Recruiting Forum: Football Talk II

Status
Not open for further replies.
#1,676
#1,676
nicksjuzunk said:
Thanks for the well wishing guys. I'm pretty sure we will be ok, but I've never been through a hurricane. Knoxville tended to lack those when I was growing up.

We are in the center of the island, and on relatively high ground. The hurricane is still hours away, but the coasts are already flooding badly as the storm is pushing the tides in. A lot of people are losing a lot. We have family who are going to be severely affected, so prayers for them please. :hi:
Click to expand...

Hey great posts. Prayers coming for all to stay safe!!! A country boy can survive!!!!:good!:
 
#1,679
#1,679
ORNGFACTOR said:
Okay, so lets say this fella is right and that the stat is skewed. Call my insight as being in a bad mood for going 0-5 3 years in a row. For now, I say my apologies and move on...but...

I don't see how inverting the schedule, going 2-5, justifying losses bc we played ranked teams, and then saying that we had "near" wins makes the 0-5 stat (regardless of however skewed he wants to make it) any less relevant or not as bad.

In fact, the way he explains it makes the stat even more real bc we still lose 5 in a row if we play KY and Vandy in the first two games. Tomatoe...Toe mato.
Click to expand...
The purpose of 0-5 doesn't consider the end record and never has. Take Vandy and Kentucky and switch it with two of our loses and we are 2-3 in SEC play and you aren't complaining. The premise of the stat is to exaggerate the state of the program. It has no meaning outside of upsetting people like the stats given on political commercials. The END record can be discussed with legitimacy and if its 2-6 or worse then you may compare to Florida or Georgia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,680
#1,680
ORNGFACTOR said:
Okay, so lets say this fella is right and that the stat is skewed. Call my insight as being in a bad mood for going 0-5 3 years in a row. For now, I say my apologies and move on...but...

I don't see how inverting the schedule, going 2-5, justifying losses bc we played ranked teams, and then saying that we had "near" wins makes the 0-5 stat (regardless of however skewed he wants to make it) any less relevant or not as bad.

In fact, the way he explains it makes the stat even more real bc we still lose 5 in a row if we play KY and Vandy in the first two games. Tomatoe...Toe mato.
Click to expand...

i think the point is even though we started the last 3 seasons 1-0, doesn't mean anything, we didn't go undefeated. it's how you finish and your record in the end
 
#1,683
#1,683
utvols88 said:
The purpose of 0-5 doesn't consider the end record and never has. Take Vandy and Kentucky and switch it with two of our loses and we are 2-3 in SEC play and you aren't complaining. The premise of the stat is to exaggerate the state of the program. It has no meaning outside of upsetting people like the stats given on political commercials. The END record can be discussed with legitimacy and if its 2-6 or worse then you may compare to Florida or Georgia.
Click to expand...

The premise of the stat is to exaggerate the state of the program... I agree although it isn't much of an exaggeration when our schedule has been close to the same for years with FL being the 3rd game, Bama in Oct, and Vandy/KY at the end. Upsetting people... I agree and rightly so. Agreeing to see the end result and then making a decision like you suggest is all well and good but bottom line is we still go 3-5....IF we beat Mizzou...
 
Last edited:
#1,686
#1,686
ORNGFACTOR said:
The premise of the stat is to exaggerate the state of the program... I agree although it isn't much of an exaggeration when our schedule has been close to the same for years with FL being the 3rd game, Bama in Oct, and Vandy/KY at the end. Upsetting people... I agree and rightly so. Agreeing to see the end result and then making a decision like you suggest is all well and good but bottom line is we still go 3-5....IF we beat Mizzou.
Click to expand...

The point is that it is not truly indicative of the job that Dooley has done in turning around this program. That is where the stat is "skewed".
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,687
#1,687
PKT_VOL said:
The point is that it is not truly indicative of the job that Dooley has done in turning around this program. That is where the stat is "skewed".
Click to expand...
I went back to his post...he never mentioned Dooley or how his point validates Dooley turning the program around. His point (and yes I get his point although it doesn't change the end result much) would never be used to justify the job that Dooley has done in turning the program around. I don't think he ever meant that...surely you both don't suggest using the last 3 years records to justify Dooley's job?

I agree that Dooley has done a lot to turn the program around but you don't see the results in the record.
 
#1,689
#1,689
ORNGFACTOR said:
Does Hart have connections with Stoops? Please forgive me if this kindles another drama over coaching candidates but Stoops has made it known that he wants out at OK and is wanting to return to the SEC. I think Rick Hart helped hire Stoops?
Click to expand...

Stoops would be a good hire, but I wouldn't throw the bank at him which it would be what it would take to get him out of Okla. I think (at least the rumors said so) we went to him after the Kiffin debacle and indeed threw the bank at him. Back then with 3 weeks prior to signing day, that would of been a great move. However, his "talented" Okla teams, have not impressed me especially in the Big 12. They find a way to lose a couple of games. That translates to 4 or 5 games in the SEC. No thanks.
 
#1,692
#1,692
babyavi said:
well if dooley was in a pressure cooker, imagine Gruden, with all the fame and glory he brings and success, he better have at least 9 wins next year (thats what everyone will start saying if we land him). If he is getting paid close to 6 million to coach here, he better back it up.
Click to expand...

i agree with your general point, but he will be so entrenched financially, we will be along for a long ride, regardless. i also dont think the fanbse will be demanding 9 wins in year 1 either. year 2, now thats a different story.
 
#1,695
#1,695
BigOrangeD said:
It's Bama. It will always be Bama unless Bama does not want the recruit. If they want him, they will get him.
Click to expand...

They're losing some battles just not to us.

FSU came in the state last year and went toe to toe with them.

Auburn was beating them head to head for prospects too.

Bama can be beat on and off the field.
 
#1,697
#1,697
BigOrangeD said:
It's Bama. It will always be Bama unless Bama does not want the recruit. If they want him, they will get him.
Click to expand...

UA certainly is having its way right now on the field and in recruiting. However, I am reminded of an old timer's saying, "The sun doesn't always shine on a dog's ass, either the sun moves or the dog has to move."
 
#1,698
#1,698
The Breakerboy said:
They're losing some battles just not to us.

FSU came in the state last year and went toe to toe with them.

Auburn was beating them head to head for prospects too.

Bama can be beat on and off the field.
Click to expand...

Somebody needs to pull recruits away from them. This sh#t is getting old.
 
#1,700
#1,700
The Breakerboy said:
They're losing some battles just not to us.

FSU came in the state last year and went toe to toe with them.

Auburn was beating them head to head for prospects too.

Bama can be beat on and off the field.
Click to expand...


FSU came in and beat Bama for one recruit last year and that was Winston. They passed on Shanks. Casher grades were so bad they were surprised he even qualified. AU beat Bama for 3 prospects last year. Bama beat AU for over half of their class.

They can be beat on and off the field just like anyone else but lets not pretend like they were truly challenged instate regarding recruiting.
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.

VN Store



Back
Top