the UT’s?”
Click to expand...
At least Georgia and Florida would have to play Bama every year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolsDoc81TX, nicksjuzunk, Smokeytom and 11 others
#214,065
#214,065
Dudley Smith said:
Reading an insider on another board who says the current thinking is the SEC stays in two big divisions, not pods, with UA/AU moving to East and Mizzou to West with the newcomers. 9 game conference schedule. Play everyone in your division plus one cross-division permanent opponent and the other rotating each year.

If that comes to pass, who would we want as our permanent opponent from the West now that Bama would be in the East? Ole Miss is the only one that has any history behind it for us, from the pre-1992 expansion days. Would they want an annual “Battle of the UT’s?”
Click to expand...

I think this makes more sense for parity reasons and preserves the majority of the traditional rivalries. Would LSU continue with their cross divisional opponent Florida or change it to Bama? For historical purposes I would think Ole Miss makes the most sense for us but we are more likely to get Oklahoma/Texas.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dudley Smith
#214,066
#214,066
Dudley Smith said:
Reading an insider on another board who says the current thinking is the SEC stays in two big divisions, not pods, with UA/AU moving to East and Mizzou to West with the newcomers. 9 game conference schedule. Play everyone in your division plus one cross-division permanent opponent and the other rotating each year.

If that comes to pass, who would we want as our permanent opponent from the West now that Bama would be in the East? Ole Miss is the only one that has any history behind it for us, from the pre-1992 expansion days. Would they want an annual “Battle of the UT’s?”
Click to expand...
How about no permanent opponents? If AU and UA come to the East, then that's all the really traditional rivalries already taken care of. I say just do a rotation for parity's sake.

I'd also say keep it at 8 games. As I posted the other day, the more conference games, the worse we will do in the eyes of voters. They focus on W/Ls more than insanely tough SoS. The more SEC games we all play, the worse for us nationally. Of course...$$$ may win out...again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brillovol, Fairacres Vol, UpstateVol613 and 1 other person
#214,069
#214,069
Devo182 said:
How about no permanent opponents? If AU and UA come to the East, then that's all the really traditional rivalries already taken care of. I say just do a rotation for parity's sake.

I'd also say keep it at 8 games. As I posted the other day, the more conference games, the worse we will do in the eyes of voters. They focus on W/Ls more than insanely tough SoS. The more SEC games we all play, the worse for us nationally. Of course...$$$ may win out...again.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's true. When the playoff expands, you'll see 3 and 4 loss SEC teams getting in.

And also, you have to question whether this creating a problem, or just failing to fix a problem.

TAMU missed the playoffs this year with one loss, that loss coming by way of the national champion.

Is OK and Texas going to somehow cause teams to get screwed worse than that? I highly doubt it. Especially after playoff expansion.
 
#214,071
#214,071
Ten_Titans said:
I don't think that's true. When the playoff expands, you'll see 3 and 4 loss SEC teams getting in.
Click to expand...

But the more conference games, the fewer teams will have a chance from 1 league. We went from 5 top 12 teams in 2018 and 4 in 2019 to just 3 during 2020 when we played 10 conference games...in fact we only had FOUR teams receive votes whatsoever. Meanwhile, way more G5 teams were ranked. The evidence seems clear more conference games hurts the SEC in perception.

Pollsters/voters hardly care about SoS/Margins. Exactly why #12 Northwestern was a 9 pt underdog to us in 2015 when we were ranked 24th. Pollsters are idiots.
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.

VN Store



Back
Top