SEC Combined Experience Ranking per Phil Steele

[landscapingvol]

Talent is a requirement so long as the coaches need it for results.

And, again, I'm not expecting UT to do well. I expected 6-6 with struggles in big games.

I am just not buying that UT, by mid-season, is excusable to still have been struggling in pass protection and in the run game like we were against UT-Chattanooga.

I'm also a bit curious as to why 3 academic Sophomores are still basically unheard of. Kendrick, Sanders and Weisman are nowhere to be seen.

Are you suggesting that talent doesn't win championships? If so, this is a useless discussion. There is a reason Bama, UGA, LSU, Ohio State, Oklahoma, USC, and Florida State are generally at or near the top most of the time. It is talent.

 

[JackHVFL]

.

 

[agent|orange]

Are you suggesting that talent doesn't win championships? If so, this is a useless discussion. There is a reason Bama, UGA, LSU, Ohio State, Oklahoma, USC, and Florida State are generally at or near the top most of the time. It is talent.

Oklahoma hasn't had a Top 10 class since 2010, by the way. USC if it's SoCal isn't great and SoCarolina has never had talent. Neither are good to try to use here.

Neither is UGA as they're showing you have to have talent AND coaching.

Talent matters. Coaching matters just as much.

Talent only matters the most when you require it to cover up deficiencies in coaching ability.

Teams that do well without much talent in terms of *****s out of HS (i.e. don't have Top 10 classes year-in-year-out):

Oregon

Michigan State

South Carolina (before this year)

TCU

Oklahoma State

Baylor

Ole Miss

Miss State

Stanford

And we'll see where Arkansas and Kentucky are next year. I honestly expect them to be competitive and that'll be 2 more teams you can add to the "don't have Top 10 classes, showing coaching means something" list.

 

[agent|orange]

My point is we have 3 guys starting that are academic Seniors. They've been in the S&C program and the system for 2 full years. They should be better.

We have 3 academic Sophomores that are also effectively worthless. Same as with above, been in the S&C and system 2 years.

Where is Pair?

These are all SEC caliber guys that got SEC offers out of HS. Their talent has fallen into a void.

 

[oldsmokey67]

I get it.

Until we had UT-Chatt roll into Neyland and put up how many sacks? Our RBs put up a mediocre 3.4ypc against the stalwart UT-Chatt defense.

The Citadel, by the way, put up 4.02ypc against UT-Chatt. Central Michigan put up 4ypc. Samford put up 3ypc.

So I guess our guys are worse than the Citadels and Central Michigans. Our OL of SEC offered guys are just above Samford.

We are getting what we paid for. MAC results with SEC guys from a MAC staff.

Deny deny deny away!

what is your problem man.if you thought tennessee would win more than 6 games you are smoking crack.everyone except a choice few on here knew year 2 under jones would be as bad or worse than last year.why can't you get that.i guess you thought sense we hung with uga we should hang with anyone we play.it does not work like that.so quit acting like cbj should 10 games with a roster full of freshmen.

 

[bowlinggreenvol]

give me a 23 yr old DL from nooga or the Citadel against your 18 yr old OL that arrived on a college campus 3 months ago in one on one battles and I'm winning 9 of 10 times.

Are their starting DL's all 23 yr old seniors? I don't know but unless you've looked that up and verified it then you're making a big assumption. You also fail to mention that we have three, 21-22 yr old men on our OL too. We're not trotting out five, 18 yr olds we have 2 out there. Our guys act like they've never played a down of football or been in a S&C program though. Kerbyson hasn't made contact on a DE in 242 QT of play.

Just FTR, 23 yr old would mean that those guys were likely RS. Very few people are 23 when they graduate college let alone 23 already in the fall. So now you're assuming or maybe you've verified that those teams are trotting out 4, RS Sr along thier DL's.

 

[daj2576]

Math is like garlic to these guys. All they can do is hiss from the shadows when confronted with numbers.

That's a beautiful way to put it. Kudos.



And we wonder why any explanation that isn't overtly negative is considered "sunshine pumping" and therefore terrifying to so many.

 

[TulsaVol]

I get it.

Until we had UT-Chatt roll into Neyland and put up how many sacks? Our RBs put up a mediocre 3.4ypc against the stalwart UT-Chatt defense.

The Citadel, by the way, put up 4.02ypc against UT-Chatt. Central Michigan put up 4ypc. Samford put up 3ypc.

So I guess our guys are worse than the Citadels and Central Michigans. Our OL of SEC offered guys are just above Samford.

We are getting what we paid for. MAC results with SEC guys from a MAC staff.

Deny deny deny away!

Is there a way to petition leaving the SEC for a more suitable conference for the mid major coaching staff?

 

[Vol_is_Lyfe18]

Are their starting DL's all 23 yr old seniors? I don't know but unless you've looked that up and verified it then you're making a big assumption. You also fail to mention that we have three, 21-22 yr old men on our OL too. We're not trotting out five, 18 yr olds we have 2 out there. Our guys act like they've never played a down of football or been in a S&C program though. Kerbyson hasn't made contact on a DE in 242 QT of play.

Just FTR, 23 yr old would mean that those guys were likely RS. Very few people are 23 when they graduate college let alone 23 already in the fall. So now you're assuming or maybe you've verified that those teams are trotting out 4, RS Sr along thier DL's.

This. Thank you

 

[Spartacavolus]

Are their starting DL's all 23 yr old seniors? I don't know but unless you've looked that up and verified it then you're making a big assumption. You also fail to mention that we have three, 21-22 yr old men on our OL too. We're not trotting out five, 18 yr olds we have 2 out there. Our guys act like they've never played a down of football or been in a S&C program though. Kerbyson hasn't made contact on a DE in 242 QT of play.

Just FTR, 23 yr old would mean that those guys were likely RS. Very few people are 23 when they graduate college let alone 23 already in the fall. So now you're assuming or maybe you've verified that those teams are trotting out 4, RS Sr along thier DL's.

ok, give me 21 yr old DE against your 18 yr old RT and I'm beating you one on one all day. There is a huge difference on the OL as a ttrue freshman teenager vs men on the opposite side of the ball.

Kerbyson isn't a LT. He was forced to play there. RG and RT are 18 yrs old and been there since August.

 

[Orange And Garnet]

Great post OP

 

[MedicT]

Talent is a requirement so long as the coaches need it for results.

And, again, I'm not expecting UT to do well. I expected 6-6 with struggles in big games.

I am just not buying that UT, by mid-season, is excusable to still have been struggling in pass protection and in the run game like we were against UT-Chattanooga.

I'm also a bit curious as to why 3 academic Sophomores are still basically unheard of. Kendrick, Sanders and Weisman are nowhere to be seen.

My goodness you do get defensive in the face of condemning evidence. Ease up, you win a few and in this case YOU lose a few. It's all good.

 

[nash101]

Missouri is rated just a little ahead of us on these charts yet they went into the Swamp and curb stomped the Gators! We did not even score a TD against them at home with a checkerboard Neyland loud crowd

That tells me it more than just experience

 

[hndog609]

Missouri is rated just a little ahead of us on these charts yet they went into the Swamp and curb stomped the Gators! We did not even score a TD against them at home with a checkerboard Neyland loud crowd

That tells me it more than just experience

One of the most deceptive scores I've ever seen.

Are you aware that vs FL's defense we had 5 more 1st downs and 114 more total yds than Missouri's offense managed? Meanwhile on D we held FL to fewer 1st downs and fewer total yards as well. MO had a grand total of 2 drives that lasted longer than 4 plays. In fact they only had 2 drives that managed more than 20yds.

 

[ajvol01]

Missouri is rated just a little ahead of us on these charts yet they went into the Swamp and curb stomped the Gators! We did not even score a TD against them at home with a checkerboard Neyland loud crowd

That tells me it more than just experience

Check the stats.

20 yards passing, 3 INTs
99 yards rushing

1 fumble return TD
1 KO return TD
1 punt return TD
1 INT return TD

Gators quit

 

[bowlinggreenvol]

One of the most deceptive scores I've ever seen.

Are you aware that vs FL's defense we had 5 more 1st downs and 114 more total yds than Missouri's offense managed? Meanwhile on D we held FL to fewer 1st downs and fewer total yards as well. MO had a grand total of 2 drives that lasted longer than 4 plays. In fact they only had 2 drives that managed more than 20yds.

They also had 4 less possessions due to those ST and defensive TD's and short fields as a result of other TO's. You're right it is deceptive but you can't blanket it by showing their offensive stats without discussing the other side of it. Against USC they had like 120 yards of offense until their last 2 drives where they went roughly 150 yards between the 2. If they force UF punts rather than taking TO's to the house or have sustained drives rather than 2 ST TD's then their offensive stats may look different but their offense didn't have to sustain drives or score many points.

 

[ajvol01]

They also had 4 less possessions due to those ST and defensive TD's and short fields as a result of other TO's. You're right it is deceptive but you can't blanket it by showing their offensive stats without discussing the other side of it. Against USC they had like 120 yards of offense until their last 2 drives where they went roughly 150 yards between the 2. If they force UF punts rather than taking TO's to the house or have sustained drives rather than 2 ST TD's then their offensive stats may look different but their offense didn't have to sustain drives or score many points.

UGA 34 Mizzou 0

 

[bowlinggreenvol]

UGA 34 Mizzou 0

UF 10 UT 9
UF 13 UM 42


Point? Does that mean we lose to Mizzou 42-12? Extrapolating games clearly doesn't work based on your own UGA-Mizzou example.

 

[volfan411]

Mizzou beat Florida.

Yet, would you guys be thrilled with their 120 total offensive yards?

Probably would be, actually. Nobody would be allowed to talk about the paltry 1.1ypa that Mauk had.

I would not give a damn if we only had 1 yard of offense and gave up 10 sacks if we won the game but apparently that is not the case with you as you continue to whine about UTC when WE WON the game and that is the only stat that matters at the end of the day.

 

[ajvol01]

UF 10 UT 9
UF 13 UM 42


Point? Does that mean we lose to Mizzou 42-12? Extrapolating games clearly doesn't work based on your own UGA-Mizzou example.

Mizzou isn't a sure win or loss.

My point is that the games are played on the field - we'll find out on 11/22 how we match up with Mizzou.

 

[hndog609]

They also had 4 less possessions due to those ST and defensive TD's and short fields as a result of other TO's. You're right it is deceptive but you can't blanket it by showing their offensive stats without discussing the other side of it. Against USC they had like 120 yards of offense until their last 2 drives where they went roughly 150 yards between the 2. If they force UF punts rather than taking TO's to the house or have sustained drives rather than 2 ST TD's then their offensive stats may look different but their offense didn't have to sustain drives or score many points.

All I was doing was pointing out that comparing offenses vs FL's D isn't a ringing endorsement for MO regardless of what the scoreboard indicated. Here's their offensive drives from scrimmage:


3 plays -3yds INT
3 plays 8yds Punt
4 plays 19yds TD (after FL fumble on own 19)
18 plays 55yds FG
3 plays 4yds Punt
4 plays -11yds FG (after INT to FL's 5)
3 plays 7yds Punt
3 plays -7yds Punt
6 plays 24yds Punt
3 plays -5yds Punt
final play to run out the clock

I don't see anything here that exactly gives props to MO's offense in there.

 

[sechamp2012]

One thing I noticed from the OP stat post is a lot of people were saying... I get tired of hearing Dooley left him nothing and say Nutt left Freeze nothing and look what he's doing but 8 Senior starters and 6 Seniors in the 2 deep from Houston Nutts last class tells me the cupboard wasn't as bare as the Dooley disaster..One of those Seniors is Pruitt who leads in interceptions.

 

[bowlinggreenvol]

Mizzou isn't a sure win or loss.

My point is that the games are played on the field - we'll find out on 11/22 how we match up with Mizzou.

Ok I agree with that 100%. If the Mizzou from UGA shows up we should win but if the opportunistic defensive Mizzou shows up combined with our propensity for turning it over it could get bad. This team is capable of winning out minus Bama and very capable of losing out minus Vandy (please don't make me regret that Vols).

 

[bowlinggreenvol]

One thing I noticed from the OP stat post is a lot of people were saying... I get tired of hearing Dooley left him nothing and say Nutt left Freeze nothing and look what he's doing but 8 Senior starters and 6 Seniors in the 2 deep from Houston Nutts last class tells me the cupboard wasn't as bare as the Dooley disaster..One of those Seniors is Pruitt who leads in interceptions.

Golson leads in INT's but still a Nutt recruit.

Of those 8, only 2 are on the OL though. They start 2 SR's equivalent to Kerbyson, Jackson and Crowder (all 4 yr guys) 1 Jr, 1 So and 1 TR Fr. The difference is their old guys got thrown to the fire quicker than ours because they didn't have an upperclassmen laden line like we did the last 2 yrs. That means when Freeze got there he was playing 2 So and a Fr on the line, assuming those guys started his first year, and given their career number of starts Id say they did start young. Perhaps younger than us since we're only playing 2 FR and all RS Jr.

 

[dbowen]

These numbers from before the season, plus recruiting quality, explain this season pretty well if you take the time to look them over.

Feel free to refer people to this post when they claim our youth and inexperience is merely an excuse. The math clearly says something else:

Combined Experience Rank

Rank - Team - Exp Pts
1 MS St. 77.36
2 AU 76.38
3 SC 70.12
4 Ole MS 69.46
5 AR 64.37
6 KY 62.47
7 FL 60.03
8 GA 58.72
9 A&M 55.55
10 BAMA 49.95
11 LSU 46.82
12 MO 45.79
13 Vols 44.85
14 Vandy 44.25


Senior Experience Rank

Rank - Team -Senior Strs - Snr 2 Deep - Snr Exp Pts
1 - AU - 12 - 4 - 79
2 - MS St. - 12 -4 - 75
3 - Ole MS - 8 - 6 - 72
4 - SC - 7 - 5 - 71
5 - GA - 10 - 4 - 70
6 - KY - 8 - 8 - 66
7 - AR - 9 - 3 - 65
8 - BAMA - 8 - 4 - 63
9 - MO - 10 - 2 - 63
10 - FL - 7 - 4 - 57
11 - A&M - 8 - 5 - 56
12 - LSU - 6 - 3 - 50
13 - Vols - 5 - 2 - 45
14 - Vandy - 5 - 1 - 42

Lettermen Returning Rank

Rank - Team - LTR Return
1 - SC - 85.29%
2 - MS St. - 82.61%
3 - A&M - 75.00%
4 - AU - 73.61%
5 - LSU - 73.33%
6 - FL - 70.00%
7 - KY - 69.44%
8 - Vandy - 69.35%
9 - Ole MS - 68.97%
10 - GA - 68.92%
11 - AR - 68.75%
12 - BAMA - 68.57%
13 - MO - 61.90%
14 - Vols - 59.72%

OL Career Starts Rank

Rank - Team - OL CAR STRS
1 - SC - 113
2 - AU - 113
3 - A&M - 89
4 - Vandy - 83
5 - MS St. - 81
6 - LSU - 75
7 - KY - 74
8 - MO - 72
9 - FL - 66
10 - Ole MS - 61
11 - GA - 54
12 - AR - 51
13 - BAMA - 37
14 - Vols - 6

A few additional notes:
*The average OL career starts for all teams nationally: 67 starts.
*Tennessee's 6 OL career starts prior to the season is 128th of 128 FBS teams.

Great work. The facts speak for themselves.