Over Signing and the attrition that follows.

#152
#152
#154
#154
LebanonVolunteer said:
From what I see, I think they continue to over sign and continue to have the attrition. Folks looking at it and saying 40%, it's normal are correct. 40% over 4-5 years, not 1-2. We'll see where it's at when the last couple classes graduate. Common sense tells me UT will still be alarmingly high. I get improving the roster. I get adding guys who fit. Over signing STILL going into 2016? That's what tells me there is trouble in the future. Bruce, Perry, and Young. Most saying we have to flip the roster still today will be pointing at guys like those 3 in the future still saying we need to flip the roster. Imo it just makes zero sense. They have already signed over 80 kids. Obviously they are not still flipping the roster when you figure in upper class men starting. LOL@ the idea that they need to flip the roster when it's mostly THEIR Signee's they are flipping. Dial it back, I doubt it.
Click to expand...

Doubt it or not, they cannot keep forward counting guys and get a high quality class. And as much as you're questioning the attrition, you cannot say that the talent advantage is beginning to go in UT's favor more so especially versus SEC east teams. I cannot count the class mostly recruited by Dooley against them. You have a month to evaluate what you have and add to it, just not a fair evaluation versus coaches that have had two years to get to know kids and identify how they fit talent and chemistry wise.
 
#157
#157
LebanonVolunteer said:
Their signing classes in 1999, 2000, and 2001 were 17, 21, and 26.

Obviously a lot more development being done, and not so much over signing.
Click to expand...

Obviously a consistent stocked roster since the Majors days...totally different circumstances than when Butch took over...we had to recover from those Dooley classes where he carefully cultivated 19-21 athletically average to below average prospects whose common attribute is they said ok. We managed to hold on to an inordinate amount of those guys...almost like they didn't have anywhere better to go. :pinch:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#160
#160
LebanonVolunteer said:
Not really.

1999-2004

SECE finish: 2nd, 2nd, 1st, 3rd, 1st, 1st.

If that's downward, I'd happily take it today.
Click to expand...

Those classes didn't begin to hit the field until 2000. Most didn't contribute for at least a couple of years. That means you have to carry them out until 2008. There is no way our program was better from 2000-2008 than it was from 95-99.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#161
#161
wtorange said:
Those classes didn't begin to hit the field until 2000. Most didn't contribute for at least a couple of years. That means you have to carry them out until 2008. There is no way our program was better from 2000-2008 than it was from 95-99.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying it was better. The link posted was talking about the 2001 roster. Obviously that would in large part include kids who signed from 1999-2001. 247 doesn't show how many were signed in 1998 or I would have included those as well. Do I think ALOT of kids who signed in 1999 and 2000 were seeing the field in 2001? Of course.

UT was very much competing for the SEC without over signing 80+ kids in 3 classes.
 
#162
#162
wtorange said:
Those classes didn't begin to hit the field until 2000. Most didn't contribute for at least a couple of years. That means you have to carry them out until 2008. There is no way our program was better from 2000-2008 than it was from 95-99.
Click to expand...

Recruiting wasn't a problem in the early 2000s. We had consensus top-5 classes in 2000 and 2002, with at least eight future NFL starters (Jason Witten, Jabari Greer, Kevin Burnett, Parys Haralson, Justin Harrell, Omar Gaither, Jason Allen, and Gibril Wilson) and college stars like Casey Clausen, Michael Munoz, and Gerald Riggs, Jr. We also got guys still in the NFL like Arian Foster, Tony McDaniel, Robert Meachem and Jerrod Mayo in other classes in the early 2000s.

Talent-wise those years were definitely comparable to the late 90s. And Lebvol is right - we didn't need to habitually oversign to get the job done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#163
#163
butchna said:
Let's get a four year sample of Butch taking care of the program and then we'll put that up against your imaginary roster where we babysit every prospect in the fervent hope that they eventually excel. These three excessive QBs pitted against Peterman,Ferguson and Matthews, would be a good start. FWIW IGWT USAA OMG
Click to expand...

Now there's an idea...actually wait and see when we have relevant data instead of rampant accusations and speculation. Just might work...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#164
#164
butchna said:
Obviously a consistent stocked roster since the Majors days...totally different circumstances than when Butch took over...we had to recover from those Dooley classes where he carefully cultivated 19-21 athletically average to below average prospects whose common attribute is they said ok. We managed to hold on to an inordinate amount of those guys...almost like they didn't have anywhere better to go. :pinch:
Click to expand...

Fulmer didn't inherit a slop jar of a roster in 1998/99 like Butch did so these comparisons are idiotic.

Butch will not be signing 28-32 person classes every year. This has been and is a great strategy to flush as much of the unwanted original roster and bringing in as much new blood as possible as fast as possible. Then assess that new blood and keep the best parts of it and do it again till we have 4 classes of good talent and can recruit like a normal successful program.

2014 - 32
2015 - 29
2016 - 23-25
2017 and beyond -20-25

It will level off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#165
#165
Ericvol2096 said:
Fulmer didn't inherit a slop jar of a roster in 1998/99 like Butch did so these comparisons are idiotic.

Butch will not be signing 28-32 person classes every year. This has been and is a great strategy to flush as much of the unwanted original roster and bringing in as much new blood as possible as fast as possible. Then assess that new blood and keep the best parts of it and do it again till we have 4 classes of good talent and can recruit like a normal successful program.

2014 - 32
2015 - 29
2016 - 23-25
2017 and beyond -20-25

It will level off.
Click to expand...

Agreed
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#166
#166
Ericvol2096 said:
Fulmer didn't inherit a slop jar of a roster in 1998/99 like Butch did so these comparisons are idiotic.

Butch will not be signing 28-32 person classes every year. This has been and is a great strategy to flush as much of the unwanted original roster and bringing in as much new blood as possible as fast as possible. Then assess that new blood and keep the best parts of it and do it again till we have 4 classes of good talent and can recruit like a normal successful program.

2014 - 32
2015 - 29
2016 - 23-25
2017 and beyond -20-25

It will level off.
Click to expand...

Yep. One would think this is quite obvious. Unfortunately, it is hard to fathom for some.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#167
#167
Obviously the "flipping" and "flushing" of the roster would make a lot more sense if it were Dooley kids being flushed. Of course the 8 who just walked from the 2014 class had nothing to do with Dools.
 
#168
#168
LebanonVolunteer said:
Obviously the "flipping" and "flushing" of the roster would make a lot more sense if it were Dooley kids being flushed. Of course the 8 who just walked from the 2014 class had nothing to do with Dools.
Click to expand...

We had the youngest roster in college football last year. Your suggestion to get our program respectable is to make it younger?

You have to have veteran leadership around to provide an example of how you train and adjust to the role of student athlete, plus many of Dooley's veterans were at least solid back-ups.

Fielding a roster of 50+ guys who are not old enough to drink is asinine to growing a team.
 
#169
#169
utvol372 said:
We had the youngest roster in college football last year. Your suggestion to get our program respectable is to make it younger?

You have to have veteran leadership around to provide an example of how you train and adjust to the role of student athlete, plus many of Dooley's veterans were at least solid back-ups.

Fielding a roster of 50+ guys who are not old enough to drink is asinine to growing a team.
Click to expand...

Wait...Wat?

I've long been an advocate of keeping the older guys and not so focused on over signing which leads to the roster being "young". Those screaming we need to "flip" the roster faster IS making it younger. I've said develop them. Not "flush" the roster.

"We don't have time to develop these kids". Was recently tossed out there. "Not starting as a SO, dump em and sign more". Was another great plan. LOL
 
Last edited:
#170
#170
LebanonVolunteer said:
Obviously the "flipping" and "flushing" of the roster would make a lot more sense if it were Dooley kids being flushed. Of course the 8 who just walked from the 2014 class had nothing to do with Dools.
Click to expand...

As I mentioned, the players happy to play for Dooley weren't going anywhere...movement was going to be AROUND them for the most part...you're neglecting Alan Posey, Christian Harris and Vincent Dallas in your little attrition narrative also. Butch has access to an entirely different level of athlete in upgrading from Cincy to Tennessee. He's adjusting his standards on factors other than strength and speed. He's been impressive establishing a Vols brand of standards. Recruiting will fall in line with that more and more with each class. JMO FWIW PETA NAFTA NRA
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#171
#171
butchna said:
As I mentioned, the players happy to play for Dooley weren't going anywhere...movement was going to be AROUND them for the most part...you're neglecting Alan Posey, Christian Harris and Vincent Dallas in your little attrition narrative also. Butch has access to an entirely different level of athlete in upgrading from Cincy to Tennessee. He's adjusting his standards on factors other than strength and speed. He's been impressive establishing a Vols brand of standards. Recruiting will fall in line with that more and more with each class. JMO FWIW PETA NAFTA NRA
Click to expand...




Butchna, I've been following Tennessee football for over 50 years and still don't understand this recruiting thing. Maybe in another 50 years I'll learn how to figure out the "Big Board" deal and which 20-23 players to put on it that I would sign and stick with come he!! or high water. But instead of doing that I might be better off just learning how to argue some ridiculous, off the wall crap about integrity and numbers.
I really like what Butch is doing on the recruiting trail.
JMO FWIW APPLE ORANGE
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#173
#173
butchna said:
As I mentioned, the players happy to play for Dooley weren't going anywhere...movement was going to be AROUND them for the most part...you're neglecting Alan Posey, Christian Harris and Vincent Dallas in your little attrition narrative also. Butch has access to an entirely different level of athlete in upgrading from Cincy to Tennessee. He's adjusting his standards on factors other than strength and speed. He's been impressive establishing a Vols brand of standards. Recruiting will fall in line with that more and more with each class. JMO FWIW PETA NAFTA NRA
Click to expand...

OldVol49vfl said:
Butchna, I've been following Tennessee football for over 50 years and still don't understand this recruiting thing. Maybe in another 50 years I'll learn how to figure out the "Big Board" deal and which 20-23 players to put on it that I would sign and stick with come he!! or high water. But instead of doing that I might be better off just learning how to argue some ridiculous, off the wall crap about integrity and numbers.
I really like what Butch is doing on the recruiting trail.
JMO FWIW APPLE ORANGE
Click to expand...

:good!:

It's hard to understand how having a roster that looks like this one and is already on the road to being even better is a bad thing. Especially when the attrition percentage is mid-peer. I guess Butch will have to live with only pleasing 99 out of a 100 Vol fans. Oh well. TIFWIW TWRA TVA TENNCARE
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#174
#174
This would be even less of an issue if not for having an 85 man roster limit when a school can sign 25 per class. This actually encourages attrition. Kinda stupid really.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#175
#175
MrVolton said:
In recruiting, NO ONE is a lock. You can't recruit like they are either.
Click to expand...

There would be a lot of UT recent commits who chose to not take ANY visits other than UT after committing who might disagree with you. The day they were allowed to commit, they considered themselves a lock. It was then up to UT to follow through.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top