This staff

#51
#51
UTRavens said:
So if we just decided to get rid of 10 3-star recruits, our star average would jump to 3.83, which would be better than LSU's in any of those years.

Would that make our class better, just because the average is higher?
Click to expand...

You really don't understand that when they have those 10 scholarships to give to more 4/5* players next year then their average stars over 4 or 5 years likely means they have more talent?
 
#52
#52
UTRavens said:
But those scholarships aren't being used in this scenario. If you simply got rid of ten 3-star recruits in the class, the average rating would skyrocket. But that wouldn't actually make the class better. That's why quantity is just as important as quality, and the Rivals' formula gets it wrong by setting their "limit" at 20 recruits.
Click to expand...
I agree that quantity is as important and that in a one-year scenario your logic is sound. But scholarships are handed out for 4 years. Therefore, while those 3-stars help your quantity score (I.e. Total points) this year, they reduce your chance to add higher rated players in subsequent years.

In any case, I'm really glad that UT has a deep and quality haul this year and hope that it helps future success which brings about even more highly-rated classes in years to come.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#53
#53
sjt18 said:
You really don't understand that when they have those 10 scholarships to give to more 4/5* players next year then their average stars over 4 or 5 years likely means they have more talent?
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with the gradings and rankings for THIS year's class? That is and has always been the only thing I'm talking about in this thread. I have never even come close to implying anything else, so I don't know why you keep going on with this unless your reading comprehension is just that poor.

By the way, these extra scholarships are coming at the expense of the past moreso than the future. Projections for 2015 aren't exactly expecting us to have a small class. So having a lot of 3*s in this year's class isn't something I'd worry about. Think of it as more of a bonus.
 
#55
#55
UTRavens said:
But those scholarships aren't being used in this scenario. If you simply got rid of ten 3-star recruits in the class, the average rating would skyrocket. But that wouldn't actually make the class better. That's why quantity is just as important as quality, and the Rivals' formula gets it wrong by setting their "limit" at 20 recruits.
Click to expand...

Regardless of what Rivals does, those 10 3* occupy one of the 85 scholarships UT is allowed. The composite average of those 85 players is (ostensibly according to Rivals) the talent level of the team. Does that help?

If you do a weighted average of the four classes that make up most of a team's roster then that is the talent "potential" according to Rivals.
 
#56
#56
sjt18 said:
Regardless of what Rivals does, those 10 3* occupy one of the 85 scholarships UT is allowed. The composite average of those 85 players is (ostensibly according to Rivals) the talent level of the team. Does that help?

If you do a weighted average of the four classes that make up most of a team's roster then that is the talent "potential" according to Rivals.
Click to expand...

For the last time, I am talking about one specific recruiting class. Not four. One.
 
#58
#58
UTRavens said:
For the last time, I am talking about one specific recruiting class. Not four. One.
Click to expand...

And..., you are STILL WRONG. This is a really simple concept we are discussing... but unsurprisingly, you just can't seem to grasp it.
 
#61
#61
sjt18 said:
And..., you are STILL WRONG. This is a really simple concept we are discussing... but unsurprisingly, you just can't seem to grasp it.
Click to expand...
I'm not failing to grasp a damn thing.

The extra 3* players we're recruiting this year do not come at the expense of 4* and 5* recruits in future classes. They are going to come at the extent of other 3* recruits. If a top 100 prospects wants to commit to the Vols next year, we'll make room for him. The 2015 class already has enough space to support at least a decently sized class and if 20 4* caliber recruits want to commit to us, we'll take 20 of them. But if a random 3* wants a spot, we won't be able to take him. It's not that we're actually sacrificing talent - we'll just take some extra 3*s a year earlier. It'll hurt our average star rating for this year, but it doesn't mean we're actually taking in less talent.

The same goes for other schools. Do you really think, if they took 10 extra recruits, their average star rating would remain the same? That they'd be taking in more big time prospects who aren't in the class now simply because there isn't room? Of course not! If that was the case, they'd be pushing their current 3* commits aside to take on those big names. The difference is that instead of taking 10 3* commits now like we are, they'll just take 5 now and 5 next year.
 
#63
#63
WebbCobb said:
I agree that quantity is as important and that in a one-year scenario your logic is sound. But scholarships are handed out for 4 years. Therefore, while those 3-stars help your quantity score (I.e. Total points) this year, they reduce your chance to add higher rated players in subsequent years.

In any case, I'm really glad that UT has a deep and quality haul this year and hope that it helps future success which brings about even more highly-rated classes in years to come.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I thought they were given 1 year at a time instead of a guaranteed 4 years..
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#65
#65
TommyOler said:
When you have great team speed, coaches look like geniuses on the field.

When there isn't enough speed... coaches look like they can't scheme their way past a high school team.

The true measure of coaching, this year, was how the team performed early in games against top flight competition. The first quarter is an indication of how a coach prepares his team.

Later...speed takes over...and there is no "adjusting" a coach can do to make up for it. The team is fatigued, the benefits of adrenaline have worn off and the players spirit is broken because they don't believe that they can get to their "spots" in time.

You want to measure coaching... look at the first 10 minutes against Oregon and Auburn...the entire Georgia, South Carolina, Vandy and Western Kentucky games.

This staff outcoached Richt, Petrino, Spurrier and (yes) Franklin. This team didn't have the defensive speed to hang with Georgia, South Carolina or even Vandy. They matched up evenly with Western Kentucky and tore the Hilltoppers apart.

The days of the Vols being blown out by the top half of the SEC are rapidly coming to a close.
Click to expand...


out coached is now measure the first 10 mins.. geez :crazy:

i wish my performance at my job was based on the 10 mins of each day... man i would be a rock star..
 
#66
#66
92volalum said:
out coached is now measure the first 10 mins.. geez :crazy:

i wish my performance at my job was based on the 10 mins of each day... man i would be a rock star..
Click to expand...

I think the 2nd half of a game speaks a lot more towards the coaching ability of a staff as half-time adjustments need to be taken into account. I understand that weak depth can't be coached around but the great ones always seem to be able to squeak out a W when it counts.
 
#68
#68
UTRavens said:
But those scholarships aren't being used in this scenario. If you simply got rid of ten 3-star recruits in the class, the average rating would skyrocket. But that wouldn't actually make the class better. That's why quantity is just as important as quality, and the Rivals' formula gets it wrong by setting their "limit" at 20 recruits.
Click to expand...

Exactly!

And...take a look at the 40 times on the 3 star guys at the skill positions. Take as many 3 star guys with speed, as you can. The staff can coach them into having quality skill sets...but you can't coach speed.

I know that I'm on a "speed kick." lol.

However...recruiting is about "raw materials." The Vols appear to be recruiting (and landing) skill-position kids who have SEC caliber speed & acceleration...a "raw material" that they desperately need...with the intention of refining that raw material into technically proficient ballers.

This class won't bust, like previous (similarly rated) classes. The Vols are probably going to have a hard time along the line of scrimmage, on both sides of the ball, though. These youngster linemen are going to need another year in the weight room, before they can hold up for 60 minutes in the SEC. They will give passing teams fits...but grinders like Alabama will wear them out.

Watch for Jason Carr, though. Everybody seems to have forgotten that kid... he will make some noise, in 2104.
 
#69
#69
sjt18 said:
You really don't understand that when they have those 10 scholarships to give to more 4/5* players next year then their average stars over 4 or 5 years likely means they have more talent?
Click to expand...

You'd be the one crying, "why do we suck again!" next year if you followed that approach. Stars don't matter all that much because any idiot can see a 4/5 star. Those 10 three star are probably better than a lot of four star out there. Larry Coker got fired by being a star chaser.
 
#70
#70
Let's celebrate our good fortune and not degenerate into a star rating debate. Two players who weren't highly ranked, the late Harry Galbreath and the current player Cam Sutton.
 
#71
#71
sjt18 said:
The future has nothing to do with Dooley. He's gone. This fall well over half the roster will be guys that signed with Jones... in fact almost 2/3's of it.
Click to expand...

This opinion doesn't account for the talent being so young since CBJ's recruited most of it. IF CDD had of recruited like an SEC coach, then the talent would be more experienced.

Now in 2 years, the CDD factor will be out of the equation.
 
#72
#72
92volalum said:
out coached is now measure the first 10 mins.. geez :crazy:

i wish my performance at my job was based on the 10 mins of each day... man i would be a rock star..
Click to expand...

LOL!

Maybe... but if your job was to teach a group of teenagers who run a 4.9 in the 40 to hang with Oregon, 'Bama & Auburn for 60 minutes, what measurement should be used to evaluate coaching?

I just don't think there really is one. In a couple of years... with recruiting like we've seen... if the Vols are using games, it will be fair to be critical of schemes and adjustments.

Having said that... the way UT looked, from a preparation standpoint, in the first 10 of those games...is encouraging.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top