Recruiting Forum Football Talk IV

johnfnkelly

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2017
Messages
2,875
Likes
9,214
As with all transfers that leave before their time is actually done.


Don't care not a Vol anymore. But I can tell you right now, no one can actually show someone who transferred out and did better somewhere else at the P5 level.
Peterman turned out okay. Chandler has been pretty good. Only examples I can think of. I'm sure Key Lawrence will end up being good.
 

MoCo_Vol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2017
Messages
12,206
Likes
39,195
Also with Henry T & Crouch, neither one is having a better year than Banks. So personally I think BOTH would have had better seasons returning to UT than they're having at their new schools had they returned. Cause each would have been on the field as much as Banks (if not more).


Banks
60 tackles, 9 TFLs, 4.5 sacks, 1 INT, 1 PD

Henry
52 tackles, 2.5 TFLs, 1 sack, 0 INT, 1 PD

Crouch
52 tackles, 2 TFLs, 2 sacks, 0 INT, 2 PD, 1 FR, 1 FF
 

Bruce Wayne

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2013
Messages
3,464
Likes
7,276
Also with Henry T & Crouch, neither one is having a better year than Banks. So personally I think BOTH would have had better seasons returning to UT than they're having at their new schools had they returned. Cause each would have been on the field as much as Banks (if not more).


Banks
60 tackles, 9 TFLs, 4.5 sacks, 1 INT, 1 PD

Henry
52 tackles, 2.5 TFLs, 1 sack, 0 INT, 1 PD

Crouch
52 tackles, 2 TFLs, 2 sacks, 0 INT, 2 PD, 1 FR, 1 FF

Oh I agree there. I think that's a slightly different argument.

Ty Chandler for example, would have benefitted from staying in retrospect with all the injuries. He still would have split carries with Tiyon. He's still having a good year at UNC.

Key Lawrence is having a fine year at OU, but he could be a star here at Tennessee this year.
 

MoCo_Vol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2017
Messages
12,206
Likes
39,195
Peterman turned out okay. Chandler has been pretty good. Only examples I can think of. I'm sure Key Lawrence will end up being good.
Yeah, Peterman I can give ya...but I'm not sure if that one is truly fair. He only appeared in 9 games in 2 seasons at UT and even though he did stay in a P5 the competition he faced while at Pitt vs UT was a step down.

Chandler is on pace though to eclipse his best season while at UT. So he'll be another, course I think we under utilized the hell out of him here. At UNC he's averaging 16+ touches a game. His highest at UT was just over 12.

Edit: Also, I wasn't counting grad transfers... since to me if they stayed long enough to graduate they didn't really "leave early"
 
Likes: VolsDoc81TX

MoCo_Vol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2017
Messages
12,206
Likes
39,195
Key Lawrence is one I legit just don't get...my guess is that some of their handlers and former staff convinced quite a few of them that if they stayed they'd be ruled ineligible and ruin their careers.

Cause Tank's numbers are better than Key right now, but I for sure think if Key was here he'd be starting over Tank and likely doing a lot better.
 
Last edited:

rjd970

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2007
Messages
21,974
Likes
18,329
Left TN to go to another P5 school and had better careers.

Crouch is the only one that's close. But he also was a RB converted to LB, so in his 3rd year he very well could have been playing at the same level (or better) here that he is at MSU now.

Per game stats though for him and Henry T
Crouch
UT - 5.7 tkls, 0.2 TFLs, 0 sacks 0 ints
MSU - 7.4 tkls, 0.3 TFLs, 0.3 sacks, 0 ints

Henry T
UT - 7.5 tkls, 0.8 TFLs, 0.1 sack, 0.1 int
Bama - 7.4 tkls, 0.3 TFLs, 0.1 sack, 0 ints
Toot just wanted to keep his paycheck. I really don’t think there is anymore to it.
 

matt_mccoy19

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2019
Messages
806
Likes
5,018
Timing is also important to keep in mind when talking about transfers, Ty Chandler left while pruitt was still here, while lawrence left when pruitt was fired. It’s important to keep in mind that the young guys that left after pruitt was fired could be linked to the investigation
 

ConwayFitty

Hello Shorty
Joined
Jan 9, 2019
Messages
417
Likes
2,208
As with all transfers that leave before their time is actually done.


Don't care not a Vol anymore. But I can tell you right now, no one can actually show someone who transferred out and did better somewhere else at the P5 level.
umm.... Nathan Peterman? Jalen Hurd and Riley Ferguson didn't do too bad leaving Either
 
Last edited:

Smyrna ATL Vol

We finally get it right and UT is great once again
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
6,388
Likes
27,261
You spin the narrative though and post things that people never said. Everyone said that they hoped he would develop this year because there is no guarantee that Hooker is back.
I spin it? Lol. Most people have said they thought Hooker was coming back until literally a day ago. But I know you like to argue so do you and put words in my mouth.
 

MoCo_Vol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2017
Messages
12,206
Likes
39,195
umm.... Nathan Peterman? Jalen Hurd and Riley Ferguson didn't do too bad leaving Either
Riley was at a G5 school, and also never got out of his own way long enough to make an appearance here in anything except the O&W game.

Hurd left with potential to be the all-time leader in rushing yards at UT to not even having 1k receiving yards at Baylor. He did fine, but that's not better than what he had done here at UT.
 

VolsDoc81TX

Bleeding Orange since 1962
Joined
Apr 3, 2011
Messages
10,334
Likes
29,570
I will try to add some color as concisely as I can from a big picture perspective. First, there is naturally a lot of focus on the emergence of EVs and its impact on the demand for electricity. But, there is also a huge demand for electricity with the emergence and growth of big tech companies (e.g., Google and Amazon). These companies are huge in the cloud data storage arena. This requires a huge amount of electricity use, and it never shuts off. A Ford factory or a steel plant requires a ton of electricity, but it can be powered down or shut off. Long story short, the amount of electricity use worldwide over the next 30 to 50 years, according to some reports, is going to increase by 60%. Emerging countries like India and China use and require a tremendous amount of energy.

So, this brings into question the sources of energy generation. Obviously, there is a ton of discussion around green energy sources like wind and solar. What many don’t realize is that the technology for wind and solar is not available today to operate as a base load operator. The transmission systems are not designed to operate with intermittent power supply. The proof of this can been seen within the last 12 months in Europe and even in Texas. The research into renewables will continue to progress and probably get better. A lot of time will be needed.

Now, we think about the transition to renewables. I will not bring my personal views on the matter into the discussion. It is well known that the current and previous democratic administrations have pushed the transition in a pretty rapid fashion. They are incentivizing this through huge tax credits. The current administration is currently trying to extend these credits. However, this transition costs huge amounts of money by building wind and solar farms and the transmission systems. Hundreds of millions and billions of dollars. The utilities finance these projects through rate hikes, which negatively impacts the ratepayers. More alarmingly, the current administration is influencing the continued transition to renewables through influencing the Fed and capital markets. These entities are being influenced against lending to fossil fuel producers (i.e., coal, natural gas, oil), which limits their growth and operating capacities.

There’s a lot here, and I could discuss the matter for hours in more detail. The global supply chain issues are in everyone’s mind. I suggest people track their utility bills over the next 6 months as the weather gets cold. I suggest people research all the uses of oil byproducts. I will reiterate people research the materials involved in developing EVs (specifically the batteries), where they come from, and who are currently the largest investors.

IMO, a key takeaway is the idea of base load generation and our current infrastructure.
TL;DR

Just kidding. Thanks!
Which two countries was my real question…
 
Likes: VOLSONLY

Smyrna ATL Vol

We finally get it right and UT is great once again
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
6,388
Likes
27,261
Unfortunately, the money side of the push/transition is very political, which is a major reason why making sense of it all is difficult. Government intervention, more often than not, is not good for anyone. This can lead us down the road of a discussion around climate change, but I think everyone is best served if that is not discussed here. You also have arguments that renewables are cheaper (primarily on a $/kWh basis), but those arguments are debatable, especially when you consider their unpredictable nature as well as the upward pressure on cost of materials as demand increases. This is also ignoring the regulatory costs other producers have to deal with while renewables do not, plus the huge tax credits renewables have available to them. If more renewables are coming online, why is the cost to the ratepayer increasing? Data from the US EIA supports this. The wind does not always blow, and the sun does not always shine. So, this brings us back to the discussion about storage, and currently, that technology is not there yet, and neither are the transmission systems.
Yep. If Texas was running off of solar, wind, and water, they would have been screwed when the winter storm hit. But no one wants to talk about that.
 

VN Store




Top