Transfer Portal - Confirmed Tennessee Interest

You really think our two deep at OL was as good as Georgia?
UT didn't really play two deep but as a unit... yes. The numbers bear that out.
Our two deep at LB? DL? RB?
I was talking specifically about the DL. UT didn't have a player the caliber of Carter. But apart from him UT had some very good players on the DL. UT played about 10 or 12 guys in competitive minutes. I don't think UGA played that deep.

We had a very good QB and WR's and an exceptional play caller that hid a whole lot of weaknesses.
Weaknesses? Agreed. "A lot"? What is a lot? Seems a pretty long stretch to get from covering "a whole lot of weaknesses" to 11 wins with victories over LSU, Bama, and Clemson. That's why I think the other guy is overestimating the gap between where UT is and having a roster that compares well talent wise.
 
Not "underestimating" anything... just not buying your "overestimation" of your opinion.

UT was 2+ deep as anyone in CFB on the DL last fall. They got "good" LB play. The secondary was a problem. You simply don't lead the nation in scoring and total O while playing in the SEC while not being "close" talent wise. To say that doesn't diminish what anyone did... it just recognizes that UT also had very good offensive talent.

Not really sure why you are so committed to calling these guys untalented. Really odd in spite of your attempts to deflect.
Where in any of this did I say that our guys were untalented? Saying our roster isn't close in talent to the most loaded rosters in CFB is a long way from saying they're untalented. You say we were 2+ deep as anyone on the DL, but how many 1st rounders do you see in that 2+ deep? Now answer that same question for Georgia and tell me how we were close in talent. Come on man. If this is just my opinion, then plenty of people that make millions to do it hold the same opinion. You take Georgia's entire 2nd string defense on their absolute worst day, and SC isn't putting up 63 against them. Yet, you want to claim that the talent gap is miniscule. SMDH.
 
You really think our two deep at OL was as good as Georgia? Our two deep at LB? DL? RB?
We had a very good QB and WR's and an exceptional play caller that hid a whole lot of weaknesses.
We also got lucky with injuries on the OL and overall really. A couple of injuries at OL, LB, TE or RB and we might have had a serious problem
 
Who said they were? You indicated that the Vols weren't "close in talent". I didn't say the Vols were equal much less greater. But you make out like UT is miles and miles behind the top programs and not in better shape than the vast majority of those not named Bama, UGA, or OSU. That is crux of our disagreement.

No doubt Huepel did more with less. No doubt in my mind that this staff's development ability squeezed more out of each guy. They appear to be elite in that regard. However in regard to talent... if Bama/UGA/OSU are 10's then UT is between an 8 and a 9. They're not a 5.

We are not in better shape. Our roster is/was middle of the pack in the SEC. Our 247 total talent (or whatever they call it) was within a tenth of a point of USC last season.
 
We are not in better shape. Our roster is/was middle of the pack in the SEC. Our 247 total talent (or whatever they call it) was within a tenth of a point of USC last season.
And yet another proof that the difference between "3*" and 4* isn't really all that reliably accurate.

So what about those 3*? UT had the SEC's #3 rushing O against the conference. That's better than UGA. Better than Bama. Better than TAM. Better than LSU. Better than Auburn. All teams with 4/5* RBs and OLs. UT's top 3 RBs were all rated 3*.

Judkins, the SEC's leading rusher as a Fr, was a 3*. He beat out a 5* to become their 1A. Ray Davis the SEC's #4 rusher... 3*. Wright was #8... a 3*. Montrell Johnson was #9... a 3*. Even better. The #10 RB in rushing was Schrader from Mizzou. A zero star transfer from a D2 school.

That's 5 of the top 10 most productive RBs in the SEC that were 3* or below.

The point isn't nor has it ever been that 4/5* players don't have a reasonably good probability of being good players. The point is and always has been that the recruiting sites miss a lot more guys who deserve 4/5* than they award to guys who turn into good/great players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NighthawkVol
And yet another proof that the difference between "3*" and 4* isn't really all that reliably accurate.

So what about those 3*? UT had the SEC's #3 rushing O against the conference. That's better than UGA. Better than Bama. Better than TAM. Better than LSU. Better than Auburn. All teams with 4/5* RBs and OLs. UT's top 3 RBs were all rated 3*.

Judkins, the SEC's leading rusher as a Fr, was a 3*. He beat out a 5* to become their 1A. Ray Davis the SEC's #4 rusher... 3*. Wright was #8... a 3*. Montrell Johnson was #9... a 3*. Even better. The #10 RB in rushing was Schrader from Mizzou. A zero star transfer from a D2 school.

That's 5 of the top 10 most productive RBs in the SEC that were 3* or below.

The point isn't nor has it ever been that 4/5* players don't have a reasonably good probability of being good players. The point is and always has been that the recruiting sites miss a lot more guys who deserve 4/5* than they award to guys who turn into good/great players.

You’re confusing talent and coaching. It’s not that we had a better roster but rather we had a better scheme and better QB play which is the most important position of all
 
You’re confusing talent and coaching. It’s not that we had a better roster but rather we had a better scheme and better QB play which is the most important position of all
You replied to a post that referenced 3* production from about 6 teams and replied “we had better this and that “.
I think you’re confused
 
You replied to a post that referenced 3* production from about 6 teams and replied “we had better this and that “.
I think you’re confused

Maybe you should go back further look into what we were discussing. The overall question was regarding how wide the talent gap is between UT and Bama/Georgia.
 
And yet another proof that the difference between "3*" and 4* isn't really all that reliably accurate.... [edit: blah, blah, blah]
It's like you don't even understand the basic notion of stacking top flight athletes. Or understand how the regular playoff teams do what they do and why they do it. So be it.

But please stop your endless pointless and puerile bickering. You are ruining the thread. Take your screeds here: PLAYER RANKINGS (do they matter?). Let the debate! That is the designated moderator-approved thread for what you're doing.
 
Last edited:
Maybe you should go back further look into what we were discussing. The overall question was regarding how wide the talent gap is between UT and Bama/Georgia.
Yeah but that’s not what you responded to.
You responded to a specific statement that refuted your stance so you ingnored it and made a response to the former.
 
It's like you don't even understand the basic notion of stacking top flight athletes. Or understand how the regular playoff teams do what they do and why they do it. So be it.

But please stop your endless pointless and puerile bickering. You are ruining the thread. Take your screeds here: PLAYER RANKINGS (do they matter?). Let the debate! That is the designated moderator-approved thread for what you're doing.

He does this in every thread.
 
Yeah but that’s not what you responded to.
You responded to a specific statement that refuted your stance so you ingnored it and made a response to the former.

Cherry picking random players doesn’t refute my claim that the talent gap between our program and Georgia/Bama is wide. But thanks for trying. Maybe one day if you keep at it you’ll make a valid point
 
It's like you don't even understand the basic notion of stacking top flight athletes. Or understand how the regular playoff teams do what they do and why they do it. So be it.
Understand completely that you need talent to win. Also understand that the labels put on players by journalists working for the recruiting sites do not make them "top flight athletes" or prevent players they don't rate highly less.

The ridiculous thing is that this is your response to a post pointing to FACTUAL evidence proving you don't need 247's stamp of approval on your players to get players who perform at top levels in the top conference. So what is your answer to all those 3* being so successful? Four players went over 1000 rushing in the SEC last fall. Two were 3* and two were 4*.

According to 247... there are actually only 3 5* RBs in the SEC... only one was in the top 10 of SEC rushers. How can that be if you guys are right? How can a lowly 3* like Judkins lead the SEC in rushing as a Fr?

It's like you don't even understand the basic notion that top flight athletes don't always have 4/5*... or in fact they quite often don't.

But please stop your endless pointless and puerile bickering. You are ruining the thread. Take your screeds here: PLAYER RANKINGS (do they matter?). Let the debate! That is the designated moderator-approved thread for what you're doing.
Good grief. You are worse than those who keep picking this ridiculous fight. Whine to someone else and help yourself to not reading. If you weren't too busy being a jack@$$... you would have gone back and noticed that another poster specifically started this argument again.
 
Last edited:
He does this in every thread.
LOL. No "he" doesn't. "He" just doesn't buy the BS.

And if the talent gap were what you try to make it... UT wouldn't have been as close to being in the playoff as they were... they wouldn't have beaten the team that according to 247's composite had the most talent... they wouldn't have beaten both of the top teams in the SEC West or the ACC champion who is also a top 5 team talent wise according to 247. Maybe YOU should stop trying to "do this in every thread"?
 
LOL. No "he" doesn't. "He" just doesn't buy the BS.

And if the talent gap were what you try to make it... UT wouldn't have been as close to being in the playoff as they were... they wouldn't have beaten the team that according to 247's composite had the most talent... they wouldn't have beaten both of the top teams in the SEC West or the ACC champion who is also a top 5 team talent wise according to 247. Maybe YOU should stop trying to "do this in every thread"?
The truth is in between

We still need to get more talented

There is a talent gap

But it obviously wasn't that big

If it was there's almost no way we could have had as successful of a year.

Yes the talent rankings are what they are, but when you go toe to toe with Bama and match them blow for blow and win then you can't objectively say that there is actually that big of a talent gap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T2P_Priceless
The truth is in between
Sort of... maybe.

We still need to get more talented= TRUE

There is a talent gap- TRUE, just not the chasm some are suggesting

But it obviously wasn't that big- TRUE

If it was there's almost no way we could have had as successful of a year.- TRUE

Yes the talent rankings are what they are, but when you go toe to toe with Bama and match them blow for blow and win then you can't objectively say that there is actually that big of a talent gap.- TRUE
So the truth wasn't actually in between... ;)
 
Sort of... maybe.


So the truth wasn't actually in between... ;)
But they are still right because when you compare the second third and fourth stringers the gap widens

But that gap isn't as important as they think.

We can win the natty next year if Joe Milton is great.
 
But they are still right because when you compare the second third and fourth stringers the gap widens

But that gap isn't as important as they think.

We can win the natty next year if Joe Milton is great.

A natty for us now means going thru UGA somewhere, somehow. Either in regular season or as an 11-1 invitee to the four team playoffs. We can do it without beating them once the 12 team playoffs come around.
Our talent is still pretty far behind theirs especially when you go into the second team depth chart.
 
But they are still right because when you compare the second third and fourth stringers the gap widens

But that gap isn't as important as they think.

We can win the natty next year if Joe Milton is great.
That gap with the second, third, and fourth string definitely makes a difference beyond just having depth on gameday. Kirby Smart has pointed out that they can go harder in practice every week with less fear of injury because of that depth. You also have a practice environment where the competition is very high and you are almost always going up against great talent in scrimmage situations. Their scout team has more scholarship players than probably any other team. That certainly increases the odds that they produce at an elite level every week.

You certainly don't have to get to that level of talented depth to win it all, but the margin for error definitely increases the closer you get to that.
 
That gap with the second, third, and fourth string definitely makes a difference beyond just having depth on gameday. Kirby Smart has pointed out that they can go harder in practice every week with less fear of injury because of that depth. You also have a practice environment where the competition is very high and you are almost always going up against great talent in scrimmage situations. Their scout team has more scholarship players than probably any other team. That certainly increases the odds that they produce at an elite level every week.

You certainly don't have to get to that level of talented depth to win it all, but the margin for error definitely increases the closer you get to that.

It felt like we did NOT have that this year whether through design or lack of players...we kept trotting out the same underperforming DBs week after week.
 
But they are still right because when you compare the second third and fourth stringers the gap widens
How so? Do we know what those players will do before they actually make the rotation? No doubt that Bama, UGA, and OSU have depth. The recruiting sites are a trailing indicator that have taken note of how consistently those top few programs recruit highly talented players... and players that eventually play at a championship level for the most part.

But that doesn't prove the point those guys keep trying to make. For it to prove their point... you could never have what Texas A&M did this year among others. How deep do you go before the rankings no longer prove quality depth? I'm not sure you could argue that Oregon or even USC had more quality depth than Utah this year. Oregon had 51 4/5* players. USC had 40. Utah had 15.

But that gap isn't as important as they think.
Agreed. I think it is in fact more a matter of numbers than quality regardless of the ratings. Bama just has more guys in reserve than UT did this past year. That showed up for UT vs USCe. They ran out of players in the secondary.

But these other guys bristled when I suggested that UT was closing the gap in this cycle. I truly believe they are... and you've seen me post enough to know I don't go out on limbs with ironclad predictions very often. I think Telander, Perry from last year, Luttrell, Slaughter, etc are the kinds of players Dabo got as he began his climb at Clemson. They weren't highly rated but he found some guys with 4/5* potential that others had ignored.

I also think that Heupel is approaching recruiting in a similar way by looking at character and grades more. In some respects, it is better to sign and develop guys with a high likelihood of being on the roster in their 3rd year. IMO, Clemson may be suffering a little now because their success has allowed them to pursue and "win" some of top end talent guys who prove to be more of a risk in other ways.

We can win the natty next year if Joe Milton is great.
You are definitely right that a great QB is an equalizer. I do think UT has to resolve the issues on D though especially CB. I'm a little worried about depth at the slot position too. But overall I believe the Vols have taken and are taking a good step forward roster wise.
 

VN Store



Back
Top