Originally posted by jauk11:
Didn't respond to your answer? Give me an answer that makes some sense I am tired of wasting my time. A strong case you made, the past three years in the top six in the incredible recruiting SEC and two years in the top ten NATIONALLY. THAT is your answer? LOL. LMAO. I'm rolling on the floor.
OK, enough, now my clothes are all dirty. Go away.
Since you failed so miserably with your last reply, maybe you can try AGAIN to explain how the TWO four stars that even played at all for UK this year compares to the multitude of them (AND the five stars) on UT's roster before you leave.
No, never mind, just go away. Please.
Dear God...this is borderline insanity. Mrschwump, you seem to have some sense here. Help me out. Jauk11, I'm not sure where to start since my last post was too complicated for you. I'll give it a whirl although, I'm not sure it's worth my time. Here's the OP:
Originally posted by ukfit:
5 star: 1, 4 stars: 12! (2010 class)
Granted they are frosh this year, but UT is starting a few of these.
I could be wrong, but I think that UT does less with more than any team in the SEC.
If UK had that class...
This post was edited on 10/22 7:47 PM by ukfit
So the OP is stating that he feels the Vols underachieve when considering the type of recruits that sign with them. Hence the title of the thread as well, "Underachieving Vols." He clearly states,
"I think that UT does less with more than any team in the SEC." Again, his belief is that they are the most underachieving team in the Southeastern Conference when considering their recruiting. I have a different opinion and decided to defend UT. Here is my response to the OP:
Originally posted by CJNVol:
True freshman and UT is considered to be underachieving? Come on guys.....you're better than that. Any clue how hard it is for freshman OL to start in college? Any clue how many we started on the OL this year? Did you know that UT's depth is lacking so badly that they couldn't even field an entire travel squad to LSU this season? You think UT deserves the "less with more" title over UGA? If you say yes to that, well, I just don't know what to say.
You have a different opinion and one that lines up more closely with the OP's. This can be seen in your response to me here:
Originally posted by jauk11:
I thought your true freshman 4* QB was the difference in the game and several others played. But what about the twenty three 4*s and SEVEN 5* commits from the previous three years, I know a lot of them didn't want to play with a bunch of thugs, but weren't most of them still around? I know you have managed to keep your 5* Jackson, the one with the dumb thug hit that cost you the bowl game, out of jail-----so far.
Yes, Georgia underachieved greatly, but then I think UK is the only SEC team that actually overachieved if you just go by recruiting classes, only two 4*s that contributed this year.
I also think UT did a very poor job with their talent, but then Dooley does have a very useful law degree and it seems like the lack of integrity to put winning above everything else, so he should fit in well at UT.
First, UT didn't have
"seven 5* commits from the previous three years." Not sure where you got that number. Second, I love how you quickly glazed over the UGA topic and pushed it aside by saying,
"Yes, Georgia underachieved greatly." Then you start discussing how you believe UK "overachieved" even though that wasn't the point of the discussion. Regardless, it's fine what you think about UK but you really didn't address the UGA topic even though it sounds as though you may agree with my thoughts there. After this, you begin your rant about Bar Knoxville that has nothing to do with this topic. I'll skip those posts to stay on topic here. However, at the end of one of those posts, you say this:
Originally posted by jauk11:
Why don't you answer any of the questions, what happened to the multitude of four AND five stars UT signed the previous three years, surely UT doesn't recruit that many stars that can't hack it in college in Phys Ed or found out that UT isn't really the place they wanted to be. Four and five stars dropping out doesn't reflect well on your program, and I know for sure most of them didn't drop out. I can tell you the four stars UK had play against UT, two JC transfers, can you give me a list that played for UT, or is it too long?
So you clearly want to know
"what happened to the multitude of four AND five stars UT signed the previous three years?" This is exactly what you asked me. To this, I responded with the following:
Originally posted by CJNVol:
2008 - signed zero 5*s and four 4*s. Of those four 4*s, Abrams-Ward left the program, Douglas transferred, Walls didn't qualify, and Williams just graduated
2009 - two 5*s and nine 4*s. Of those 5*s, Brown transferred and Jackson is still with the program. Of the 4*s, four are still in the program, two were kicked out of the program, one transferred, one didn't qualify, and one has been a non-contributor
2010 - one 5* and twelve 4*s. The 5* is going to be a starting WR for UT in 2011. Of the 4*s, three never qualified, one had his position switched from WR to DB right before the season started, six were contributors, and two were non-factors this season. (Not real sure why I have to explain freshmen anyway.)
In sum, over the course of the last three years and going by the average star ranking (puts everyone on an even playing feild regardless of number of commitments) UT has signed the #6 class in the SEC in 2008 (Bama, UF, LSU, UGA, USC), the #5 class in the SEC in 2009 (UF, UGA, Bama, LSU), and the #5 class in the SEC in 2010 (UF, Bama, AU, LSU - UGA was #6). Nationally, those same three classes ranked #35 in 2008, #10 in 2009, and #9 in 2010.
Those facts, when combined with two coaching staff changes over the course of the same time period don't exactly scream of impending success for a program. Would you not agree? The fact of the matter is, you are literally speaking of things you have put no research into. All of these facts can be found by simply searching Rivals.com. You don't even have to leave this site you're currently on. Please continue throwing around whatever misguided, misinformed, downright false information you want to but remember that these factual number tell a very different story.
Now, if you fully read that response and don't just skim over it, you'll notice that for the three years you questioned me on, UT signed a total of three 5-star players (not sure where you pulled seven from) and twenty-five 4-star recruits. I went on to give you a thorough explanation of
"what happened to the multitude of four AND five stars UT signed the previous three years." Of those twenty-eight players, 17 are still with the program or were a JUCO and played out their eligibility last season. Of those 17, I said that three were non-contributors, one had his position changed before last season, and seven were true freshman during the 2010 season. If all you noticed was the national rankings I listed, then yes, 2009 and 2010 look decent. However, what your obvious lack of experience in the recruiting world doesn't allow you to realize is that rankings on paper do not automatically equate to success on the field. For instance, while three 4-star players certainly helped the Vols achieve that #9 ranking in 2010, they actually did not end up qualifying for school and therefore never saw the field. So while those national rankings look real pretty on paper, they don't tell you the real story. Now, as far as the SEC rankings go, as I said, UT finished #6, #5, and #5 in 2008, 2009, and 2010 respectively. Again these rankings were based on those kids that signed with UT and did not take into consideration those kids that didn't qualify. Nor does it reflect the class even one year later to include anyone that has transferred. Regardless, if you want to go by those rankings, they barely put us in the upper half of the conference. So regardless of where we were ranked nationally, we were barely good enough to get into the upper half of own conference. The national rankings therefore mean even less if UT is ranked 9th in the nation yet five of the teams ranked 1-8 are in the SEC. Now onto your request for an explanation of,
"explain how the TWO four stars that even played at all for UK this year compares to the multitude of them (AND the five stars) on UT's roster." I'm sorry but please direct me to where you asked me to make such a comparison prior to this last post of yours. I don't see that anywhere. The OP's point is that UT is the most underachieving team in the SEC. Your points, prior to this last post, were that you agree with the OP. When did this become a debate of UT's classes vs. UK's classes?
I am sure you won't read even half of this post. You will somehow take some number in here, spin it to scream about some off-the-field issue that is completely off-topic or just resort to some type of "you don't make any sense and therefore I am getting my clothes dirty rolling on the floor" type of comment that a pre-teen would make. You asked me to to discuss the Rivals-ranked 4-star and 5-star players that UT has signed for the previous three recruiting classes. I did so. You somehow didn't understand. With this post, I have essentially attempted to draw a map from "point A" (the OP) to "point B" (your most recent post) for you. I hope you can follow along.
On another note, once a year Rivals will go back an revisit and re-rank recruiting classes from a couple of years prior and base these new rankings on how effective those classes have been on the actual playing field. I'd suggest reading that when they put it out as it shows you that their original rankings don't always correspond with future success and not just for the University of Tennessee.
