Class of '16 Position Needs

#1

Rocky_Top_Vol13

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2011
Messages
35,124
Likes
26,990
#1
I know the ink for the class of '15 is barely dry, and if this has been discussed before my apologies, but what will be the biggest position needs of the '16 class? Or will the staff be looking for overall and quality depth and no one position more important than the others. Thoughts?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2
#2
I know the ink for the class of '15 is barely dry, and if this has been discussed before my apologies, but what will be the biggest position needs of the '16 class? Or will the staff be looking for overall and quality depth and no one position more important than the others. Thoughts?

WR, RB, and DBs seem to be mentioned quite a bit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#8
#8
Imo Hardman at WR. Realistic target at RB would be Washington. DB IMO will be Warrior & Vaughn.

Taylor is the guy on most folks DB board. Imo he goes elsewhere.

We are recruiting Hardman at WR? Good to know because we are in on so many DB.
 
#9
#9
We are recruiting Hardman at WR? Good to know because we are in on so many DB.

Yeah, in one of his interviews he said UT liked him in the slot.

There does seem to be a lot of great DB options this year Who seem to have UT right in it. I'd love to add Edmonds to my projection, but just don't think there will he room.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#10
#10
IMO, you take at least 1 QB every year and 4-5 oline. 5 dline every year on a 2/3 rotating ratio of de and DT. In theory that would give you 18-20 each d and o lineman on Ur roster. Fill in accordingly the rest based on needs and big time talent.

This would be my format...

1 QB
2 RB
3-5 WR/TE
4-5 Oline
3 DE
2-3 DT
2-3 LB
3-4 DB

Obviously, you wouldn't want to take more then 2 te in back to back year as the we/te number is more of a number to meet for scouting purposes, as is the rb and lb number. Don't think you would see more then 6 or seven rbs or 10 lbs on a ut roster at one time.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#12
#12
IMO

1 QB
2 RB
3 WR
4-5 Online
3 DE
2-3 DT
2-3 LB
3-4 DB

Solid 3 on DT, +1 RB, +1? WR, DBs 2+ should be safeties & if it looks like Cam is gone +1 CB, LBs 2 should be ILB. If tradeoffs have to be made then -1 OL and -1 DE. If attrition allows, add one high quality TE.
 
#13
#13
I actually don't think there are any alarming holes in the roster going forward.

On defense, safety could become a concern after Randolph and McNeil graduate, depending on where certain guys end up. We have TK, but if both Berry twins end up at other positions, our depth becomes a little scary. But LB is strong, DL is strong (always looking for more there though), and CB is strong - in each case we just need our guys to develop.

On offense, we still need some quality at OT, though we're in MUCH better shape now than we were at this point last year. Interior line looks fine. QB looks good. Could use some talent at WR, especially in the slot. I don't expect North to go pro after this next season, but if he does then we will need to be prepared for that. Wouldn't mind another TE to go along with Brooks, though either Creamer or Oliver could ease my concerns there (no idea what to expect of Creamer in particular). I think I'm happier than most with RB. Hurd and Kamara are both excellent and I also really like Kelly. So give me one or two quality RB in this class and I'm happy there too. Getting Paulk back would set us up even better, if that ends up happening.

So... personally I'm paying attention to S, OT, WR. After those, just take the best guys you can, spread among all positions. Just my opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#15
#15
So... personally I'm paying attention to S, OT, WR. After those, just take the best guys you can, spread among all positions. Just my opinion.

i agree with this but I would LB, while we have some numbers there none have produced, so i would push for a top ILB and OLB not sure we are at the point with LB where we can red shirt and develop.

S is a big concern 1 or 2 good guys here
OT one more really good one
WR i think we need several top guys here.
 
#16
#16
If we can take 18-20 guys I'd go with:

1 QB
2 RBs
3 WRs
2 TEs
2-3 OL- 2 OT IMO
3-4 DL- 2 DEs and 1 elite DT
2 LBs
3-4 DBs with at least 2 CBs

I think Bruce and Perry will dictate the #'s at RB/S/WR. I could see Bruce at S/WR and I could see Perry at WR/RB.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#18
#18
If we can take 18-20 guys I'd go with:

1 QB
2 RBs
3 WRs
2 TEs
2-3 OL- 2 OT IMO
3-4 DL- 2 DEs and 1 elite DT
2 LBs
3-4 DBs with at least 2 CBs

I think Bruce and Perry will dictate the #'s at RB/S/WR. I could see Bruce at S/WR and I could see Perry at WR/RB.

Nice. Honestly, I would replace the QB with another LB.
I guess that's one of the reasons I'm not the coach. :)

GO VOLS!
 
#19
#19
No less than 3 WR, and 2 RB in 16 class. I think the staff feels we are in a position now to try and knock it out the park at every other position. I think we will see them being extremely selective on who they allow to commit. I also think we will see a domino effect of top recruits committing once the new unis are unveiled. JMO
 
#20
#20
1 QB
2 RB
4 WR
1 TE
4 OL
3 DE
2 DT
3 LB
2-3 S
2-3 CB
Finally, the roster is in replenishment mode. For the most part, we are simply recruiting the expected number for each position. Some of the exceptions are DT where we took 3 in 2015 and only need 2 for 2016. Same for OL. Having taken 5 highly rated in 2015, we should be able to get by with 4 in 2016. We will need at least 4 WR, possibly 5. With LBs so important to special teams, one could make a case for 4.

Injuries and transfers could significantly affect the mix. We will just have to wait and see how things play out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#21
#21
i agree with this but I would LB, while we have some numbers there none have produced, so i would push for a top ILB and OLB not sure we are at the point with LB where we can red shirt and develop.

S is a big concern 1 or 2 good guys here
OT one more really good one
WR i think we need several top guys here.

With Justin King transfer, we are down to Bynum, Bryant, JJohnson and Kirkland at ILB. I think Bynum might be a SR too, so we need 2 ILBs for depth and to backfill attrition losses.

If Bates moves inside, then maybe just one; but he is so good in coverage, we kind of want him on the outside if possible.
 
#23
#23
IMO, you take at least 1 QB every year and 4-5 oline. 5 dline every year on a 2/3 rotating ratio of de and DT. In theory that would give you 18-20 each d and o lineman on Ur roster. Fill in accordingly the rest based on needs and big time talent.

This would be my format...

1 QB
2 RB
3-5 WR/TE
4-5 Oline
3 DE
2-3 DT
2-3 LB
3-4 DB

Obviously, you wouldn't want to take more then 2 te in back to back year as the we/te number is more of a number to meet for scouting purposes, as is the rb and lb number. Don't think you would see more then 6 or seven rbs or 10 lbs on a ut roster at one time.

Seems pretty fair in the 20-25 size class size. The great thing about our recruiting now, is what almost makes this thread meaningless. We are getting into "maintenance mode" and out of crisis mode.

Long term success at the highest levels means smaller classes than were seeing in the last 2 cycles. More highly ranked players red-shirting, and more seasoned, developed, and experienced elite upperclassmen taking the field with young elite talent backing them up on the depth chart.

Did Butch ever mention a "process". :whistling: Were somewhere in the middle of that IMO. Will not see the fulfillment of the above until the 16' & 17' seasons.

I'm honestly amazed at how far along Butch has brought us in this. Have not really overachieved on the field. But, we are waaay above average in stocking the cupboard, especially for a HC with a losing record at this point! :yes:
 
#24
#24
I think this class will be the best of the best players and we won't settle for less Considering we can't sign as many.
 
#25
#25
I think this class will be the best of the best players and we won't settle for less Considering we can't sign as many.

I don't think it really matters. We'll swear the 3*'s should be 4*'s and the 4*'s should be 5*'s. Isn't that how it always plays out anyway?

ESPN hates us, Rivals is just homers, 247 favors Bama, and Scout is asleep at the wheel. LOL
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person

VN Store



Back
Top