Sitting right now with the 14th ranked class (Rivals)

#1
Sabanocchio

Sabanocchio

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
17,286
Likes
1
#1
and that's without our JuCos being ranked. I think we have a top 10 class with them ranked fairly easily. 9 or 10 probably.

The thing about it is, we have plenty of room still unlike a lot of the schools we are chasing and have BIG targets on our radar. I think this class could very easily be a top 5 class and I wouldn't have said that in July.

Not having a QB committed doesn't seem to have hurt us very much. Speculate all you want as to why.

I realize the rankings are subjective, but recruits look at them and want to be a part of a highly ranked class. And I believe it has been proven time and again that highly ranked classes have the best chance to translate into success on the football field.
 
#3
#3
On Scout, Brown and Harris are four stars, and Irvin is a three. On Rivals, Brown was a four star (5.9) for the 2007 class when he signed with Florida. Those ratings usually rise on Rivals for JUCO players. Brent Schaeffer was a five star after JUCO, which on the other hand, is exactly why ratings are not always right .
 
#4
#4
Brown and Harris are both 4stars on Scout and Irvin is a 3star...

Scout's JUCO ratings are alot better than Rivals'...
 
#5
#5
Two 4*s in the DTs, and a 3* in Irvin (I think he will be a 4* if he plays up to his potential this year)
 
#7
#7
idk John Brown maybe 4*'s. At least all threes though.

I agree top ten class (maybe 7-8). I think we will pick up a few 5*'s and several 3 & 4. I also think those rankings are biased. It will also change as new rankings come back out. I am glad we are not filling positions to fill positions. I think our coaches will coach em up too. I trust their opinions more than Rivals and esp. ESPN! Go Vols!
 
#8
#8
What we need to remember players rankings will change dramatically after their senior season and the AA games
 
#10
#10
UCLA is 31st with 6 verbal pledges rated.

Houston sits behind them at 32 with 21 commits.

Ouch.

...oh and where's Auburn? :p Oh, I see...sitting pretty at 27...but wait they're going to sign 2/3rd of Lattimore, Seastrunk and Dyer.
 
#11
#11
joeydupree said:
What are you drinkin' on ?
Click to expand...

Natty light, but I've only had one. Not sure what you are disputing about the thread, Joey.

Clemson has no JuCo guys committed. We pass them when ours are ranked.

USC has one and he's a low 3 star. They only have 12 commits.

Stanford is almost full. No JuCo players. We pass them.

Michigan has no JuCo players. We pass them.

That puts us at #10 in the rankings as it currently stands with our JuCo players ranked. The targets left on our board are highly rated guys and we have 12 spots open. A top 5 class is very attainable.
 
#12
#12
Like I said on another thread, if we were to sign all the verbals so far, this class would be better than the entire 2008 class.
 
#14
#14
:wavey:

espns team rankings are by far the best. as they actually evaluate who you signed rather than how many players. quality >>>>> quantity. You guys are going to need more than one player ranked in the top 100 to have a top 10 class.

:hi:
 
#15
#15
UFownsUT said:
:wavey:

espns team rankings are by far the best. as they actually evaluate who you signed rather than how many players. quality >>>>> quantity. You guys are going to need more than one player ranked in the top 100 to have a top 10 class.

:hi:
Click to expand...

Go away
 
#16
#16
UFownsUT said:
:wavey:

espns team rankings are by far the best. as they actually evaluate who you signed rather than how many players. quality >>>>> quantity. You guys are going to need more than one player ranked in the top 100 to have a top 10 class.

:hi:
Click to expand...

go away Tebow and don't forget your crotcheless panties.:p
 
#17
#17
ESPNs rankings are utter and complete crap and it has nothing to do with where UTs players are ranked. It's so wrong it's embarrassing. This is coming from someone who really wanted them to make a huge jump towards legitimacy this year.
 
#18
#18
Not to mention Ole Miss beat the Gators with a whole bunch of Orgeron's "3 stars" last year.
 
#19
#19
UFownsUT said:
:wavey:

espns team rankings are by far the best. as they actually evaluate who you signed rather than how many players. quality >>>>> quantity. You guys are going to need more than one player ranked in the top 100 to have a top 10 class.

:hi:
Click to expand...

Worried we're going to pass you up again?
 
#22
#22
Espn rankings are about whoever signs with Florida or USC, or whoever is playing in the UA game as opposed to the army game
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#24
#24
UFownsUT said:
:wavey:

espns team rankings are by far the best. as they actually evaluate who you signed rather than how many players. quality >>>>> quantity. You guys are going to need more than one player ranked in the top 100 to have a top 10 class.

:hi:
Click to expand...
You should spend more time explaining why it took you 62 years to win your first conference title.
 
#25
#25
Sabanocchio said:
espns team rankings are by far the most biased.

ESPNs rankings are utter and complete crap and it has nothing to do with where UTs players are ranked. It's so wrong it's embarrassing. This is coming from someone who really wanted them to make a huge jump towards legitimacy this year.
Click to expand...


Hahaha I think ESPN rankings are all about commercialism
Click to expand...

Espn rankings are about whoever signs with Florida or USC, or whoever is playing in the UA game as opposed to the army game
Click to expand...

You should spend more time explaining why it took you 62 years to win your first conference title.
Click to expand...




salty2.jpg
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top