Why UT wins 9 + in 2020

[sjt18]

Florida is ahead of us the last two seasons in wins, coaching and player development and recruiting.

They also had a head start.... and A LOT more instate talent.

They had a better recruiting class than we did last year and a much better one this season not too mention they have easily beat us the last two years haven’t even been competitive

That will be proven on the field... not because a journalist at 247 got a tingle.

UF's class is no more than 2 players short of being full. UT has to fill 7 or 8 more. Last year according to 247, UF finished with 276.85 points while UT had 267.07. That is well within the margin of error of the expertise of the journalists who hand out "stars". At this point, UT trails UF by 56 points. So how UT finishes really comes down to who they end up with in those 7-8 remaining spots. They won't finish 56 points behind UF even if they sign all 3* guys... which doesn't look likely.

and I don’t think that will change in 2020. I’m not sure Mullen will win a Natty or not at Florida but I know this he is going to own Pruitt on the field.

No you don't. You simply don't. I haven't followed you enough to know if this is some personal dislike of Pruitt or if you somehow do not think he's a good coach for objective reasons. But if he continues to develop players like he did during this season and gets to a point where he is backfilling with guys ready to play rather than starting from the miserable place Jones left the program then he's going to be successful.

Lots of folks here loved Jones. He appealed to emotion. He "won" on NSD... helped by homers like Hurd and legacy players. Maybe you were one of them. I wasn't. He took a 7 or 8 win team in his first year and turned it into a 5 win team. His brilliant "schemes" were a joke. His player development and management was worse... and that was visible within the first two years. He underperformed every roster he had... and his recruiting was overrated. But the worst thing is his ideas on S&C and player development (technique). Most of the roster he left had to simultaneously be "untaught" bad technique while trying to catch up in the weight room.

Many love to hate on Dooley. He was a lazy recruiter and apparently a jerk to deal with... but even the thin roster he left was developed the way SEC players are developed. Jones thought he was going to revolutionize football in the SEC... literally that he was 'smarter" than everyone else. Personally... I'm willing to give Pruitt a little slack if he shows progress.

 

[sjt18]

...but all of the national title winners (and most of the schools that compete for it) are in the top 5 almost every year according to those guys. Definitely the top 10.

Clemson wasn't. OU's last 5 classes have averaged 11th. They haven't had a top 5 class during that period. Utah was close to making it in winning the conference over USC and Washington... USC has had a top 5 class in 3 of the last 5 years. FSU has 3 top 10 finishes on NSD in the last 5 years with the worst class at 19th. They've been beaten by teams that have never finished in the top 10.

Joe Burrow was a 4* recruit to tOSU. He was ranked the #8 dual threat QB by 247 composite... behind these in order of finish Murray, Stidham, Wimbush, Travis Jonsen, Darnold, Jauan Jennings, and Sheriron Jones (remember him?).

I'm not poopooing the rankings totally. But this idea that they are ironclad indicators of talent level or future performance... just isn't true.

 

[05_never_again]

Clemson wasn't. OU's last 5 classes have averaged 11th. They haven't had a top 5 class during that period. Utah was close to making it in winning the conference over USC and Washington... USC has had a top 5 class in 3 of the last 5 years. FSU has 3 top 10 finishes on NSD in the last 5 years with the worst class at 19th. They've been beaten by teams that have never finished in the top 10.

Joe Burrow was a 4* recruit to tOSU. He was ranked the #8 dual threat QB by 247 composite... behind these in order of finish Murray, Stidham, Wimbush, Travis Jonsen, Darnold, Jauan Jennings, and Sheriron Jones (remember him?).

I'm not poopooing the rankings totally. But this idea that they are ironclad indicators of talent level or future performance... just isn't true.

They aren't ironclad indicators at the individual level. 5-stars bust all the time. But they are great indicators at the class level. There are teams who often rank in the top 10 who haven't won or almost won a title, but there aren't any teams that consistently compete for titles who consistently recruit outside the top 10. Individual players bust all the time, so you have to scoop up all the 4s and 5s you can, because they aren't all going to be busts. The teams that scoop up the most 4s and 5s are the most successful - that's just a fact. As much as people love underdog stories, the teams winning (and largely competing for) titles aren't made up of players who have spent their whole life as an underdog. Even Joe Burrow, for example, I don't consider an underdog. He was a fairly highly recruited player (not an uber-recruit like Fields or Lawrence, but a really good player) out of HS; I mean, he was the 280th best HS player in the entire country. Just because you aren't a top 10 player or something like that doesn't mean you're a scrub. He transferred from Ohio St because he lost the starting QB job to a really good player who was taken as a 1st round draft pick the very next year. The kid could play, and I think most people knew that, but he just needed to find a spot where he could start.

Clemson began cracking the top 10 right around the time they stopped Clemsoning and started getting in the CFP every year. 2015.

 

[Volunteer_Kirby]

UT wins 9 next year if we win a bowl game. No reason to expect 9 regular season wins, especially after the way we started this season.

 

[sjt18]

They aren't ironclad indicators at the individual level. 5-stars bust all the time. But they are great indicators at the class level. There are teams who often rank in the top 10 who haven't won or almost won a title, but there aren't any teams that consistently compete for titles who consistently recruit outside the top 10. Individual players bust all the time, so you have to scoop up all the 4s and 5s you can, because they aren't all going to be busts. The teams that scoop up the most 4s and 5s are the most successful - that's just a fact.

Or... players that get recruited by programs with a history of finding great players get a boost....

As much as people love underdog stories, the teams winning (and largely competing for) titles aren't made up of players who have spent their whole life as an underdog. Even Joe Burrow, for example, I don't consider an underdog. He was a fairly highly recruited player (not an uber-recruit like Fields or Lawrence, but a really good player) out of HS; I mean, he was the 280th best HS player in the entire country. Just because you aren't a top 10 player or something like that doesn't mean you're a scrub. He transferred from Ohio St because he lost the starting QB job to a really good player who was taken as a 1st round draft pick the very next year. The kid could play, and I think most people knew that, but he just needed to find a spot where he could start.

Didn't say he was a scrub or lowly rated. Only that the rankings were off significantly when you look at them. Lamar Jackson was in Burrow's class and a composite 3* ranked 12th.

Clemson began cracking the top 10 right around the time they stopped Clemsoning and started getting in the CFP every year. 2015.

Well, no. The guys who pushed them to the top tier were from those lower ranked classes. In fact, they haven't had a top 5 finish during that run that I can find. They've averaged 10.3 over the last 5 years. From 2009 to 2014, their highest ranked class was 10th. They had two classes outside the top 25.

So throughout this rise... they've had classes ranked similar to what we see Pruitt doing... or worse. But Sweeney and his staff know how to coach. They know talent. They find and develop character. They didn't need sports writers to tell them how to build a team. I don't know that Pruitt can do that.... but it can be done.

 

[sjt18]

@05_never_again

Really straight forward question. Do you think guys like Spraggins would remain 3* if they were committed to Bama or UGA? How much difference do you truly believe there is between a guy like that and say... Ratledge?

 

[05_never_again]

@05_never_again

Really straight forward question. Do you think guys like Spraggins would remain 3* if they were committed to Bama or UGA? How much difference do you truly believe there is between a guy like that and say... Ratledge?

There definitely is a bump associated with guys committing to certain programs. Particularly Alabama. However, the fact that Alabama has had a #1 or #2 class almost every year since about 2009 and they've won, on average, a national title every other year since this time speaks for itself. The recruiting class (not player) rankings, over time, aren't wrong. There isn't a single team that is consistently outside the top 10 that consistently competes for national titles. There are teams that consistently punch above their weight (like Wisconsin), but they aren't competing for titles every year.

If Alabama had the #1 or #2 class every year but was going 10-2 every year, then I think the argument of "...but their prospects are getting bumped!" would be more valid. That would be a pretty good indication that perhaps their 5-stars were really 4s and some of their 4s were 3s. But that isn't happening.

Well, no. The guys who pushed them to the top tier were from those lower ranked classes. In fact, they haven't had a top 5 finish during that run that I can find. They've averaged 10.3 over the last 5 years. From 2009 to 2014, their highest ranked class was 10th. They had two classes outside the top 25.

The guys who pushed them to the top were from lower ranked classes. I'm not suggesting that a team with a history of recruiting outside the top 10 can't compete for a title in a single given year. The guys keeping them at the top (which is much harder, IMO) are from top classes. I don't think Clemson would have been able to replicate their 2015-? level of play with recruiting classes ranked anywhere from 10-25 overall. The point is that they became a consistently elite program (they weren't a consistently elite program yet in 2015) when they started consistently recruiting top classes.

 

[99gator]

Oh wow... what a surprise! 99gator showed up to inform UT fans that their expectations are too high. This wasn't predictable at all....

I am telling you what I think.

What anyone else thinks is up to them.

I didn’t expect Florida to win the SEC this year. Does that mean I think that is a goal the program can’t achieve or I am happy not winning the SEC? Or....does that mean in the year 2019, I thought other teams were better than Florida and that Florida would not achieve that goal?

I think 4 schools that will finish the season ranked in the top 10 will beat Tennessee next year. If that’s a hate filled Earth shattering opinion to you, I don’t care.

In addition, it’s December 2019. I reserve the right to change my opinion eight or so months from now

 

[sjt18]

I am telling you what I think.

You always do. And you are always consistent in tilting your head at a very subtle angle as you look down at UT and Vol fans.

I didn’t expect Florida to win the SEC this year. Does that mean I think that is a goal the program can’t achieve or I am happy not winning the SEC? Or....does that mean in the year 2019, I thought other teams were better than Florida and that Florida would not achieve that goal?

No. But you're lying if you said you didn't expect to compete for the East.... this year and every year.

I think 4 schools that will finish the season ranked in the top 10 will beat Tennessee next year. If that’s a hate filled Earth shattering opinion to you, I don’t care.

First, that's not the issue. Second, it isn't a done deal. It is your arrogance in "telling us what you think" any time a UT fan expresses the notion that we should expect UT to compete with those 4 teams... much less your mighty Gators.

You are who you are. You've been doing this for a long time. You are subtle... but very consistent.

In addition, it’s December 2019. I reserve the right to change my opinion eight or so months from now

But... we can be pretty certain you won't.

 

[sjt18]

There definitely is a bump associated with guys committing to certain programs. Particularly Alabama. However, the fact that Alabama has had a #1 or #2 class almost every year since about 2009 and they've won, on average, a national title every other year since this time speaks for itself. The recruiting class (not player) rankings, over time, aren't wrong. There isn't a single team that is consistently outside the top 10 that consistently competes for national titles. There are teams that consistently punch above their weight (like Wisconsin), but they aren't competing for titles every year.

But that doesn't disprove the point. Saban gets talent. He has gotten top talent consistently. The recruiting sites rank his targets higher.

It is a matter of the chicken or the egg... and I think you choose the wrong one.

If Alabama had the #1 or #2 class every year but was going 10-2 every year, then I think the argument of "...but their prospects are getting bumped!" would be more valid. That would be a pretty good indication that perhaps their 5-stars were really 4s and some of their 4s were 3s. But that isn't happening.

Why? That does not follow.

If someone comes along and begins to find the underrated 3* players... will they be less talented or capable of championships than teams with higher class rankings?

I'm not claiming Pruitt is that guy. I am simply saying there are more than enough 3* guys out there with 4/5* talent that a coach really good at evals can win without being "ranked" high. I cited some examples.

The guys who pushed them to the top were from lower ranked classes. I'm not suggesting that a team with a history of recruiting outside the top 10 can't compete for a title in a single given year. The guys keeping them at the top (which is much harder, IMO) are from top classes. I don't think Clemson would have been able to replicate their 2015-? level of play with recruiting classes ranked anywhere from 10-25 overall. The point is that they became a consistently elite program (they weren't a consistently elite program yet in 2015) when they started consistently recruiting top classes.

Except that they averaged 10th... and did they start signing better players or did the recruiting sites start to realize that Sweeney was finding talent?

 

[99gator]

It is your arrogance in "telling us what you think" any time a UT fan expresses the notion that we should expect UT to compete with those 4 teams... much less your mighty Gators.

You should expect to compete when you have a football team good enough to do it. Tennessee hasn't had that.

They are moving in the right direction.

But, damn. They've lost 13 in a row to one school, 14 of the last 15 to another, and 8 of the last 10 to yet another. Under Pruitt, they've lost to these teams by an average of 28.5 points per game.

Forgive me, I have doubts they break through next season.

 

[05_never_again]

But that doesn't disprove the point. Saban gets talent. He has gotten top talent consistently. The recruiting sites rank his targets higher.

I think you're missing the point. You say that the recruiting sites rank Saban's targets higher. Of course that's true. The more important question is why do they rank his targets higher? Are they ranking them higher just because he's Saban, or because Saban targets guys who actually are really talented? I won't deny for a second that there's a Bama bump - the question is to what degree does it distort Alabama's recruiting rankings. And every big name school has a bump factor...his name escapes me, but one of our recruits for 2020 was unrated by the recruiting services until he committed to Tennessee, whereupon he instantaneously got a 3-star rating.

If the recruiting sites ranked Saban's targets higher just because he's Saban, then they are overrating Saban's targets. If Saban's targets, by and large, aren't really as good as their rankings indicate, then that should be borne out over time, should it not (i.e., he should underachieve)? Instead, Saban lands what the recruiting services say are the best classes, and he wins national titles every other year on average. Seems like the recruiting services are right about him.

Now, if Saban starts going 10-2 consistently with #1 or #2 recruiting classes, then I'll be right there with you in saying that there's a "Saban effect" or perhaps Saban is losing his touch.

 

[sjt18]

I think you're missing the point. You say that the recruiting sites rank Saban's targets higher. Of course that's true. The more important question is why do they rank his targets higher?

No. The relevant question is if there are players as good as those Saban decides to pursue that get a lower ranking while being as good or better.

People tend to think as if the recruiting sites have an established standard as to what it takes to get 4 or 5 stars. They don't. In fact, they arbitrarily limit the number of high rankings they hand out. I think they do the same by position. I don't think there is a lot of dispute that some years are better than others overall and especially by position. A ranking could be off by a "star" simply based on that year's competition. It is decidedly true that Saban finds and pursues talented guys. It is decidedly untrue that he finds or pursues every talented guy.

Are they ranking them higher just because he's Saban, or because Saban targets guys who actually are really talented? I won't deny for a second that there's a Bama bump - the question is to what degree does it distort Alabama's recruiting rankings. And every big name school has a bump factor...his name escapes me, but one of our recruits for 2020 was unrated by the recruiting services until he committed to Tennessee, whereupon he instantaneously got a 3-star rating.

If the recruiting sites ranked Saban's targets higher just because he's Saban, then they are overrating Saban's targets.

Both.

If Saban's targets, by and large, aren't really as good as their rankings indicate, then that should be borne out over time, should it not (i.e., he should underachieve)? Instead, Saban lands what the recruiting services say are the best classes, and he wins national titles every other year on average. Seems like the recruiting services are right about him.

But if that were a "rule" covering all recruit rankings then USC would be in the playoff this year. Coaching can hurt talent... and the recruiting sites can have biases that cause them to over/under rate players. Not just miss them... but misevaluate them. One instance would be SoCal recruits. Traditionally their leagues have been very competitive so a kid that looks good in their league is assumed to be a 4/5* caliber player... but it could be nothing more than a good player in a good league during a down year.

My main point is that someone who is great at talent evals can build a great roster while not "winning" on NSD according to the recruiting sites... and vice versa.

Now, if Saban starts going 10-2 consistently with #1 or #2 recruiting classes, then I'll be right there with you in saying that there's a "Saban effect" or perhaps Saban is losing his touch.

Or he could still be getting players while someone caught and passed him in regard to scheme or development. Or someone broke the code and signed talent that he missed or lost out on.

Saban knows talent. The recruiting sites trust that and shade rankings toward his guys. Nothing particularly wrong with that... but it isn't an objective system.

 

[05_never_again]

No. The relevant question is if there are players as good as those Saban decides to pursue that get a lower ranking while being as good or better.

People tend to think as if the recruiting sites have an established standard as to what it takes to get 4 or 5 stars. They don't. In fact, they arbitrarily limit the number of high rankings they hand out. I think they do the same by position. I don't think there is a lot of dispute that some years are better than others overall and especially by position. A ranking could be off by a "star" simply based on that year's competition. It is decidedly true that Saban finds and pursues talented guys. It is decidedly untrue that he finds or pursues every talented guy.

Are they ranking them higher just because he's Saban, or because Saban targets guys who actually are really talented? I won't deny for a second that there's a Bama bump - the question is to what degree does it distort Alabama's recruiting rankings. And every big name school has a bump factor...his name escapes me, but one of our recruits for 2020 was unrated by the recruiting services until he committed to Tennessee, whereupon he instantaneously got a 3-star rating.

Both.

But if that were a "rule" covering all recruit rankings then USC would be in the playoff this year. Coaching can hurt talent... and the recruiting sites can have biases that cause them to over/under rate players. Not just miss them... but misevaluate them. One instance would be SoCal recruits. Traditionally their leagues have been very competitive so a kid that looks good in their league is assumed to be a 4/5* caliber player... but it could be nothing more than a good player in a good league during a down year.

My main point is that someone who is great at talent evals can build a great roster while not "winning" on NSD according to the recruiting sites... and vice versa.


Or he could still be getting players while someone caught and passed him in regard to scheme or development. Or someone broke the code and signed talent that he missed or lost out on.

Saban knows talent. The recruiting sites trust that and shade rankings toward his guys. Nothing particularly wrong with that... but it isn't an objective system.

Their limiting isn't as arbitrary as you think. The limit the number of 5-stars in any given year to 32 because those are guys they think can be first round draft picks. There are only 32 of those to go around, even if there might be other first round talents in addition to that 32.

Somebody who is great at talent evaluations can still build a great roster, but that still doesn't really change the fact that consistent title contenders don't consistently have classes outside the top 10.

As for the site systematically shading rankings toward big name coaches' guys, how would you explain Georgia's incredible recruiting since Kirby arrived. Over the last 4 years, the only school who has recruited better than them is Alabama, and it's been by a really narrow margin. Are they biased towards Kirby's guys too, even though he had no track record to go on as a HC before taking the Georgia job? Personally, I think the recruiting services are biased more based on what camps you go to and such rather than what coach they think you're going to ultimately sign with.

But if that were a "rule" covering all recruit rankings then USC would be in the playoff this year. Coaching can hurt talent... and the recruiting sites can have biases that cause them to over/under rate players. Not just miss them... but misevaluate them. One instance would be SoCal recruits. Traditionally their leagues have been very competitive so a kid that looks good in their league is assumed to be a 4/5* caliber player... but it could be nothing more than a good player in a good league during a down year.

I didn't say that every school that recruits in the top 10 competes for championships. I said every school that consistently competes for championships consistently recruits in the top 10. There are teams in the top 10 that appear to consistently underachieve given their class rankings, USC probably being chief among them at the moment. But there isn't a school that recruits consistently, say, in the 20s but is in the mix for the playoff every year. Wisconsin is probably the school that comes closest to something like that - either 247 consistently underrates their classes or their coaching staffs are great at evaluation and development (more likely).

 

[lawgator1]

someone explain how Florida's roster is better. It's Pruitt's third year. Gators at home. Why shouldn't we win?

TN and FLA rosters are not too far apart talent wise. Gators only have a slight edge right now.

Tennessee will be very good for SEC standards On the offensive line and along the defensive front 7. The guys at these positions will be just about as good as anyone they play (at least the starters and a few of the back-ups) baring a lot of injuries. Tennessee should be at least average at QB with plenty of talented depth there as well. As has already been said, Chaney's offenses flourish in the second year. I expect alot more consistency next season no matter who is under center.

Tennessee has 4 very talented opponents next year, but you know the way football goes. One of those teams is likely to have a bad day against us. If that happens then Tennessee will certainly be good enough to steal a win against a good opponent. 9 - 3 is a very likely scenario for the Vols next year.

UF has a significant advantage at skill positions and a substantial depth advantage on the offensive and defensive lines. This is particularly true on the offensive line, where UF recruited heavily last year and has managed to red shirt a few players to build depth, let them work out and work on conditioning. Despite having a ton of issues there this year as that went on, UF managed to do pretty well, losing only to UGA and LSU, and performing respectably in those games.

With Franks bowing out and relieving some internal political pressure on the team that we've heard about for awhile, UF should be better offensively, and hopefully with improved run blocking we might be a whole lot better in terms of scoring. WR remains strong position for UF.

Defensively we lose Henderson, but we have plenty of depth on this team on that side of the ball. People have been predicting big fall offs for us every year and it has yet to materialize. We just reload.

Its a long way off, but barring major injury I would expect UF to be the preseason favorite by many to win the SECe

 

[sjt18]

Their limiting isn't as arbitrary as you think. The limit the number of 5-stars in any given year to 32 because those are guys they think can be first round draft picks. There are only 32 of those to go around, even if there might be other first round talents in addition to that 32.

That's still arbitrary. Taking any 4 consecutive years... you aren't going to get 128 players who would have been 5* players in any of those years. In any given year not even counting the complete busts... you could have 8 or 10 guys that would not have been 5* in any of the other 4 years. You could have that many that would have been 5* in any other year.

Then you have a much, much greater chance of error between 3* and 4*. The fact that they miss easily as many good players as they reward with 4/5* AND that a lot of 4/5* guys become Tyler Byrd... is telling.

Somebody who is great at talent evaluations can still build a great roster, but that still doesn't really change the fact that consistent title contenders don't consistently have classes outside the top 10.

Except that Clemson did.

There's also the degree to which Bama has simply been dominant... over teams that had high recruiting rankings and ones that had those averaging outside the top 10.

As for the site systematically shading rankings toward big name coaches' guys, how would you explain Georgia's incredible recruiting since Kirby arrived. Over the last 4 years, the only school who has recruited better than them is Alabama, and it's been by a really narrow margin. Are they biased towards Kirby's guys too, even though he had no track record to go on as a HC before taking the Georgia job? Personally, I think the recruiting services are biased more based on what camps you go to and such rather than what coach they think you're going to ultimately sign with.

There are several factors that go into it. One we haven't discussed is the perceived quality of football played in particular states. Georgia is known to produce great talent as is Florida. Smart came in and started getting the players that were getting away from Richt. Richt was a respected recruiter in a talent rich state. Smart did better by comparison.

And... he got players that Saban and others were chasing.

 

[sjt18]

UF has a significant advantage at skill positions and a substantial depth advantage on the offensive and defensive lines. This is particularly true on the offensive line, where UF recruited heavily last year and has managed to red shirt a few players to build depth, let them work out and work on conditioning. Despite having a ton of issues there this year as that went on, UF managed to do pretty well, losing only to UGA and LSU, and performing respectably in those games.

With Franks bowing out and relieving some internal political pressure on the team that we've heard about for awhile, UF should be better offensively, and hopefully with improved run blocking we might be a whole lot better in terms of scoring. WR remains strong position for UF.

Defensively we lose Henderson, but we have plenty of depth on this team on that side of the ball. People have been predicting big fall offs for us every year and it has yet to materialize. We just reload.

Its a long way off, but barring major injury I would expect UF to be the preseason favorite by many to win the SECe

You know UF.

You don't know UT.

UT should be both deep and good on both sides of the LOS. The others I don't have a good basis for comparison at this point.

 

[05_never_again]

Except that Clemson did.

There's also the degree to which Bama has simply been dominant... over teams that had high recruiting rankings and ones that had those averaging outside the top 10.

Yeah, for one year. They didn't start being in the mix for the playoff every year until they started consistently having top 3-5 classes. I'm looking at performance at the class level over a period of time, not performance in one particular year. Our difference is you think the egg comes first and I think the chicken comes first.

Dabo got there initially with lower ranked classes, but he appears to be staying there with elite classes.

 

[wmcovol]

Depends on 1) injuries and 2) QB play.

 

[sjt18]

Yeah, for one year. They didn't start being in the mix for the playoff every year until they started consistently having top 3-5 classes.

Sorry... but if they finish in the top 5 this year it will be the first time they've done it during Dabo's run. His previous top finish was 7th. You can confirm that pretty easily for yourself.

I'm looking at performance at the class level over a period of time, not performance in one particular year. Our difference is you think the egg comes first and I think the chicken comes first.

Sort of. I am saying that not all eggs that hatch into good chickens get awards for beauty at the county fair.

Dabo got there initially with lower ranked classes, but he appears to be staying there with elite classes.

Or... the recruiting services have learned that the guys he pursues that didn't used to appeal to them... turn into pretty good players.

The four classes that led to one of the best teams in the history of CFB last year ranked: 9th, 11th, 16th, and 7th. No top 5 classes. The best class of the group were the freshmen who had the least impact overall.

 

[05_never_again]

Sorry... but if they finish in the top 5 this year it will be the first time they've done it during Dabo's run. His previous top finish was 7th. You can confirm that pretty easily for yourself.

He's been in the top 10 each of the last 3 years. Should have said top 10 instead of top 5.

 

[sjt18]

He's been in the top 10 each of the last 3 years. Should have said top 10 instead of top 5.

And on his way... he was generally between 10 and 20 with a couple of outliers worse/better. Which brings us back to the panic some are having over Pruitt and UT ranking 20th currently. My guess is that the Vols will rank in the top 15 by the time the ink is dry.

The difference between a #15 class and a #5 class can be the talent of the guy evaluating the players.

I have said since Kiffin that the guy who turns UT around will be unusually good at finding the 3* guys with 5* talent. That may or may not be Pruitt. However, imho, he is the best "coach" at UT strictly relating to knowing and coaching the game since Fulmer or possibly before. I have unanswered questions about Pruitt's ability to handle politics, long term management of the players and staff, recruiting, and in-game coaching. But I strongly believe he is good at teaching the game and developing players.

 

[sjt18]

He's been in the top 10 each of the last 3 years. Should have said top 10 instead of top 5.

what do you think of Holiday in spite of his 3* ranking?

IMHO, the recruiting sites have missed him in part because TCU probably was recruiting him as a full time QB. If he flips, I think he's the steal of the class... and will potentially bring UT's NSD ranking down.

 

[ABINGDON VOL FAN]

Agree with all this, except I think we get one of the 4 to get to 9 wins. Correction....technically 1 of the 3 since Florida is an automatic loss. Literally have a better chance of beating Alabama, Georgia or Oklahoma, all recent playoff teams multiple times, than Florida.

I agree that Florida may have the best team of the 4 next year. I still do not understand their loss to Georgia. It seemed like both teams were heading in different directions when they played.

 

[Catbone]

someone explain how Florida's roster is better. It's Pruitt's third year. Gators at home. Why shouldn't we win?

Lol