Grading the Team

#1
white65

white65

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2010
Messages
3,891
Likes
2,946
#1
Yes, its another one of these type pre-season threads.

I'm going A+ through F. The first letter will be where I think we'll be this season. The second will be best case scenario.

QB: (C-) I think our qb play will be slightly below average.
(Max: B+) Jarrett was a highly rated qb out of high school and he has all the physical tools.

WR: (B) Jauan being back will help. I think our WR core is above average but will be held back by poor qb play for at least half the season.
(Max: A) We have a lot of play makers at WR but they haven't had a collectively good game in a season or two. If they can be more consistent instead of one receiver stepping up per game then we will get to a bowl (at a minimum).

RB: (B) Chandler will have a breakout season.
(Max: A) We have three RB over 500 yards.

TE: (D) A lot of new comers here, I'm gonna be cautious.
(Max: B-) Butch Jones must have lost a girl friend to a TE because it seemed like he hated them. (I know Ethan Wolf played a ton but he was criminally under used.) If the new staff utilizes the TE they could be a huge part of keeping SEC line backers at bay.

OL: (C-) I really like our OL potential but I did last year too.
(Max: B+) If Smith plays like he did last year and Richmond gets more consistent then our passing should improve. I really want the OL to be (left to right) Smith, ?, Kennedy, Hall, Richmond. With the question mark being fill by Lord knows who.

Defense

DL: (C-) There's a lot of talent here, but depth concern me and we've been TERRIBLE against the run.
(Max: B-) Some new comer will have to surprise for this group to be slightly more than average.

LB: (B-) I really like our starters, but again we sucked last year and depth is lacking
(Max: A-) Our starting 4 LB are the most Athletic unit on the team. If they play fast and know the system they could be scary.

Safety: (B-) Play makers but....you guessed it no solid depth.
(Max: B+) Maybe there is some solid depth.

CB & Nickel: (D-) Biggest weakness on the team imo
(Max: C+) Theres a chance they could be average if our front 7 is decent against the run and they aren't put on islands.

Overall: (C-) I think we'll be a team just behind the middle of the pack in the SEC.
(Max: A+) NC Bound BABY!!!!!!
More like a B- if we make some sets happen along the way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PureVol, VFL-82-JP, RollerVol and 2 others
#3
#3
grading_3_large.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: FLVOL_79, MoodyVol and Pruitt Will Do It
#4
#4
I would start the TEs with a C. Reports out of camp already say that DWA is looking like what the coaches were hoping they were getting. Plus I think Wolf is going to be a solid, dependable TE.

Other than that, I won't quibble with your ratings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: white65
#9
#9
I think TE will be a lot better than a D. With Wood-Anderson coming in as a juco Junior. 4-star TE, probably one of the better TE's we've had in years. 4-star says quite a bit too, I think, for TE's. If you look at the ratings year in and out for TE's, you'll usually see that 4-star is about as high as TE's go. 3-star is the average. Wolf was a 3-star coming in. Already hearing good reports on Wood-Anderson too. Apparently he's the best blocker of the TE's on the team as well. Which will get him lots of playing time. Also, Pruitt and them have made an emphasis...unlike Butch, that they want a good TE. Especially one that can block. So I don't think you'll see quite the reservation as Butch had when it comes to TE's. Then next year we already got another good TE coming in, with Jackson Lowe who is 6'5"...another 4-star. And we also have 3-star Sean Brown who is a hard commit for next year too, will be a good pairing. We'll even have Wood-Anderson as well that year. Going to have a good TE core next year. Apparently even going to be running some sets where we use two TE's. To suit a power running game. They will be used more as blockers, but they are good at that. Big bodies, good blocking, will help our O-line out and get our run game going.

Article from 4-months ago: Offense change has Tennessee emphasizing tight end recruiting
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: VOLinPD
#11
#11
Honestly with new players, new coaches, and new schemes (Offense and defense) I could see us being a C- or D+ even with mid-level SEC talent. I hope I am proved wrong but I see 6-6 as the most likely outcome for this season. A low level bowl is not a bad thing this year as bad as we were last year.
 
#12
#12
What I don't understand, the same agencies that are rating Bama's players is rating UT's players and why any of us would say that UT does not have any talent to be competitive is a head scratcher, it feels like some on here want to the team to fail to prove some point. The margin between 5* and 3*s is sometimes how many camps each of these players get to perform in front of evaluators who determine a player's "potential", and when a 5* doesn't live up to their rankings, the blame is placed on the player or S&C program (outside of injuries). All of these young men who make it to an elite program who dedicate themselves to developing their skills will improve or not.........it is that simple. It takes 10,000 hours or 10 years to become a master of anything. We're asking 18-20 year old men to be masters of their craft in less than 5 years (average time playing any sport before entering college). This is why you really don't want freshman playing until their sophomore years, one year of development, diet and S&C makes a world of difference.

So, fall camp has 27 practices, let's say 6 hours a day, that is 162 hours (not counting film study) that is 2% of the 10,000 hours needed. Now, over a five year period, and I am shooting high here, that is approximately 1300 hours of organized football from 9th grade to 12th. The difference is this, take Peyton for an example, comes from a hall of fame father, his exposure to football is probably triple (4,000 or 40% of 10,000 hours). This is light years from what I would say is the average 5*. My point, you don't want Freshman playing for the sake of maybe getting a freak like Peyton Manning. However, I understand the desire to play early and going to the League in your Junior year........money drives unrealistic desires. How many player's careers were dashed because of injuries? too many to count. It is "my opinion" that sports media, and sports evaluators build a unrealistic expectation in these young men's heads that lead to unrealized dreams, all in the hope of getting into the NFL earlier........... HCs are probably guilty as well........with the statement of "early or immediate playing time" promises. My numbers above could be low or high, but my point is the #hours "dedicated" to football is different for each player.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bsvol
#13
#13
Solid C minus across the board.

Once the defense gets gashed a few times from being out of position against WVU in a new defense, may have to drop them some.
 
#14
#14
Sorry OP I think your grade across the board is low. More talent on this team then is being given credit. Now there is real coaching and yes will be growing pains. I hope by the time we get to Florida game you change your mind.
 
#17
#17
I really don’t know what criteria to use to even give the team a grade. There is nothing to go on other than results from last year and they don’t mean anything this year. Even more than most, this year is an anomaly. We have a completely new coaching staff with a completely different philosophy on both sides of the ball than the last decade plus.

We have a completely different mindset from a S&C perspective and no idea the real measurable of the results from that program. Word is everyone looks more fit than ever before, but that seems to be the result after every summer session these days.

WE also do not know how much the team is buying into the new system yet either. All in all, I think we need to wait until after the first couple of games to have any idea of how to grade the team. We need to see how the team reacts to some adversity before we can judge their mindset with the new staff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HuntlandVolinColo
#18
#18
I like it, White. And in broad brushstrokes, I generally agree with you. But, to show I can raise the ante a bit:

Score Code:
A = SEC and/or National Championship performances
B = SEC East winners
C = middle of the East
F = last year (there is no D, just straight to F)


OL = B / soo much better than recent years, shows how much coaching (and health) matter
QB = B+ / there's a reason JG was a top-rated QB out of HS; finally, it shows
RB = B- / the cupboard sure ain't bare; and hey, a fullback!
TE = C+ / improved, but not yet gangbusters
WR = B- / Jennings, Calloway, and Johnson a solid trio; more dependable than before
Offense Composite = B- / surprisingly, we are actually competitive for the East into November

DL = C+ / the least settled position group; talent's there, but team synergy not yet
LB = B+ / really impressive performance as a group
DB = B / surprisingly good, in all aspects
Defense Composite = B- / ditto comment for offense. Not the best D in the East, but close to it, for a change

Kickoffs = A- / Cimaglia is da man
Kickoff Returns = C / still miss Evan Berry
Punts = C+ / work to do with our young punter
Punt Returns = B+ / we return a few for TDs this year
Special Teams Composite = B- / mixed bag, some great, some just okay

Team Overall: B- / At 9-3 (5-3), we end up tied for 2nd in the East, still in the hunt into early November (but not in control of our destiny after the October gauntlet). Better than many would have predicted, but not yet winning championships. All indications are, we got a good one in Pruitt & Co.

This is my orange-tinted prediction. When I take the sunglasses off, we win one or two fewer games (7-5 most likely), and get knocked out of contention in the East by the TSIO. Overall score C or C+.
 
  • Like
Reactions: captennmike and JohnnyJava
#20
#20
FlyFishnVol said:
What I don't understand, the same agencies that are rating Bama's players is rating UT's players and why any of us would say that UT does not have any talent to be competitive is a head scratcher, it feels like some on here want to the team to fail to prove some point. The margin between 5* and 3*s is sometimes how many camps each of these players get to perform in front of evaluators who determine a player's "potential", and when a 5* doesn't live up to their rankings, the blame is placed on the player or S&C program (outside of injuries). All of these young men who make it to an elite program who dedicate themselves to developing their skills will improve or not.........it is that simple. It takes 10,000 hours or 10 years to become a master of anything. We're asking 18-20 year old men to be masters of their craft in less than 5 years (average time playing any sport before entering college). This is why you really don't want freshman playing until their sophomore years, one year of development, diet and S&C makes a world of difference.

So, fall camp has 27 practices, let's say 6 hours a day, that is 162 hours (not counting film study) that is 2% of the 10,000 hours needed. Now, over a five year period, and I am shooting high here, that is approximately 1300 hours of organized football from 9th grade to 12th. The difference is this, take Peyton for an example, comes from a hall of fame father, his exposure to football is probably triple (4,000 or 40% of 10,000 hours). This is light years from what I would say is the average 5*. My point, you don't want Freshman playing for the sake of maybe getting a freak like Peyton Manning. However, I understand the desire to play early and going to the League in your Junior year........money drives unrealistic desires. How many player's careers were dashed because of injuries? too many to count. It is "my opinion" that sports media, and sports evaluators build a unrealistic expectation in these young men's heads that lead to unrealized dreams, all in the hope of getting into the NFL earlier........... HCs are probably guilty as well........with the statement of "early or immediate playing time" promises. My numbers above could be low or high, but my point is the #hours "dedicated" to football is different for each player.
Click to expand...

Some good points here. But, we need to get something settled around here. That is this "star gazing" problem. It's one thing to want to rank HS recruits by 3-4-5*. It's been argued every way possible. It has a certain value. It has a certain error.

But, what bothers me worse that unrealistic expectations or the opposite lack of respect, based on stars, is this ... After a player has put a year or more of play on game tape, practice reps, and offseason prep, then we've got to LET THE STARS GO completely. They are now P5 collegiate players with a resume'. That resume', work ethic, football mind, and film record should start afresh 100%.

Continuing to project what someone saw at a HS game, film, or camp vs radically varying competition, from 2, 3, 4 YEARS before needs to be completely banished. It completely skews reason from fans literally years down the road.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FlyFishnVol
#21
#21
Safety? We are super deep at Safety.

TE? We may have an all SEC TE in Wood-Anderson, Wolf is improving a lot too. And Warren shocked some people in practice with how good he is.

WRs I think are an A as well. Very deep and that doesn't even include swingman Taylor. Tillman looks very good so far in practice. And Jennings hasn't even hit his stride yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alto1
#22
#22
Good lord, I forgot how much Kool-Aid Volnation drinks. I knew some people would be optimistic but there are post about a Juco-TE already being all SEC and our defense being not far from the best in the league. We were 4-8 last year and we shouldn't have beat GT.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tarkus
#23
#23
JonGrudensAgent said:
Solid C minus across the board.

Once the defense gets gashed a few times from being out of position against WVU in a new defense, may have to drop them some.
Click to expand...

Okay there glass half empty.

Or when Phillips breaks Grier in half and WV fans pile out and we curb stomp them, then I’ll go B+ and we start 4-0!

đź‘Ť
 
  • Like
Reactions: HuntlandVolinColo
#24
#24
Crazy Ivan said:
I would start the TEs with a C. Reports out of camp already say that DWA is looking like what the coaches were hoping they were getting. Plus I think Wolf is going to be a solid, dependable TE.

Other than that, I won't quibble with your ratings.
Click to expand...

IF we can find a TE that will just get in the way of a defender that will be marked improvement. If we find one that will actually attempt an actual block that will be a 100% improvement. If we find one that will lay a lick on somebody heaven's to Betsy it will be a miracle.
 
#25
#25
white65 said:
Good lord, I forgot how much Kool-Aid Volnation drinks. I knew some people would be optimistic but there are post about a Juco-TE already being all SEC and our defense being not far from the best in the league. We were 4-8 last year and we shouldn't have beat GT.
Click to expand...
disagree...........enough said.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top