The Numbers Thread

CBJ will sign 25 a year (more if he can back count with EE's).

He has proven he will over recruit if need be, pull scholarships if need be and award scholarships to the ones who deserve it.

Scholarships are given yearly and if CBJ thinks a high school senior is more valuable than someone already on the team he will award the scholarship as he sees fit.

Some of the commits we have will move on, some will have issues or a give up on their senior year since they are already committed and we will move on.

People act like these kids are playing for UT in the fall. They will still be playing high school or JUCO ball this fall. There is a long way to go.

Feel good about 4 commits this weekend!!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
would not be surprised to see 26 or 27 commits. we will lose 3-4 before NSD.

I don't believe that is possible this year. UT used all their "back counts" they had in the last class, plus took a full 25 on NSD last year. Only way you can take more than 25 is to be able to "back count".

Several people have said there is a "hard number" this year and it's less than 25 I think(I've seen 23 & 24 thrown around).
 
I'm pretty sure you can, IF you don't have a spot for them by a certain date.

Of course it's unlikely that would actually happen. The coaches would just force someone out vs take the penalty I'm sure.

That's not the way I understood the rule. My interpretation is the over signing applies to the yearly limit not the 85.
 
Just have to be at 85 by August 1st right?

Yeah, not sure of an exact date but basically we've got 13 months to free up enough spots for this class.

The over signing penalty doesn't apply to the 85 limit. That doesn't make any sense.

The penalty is for signing over the SEC limit which is 25 + back counts IIRC. This year we are up against the 85, which as I said we have time for attrition to occur. We will sign 23-25 players IMO. Possibly more.

Over signing penalty is not an issue for us this year.
 
Yes, McKenzie would be #18 when he commits. Woods spot is at least questionable. I think everyone else is pretty firm as of today. Technically speaking when CBJ took Oliver's commitment, he is over by 1 as of today as there are currently only 16 available spots slated for the 2015 class. From here on out, either a kid has to leave UT, or scholarships have to be pulled. He takes 3 more and no one chooses to leave by NSD? He is then over by 4. He chooses to take/sign 6 more and he is over by 7.

It's a big roll of the dice IF they try something like that. Saban has been slammed in the media for years for the tactic. Your technically over signing and assuming "this many" spots will open up. The problem is, what if they don't? As a coach you're then either forced to send kids packing, or start yanking scholarships. I think someone had stated before that the penalty for "over signing" is 3 scholarships for every 1 you over sign and don't have a spot for by a certain date. Hopefully it does not come to that.

I'll admit it's a tactic I wish was not allowed. IMO you should recruit/sign for the spots you have. Not so much for the spots you "might" have.

I'm sure this is going to sound real bad, but it is a reality when you start getting into doing things like this.

Imagine your a borderline SEC recruit. Your headed into your RSSO or RSJR year as a Vol. Your a team player, you give 100% everyday in practice, go to class, make the grades, and your a model citizen. Then your asked to host a recruit on his visit to UT. As with everything, you give it your all and sell that kid on "family", "tradition", and "what it is to be a Volunteer". The kid commits and signs with UT. A few months later you realize you're one of the casualties for "over signing". How does it feel that you just delivered your replacement? Don't worry, you'll like ETSU. :ph34r:


Okay, I'll bite.

You "deliver" your replacement. Yeah, it sucks. But you may train the guy at work who gets the promotion over you. The facts are these: The world is hard, and either you've got it or you don't. But the "everybody gets a trophy" mentality sucks, and it's caused a lot of things to suffer.

I've got a boss who absolutely sucks, but she got the job because she's been with the company for so long and they felt they had to give it to her. Does that make the company better? Heck no. I could do her job better than she does.

I get that these are "kids," but they have to make a risky decision just like the coaches do. The coaches take a risk on the players by hoping that they will contribute to the program on the level that they project they will. The players take the same risk.

No player goes in thinking they won't get playing time, or they won't be a candidate for a starter. Just like nobody signs up for a job thinking that they won't potentially get a promotion.

Facts are, it doesn't always happen. People get passed over, and passed up. Some aren't willing to put in the work, and some are, but just aren't good enough.

Butch did not sign a lot of the players on the roster. I think 43% of the roster is still Dooley's. Butch might not have even recruited the players that are on the roster now, had he been here. So is he obligated to keep them, when their performance determines his job security? I would say not.

I think each player needs to earn their spot. If they can contribute, then absolutely, keep them. But I'm sorry, I don't feel bad about saying to a kid "this just isn't in our best interest, and therefore isn't in yours."

The expectations are that way in every other facet of life. If you don't make the payments, you don't get to stay in the house. If you don't keep the contract, you get a fine. If you don't meet the deadline, you get fired. If you don't abide by the rules, you get kicked out. If you don't go to class, you don't get an A. If you aren't the best, then you don't get the things the best deserve. It's life.

I know it's harsh and hard. But if we're making our product the best we can be, then we don't always do it by being nice. We sign these kids after doing the best evaluation we can do, and we sign them with as much certainty as we possibly can have that they will work out, but at the end of the day, nobody can truly know how it will pan out. When expectations aren't realized, the best thing for the program has to be done.

JMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Amazing. We pay the guy millions to do something very few people in the world can do - coach a D1 football team - and then question him on his ability to do simple math in recruiting. Relax people.

butch-jones.jpg


Coach Jones -

"I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very football program that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a helmet, and stand by a goal post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to."
 
We wont keep all the scrubs that are currently committed. Sorry, just simply will not happen. Save the BS about offer lists and how recruiting rankings dont matter. All of these players will not recieve a letter of intent on signing day.

This. Some people never learn. Look at all of last year's early commits that were asked to look elsewhere. The two JC WR's, Booth, Mouhon, Lawrence Lee, etc... This staff isn't turning down any big-time players. Numbers wont be an issue and the commit list in December / January will look a lot different than it does right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Ok, so now at 17 commitments.

IF...IF...they can take up to 24...

QB-2 Dormady, Jennings
RB-2 Reid, Kamara
WR-3 Williams, Bruce, Jefferson
TE-1 Oliver
OL-3 Stewart, Jones, Richmond
DT-3 Picou, Jones, McKenzie
DE-3 Butcher, Jackson, Phillips
LB-3 Cherry, Smith, Sapp
S-1 Griffin
CB-2 Ordway, Martin
LS-1 Lovingood


IMO it has to be Woods as the odd man out. Maybe he sticks IF and only if they miss on Jefferson.

EDIT:

So I see in several threads people are talking about who we may lose from this current class so that we can add "higher rated" guys later on. IMO a lot of times the reason you lose a kid, is partly due to how many you are trying to sign at a given position.

QBs, IMO if they plan on signing just the 2 committed, IMO they stick. Very different skillsets.

RBs, Only taking 2, I think we are fine here. I would assume Reid knows he will likely RS.

WR's, IF Jefferson commits, Bruce is not going anywhere on his own. Only way he is not a Vol is if CBJ drags him off campus. Williams won't be intimidated by anyone. No reason to think we have an issue here.

TE's, Oliver is it. No reason to think he is going anywhere.

OL, Stewart or Jones would not be affected at all by adding Richmond. IMO those 2 would give him a piggy back ride from Memphis to Knoxville if he needed transportation.

DT, Could Picou be concerned IF Jones and McKenzie both commit? I suppose I could see that. IMO his GF going to be a Lady Vol keeps him in Orange.


DEs, Butcher is as Vol as you can get. Phillips would be the last piece to the DE puzzle and IMO would fit perfectly. Jackson would be the only one I would watch and for no other reason but IF they try and tell him it's OT or nothing at UT. The kid is all Vol, but I could see that being an issue IF they tried it.

LBs, Cherry is a legacy. Smith fills a void. IMO Sapp completes the LB class. All 3 play different LB roles. No reason to think one would affect the others commitment wise.

CBs, Tough to see a problem here as of yet. We don't have any. :)

S's, With only taking Griffin IMO, no worries here.

LS, Lovingood is it. No worries here.


Let The Debate!

What you have is 8 players that will have to fit into 7 remaining spots. That is not including the cornerback position, which we will sign at least 2, which would mean we are crunching 10 into 7 remaining spots.
 
Orange Carpet weekend brought in 4 new verbals. With tight numbers for '15 can the Vols only sign 20? All these skill players are wonderful additions and obviously you have to have play makers on the field. But, in order to win consistently and compete in this league and be in games late in the 3rd and 4th quarters you have to have serious talent and depth on the interior line. Both defensively and offensively. I would love if they signed another QB at least for depth and competition and the rest DTs and interior OL'men. Who do they ask for look elsewhere and if they do when? Any room for Tim Settle and McKenzie? McKenzie is a MUST!!!!!

Also, Nigel Warrior is a legacy kid. Have to get Dale Carter's son just on principle alone.

So you are worried about available spots, but you want them to sign another QB? To make 3 QB's?
 
and just so you know, I'm not a old geezer. I'm in my mid-twenties, and I got this implanted in me when my college professor gave me a B in a class where a 90 was an A, and I scored a 89.7. I was so used to having things "rounded up," that I went to him and said "i think there's been a mistake. I'm supposed to have an A." He said "What is an A in this class?" I said "A 90." He said, "What grade did you earn?" I said "An 89.7." He said, "Did you earn a 90?" I said, "No." He said, "Then based on the work you did, you did not earn an A."

I've never felt entitled to anything since.
 
Excited to get Oliver, another in-state kid.

But should we be concerned that season hasn't even started yet and we're already filling up the class? Weren't we suppose to have less available spots this year?

I think getting your commits early is much better than having 7-8 commits in December and just picking through the leftovers like the previous staff did.

That being said, I think it's inevitable that the class will be somewhat fluid for a number of spots from now til Feb. Bound to be a few guys currently verbally committed who won't be a part of the class. Still, very glad we have 17 commits this early....Butch is going out and getting who he wants.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Okay, I'll bite.

You "deliver" your replacement. Yeah, it sucks. But you may train the guy at work who gets the promotion over you. The facts are these: The world is hard, and either you've got it or you don't. But the "everybody gets a trophy" mentality sucks, and it's caused a lot of things to suffer.

I've got a boss who absolutely sucks, but she got the job because she's been with the company for so long and they felt they had to give it to her. Does that make the company better? Heck no. I could do her job better than she does.

I get that these are "kids," but they have to make a risky decision just like the coaches do. The coaches take a risk on the players by hoping that they will contribute to the program on the level that they project they will. The players take the same risk.

No player goes in thinking they won't get playing time, or they won't be a candidate for a starter. Just like nobody signs up for a job thinking that they won't potentially get a promotion.

Facts are, it doesn't always happen. People get passed over, and passed up. Some aren't willing to put in the work, and some are, but just aren't good enough.

Butch did not sign a lot of the players on the roster. I think 43% of the roster is still Dooley's. Butch might not have even recruited the players that are on the roster now, had he been here. So is he obligated to keep them, when their performance determines his job security? I would say not.

I think each player needs to earn their spot. If they can contribute, then absolutely, keep them. But I'm sorry, I don't feel bad about saying to a kid "this just isn't in our best interest, and therefore isn't in yours."

The expectations are that way in every other facet of life. If you don't make the payments, you don't get to stay in the house. If you don't keep the contract, you get a fine. If you don't meet the deadline, you get fired. If you don't abide by the rules, you get kicked out. If you don't go to class, you don't get an A. If you aren't the best, then you don't get the things the best deserve. It's life.

I know it's harsh and hard. But if we're making our product the best we can be, then we don't always do it by being nice. We sign these kids after doing the best evaluation we can do, and we sign them with as much certainty as we possibly can have that they will work out, but at the end of the day, nobody can truly know how it will pan out. When expectations aren't realized, the best thing for the program has to be done.

JMO.

There are cases where I have no issue at all with sending a kid on his way. IF they are not doing things the right way(as I mentioned in my earlier post), then it is what it is. Just because a kid is not All SEC by his SO/JR year IMO is not cause to "clear them out" for the next unproven kid coming in. JMO

Every school roster in the country has role players on it. I have no issue at all with Tennessee having some role players on their roster. Especially when those kids are doing things the right way.
 
Keep drinking the butch Kool-aide. Hes been here one season and didn't go bowling. Dooley did better his first season. And whats with all the stinking 3 stars. Look how many 3 stars the other teams have now. Here we go! The Bottom Feeder Vols

:crazy:
 
This. Some people never learn. Look at all of last year's early commits that were asked to look elsewhere. The two JC WR's, Booth, Mouhon, Lawrence Lee, etc... This staff isn't turning down any big-time players. Numbers wont be an issue and the commit list in December / January will look a lot different than it does right now.

+1.

I don't know why this is so hard to understand.

Players on the current team will see writing on the wall regarding their football careers and they will leave. If any of our current commits slack off during their senior years - see ya. Some guys will wash out because of academics.

No big time guys will be turned away.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
What you have is 8 players that will have to fit into 7 remaining spots. That is not including the cornerback position, which we will sign at least 2, which would mean we are crunching 10 into 7 remaining spots.

Yeah, it's going to be interesting to see it all play out. Obviously some talented guys who would like to be Vols, won't be.
 
There are cases where I have no issue at all with sending a kid on his way. IF they are not doing things the right way(as I mentioned in my earlier post), then it is what it is. Just because a kid is not All SEC by his SO/JR year IMO is not cause to "clear them out" for the next unproven kid coming in. JMO

Every school roster in the country has role players on it. I have no issue at all with Tennessee having some role players on their roster. Especially when those kids are doing things the right way.

Sorry, I disagree. I definitely can see where you're coming from, and I think that Tennessee will always have "role players" as you call them.

But, like I said, this logic doesn't work in any other business. We don't say in sales, "Well, this person plays by the rules and always shows up on time and has really stylish bow ties, but his sales have been consistently lower than everyone else, and we've got a lot of very promising people chomping at the bit to take his place....we'll keep him."

I mean, the facts of life are, you either perform..or you pack. And the more limited the spots, the more pressure there is. If a firm only has 6 people, you better be darn good to make sure you stay in it.

The University of Tennessee Football Team has 85 spots on it, reserved for 85 players that can ideally contribute to the success of the product on the field. If a player is not, and will not in the foreseeable future contribute to that success, then I would be perfectly okay with finding a different option. I realize that kids "bleed orange" and do things the right way. But people every day get laid off and fired, and those people have families, and do things the right way too.

I'm just saying, part of the reason why Saban is successful, is because he demands success, and he doesn't reward mediocrity.

Do I want to see anyone cut loose from the program? No, I don't. But the fact is, unless some people are, our program isn't going to get to where we need it to be by the time we want it to be. We are possibly the most impatient, spoiled fanbase in the country. We want to win, and we want to win now, and we won't give you tons of time to do it.

If that's what you want, then unfortunately, drastic changes have to be made, and sometimes people have to get sent on their way. It's a business.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
Not to mention, when you think about cost-benefit relationship.

It costs how much to send these student-athletes to school per year? By the time you cover tuition, room and board, the meals they eat, their books, the hotels and travel arrangements to and from games, it is a lot of money just for one student athlete.

If he is not helping to produce a winning product (which is the coaches decision), then is he not costing the program more than he is bringing in theoretically? Wouldn't it be more profitable to bring in another player who could "profit" the program more?

I'm just trying to look at this from the logical standpoint of putting a solid product on a field. And I keep using the term product, because it something that is produced through process.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Not to mention, when you think about cost-benefit relationship.

It costs how much to send these student-athletes to school per year? By the time you cover tuition, room and board, the meals they eat, their books, the hotels and travel arrangements to and from games, it is a lot of money just for one student athlete.

If he is not helping to produce a winning product (which is the coaches decision), then is he not costing the program more than he is bringing in theoretically? Wouldn't it be more profitable to bring in another player who could "profit" the program more?

I'm just trying to look at this from the logical standpoint of putting a solid product on a field. And I keep using the term product, because it something that is produced through process.

It's probably a good thing I am not an SEC coach. :)

I guess I just value the idea of "commitment". To me, that has to mean something. As a coach it would be near impossible for me at least to cut loose a kid who does things the right way. Maybe he is not even one of the best 50 players on the team. If he is doing the things expected of a "student athlete", then he is doing his job. I did take him as part of my football team. I asked him to commit to being a part of the program. If he is not the "star" I had hoped for, is it his fault or am I not doing the job as "coach" I should be? It's always easier to blame others than to look at yourself. Obviously I saw something in the kid to want to sign him and bring him onboard. Maybe my focus should be bringing out that "star" vs processing him and starting over? At some point coaches have to coach the players they have committed to. You keep cutting them loose and starting over, your never going to build anything. JMO
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people

VN Store



Back
Top