Recruiting Forum: Football Talk IX

Status
Not open for further replies.
#352
#352
buffaloblue said:
30 is the number. 100 percent the number.
Click to expand...

So you have evidence that supersedes the reports by people that have a better knowledge of what is going on in the UT coaches offices? Sweet, do share this evidence so we can know what is going on and stop racking our brains trying to decipher how we will get more than 30.
 
#353
#353
buffaloblue said:
30 is the number. 100 percent the number.
Click to expand...

Arrived at how? Again we took 21 in 2013 and 21 in 2012 per Rivals. We had 5 early enrollees from last year's class, minimum 4 of them could backcount to the previous class assuming none of that class backcounted to the previous. So bare minimum that 17 counters against last year's 25 which leaves 8 spots that can be backcounted.
 
#354
#354
Tennessee can only sign 30, although they are probably going to try and grayshirt a guy or two. Beyond that, I'm not sure how all of this is going to work.

We're all waiting to see how Jones handles this.

The 30 is a fixed number for this year, they could only have 50 on scholarship but couldn't sign 35 because they are still bound to the 25 per year rule. The way they are able to sign 30 is they are backcounting five from last year's class and will have at least five early enrollees.
Click to expand...

-Fortenberry
 
#355
#355
Assuming we had a transfer or something that counted against some of those classes because this isn't adding up.

Has Fortenberry ever been wrong on the numbers? Where is Hooker getting 34?
 
#356
#356
Just sign 40 and justify it with a complex 2nd order differential equation.

Nobody knows anyway and would just sign off on it.
 
#358
#358
DaddyChad said:
Assuming we had a transfer or something that counted against some of those classes because this isn't adding up.

Has Fortenberry ever been wrong on the numbers? Where is Hooker getting 34?
Click to expand...

No idea if Fort's been wrong on numbers or where Hooker is getting his number. All I know is that most have said 30, Butch said 30 on the radio and Fortenberry and Hubbs have said 30. I'm going with 30.
 
#359
#359
Butch should make a feeder system.
Recruit the top 30 to UT, and the rest to a smaller school D1 but not JUCO.
Have the team run the same system and weight regiment as UT.
Then the players all "transfer out" to UT after their 1st year...

I know it doesn't have a snowflake's chance (and dumb), but that is my idea.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#362
#362
therickbol said:
So you have evidence that supersedes the reports by people that have a better knowledge of what is going on in the UT coaches offices? Sweet, do share this evidence so we can know what is going on and stop racking our brains trying to decipher how we will get more than 30.
Click to expand...


straight from Butch Jones' mouth, the number is 30
 
#363
#363
I don't know the rule on max EEs you can backcount, but here's a quote from Richt from last year's class.

“I will say this: We will definitely have space to count guys back to last year’s class … there’s no doubt about that. We would love to have as many midyear enrollees as possible to maximize that number going back"

That quote implies you can do more than 5.
 
#371
#371
Let me break this down again, with more info than I had in July. For sake of argument, let's say there is NOT a 5 EE backcount limit, ok?

In 2008 and 2009, there were no MAX signing rules in place by the SEC.

2008 - 18 signees
2009 - 22 signees

For 2010 and 2011, the NCAA and SEC implemented the 28 signee rule.

2010 - 27 signees
2011 - 27 signees

In 2012, the SEC implemented the 25 signee rule.

2012 - 22 signees
2013 - 22 signees (this includes Vickers and Johnson, but not Swafford due to GS)

Now, let's look at the math for the first three years.

2008 - 18
2009 - 22
2010 - 27 (this class includes EIGHT [8] EEs that were most likely backcounted to 2009) bringing new totals to:

2008 - 18
2009 - 30 (22 + 8 EEs from 2010; remember, there was limit for that class)
2010 - 19 (27 - 8 EEs backcounted to 2009)

Let's keep moving.

2010 - 19
2011 - 27
2012 - 22

But wait. The 2011 class has SIX [6] EEs to backcount. New numbers:

2010 - 25 (19 + 6 EEs from 2011 class)
2011 - 21
2012 - 22

The 2012 class has SIX [6] EEs, however. Watch what happens:

2010 - 25
2011 - 27 (21 + 6 EEs from 2012; we are under the 28 limit)
2012 - 16

Here is the payoff.

2011 - 27 (max was 28)
2012 - 16
2013 - 22

2013 brought us FIVE [5] EEs that could easily roll back.

2011 - 27
2012 - 21 (16 + 5 EEs; way under the 25 limit)
2013 - 17

So, if there is NO MAXIMUM on how many EEs you can backcount, Tennessee could sign the 25 allotted from the SEC + 8 EEs to backcount, which is

33!!!!

Now, we greyshirted Mr. Swafford. If Butch gives him that scholarship, it would come from the 2014 class, meaning we have:

32!!!!!

But why would Butch say the number is 30? Well, because maybe THERE IS a maximum on backcounting early enrollees.

Or he isn't stupid enough to give away his exact number.

Or he changed his mind.

Or he wanted to save room for 2015's class because we WILL continue to get top talent, and WILL have a better class in 2015 if we have enough room to make an impact.

In the end, the recruiting numbers are confusing. However, if there is a 5 EE limit on backcounting, it becomes clear we have 30 to sign.

I hope this makes sense.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 11 people
#373
#373
Oh and another pretty definitive quote from MARK RICHT last year (bolded emphasis mine):

“We can have as many as 10 mid-year enrollees and count them back to last year’s class,” Richt said, “which allows you to sign forward still in this year’s class with 25. We can get into the 30, 35-range possibly.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#375
#375
VolinArizona said:
Let me break this down again, with more info than I had in July. For sake of argument, let's say there is NOT a 5 EE backcount limit, ok?

In 2008 and 2009, there were no MAX signing rules in place by the SEC.

2008 - 18 signees
2009 - 22 signees

For 2010 and 2011, the NCAA and SEC implemented the 28 signee rule.

2010 - 27 signees
2011 - 27 signees

In 2012, the SEC implemented the 25 signee rule.

2012 - 22 signees
2013 - 22 signees (this includes Vickers and Johnson, but not Swafford due to GS)

Now, let's look at the math for the first three years.

2008 - 18
2009 - 22
2010 - 27 (this class includes EIGHT [8] EEs that were, most likely backcounted to 2009) bringing new totals to:

2008 - 18
2009 - 30 (22 + 8 EEs from 2010; remember, there was limit for that class)
2010 - 19 (27 - 8 EEs backcounted to 2009)

Let's keep moving.

2010 - 19
2011 - 27
2012 - 22

But wait. The 2011 class has SIX [6] EEs to backcount. New numbers:

2010 - 25 (19 + 6 EEs from 2011 class)
2011 - 21
2012 - 22

The 2012 class has SIX [6] EEs, however. Watch what happens:

2010 - 25
2011 - 27 (21 + 6 EEs from 2012; we are under the 28 limit)
2012 - 16

Here is the payoff.

2011 - 27 (max was 28)
2012 - 16
2013 - 22

2013 brought us FIVE [5] EEs that could easily roll back.

2011 - 27
2012 - 21 (16 + 5 EEs; way under the 25 limit)
2013 - 17

So, if there is NO MAXIMUM on how many EEs you can backcount, Tennessee could sign the 25 allotted from the SEC + 8 EEs to backcount, which is

33!!!!

Now, we greyshirted Mr. Swafford. If Butch gives him that scholarship, it would come from the 2014 class, meaning we have:

32!!!!!

But why would Butch say the number is 30? Well, because maybe THERE IS a maximum on backcounting early enrollees.

Or he isn't stupid enough to give away his exact number.

Or he changed his mind.

Or he wanted to save room for 2015's class because we WILL continue to get top talent, and WILL have a better class in 2015 if we have enough room to make an impact.

In the end, the recruiting numbers are confusing. However, if there is a 5 EE limit on backcounting, it becomes clear we have 30 to sign.

I hope this makes sense.
Click to expand...

Excellent post. I'm not sure CBJ intended to be literal when he said 30. If that's the only evidence for 30, I'd say 33 is more likely.
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement





Back
Top