From Chris Low

[rexvol]

While realizing the importance that solid player evaluations and recruiting in general play in the success of a college football program. I’ve never fully understood the zealotry and borderline obsession that seems to be intertwined with the whole recruiting process.
Tennessee fans are no different than anybody else. They hang on every recruiting ranking, yearn for their commitments to be elevated from a three-star prospect to a four-star prospect and worry about where the Vols might finish in the final mythical Top 25 recruiting poll.
Last I checked, they don’t award trophies for those. And when it comes to all those can’t-miss, five-star prospects, I’ve got news for you. As many of them miss as they do hit. Then there are those guys that barely register a blip in the whole recruiting circus that end up being great players.
See Ole Miss’ Patrick Willis.
This is all a long-winded way of saying that if a kid from this state (Knoxville Catholic safety Harrison Smith) decides to bolt for Notre Dame, let him go. It’s his choice, or as some UT fans contend, his father’s choice.
It’s not an exact science, and who’s to say what kind of player Smith will be at the next level?
And if his father is as meddlesome as some with orange agendas suggest, then maybe it’s a blessing in disguise. The Vols already have more members than they know what to do with (current and past) in the Big Orange chapter of the Daddies Club.

he makes a great point about the fathers

[sjt18]

Yes. But he whiffs completely on the importance of recruiting.

How long has it been since a team that didn't average top 20 recruiting classes won the national championship? It usually takes those kinds of classes to win the SEC.

I'd like to see a proof that as many 5* players miss as hit... or that droves of 2* players are becoming dominant players.

[sjt18]

I think he's right on the Smith comments in general.

Frankly, Smith isn't the best player in Tn... but UT did get the best player from Ga this year.

Good trade off IMO.

[exotic_vols]

Patrick Willis was from Tennessee, wasn't he? He was a big hitter, but if I am not wrong, I think we got Omar Gaither who ranked much higher than him, it was hard to choose him over Omar Gaither. by the way, Willis reminded me those two players out of Alabama: Demeco Ryans and Roman Harper; they were not big names out of HS either.

[MG1968]

Originally Posted by sjt18

Yes. But he whiffs completely on the importance of recruiting.

How long has it been since a team that didn't average top 20 recruiting classes won the national championship?

how about the 1997 Nebraska Cornhuskers?

I think Chris Lowe's point is that recruiting a bunch of blue chip prospects doesn't guarantee you success. In a lot of cases, these kids never overcome their own egos and never function as a team.

[i2amavol]

Originally Posted by MG1968

how about the 1997 Nebraska Cornhuskers?

I think Chris Lowe's point is that recruiting a bunch of blue chip prospects doesn't guarantee you success. In a lot of cases, these kids never overcome their own egos and never function as a team.

Nebraska and coach Pearl are great examples of how coaching CAN overcome less than stellar recruiting. They are big exceptions to the rule, however, and TN's coaching in football has not been a great advantage lately - this year being an exception. Now, if Cutcliff stays for a while, maybe we can turn that part around.

[ardent enthusiast]

I thought about how much recruiting for UT football and my interest in the Vols has evolved over the years a few days ago.

My interest in the Vols started when they beat the Razorbacks in the Cotton Bowl, in umm, 1990, I think. Having just moved from Arkansas to Lenoir City (and not knowing anything about football), it made sense to root for the Hogs.

Well, I screwed the pooch on that one, and my middle school friends let me have it. I quickly switched allegiances when UT basketball was having success as well.

Back then I didn't know any of the players but the running backs.

By my senior year in high school (and having moved three years earlier to Missouri), I knew the names of our star athletes. I had no idea who we recruited each year.

I remember Manning and Stewart both coming to UT along with Shuler leaving...and Colquitt in charge. I remember thinking I liked Stewart better.

Still, recruiting didn't mean 2 cents to me. I figured UT would bring in great athletes every year, it just didn't matter to me. I watched the UT games when they were on, and I bought UT stuff when I found it, regardless of what size or what it was in general. I played with Tennessee in college football games most of the time.

The internet changed the way I was a fan in 1998, when I got my first computer. It was the first time I recall ever seeing a team roster for UT.

Still, I can't recall who we recruited after that national championship outside of Ritzmann (I loved how he picked UT over Florida State, at least that's how I remember it).

The following year some site had a poll about who should start at QB: Clausen, Rattay, Mathews, or Suggs. Suggs was my choice (and would be still).

I remember thinking, Tim Rattay?? He's in Louisiana, right? Clausen, I didn't even recognize that name.

Fast forward a few years later, 2002, when the first thing I did when I got to my classroom in Maryland (at a Navy schoolhouse) is go to the UT site to see who officially signed with UT.

Then the past few years when I'm reading about potential 06 recruits in 2004 and 07 recruits in 2005.

It's amazing how much more knowledgeable of a fan I am today, how much more of a fan I am today, thanks to the internet.

Yes...I love technology...

[rexvol]

Im not completely sold on Cut as a great developer of talent. yes, he has done wonders with Ainge, but it was his guy coaching the O-Line and they underperformed imo. I think the Vols must have exceptional recruiting classes to overcome our inability to coach them up.

[JAllen18MVP]

Originally Posted by rexvol

Im not completely sold on Cut as a great developer of talent. yes, he has done wonders with Ainge, but it was his guy coaching the O-Line and they underperformed imo. I think the Vols must have exceptional recruiting classes to overcome our inability to coach them up.

His guy? Since when is Adkins his guy? Cut's guys are coaching the RBs and the TEs. It's Jimmy Ray Stephens' fault (also Randy Sanders) that the O-line is the way it is right now. They switched to a zone blocking o-line, and it sucked and now that we've switched back to more man blocking, we're still stuck with a bunch of guys who were recruited to play in a zone-blocking system, so they don't fit right. Give Adkins a year or two before you say that he can't coach.

Matt Luke (one of "Cut's guys") has done a very good job this year with the TE's and he is also the recruiting coordinator. Those are both areas that have improved quite a bit this year.

[sjt18]

Originally Posted by MG1968

how about the 1997 Nebraska Cornhuskers?

I think Chris Lowe's point is that recruiting a bunch of blue chip prospects doesn't guarantee you success. In a lot of cases, these kids never overcome their own egos and never function as a team.

That may have been what he meant but it wasn't what he said.

Do you have recruiting info from that Nebraska team? They made a pretty good habit of developing linemen at home and bringing some of the nation's better tailbacks and running QB's in from Fl to Ca and all points in between.

[sjt18]

Originally Posted by rexvol

Im not completely sold on Cut as a great developer of talent. yes, he has done wonders with Ainge, but it was his guy coaching the O-Line and they underperformed imo.

Underperformed? You have to be kidding. They had Ligon and Sears then had to develop depth and experience on the fly. They have played mostly Soph and Fresh.

They were excellent in pass protection and you can hardly lay the whole fault for the running game at their feet when only Foster (not a great talent) had any experience at all.

If anything, this particular O-line has overperformed.

I think the Vols must have exceptional recruiting classes to overcome our inability to coach them up.

Or maybe the changes in the coaching staff will begin to pay even greater dividends next year. I think they did pretty well with the talent and experience they had on both sides of the ball.

Ainge was much better. The O-line without depth or experience played well and got better. The defense after losing most of its experience wasn't great but wasn't terrible either. The only group with experience finally played to potential- the WR's.

I will completely agree that the Vols squandered tremendous talent under Sanders and behind Clausen. But those days are over and one year is hardly enough time to make the sweeping statement you did above.

[tarvol23]

when you cant block anyone from air force to kentucky...., I'm sorry, just cant give the o-line a pass for inexperience. mc clendon was the only true frosh to play any snaps, the rest were redshirt frosh and soph, meaning they had 2-3years in the program.its true, they held up well in terms of pass protection, but outside of coker gashing some big runs, the running game was abyssmal(sp). I mean, they couldn't block anybody.I really hope johnny steps up the lifting this summer and gets these guys more physical.GBO!!!!!

[sjt18]

Originally Posted by tarvol23

when you cant block anyone from air force to kentucky...., I'm sorry, just cant give the o-line a pass for inexperience.

As I recall, UT scored on every possession except one against AFA and that one ended on an Ainge int that was his fault alone. You can't lay UK off on the o-line either with Ainge not being exactly sharp. Coker had 90 yards and there were opportunities for more.

And yes, experience is at least as important for o-linemen as any other position... and years of physical development may be even more important than any other position. You fairly often see RB's, QB's, WR's, DB's, LB's come in as Freshmen and play effectively. You almost never see o-linemen do it.

mc clendon was the only true frosh to play any snaps, the rest were redshirt frosh and soph, meaning they had 2-3years in the program.

No. They were greatly dependent on guys with less than two years in the program when the season started and guys who had not played a great deal.

its true, they held up well in terms of pass protection, but outside of coker gashing some big runs, the running game was abyssmal(sp).

It will improve. At the same time, you can't lay that all at the feet of the linemen. Neither Coker nor Hardesty had experience and Foster simply didn't play like an SEC caliber back.

I mean, they couldn't block anybody.I really hope johnny steps up the lifting this summer and gets these guys more physical.GBO!!!!!

They do need to be stronger... ummm, that is a part of maturing in the program and why it isn't great when your two deep is about 75% guys with less than two years development.

But again, the RB's have a big part in that failure as well. The biggest part of the failure of the running game though probably doesn't relate to either group. The fact that UT had no effective FB play whatsoever hurt them for most of the season.

[ardent enthusiast]

Maybe he meant when you can't tackle anyone from Air Force.

[champyvol]

Originally Posted by tarvol23

when you cant block anyone from air force to kentucky...., I'm sorry, just cant give the o-line a pass for inexperience. mc clendon was the only true frosh to play any snaps, the rest were redshirt frosh and soph, meaning they had 2-3years in the program.its true, they held up well in terms of pass protection, but outside of coker gashing some big runs, the running game was abyssmal(sp). I mean, they couldn't block anybody.I really hope johnny steps up the lifting this summer and gets these guys more physical.GBO!!!!!

i agree our o-line needs alot of help.