Our offensive vs defensive talent disparity is huge.
No. It really isn't. You can make a very strong case that UT over the last two years has had more talent and depth on the DL than the OL. UT has not had elite talent at RB. You could say that UT has had more talent at WR and QB... except that several of those guys were going absolutely nowhere before playing for Heupel. Without Heupel Hooker probably wouldn't have been drafted. Tillman was a good WR but likely not on the NFL radar. It even took Hyatt a year to understand what Heupel expected. V Jones wasn't special at USC. Payton was an afterthought for MSU. They weren't great until Heupel and crew made them great. They coached them up then gave them an opportunity to excel.
We had less DB talent than any SEC team not named Vandy,
I've seen that claim... and the mental gymnastics needed to get there. Typically if an unproven recruit is a 4* on Rivals/On3/247 then they're counted. By that count, Williams, Burrell, Charles, Slaughter, McCollough, Turnage, McDonald, Walker, Turrentine, Miller, and Rucker were all 4* recruits according to one "expert" or another. But of course when someone is trying to "prove a point" or more accurately make an excuse... you only count "stars" the way most convenient. That's 11 out of 15 DBs that were 4*. The other 4 were 3*.... with solid offer lists.
yet we fielded a middle of the pack defense.
You take the "averages" and you have a middle of the pack statistical D. But you have to consider the absolute collapses too. You have to look at USCe. You have to look at UF. You have to look at Purdue last year. The statistics have to be understood in full context.
I don't believe our D had a single five star, unlike our offense that had multiple.
The O had two- Wright and McCoy. Both were widely considered busts before playing for Heupel.
I agree the offense maximized their talent, but I think the defense did too. I think you're overrating the amount of talent that was on our defense.
I do not think the talent on D was even close to ideal... and they still didn't maximize the talent. USCe didn't have elite offensive talent. Neither did Purdue. UF was a mess most of the year on O. You can throw Mizzou in there this year. They weren't a good offensive team nor did they have anything like elite talent.
If it were just teams like Bama that had abused UT's D over the last two years then I'd be on board with you. I'd agree it is just a matter of building up talent and development. But it hasn't necessarily been the teams with elite offensive talent that have had big success vs UT's D.
Beasley, Garland, Bumphus, Young, Slaughter, Mcdonald, Walker, Terry are all 3* players who our staff got great production from.
Bumphus was a 4*. On3 has Young listed in a confusing way as a 4*.
Weren't both of the Garlands walk ons?
Slaughter was a 4* on Rivals with a decent, not great, offer list.
McDonald was a 4* on Rivals with offers from LSU, UK, MSU, Ark, Ole Miss, Cincinnati and others.
Walker was a 3* with offers from UT, ND, LSU, Ole Miss, USCe, UK, and others before signing with GT.
Terry was a pretty known quantity coming in the portal.
FWIW, I think the DL has held up its end for the most part. They've covered for the LBs who struggled with QB runs on broken plays or else I think their pass rush would have been better. IMO, CRG is one of the top DL coaches anywhere... and the results show through even if other groups or the schemes or the play calling is suspect.
.
