ChattaTNVol
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2011
- Messages
- 4,920
- Likes
- 28,125
We are maybe 35% (14/40) of the way to building our top 40 player 2025 depth chart and it’s only 2022.
If you figure as I do that at least a few of our lower rated players will develop into bona fide NFL prospects/all-SEC types then we’re probably at or above 50% for our top 40 players on the 2025 roster.
Given the math behind the On3 consensus I’d like the average of our top 40 players to be around 92-93. I think that would be close to a 95 on the 247 composite and we should have a higher hit rate. After all it’s a numbers game. jmo.
We had three 3-stars from our 2017 class drafted, Palmer, Butler, and Jackson.
Right now from the 2018 class there’s some thinking that Banks and Tillman will likely make the draft.
Blue chips from the 2017 class drafted were Chandler and Trey Smith. So far from the 2018 class for blue chips we’ve only had Alontae taken in the draft but Carvin is thought to be a candidate after this season.
We haven’t had much success with previous staffs getting guys drafted but last year showed this staff can get the job done. I’ve sort of thought NFL teams might have shied away from some of our guys in recent years because of the culture of the program at the time. jmo.
I think we would be rolling if we could get to where we’re putting 9 guys a year into the league as draftees. UDFA doesn’t count in these numbers. jmo.
I don’t know whether we’ve been inconsistent with development or if in the past our trust in our staff’s prospect evaluation has been misplaced but in terms of getting players drafted in most of our recent history we’ve been an eyesore of underperformance relative to our reported roster talent.
I know it’s absurd to suggest such a thing but I think we as fans need to take a longer term view of things from a recruiting perspective and not meltdown every time something doesn’t go our way. The only people who profit from that are the folks at VolQuest and 247Sports, though if other fanbases are anything like ours then it’s likely we’re providing them with a significant amount of amusement. jmo.
If you figure as I do that at least a few of our lower rated players will develop into bona fide NFL prospects/all-SEC types then we’re probably at or above 50% for our top 40 players on the 2025 roster.
Given the math behind the On3 consensus I’d like the average of our top 40 players to be around 92-93. I think that would be close to a 95 on the 247 composite and we should have a higher hit rate. After all it’s a numbers game. jmo.
We had three 3-stars from our 2017 class drafted, Palmer, Butler, and Jackson.
Right now from the 2018 class there’s some thinking that Banks and Tillman will likely make the draft.
Blue chips from the 2017 class drafted were Chandler and Trey Smith. So far from the 2018 class for blue chips we’ve only had Alontae taken in the draft but Carvin is thought to be a candidate after this season.
We haven’t had much success with previous staffs getting guys drafted but last year showed this staff can get the job done. I’ve sort of thought NFL teams might have shied away from some of our guys in recent years because of the culture of the program at the time. jmo.
I think we would be rolling if we could get to where we’re putting 9 guys a year into the league as draftees. UDFA doesn’t count in these numbers. jmo.
I don’t know whether we’ve been inconsistent with development or if in the past our trust in our staff’s prospect evaluation has been misplaced but in terms of getting players drafted in most of our recent history we’ve been an eyesore of underperformance relative to our reported roster talent.
I know it’s absurd to suggest such a thing but I think we as fans need to take a longer term view of things from a recruiting perspective and not meltdown every time something doesn’t go our way. The only people who profit from that are the folks at VolQuest and 247Sports, though if other fanbases are anything like ours then it’s likely we’re providing them with a significant amount of amusement. jmo.
