Loser: College football parity

[VFL-82-JP]

Again, how are other conferences relevant to the SEC and Tennessee?

Without your 4 or 5 paragraph reply, answer my original question:

How many 3* teams have won a SEC or NC championship in the last 20 years?

That's the sound of goalposts moving.

First you argued about 3* teams not competing for championships. Now you prefer to talk only about 3* teams winning championships.

Before we do that, how about you acknowledge you were wrong about them being able to compete?

 

[VFL-82-JP]

yea - no . You tried by giving a few obscure examples from 10 to 15 years ago and used examples from much weaker conferences that are not playing against Alabama's and Georgia's 5 stars every year.

Mizzou winning the East--twice in a row--is not obscure. And it's not from a weaker conference.

Cincinnati playing for the national title this year--this year--is not obscure.

Wake Forest is not obscure...it just happened. The entire football-watching nation knows about it.

Iowa and the B10 were from a few years ago, sure, but they are not obscure. And the B10 is probably the second-strongest conference in college football after the SEC.

Oklahoma State in the B12 is not obscure.

Kansas State almost meeting Tennessee for the national title in 1998 was not obscure back in the day, not to us Vols fans who were paying attention that year.

I could go on.

Do 3* programs have the opportunity to unseat Bama and Georgia by beating them both regularly? No. But I never said that's our path to success. For now, we just have to find a way to compete, maybe upset them once or twice, and by that proving to the 4* and 5* recruits that Tennessee is a good college destination matching their dreams. Recruiting opens up, we get stronger, we beat them more often, recruiting opens up some more, we get stronger, etc, etc, etc, and eventually we're one o the teams advantaged by the lack of parity.

A couple of you in this thread keep ignoring those follow-on steps. They're important. You act like I'm proposing we go on to win championships never recruiting anyone but 3* players. That's not it at all.

But yeah, we can start from where we are now. Will just take work and dedication, and something we seem to already have--great coaching.

 

[sechamp2012]

Kent State and New Mexico but unfortunately for their fans they won’t be beating Wake Forest , dropped outta Gator bowl .





Oh yeah they beat Bama too

That will go as a W for Wake not sure if A&M gets an L on their history or it just does not show like you never went to a Bowl.

 

[Remy]

"Loser: College football parity
Georgia, Alabama, and Texas A&M secured dominant recruiting classes that are loaded with talent. The trio have a combined 52 four-stars and 12 five-stars. The three SEC schools are projected to sign 43 of college football's top 100 recruits. This is detrimental to teams trying to close the talent gap with college football's elite."

SMG

This is our reality -- it's a little unsettling when people get on here and criticize the efforts of the football staff or administration. I believe that we have a great staff and teachers - but please understand that the landscape has never been so lopsided. This will be a tough nut to crack - there is probably another layer with teams like Ohio State, Texas, soon to be Southern Cal and one or two others like Oklahoma, Michigan, Notre Dame.

Then everyone else fighting for the crumbs around the table. NIL and free transfer only strengthen these top teams as they recruit the top talent and players playing at other schools. Alabama most benefitted from the transfer portal last year - did they need help?

To be successful, you now have to recruit well at all three levels - high school, junior college and the portal. if you don't you will get left behind. We really need to have more success in the portal this year.

If we are consistently losing the recruiting battle and your stats seem to indicate we are, then it means we are not competing with the winners. It's not up to the winners to lower the bar to the loser level, it's up to the losers to meet the winners benchmarks if they want to be winners. We at UT either will or we will not. Stop accepting excuses and require our people do the job of winning or get gone.

 

[Boca Vol]

Mizzou winning the East--twice in a row--is not obscure. And it's not from a weaker conference.

What's up JP? It's been a while. Merry Christmas to you and your family.

The SEC East from 2013-2016 was an absolute joke. IMO, winning your division doesn't mean the team was that good. Someone has to win it. UF won the SEC E in '15-'16 and you won't find anyone claiming those were good teams. Same with Mizzou in '13-'14.

 

[brockytop]

Exact reason the transfer portal is so important for teams trying to climb the ladder. Same thing I’ve been saying for months.

 

[zooguy]

IMHO, NIL will benefit universities which have large enrollments and large alumni bases will benefit most in the new NIL era.

Look at schools with large enrollments. Texas A&M has 73,000 students. That’s a hell of a lot of potential donors.

 

[SportsBuzz]

There has been one elite team in College football and that's been Bama. Georgia and A&M are not and have not been elite. In the last 15 years Georgia has won one SEC title and A&M none. Neither has won a Natty. The pups have won the East four out of last five but that has as much to do with Florida and Tennessee being down as it does with them being "elite". Ohio State always has high rated recruiting classes but have only won one Natty in the last 15 years and they have had no real challengers from the other teams in the BIG. Oklahoma is another team that always has highly rated classes but their last Natty was 20 years ago. Here is a list of the top 15 teams in recruiting rankings (Rivals) over the last ten years.
1. Alabama, 2. Florida State, 3. Georgia, 4. USC, 5. LSU, 6. OSU, 7. Auburn, 8. Florida, 9. Oklahoma, 10. Texas, 11. Clemson, 12. Notre Dame, 13. Tennessee, 14. A&M 15. Oregon. Been one dominate team here and that's Bubba. Been several team's who recruit well and have not done much at all. With the right coach any of these teams can recruit well enough to be a power house.

 

[knox73]

There are massive changes underway in college athletics that will level the playing field. Certain geographic advantages remain with larger population states but kids no longer are bound to their school with no ability to transfer. Rosters will be constantly recruited and re-recruited. The free agent mentality will assure a higher failure rate of high school all-stars who get cash at age 18 and basically forget about school and football responsibilities. Older coaches like Saban and Brian Kelly will cash out and be done with it. Can Tennnesse with Heupel and company capitalize on all this? Yes certainly. Most assuredly.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

What's up JP? It's been a while. Merry Christmas to you and your family.

The SEC East from 2013-2016 was an absolute joke. IMO, winning your division doesn't mean the team was that good. Someone has to win it. UF won the SEC E in '15-'16 and you won't find anyone claiming those were good teams. Same with Mizzou in '13-'14.

Hi, Boca, merry Christmas to you and yours, as well.

I agree, Mizzou was no elite team even when they were winning the East. The competition, us included, was significantly down.

But the original point was, it's possible to climb out of the pit. It's possible to start with 3* talent and ratchet your way up. First to the point where you can compete for championships, and eventually to where you can start winning them. Along the way, your recruiting gets better and better as more and more recruits see the potential of the program to help them meet their goals.

And Mizzou is an example of the first part of that path. Along with the other typically 3* teams I mentioned.

Hope you guys have wonderful holidays! Starting with the gators losing yet again tonight, maybe.

Go Vols!

 

[sonofUT62]

2. I feel that you had already dated yourself with Son of UT62 - no offense. What occurred in the 60's and 70's isn't particularly relevant today. It's a very slippery slope and it's getting closer to professional teams than amateur athletics, and it's structured without any salary cap. If that's the case and you are a small market team, you can do all right when you are going against other small market teams - you can't do alright when you are up against the New York Yankees.

Not sure what assumptions you’re making based off an internet screen name. 1962 was my Dads freshman year. If you feel like that enables you to glean my age then have at it. Either way I’m not offended.