Vols a Top 15 Program Over Next 3 Years

[VFL-82-JP]

Josh Pate is one of the best college football analysts on the interwebs. Unlike most of the click-bait focused internet media, he actually thinks things through. And explains his reasoning. You can agree or disagree with him, but either way you know why he sees things as he does. That's refreshing.

One of the things I appreciate about his approach to the sport is the way he draws a distinction between how TEAMS are expected to do in the coming year, and how PROGRAMS are envisioned to perform over the longer term. He's good at measuring programs more holistically. Consequently, I think he can see a little further down the road than most. He still gets things wrong, but less often and less drastically.

So in this video released about a week and a half ago (my apologies if it has been linked already; I didn't see it), in this video Josh ranks what he sees as the top 15 programs over the next three years.

Spoiler: where specifically does he put the Vols?

according to him, Tennessee is the #12 program in the nation over that period.

I do disagree with some of Josh's list. He has fallen into the common trap of over-ranking Notre Dame. I think Michigan will fall further than he sees. And I'm pretty sure he is underestimating the Vols. That's right, UNDERestimating us.

Think we're a Top 6 to 8 program (not just team, program) over the next three years, and even higher beyond that.

Go Vols!

 

[WillisWG]

that sport writer's slobbering over ND football must be written down in the sport writer's handbook or something

 

[Brave Volunteer]

Top 15 is aiming a little low isn't it?

 

[barknoxbrawler]

Top 15 is aiming a little low isn't it?

In terms of where we have been and where we are going? No.

In terms of where a large group of our fans think we should be always? Yes.

 

[ntxVOL]

Not enough room for all those SEC teams in there. Some will have to fall as others rise.

 

[cardvolfan]

It’s being built the right way. Heupel is the man. I do believe Tennessee will be better than Top 15 moving forward. Of course, the SEC is where you get beat up the most. I think we will be a perennial Top 4 team in our conference when the dust settles.

 

[Rocky Top T]

Josh Pate is really good. He is usually spot on

 

[OffTackleVol]

It’s being built the right way. Heupel is the man. I do believe Tennessee will be better than Top 15 moving forward. Of course, the SEC is where you get beat up the most. I think we will be a perennial Top 4 team in our conference when the dust settles.

Top 4 in our conference probably translates to top 10-12 nationally.

 

[cardvolfan]

Top 4 in our conference probably translates to top 10-12 nationally.

Yes, pretty much with what I’m thinking.

 

[DirtyDawg]

Josh Pate is one of the best college football analysts on the interwebs. Unlike most of the click-bait focused internet media, he actually thinks things through. And explains his reasoning. You can agree or disagree with him, but either way you know why he sees things as he does. That's refreshing.

One of the things I appreciate about his approach to the sport is the way he draws a distinction between how TEAMS are expected to do in the coming year, and how PROGRAMS are envisioned to perform over the longer term. He's good at measuring programs more holistically. Consequently, I think he can see a little further down the road than most. He still gets things wrong, but less often and less drastically.

So in this video released about a week and a half ago (my apologies if it has been linked already; I didn't see it), in this video Josh ranks what he sees as the top 15 programs over the next three years.

Spoiler: where specifically does he put the Vols?

according to him, Tennessee is the #12 program in the nation over that period.

I do disagree with some of Josh's list. He has fallen into the common trap of over-ranking Notre Dame. I think Michigan will fall further than he sees. And I'm pretty sure he is underestimating the Vols. That's right, UNDERestimating us.

Think we're a Top 6 to 8 program (not just team, program) over the next three years, and even higher beyond that.

Go Vols!

I think it’s reasonable to think, especially for a Vols fan, that TN will be a top 6-8 program over the next 3 years. Possibly higher beyond that. The conference is going to continue to be very tough, but CJH certainly seems to have the Vols on the rise. It’s very reasonable to think this. Hell, I’m a Dawg and I fear this is definitely a possibility.

 

[LittleVol]

W

Josh Pate is one of the best college football analysts on the interwebs. Unlike most of the click-bait focused internet media, he actually thinks things through. And explains his reasoning. You can agree or disagree with him, but either way you know why he sees things as he does. That's refreshing.

One of the things I appreciate about his approach to the sport is the way he draws a distinction between how TEAMS are expected to do in the coming year, and how PROGRAMS are envisioned to perform over the longer term. He's good at measuring programs more holistically. Consequently, I think he can see a little further down the road than most. He still gets things wrong, but less often and less drastically.

So in this video released about a week and a half ago (my apologies if it has been linked already; I didn't see it), in this video Josh ranks what he sees as the top 15 programs over the next three years.

Spoiler: where specifically does he put the Vols?

according to him, Tennessee is the #12 program in the nation over that period.

I do disagree with some of Josh's list. He has fallen into the common trap of over-ranking Notre Dame. I think Michigan will fall further than he sees. And I'm pretty sure he is underestimating the Vols. That's right, UNDERestimating us.

Think we're a Top 6 to 8 program (not just team, program) over the next three years, and even higher beyond that.

Go Vols!

What Is a TOP 15 really when you’re in the SEC?

If you’re in the ACC you’re 3rd at worst if you’re a top 15 team.
Big 12…you’re number 1.

SEC, you can be the 6th ranked team in the SEC and be a top 15 team.

10th ranked in the SEC and still be a TOP 25.

That’s nuts!

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

In terms of where we have been and where we are going? No.

In terms of where a large group of our fans think we should be always? Yes.

So with how Heupel is recruiting, developing, his offense, his salary we shouldn’t expect in years 5,6 and 7 to be at the least a top 10 program? Also why shouldn’t fans expect more?

 

[VOLLeeann]

The dream my Daddy clung to.

 

[Brave Volunteer]

Personally if we are only annually ranked somewhere between 11th and 15th in years 5, 6, and 7 under CJH, I think that should be unacceptable. Sorry, but I think more highly of our program and what it's capable of being than that. Accepting anything less than top 10 is BVS and selling this program short IMO.

 

[Hank Bukowski]

Personally if we are only annually ranked somewhere between 11th and 15th in years 5, 6, and 7 under CJH, I think that should be unacceptable. Sorry, but I think more highly of our program and what it's capable of being than that. Accepting anything less than top 10 is BVS and selling this program short IMO.

I’m gonna have to agree with this. We don’t hire any head football coach to be a “top 15” team/program in years 5,6,7. This ain’t Butch or Dooley any more. As Heup has himself said many times, our singular goal is to win championships. To me, a fair expectation from our fan base would be to finish in the top 3 in the SEC every year moving forward…until we finally reach a championship. That’s why the man was hired and that’s his job. If he can publicly embrace that expectation, why shouldn’t we?

 

[HuntlandVolinColo]

I believe top 10 is more appropriate.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Personally if we are only annually ranked somewhere between 11th and 15th in years 5, 6, and 7 under CJH, I think that should be unacceptable. Sorry, but I think more highly of our program and what it's capable of being than that. Accepting anything less than top 10 is BVS and selling this program short IMO.

I think you're confusing program and team. It's a lot like the difference between climate and weather.

Like weather, teams can be mercurial. They can win a national title one year, and end up outside the Top 25 the next. Just ask LSU. Or Clemson.

More like climate, though, programs move up and down the column much more gradually. Real change only comes about in long, sloping trends. Who you are one year as a program is rarely much different than the year before. The decline in Fulmer's last few years was gradual, then continued through Kiffin, Dooley, Jones, and bottomed at Pruitt. It took a while to kill our program's standing.

That's why it is so remarkable that Heupel, backed by Dan White, is bringing us back to to the top so rapidly. Re-establishing ourselves in the national mindset as one of the handful of elite programs in the country, that should be the work of decades. And yet Josh has us on the precipice (I believe) in our 4th year from rock bottom.

Part of that is due to our history. It's easier to climb the mountain if you have climbed it before. Thank you, General Neyland, Johnny Majors, and Philip Fulmer. We have been there before.

But it should still be a slow, difficult process. We should applaud Josh Heupel at how quickly he's getting it done.

Go Vols!


p.s. Anyone saying they're the #1 program in the country is narcissistic. At the top end, it's super crowded. The differences between programs can be measured in millimeters. Not so with teams, they can "play it out on the field" to figure out who's best. But programs, those are mushier to measure.

So if the Vols end up in the top 6 or 8 over the next few years, alongside folks like Georgia, Bama, LSU, Ohio State, Michigan, Texas, and maybe Oregon, USCw, Oklahoma, or Penn State, I'd be super happy with that. We all should.

 

[bigorangepoppa]

What will NIL do to this? If a program has a huge wealthy following/fans, they can pump an unknown amount into buying, basically, the best high school talent, as well as the top players already on teams, by giving them more money than anyone else can. An example of this would be Texas A&M. I keep seeing how much money their fan base has, so they could outbid most everyone else, couldn't they? Not predicting this will happen, just wondering if it's a possibility.

 

[JohnWardForever]

that sport writer's slobbering over ND football must be written down in the sport writer's handbook or something

Watch out, A&M will probably take ND down in their opener. A&M got them a Coach..

 

[VFL-82-JP]

What will NIL do to this? If a program has a huge wealthy following/fans, they can pump an unknown amount into buying, basically, the best high school talent, as well as the top players already on teams, by giving them more money than anyone else can. An example of this would be Texas A&M. I keep seeing how much money their fan base has, so they could outbid most everyone else, couldn't they? Not predicting this will happen, just wondering if it's a possibility.

It is certainly a possibility.

Not the A&M piece. The idea that Texas and/or A&M are richer than Croesus, that's out of date. Oil hasn't had huge profit margins in a while, and Texas is nowhere near the top of any list of "richest states in the nation per capita" (google it yourself if you don't believe me).

Texas has money. Tennessee has money. Florida does. Massachusetts does (little good that's doing them in college football). California does (ditto). Hell, even Bama has some money, enough to have funded the Nick Saban collegiate parking lot.

I think it has become a college football community meme that the state of Texas has more than anyone else. And UTexas (as well as A&M) love to promote the myth. But I don't think it's true.

So yes, NIL can shift the landscape of program rankings. Slowly, over time. In the next decade or two, perhaps. But it may not be in the directions you think.

We'll just have to wait and see.

Go Vols!

 

[JohnWardForever]

Josh is using some PEDS, his body is way too big for his head.

 

[ntxVOL]

It is certainly a possibility.

Not the A&M piece. The idea that Texas and/or A&M are richer than Croesus, that's out of date. Oil hasn't had huge profit margins in a while, and Texas is nowhere near the top of any list of "richest states in the nation per capita" (google it yourself if you don't believe me).

Texas has money. Tennessee has money. Florida does. Massachusetts does (little good that's doing them in college football). California does (ditto). Hell, even Bama has some money, enough to have funded the Nick Saban collegiate parking lot.

I think it has become a college football community meme that the state of Texas has more than anyone else. And UTexas (as well as A&M) love to promote the myth. But I don't think it's true.

So yes, NIL can shift the landscape of program rankings. Slowly, over time. In the next decade or two, perhaps. But it may not be in the directions you think.

We'll just have to wait and see.

Go Vols!

I think your wrong A&M and TX. Their alumni bases are much larger than UT's first of all.

A&M specifically has a large number of alumni in the oil & gas industry partly because of their proximity to Houston and also because of degrees plans geared specifically to those industries.

To think there's no money in oil & gas is about the most ludicrous thing anyone could say.

Texas has one of the top law schools in the region. Their alumni dominate the TX political landscape as well as financial side of the oil & gas industry, someone has to manage all that oil trust money.

Both of these schools have a deeper alumni base than most to pull donations from.

 

[WillisWG]

Watch out, A&M will probably take ND down in their opener. A&M got them a Coach..

I see it as a pretty even game, it would be a nice W to start Elko era

 

[VFL-82-JP]

I think your wrong A&M and TX. Their alumni bases are much larger than UT's first of all.

A&M specifically has a large number of alumni in the oil & gas industry partly because of their proximity to Houston and also because of degrees plans geared specifically to those industries.

To think there's no money in oil & gas is about the most ludicrous thing anyone could say.

Texas has one of the top law schools in the region. Their alumni dominate the TX political landscape as well as financial side of the oil & gas industry, someone has to manage all that oil trust money.

Both of these schools have a deeper alumni base than most to pull donations from.

Come on, man. This is some Texas burnt-orange shaded glasses you're looking through.

1. A&M is better known for sending graduates into the military than into oil & gas. And you don't get rich being a soldier.

2. If oil/gas industry wages were so astounding, Texas would have something better than the #23 per capita income in the nation.* Hey, 23 out of 50 is almost exactly the definition of "mediocre" or "middling" or "average."

3. No one ever in history ever ever said, "wow he has a Texas law degree, that makes him one of the best." Harvard? Sure. Yale? Yep. Georgetown, Stanford, Duke, Columbia? Absolutely. But Texas is, at best, somewhere around 15th or 20th among US law schools. About the same level as Vandy.** Top in the region? If you define "region" as Texas and the 3 or 4 states immediately around it, maybe. Sure. I guess. But that's an awful small pond to brag about dominating.

You think Vandy law school is giving Vanderbilt a competitive advantage in football? Heh.

Go Vols!



* Per Capita Income By State 2024 as just one source. There are plenty of others. Texans aren't rich.

** https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-law-schools/law-rankings?_sort=my_rankings-asc US News and World Report's annual ranking of colleges and universities in a variety of categories is probably the most respected of all such lists. That's why I refer to it.

 

[ntxVOL]

Come on, man. This is some Texas burnt-orange shaded glasses you're looking through.

1. A&M sends more graduates into the military than into oil & gas. And you don't get rich being a soldier.

2. If oil/gas industry wages were so astounding, Texas would have something better than the #23 per capita income in the nation.* Hey, 23 out of 50 is almost exactly the definition of "mediocre" or "middling" or "average."

3. No one ever in history ever ever said, "wow he has a Texas law degree, that makes him one of the best." Harvard? Sure. Yale? Yep. Georgetown, Stanford, Duke, Columbia? Absolutely. But Texas is, as best, somewhere around 15th or 20th among US law schools. About the same level as Vandy.** Top in the region? If you define "region" as Texas and the 3 or 4 states immediately around it, maybe. Sure. I guess. But that's an awful small pond to swim in.

You think Vandy law school is giving Vanderbilt a competitive advantage in football? Heh.

Go Vols!



* Per Capita Income By State 2024 as just one source. There are plenty of others. Texans aren't rich.

** https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-law-schools/law-rankings?_sort=my_rankings-asc US News and World Report's annual ranking of colleges and universities in a variety of categories is probably the most respected of all such lists. That's why I refer to it.

First of all, per capita income is irrelevant, the majority of donations come from alumni. But when you multiply that per capita income * the population, there's still no comparison.

2nd, A&M is ranked in the top 10 nationwide for public school graduate career income, no other SEC school in the top ten. Vanderbilt is private, their graduates earn more money, yes, but a much smaller alumni base to pull from. Also, these oil & gas people are not the rough necks of the industry. They are the engineers and CEOs of the industry. See Exxon Mobile and Phillips 66 as two more prominent examples.

3rd, The tx law school has created a good ole boy network within a very large state that has made its alumni a who's who of mover and shakers. A lot of money statewide is controlled by that network.

I could go on and on but the point being, both schools have a very deep alumni base to pull donations from.