i hate the new 25 rule

#1
V

volfrk86

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Messages
3,590
Likes
0
#1
In my opinion, I think that there was a lot of good instate talent in key positions that got away this year and I think it was because of the 25 rule. Take the ol possition for example there was a lot of talented ol prospects that got away that ut either missed out on or just didn't offer a scholarship to. I know they missed on the jelks kid but there was also four other talented ol that ut missed out on. To start out with u had grham shular and blake bars who was rated a four star by rivals and on the rivals 250 watch list, then there was jay guiermo which made the espnu 150 then there was brandon hill who was just a big nasty dude who went to alabama. So my question is, was there somethin the cooaches didn't like about these guys or was it a numbers thing and they had to fill other positions of need with the numbers restriction? I personally wouldn't have minded to have four or five ol again and maybe one less wr or
db but that's jmo I think every year ur goal should be continue to build depth on the oline and dline regardless of need and then try to fill other needs
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2
#2
volfrk86 said:
In my opinion, I think that there was a lot of good instate talent in key positions that got away this year and I think it was because of the 25 rule. Take the ol possition for example there was a lot of talented ol prospects that got away that ut either missed out on or just didn't offer a scholarship to. I know they missed on the jelks kid but there was also four other talented ol that ut missed out on. To start out with u had grham shular and blake bars who was rated a four star by rivals and on the rivals 250 watch list, then there was jay guiermo which made the espnu 150 then there was brandon hill who was just a big nasty dude who went to alabama. So my question is, was there somethin the cooaches didn't like about these guys or was it a numbers thing and they had to fill other positions of need with the numbers restriction? I personally wouldn't have minded to have four or five ol again and maybe one less wr or
db but that's jmo I think every year ur goal should be continue to build depth on the oline and dline regardless of need and then try to fill other needs
Click to expand...

Agree in principle that we need to always have a few OL and DL in each class. Bit concerned most of our OL's are within the same class which means when they graduate we will be scrambling again and low on experienced depth. Right now though, I care about one thing - DL!!!!!! What the Hades happened that we can't get anymore good ones. Can we do an entire class of DL's? With the LBs we got, if we had DL depth look out! 1998 all over again - Defense made that team.
 
#3
#3
volfrk86 said:
In my opinion, I think that there was a lot of good instate talent in key positions that got away this year and I think it was because of the 25 rule. Take the ol possition for example there was a lot of talented ol prospects that got away that ut either missed out on or just didn't offer a scholarship to. I know they missed on the jelks kid but there was also four other talented ol that ut missed out on. To start out with u had grham shular and blake bars who was rated a four star by rivals and on the rivals 250 watch list, then there was jay guiermo which made the espnu 150 then there was brandon hill who was just a big nasty dude who went to alabama. So my question is, was there somethin the cooaches didn't like about these guys or was it a numbers thing and they had to fill other positions of need with the numbers restriction? I personally wouldn't have minded to have four or five ol again and maybe one less wr or
db but that's jmo I think every year ur goal should be continue to build depth on the oline and dline regardless of need and then try to fill other needs
Click to expand...

We wanted Brandon Hill - he just chose Bama.
 
#4
#4
volfrk86 said:
In my opinion, I think that there was a lot of good instate talent in key positions that got away this year and I think it was because of the 25 rule. Take the ol possition for example there was a lot of talented ol prospects that got away that ut either missed out on or just didn't offer a scholarship to. I know they missed on the jelks kid but there was also four other talented ol that ut missed out on. To start out with u had grham shular and blake bars who was rated a four star by rivals and on the rivals 250 watch list, then there was jay guiermo which made the espnu 150 then there was brandon hill who was just a big nasty dude who went to alabama. So my question is, was there somethin the cooaches didn't like about these guys or was it a numbers thing and they had to fill other positions of need with the numbers restriction? I personally wouldn't have minded to have four or five ol again and maybe one less wr or
db but that's jmo I think every year ur goal should be continue to build depth on the oline and dline regardless of need and then try to fill other needs
Click to expand...


Of course the 25 rule will limit the class, but I don't think UT felt OL was a position of need in this class. If you look, they did not even bother to offer very many kids on the OL. Guiermo picked Clemson very early on. Jelks I think got tired of waiting on UT as I think he was being slow played. They would have taken Humphries as he is the best of the best. They offered Cochran late after all the running game issues came up and the issues with snapping the ball. With us redshirting several OLine guys from last years class and Austin Sanders already a VOL for 2013, I think OLine will fine.
 
#5
#5
here is what i would like to see the class look like.
You can even take all four wr and the kicker and just take blanc off to fit in the ol and that would be sick. I just think they took the need at oline for grannite, now it is lookin like they may get one or none idk just somethin that has puzzeld me.
qb
peterman

rb
davis/williams
hill
watson

wr
bowles
croom
howard
redding

te
meredith

ol
shular
bars
guiermo
hill

de
taylior
lewis

dt
obrien
jacobs

lb
peters
santos
henderson
db
krawley
mccneil
jacobs
gray

ath
king

k
bullock

anyway thats my rant and rave for this class still gonna be a good class i just think the 25 rule handcuffed the staff, and that the need at ol was really underrated this year, but GO VOLS!:loco:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#7
#7
why do you say that when shular and bars are rivals 250 players by rivals and they are four stars and guiermo is an espnu 150 guy and goin to clemson plus hill is just a big nasty over 300 plus if he is good enough to go to bamma he is deffinatly good enough to go to ut
 
#9
#9
agreed i stand corrected bars is no longer a 250 guy but shular is but bars is still a four star i would have been happy with shular bars and hill i know guiermo commited really early so might not of been avoidable.
 
#12
#12
SmokeySteve said:
Agree in principle that we need to always have a few OL and DL in each class. Bit concerned most of our OL's are within the same class which means when they graduate we will be scrambling again and low on experienced depth. Right now though, I care about one thing - DL!!!!!! What the Hades happened that we can't get anymore good ones. Can we do an entire class of DL's? With the LBs we got, if we had DL depth look out! 1998 all over again - Defense made that team.
Click to expand...
The better teams just keep taking them away from us. One of the main reasons Tennessee has had this crappy run lately. You can tell which positions are coveted the most and where they end up. Recruiting is a dirty business. Tennessee has just been getting out bid or out worked for these guys. IMO. Until they fix it, they're not winning this conference. No matter where these classes end up ranked
 
#13
#13
Signing 25, we gonna have to get rid of nine.

If we had been allowed to sign 30, we would have had to get rid of 14.

You got to draw the line somewhere. That business where Les Miles had to tell two recruits that he didn't have room for them wasn't right. So I'm glad that the SEC took the step to limit it to 25.
 
#14
#14
volfrk86 said:
here is what i would like to see the class look like.
You can even take all four wr and the kicker and just take blanc off to fit in the ol and that would be sick. I just think they took the need at oline for grannite, now it is lookin like they may get one or none idk just somethin that has puzzeld me.

Awesome. Thank you.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#21
#21
I live in Nashville & watched Bars kid play a few times this year... He IS NOT SEC material! After seeing him play I questioned how on earth he had the Offers he did. I may have even said it out loud... Parents I set next to said his Family name got him the offers he had, his dad played at Notre Dame & used his connections wisely.
I'm buddies with Graham Shuler's dad, Graham is a Great Kid & will be a great College lineman, but UT never had a chance. His dad played at Auburn & is NOT a Vols fan, Stanford will be a good fit for him.

As for the 25 limit, I think it's going to make rebuilding a program all but impossible. As a staff you can't have any misses... & that's impossible when you're dealing with 18-20 yr old kids! I think limit should be 28-30
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#22
#22
It needs to go back to 28. We all know college kids for the most part aren't choir boys. Doesn't leave the coaching staffs much wiggle room. They just need to be the SEC. They shouldn't handicap it to appease the hypocrites in the big ten or whatever they call that crap league anymore. Slive has done little more than meddle with things he should have left alone since he got here.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top