Matt Campbell’s definition of “talent”

[VolNash17]

Talking about BEFORE that.

Bottom line is their entire roster since they have started winning championships was ranked in the top 10… 79 players on their roster for the 2016 season was ranked 9th and they had good coaching. You can’t win national titles without Top 10 talent and good coaching

 

[BigSteve09]

You might be missing what I’m saying. I’m saying that a coach could be a genius but if he doesn’t have the basic tools he’s hopeless at a certain level of competition. Bring Campbells Iowa State over here and they probably lose 6 to 7 games, not because he’s doing something wrong but because there’s a limit on what coaching alone can do. The inverse is our 1990s teams, Fulmer is not a great coach but was able to achieve a ton because of superior talent. The better coach doesn’t always win

This Iowa State team would win 8 games minimum with our schedule.

 

[lukeneyland]

Stoops at Kentucky has that mentality as well, I think. It's not a bad way to build a strong foundation, but you do have to switch into that higher gear to recruit and utilize better talent.

Right now, I would take 2-3 seasons of classes like that to build depth and culture. I'd rather have those classes than the star-chasing Butch Jones used to do, signing extra guys just because it looked good on signing day, but they didn't pan out.

Stoops won’t ever win big with his reliance on running the ball at the expense of QB development. I hope he never figures that out

 

[VolNash17]

You might be missing what I’m saying. I’m saying that a coach could be a genius but if he doesn’t have the basic tools he’s hopeless at a certain level of competition. Bring Campbells Iowa State over here and they probably lose 6 to 7 games, not because he’s doing something wrong but because there’s a limit on what coaching alone can do. The inverse is our 1990s teams, Fulmer is not a great coach but was able to achieve a ton because of superior talent. The better coach doesn’t always win

Totally agree… I didn’t see Michigan State win the title. Didn’t see Iowa State winning the title. Didn’t see Kentucky winning the title. You need Good coaching AND top 10 talent. It’s been proven over and over and over again

 

[BigSteve09]

Stoops won’t ever win big with his reliance on running the ball at the expense of QB development. I hope he never figures that out

To tack onto this point and the Clemson convo going on in here too, imagine Kentucky getting a Tajh Boyd. That would probably be enough to kickstart them to at least break through the tier that they've been on since Stoops got there.

Tajh ending up there (you're welcome, Clemson) picked up their strong foundation (to one of this article's points) and moved them forward. Paving the way for more attention, more success, the better players everyone in here agrees that you need, and a 10-year talent like Watson, who carried them to the promised land.

 

[lilesrt]

They play in a very weak conference besides OU. Their type of success is not sustainable and wouldn’t ever be able to win an SEC/Natl title.

Why is it not sustainable?

 

[butchna]

Bottom line is their entire roster since they have started winning championships was ranked in the top 10… 79 players on their roster for the 2016 season was ranked 9th and they had good coaching. You can’t win national titles without Top 10 talent and good coaching

Building up THAT team that set the tone is where we’re at…nothing afterwards is relevant to our program. Swinney BUILT that program with classes that struggled to make the top 20.

 

[VolNash17]

Building up THAT team that set the tone is where we’re at…nothing afterwards is relevant to our program. Swinney BUILT that program with classes that struggled to make the top 20.

Yet he never won a national title without a COMPLETE roster in the Top 10… which is another example of needing top 10 talent to capture a national title.

 

[butchna]

Before that? 2016 is when they won their first national championship. Their roster was ranked 9th which included every scholarship player on the team for that season… before that they obviously didn’t win a national title

So how are the classes SINCE they won the championship relative to winning THAT championship?

 

[butchna]

Yet he never won a national title without a COMPLETE roster in the Top 10… which is another example of needing top 10 talent to capture a national title.

The hell he didn’t! Do the one’s before 2016! You had 5 star Deshaun Watson throwing to plenty of targets who weren’t. The game winner against Bama was to a walk-on!

 

[BigSteve09]

Building up THAT team that set the tone is where we’re at…nothing afterwards is relevant to our program. Swinney BUILT that program with classes that struggled to make the top 20.

Agreed. We are at a walk-not-run stage of our program's development.

"We need more 4 stars, you have to win with 4 stars" is such an obvious take. Everyone knows what the Blue Chip Ratio is.

Before you can get ELITE guys that push you over the edge to conference and national titles, you have to have stable players that are usually mid-tier talent but you can depend on. Every staff that built a program from mid-tier to competitor has those 2-4 years of building their foundation, then getting the guys that make it next level.

Like the saying - "it's the Jimmy's and Joe's, not the X's and O's." Well, you gotta get the Jimmy's first.

 

[VolNash17]

The hell he didn’t! Do the one’s before 2016! You had 5 star Deshaun Watson throwing to plenty of targets who weren’t. The game winner against Bama was to a walk-on!

Sir you aren’t understanding anything. That is a COMPLETE ROSTER RANKING. which ranks EVERY player on every roster in the country by their recruiting ranking. It IS NOT a recruiting class ranking. It combines classes up to that season… Clemson had the 9th best roster when they started winning National Titles. That is again a ROSTER ranking not just a one recruiting class ranking

 

[VolNash17]

The hell he didn’t! Do the one’s before 2016! You had 5 star Deshaun Watson throwing to plenty of targets who weren’t. The game winner against Bama was to a walk-on!

They had a lower ranked roster before that but again they never won a national championship without a Top 10 roster. Roster is EVERY kid in the program. 2016 they were again 9th. Not the recruiting class ranking but the roster ranking which would include multiple classes leading up to the 2016 season… 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016 classes mainly combined with maybe a 5th year senior…. Which brought the roster ranking to 9th nationally for the 2016 season

 

[butchna]

Sir you aren’t understanding anything. That is a COMPLETE ROSTER RANKING. which ranks EVERY player on every roster in the country by their recruiting ranking. It IS NOT a recruiting class ranking. It combines classes up to that season… Clemson had the 9th best roster when they started winning National Titles. That is again a ROSTER ranking not just a one recruiting class ranking

Sketchy science there. If they weren’t basing their talent level on class rankings but TALENT LEVELS, what is their evaluation criteria…performance? If so, that belies your class rankings point entirely. They ended up more talented than their rankings. Thank you.

 

[VolNash17]

Again… this takes into account every recruiting class up to the 2016 season. So mainly 2013 class, 2014 class, 2015 class and 2016 freshman class. All together they ranked 9th for the 2016 season

 

[ThreatLevelOrange]

They play in a very weak conference besides OU. Their type of success is not sustainable and wouldn’t ever be able to win an SEC/Natl title.

Define success. I don’t think they’ll win a national title. But showing you can develop players will
maximize the talent of whoever he brings in. Then the recruits will show up. See also Rick Barnes. So yes, it is sustainable.

Campbell looks for guys who fits his culture and have something to prove. He looks at film to see who makes plays and doesn’t take plays off. That translates better than guys who physically peak at 18 years old with no work ethic.

 

[butchna]

They had a lower ranked roster before that but again they never won a national championship without a Top 10 roster. Roster is EVERY kid in the program. 2016 they were again 9th. Not the recruiting class ranking but the roster ranking which would include multiple classes leading up to the 2016 season… 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016 classes mainly combined with maybe a 5th year senior…. Which brought the roster ranking to 9th nationally for the 2016 season

How do you get kids on your roster? What were the rankings of those 2013-2016 seasons? Clemson under Swinney doesn’t take jucos, so we’re back to players outperforming their rankings.

 

[VolNash17]

Sketchy science there. If they weren’t basing their talent level on class rankings but TALENT LEVELS, what is their evaluation criteria…performance? If so, that belies your class rankings point entirely. They ended up more talented than their rankings. Thank you.

Again clemson takes in less players than most of everyone… less players but better quality. But you do have to have good coaching as well to win a national title

 

[cobbwebb0710]

To tack onto this point and the Clemson convo going on in here too, imagine Kentucky getting a Tajh Boyd. That would probably be enough to kickstart them to at least break through the tier that they've been on since Stoops got there.

Tajh ending up there (you're welcome, Clemson) picked up their strong foundation (to one of this article's points) and moved them forward. Paving the way for more attention, more success, the better players everyone in here agrees that you need, and a 10-year talent like Watson, who carried them to the promised land.

To tack onto your point, imagine Tennessee getting a Tajh Boyd...

GBO!!

 

[ThreatLevelOrange]

Stoops at Kentucky has that mentality as well, I think. It's not a bad way to build a strong foundation, but you do have to switch into that higher gear to recruit and utilize better talent.

Right now, I would take 2-3 seasons of classes like that to build depth and culture. I'd rather have those classes than the star-chasing Butch Jones used to do, signing extra guys just because it looked good on signing day, but they didn't pan out.

We’ve seen this with every coach after Fulmer. Sign some highly rated classes of guys that leave the program prematurely. We always have a young team as a result. Aside from 2017 and possibly 2016, about half our team was recruited by another staff. There’s no culture or stability.

 

[cobbwebb0710]

Yet he never won a national title without a COMPLETE roster in the Top 10… which is another example of needing top 10 talent to capture a national title.

Wouldn’t a better indicator be to look at Clemson’s ‘12-16 classes?
Clemson didn’t win the ‘16 championship with a team of 85, 2016 recruits.
GBO!!

 

[ThreatLevelOrange]

This Iowa State team would win 8 games minimum with our schedule.

Cincinnati had Georgia beat on the road. Florida can be had. I’d say 8 would be on the extremely low side.

 

[VolNash17]

Wouldn’t a better indicator be to look at Clemson’s ‘12-16 classes?
Clemson didn’t win the ‘16 championship with a team of 85, 2016 recruits.
GBO!!

That’s what the total team talent roster ranking is for the 2016 season… it takes into account the previous recruiting classes. Averages out the players individual rankings and then spits out who has the better roster for that season Which is what I’ve been trying to explain. GBO!

 

[BigSteve09]

Cincinnati had Georgia beat on the road. Florida can be had. I’d say 8 would be on the extremely low side.

I agree.

If that same roster and coach were in UT Orange we would be calling 11 wins minimum and booking our rooms in Atlanta.

 

[butchna]

Again… this takes into account every recruiting class up to the 2016 season. So mainly 2013 class, 2014 class, 2015 class and 2016 freshman class. All together they ranked 9th for the 2016 season

15th in 2013, 16th in 2014, 9th in 2015 and 8th in 2016 averages out to 12. 2017 class ranked 17th by the way.