(07-16-2013 09:31 AM)vandiver49 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-15-2013 03:31 PM)He1nousOne Wrote: [ -> ]You may be right, I may be wrong but the damage is done and it is very obvious. Perhaps my perspective from the outside does not allow me to see enough to know what I am talking about, or perhaps my perspective from the outside allows me to provide unbiased judgement on the situation.
It doesn't look good for Tennessee at all. They couldn't lure away Louisville's Head Coach. With his contacts down in Florida that would have been awesome for Tennessee yet...they didn't have the clout to pull him away from Louisville. That does not speak highly for what is going on at Tennessee and their viewed potential with those in the know. Top coaches are not jumping to go there because of their situation.
If the SEC gave Tennessee a new division, then that massive brand with it's massive following could once again fluorish. Why? Because they wont continuously be beat down out of the running for the conference championship or tournament. If they are competing in a division that is more equal for them then they immediately become the perceived dominant power in that conference and recruits are going to like that. Tennessee will be seen as the favorite to make it to any future SEC Tournament from their "Northern Border" division. That is not just a positive thing for Tennesse, in my opinion, it is necessary.
With regard to the HC search, I think Strong felt a certain loyalty to Jurich for providing him his first HC opportunity. The Vols missed on Strong after the Kiffin debacle when they doubled down and hired Dooley.
I guess my question is why would your proposed 'Boarder' division give the Vols a better chance to win than staying with 'Bama? (UF was only a big rivalry in the 90's. Historically, the Vols have played most of the teams that now make up the SEC West). Vandy, UK and Mizzou are all better than Tennessee right now. WVU and VT have out-perfored the Vols in the last 5 years as well.
I just don't think you can create a division that would be favorable to the Vols that would accomplish what you're suggesting.
I'm sure that's a big part of it. Louisville hired him and Jurich is behind him 100% in his efforts...
Tennessee had multiple chances to hire Charlie Strong prior to their offer last year. I know he was frustrated as an assistant at Florida, because he had been looking to become a head coach for some time prior to Louisville's offer. The Cards were the ones who gave him the chance to prove himself, and I think he'll remain loyal as long as Louisville continues to treat him squarely...
(07-16-2013 10:09 AM)bitcruncher Wrote: [ -> ]I'm sure that's a big part of it. Louisville hired him and Jurich is behind him 100% in his efforts...
Tennessee had multiple chances to hire Charlie Strong prior to their offer last year. I know he was frustrated as an assistant at Florida, because he had been looking to become a head coach for some time prior to Louisville's offer. The Cards were the ones who gave him the chance to prove himself, and I think he'll remain loyal as long as Louisville continues to treat him squarely...
The Vols coaching search ineptitude is a very sore subject for me. The cynic in me thinks that the hesitance in hiring Strong might has have been attributed to whom he chose to marry. And while Hamiliton couldn't have conceived of such a scheme, there might have been some old boosters which might have been rankled by the idea.
(07-16-2013 02:11 PM)vandiver49 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-16-2013 10:09 AM)bitcruncher Wrote: [ -> ]I'm sure that's a big part of it. Louisville hired him and Jurich is behind him 100% in his efforts...
Tennessee had multiple chances to hire Charlie Strong prior to their offer last year. I know he was frustrated as an assistant at Florida, because he had been looking to become a head coach for some time prior to Louisville's offer. The Cards were the ones who gave him the chance to prove himself, and I think he'll remain loyal as long as Louisville continues to treat him squarely...
The Vols coaching search ineptitude is a very sore subject for me. The cynic in me thinks that the hesitance in hiring Strong might has have been attributed to whom he chose to marry. And while Hamiliton couldn't have conceived of such a scheme, there might have been some old boosters which might have been rankled by the idea.
I'm sure that came into play. Old hatreds die hard, even if they are based in stupidity...
(07-16-2013 04:27 PM)bitcruncher Wrote: [ -> ] (07-16-2013 02:11 PM)vandiver49 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-16-2013 10:09 AM)bitcruncher Wrote: [ -> ]I'm sure that's a big part of it. Louisville hired him and Jurich is behind him 100% in his efforts...
Tennessee had multiple chances to hire Charlie Strong prior to their offer last year. I know he was frustrated as an assistant at Florida, because he had been looking to become a head coach for some time prior to Louisville's offer. The Cards were the ones who gave him the chance to prove himself, and I think he'll remain loyal as long as Louisville continues to treat him squarely...
The Vols coaching search ineptitude is a very sore subject for me. The cynic in me thinks that the hesitance in hiring Strong might has have been attributed to whom he chose to marry. And while Hamiliton couldn't have conceived of such a scheme, there might have been some old boosters which might have been rankled by the idea.
I'm sure that came into play. Old hatreds die hard, even if they are based in stupidity...
You mean "especially" if they are based in stupidity, because wisdom discards that which is irrational while stupid fights for it until death.
And the worst thing you can do to a moron is question his intelligence...
(07-16-2013 09:31 AM)vandiver49 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-15-2013 03:31 PM)He1nousOne Wrote: [ -> ]You may be right, I may be wrong but the damage is done and it is very obvious. Perhaps my perspective from the outside does not allow me to see enough to know what I am talking about, or perhaps my perspective from the outside allows me to provide unbiased judgement on the situation.
It doesn't look good for Tennessee at all. They couldn't lure away Louisville's Head Coach. With his contacts down in Florida that would have been awesome for Tennessee yet...they didn't have the clout to pull him away from Louisville. That does not speak highly for what is going on at Tennessee and their viewed potential with those in the know. Top coaches are not jumping to go there because of their situation.
If the SEC gave Tennessee a new division, then that massive brand with it's massive following could once again fluorish. Why? Because they wont continuously be beat down out of the running for the conference championship or tournament. If they are competing in a division that is more equal for them then they immediately become the perceived dominant power in that conference and recruits are going to like that. Tennessee will be seen as the favorite to make it to any future SEC Tournament from their "Northern Border" division. That is not just a positive thing for Tennesse, in my opinion, it is necessary.
With regard to the HC search, I think Strong felt a certain loyalty to Jurich for providing him his first HC opportunity. The Vols missed on Strong after the Kiffin debacle when they doubled down and hired Dooley.
I guess my question is why would your proposed 'Boarder' division give the Vols a better chance to win than staying with 'Bama? (UF was only a big rivalry in the 90's. Historically, the Vols have played most of the teams that now make up the SEC West). Vandy, UK and Mizzou are all better than Tennessee right now. WVU and VT have out-perfored the Vols in the last 5 years as well.
I just don't think you can create a division that would be favorable to the Vols that would accomplish what you're suggesting.
Tennessee has a stadium that dwarfs the stadiums of Missouri, Kentucky and Vanderbilt. I don't know about other applicable facilities to compare but I cant see how Tennessee wouldn't have similar and/or better facilities than those three schools based simply off of history, support and alumni backing.
Tennessee has all the right building blocks in place to be successful, they have the more expensive stuff in place. I personally wouldn't worry that much about performance in the past five years as you bring up.
Now, to the big question you asked. Why would Tennessee do better in such a division than what they are in now? Tennessee is closer to the heart of SEC recruiting grounds than Missouri, Kentucky and West Virginia. The problem for them is that they have to compete directly against the schools that inhabit those prime recruiting grounds yet in the recruiting competition it is not an even battle. If Tennessee was in it's own division with those schools farther north than it then the same scenario that has worked against Tennessee is now switched and works For them.
SEC hopeful recruits are more pro-SEC than recruits for any other conference in my opinion. They want to be on an SEC team that is going to be successful and reach the highly respected aspects of the post season. That means the SEC Championship game and the Major Bowls that the SEC has agreements with. In this scenario it means an SEC Tournament. That means four teams instead of just two. If Tennessee is suddenly in what is perceived as a dominant position in their division then their recruiting ability goes up dramatically. Any perspective coaches that Tennessee might want to woo will see that dramatic change too.
That change of division situation for Tennessee could be huge! Recruits will see it as a strong pipeline to getting into the future prestigious SEC Tournament. Right now it is not a strong pipeline for post season coverage because it has a locked in game against Alabama and it is outmatched in the East most years by Florida, Georgia and now South Carolina as well.
Also, in regards to Strong staying at Louisville. Of course he felt a certain inclination to stay but if the SEC program wooing him was one that was better set up within the conference for success then I am not so certain Strong would be playing that same PR card that he did this time.
Compare Louisville and Tennessee. Louisville will now be competing in a Major Conference that has a seat at the big boy table yet that conference is perceived as being much much weaker than the SEC. Louisville is primed to be extremely strong in the ACC for football. Tennessee is not in a similar situation in the SEC. It is a renovation project and the way Tennessee is currently set up in the SEC, it is not a favorable situation to be able to renovate. They have a yearly game against Alabama that they likely continue to get crushed in. Not good for recruiting. They continue to play Florida, Georgia and South Carolina every year and likely do not win. Not good for recruiting.
Louisville is actually a great place for Strong to stay and Tennessee is really not a great place to leave Louisville for. The feelings he has for Jurich and the University of Louisville are just the icing on the cake.
(07-16-2013 09:25 PM)He1nousOne Wrote: [ -> ]Also, in regards to Strong staying at Louisville. Of course he felt a certain inclination to stay but if the SEC program wooing him was one that was better set up within the conference for success then I am not so certain Strong would be playing that same PR card that he did this time.
Compare Louisville and Tennessee. Louisville will now be competing in a Major Conference that has a seat at the big boy table yet that conference is perceived as being much much weaker than the SEC. Louisville is primed to be extremely strong in the ACC for football. Tennessee is not in a similar situation in the SEC. It is a renovation project and the way Tennessee is currently set up in the SEC, it is not a favorable situation to be able to renovate. They have a yearly game against Alabama that they likely continue to get crushed in. Not good for recruiting. They continue to play Florida, Georgia and South Carolina every year and likely do not win. Not good for recruiting.
Louisville is actually a great place for Strong to stay and Tennessee is really not a great place to leave Louisville for. The feelings he has for Jurich and the University of Louisville are just the icing on the cake.
I'm not so sure about that. If it were up to SEC schools, Strong would still be an assistant coach at Florida. Louisville gave him a chance, and SEC schools passed him over time and again. Now that he's proven himself, he's not going to forget that, even if certain SEC programs hope otherwise. The only SEC school he might leave Louisville for is Florida...
(07-16-2013 09:05 PM)He1nousOne Wrote: [ -> ] (07-16-2013 09:31 AM)vandiver49 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-15-2013 03:31 PM)He1nousOne Wrote: [ -> ]You may be right, I may be wrong but the damage is done and it is very obvious. Perhaps my perspective from the outside does not allow me to see enough to know what I am talking about, or perhaps my perspective from the outside allows me to provide unbiased judgement on the situation.
It doesn't look good for Tennessee at all. They couldn't lure away Louisville's Head Coach. With his contacts down in Florida that would have been awesome for Tennessee yet...they didn't have the clout to pull him away from Louisville. That does not speak highly for what is going on at Tennessee and their viewed potential with those in the know. Top coaches are not jumping to go there because of their situation.
If the SEC gave Tennessee a new division, then that massive brand with it's massive following could once again fluorish. Why? Because they wont continuously be beat down out of the running for the conference championship or tournament. If they are competing in a division that is more equal for them then they immediately become the perceived dominant power in that conference and recruits are going to like that. Tennessee will be seen as the favorite to make it to any future SEC Tournament from their "Northern Border" division. That is not just a positive thing for Tennesse, in my opinion, it is necessary.
With regard to the HC search, I think Strong felt a certain loyalty to Jurich for providing him his first HC opportunity. The Vols missed on Strong after the Kiffin debacle when they doubled down and hired Dooley.
I guess my question is why would your proposed 'Boarder' division give the Vols a better chance to win than staying with 'Bama? (UF was only a big rivalry in the 90's. Historically, the Vols have played most of the teams that now make up the SEC West). Vandy, UK and Mizzou are all better than Tennessee right now. WVU and VT have out-perfored the Vols in the last 5 years as well.
I just don't think you can create a division that would be favorable to the Vols that would accomplish what you're suggesting.
Tennessee has a stadium that dwarfs the stadiums of Missouri, Kentucky and Vanderbilt. I don't know about other applicable facilities to compare but I cant see how Tennessee wouldn't have similar and/or better facilities than those three schools based simply off of history, support and alumni backing.
Tennessee has all the right building blocks in place to be successful, they have the more expensive stuff in place. I personally wouldn't worry that much about performance in the past five years as you bring up.
Now, to the big question you asked. Why would Tennessee do better in such a division than what they are in now? Tennessee is closer to the heart of SEC recruiting grounds than Missouri, Kentucky and West Virginia. The problem for them is that they have to compete directly against the schools that inhabit those prime recruiting grounds yet in the recruiting competition it is not an even battle. If Tennessee was in it's own division with those schools farther north than it then the same scenario that has worked against Tennessee is now switched and works For them.
SEC hopeful recruits are more pro-SEC than recruits for any other conference in my opinion. They want to be on an SEC team that is going to be successful and reach the highly respected aspects of the post season. That means the SEC Championship game and the Major Bowls that the SEC has agreements with. In this scenario it means an SEC Tournament. That means four teams instead of just two. If Tennessee is suddenly in what is perceived as a dominant position in their division then their recruiting ability goes up dramatically. Any perspective coaches that Tennessee might want to woo will see that dramatic change too.
That change of division situation for Tennessee could be huge! Recruits will see it as a strong pipeline to getting into the future prestigious SEC Tournament. Right now it is not a strong pipeline for post season coverage because it has a locked in game against Alabama and it is outmatched in the East most years by Florida, Georgia and now South Carolina as well.
UT should have everything a kid would want. They have a mammoth stadium, big crowds, beautiful campus, beautiful part of the country, and great weather. Speaking of dwarfing Missouri, UK, and Vandy, I think it dwarfs everyone except Michigan. The right moves by smart leaders could again make them a national champ.
(07-17-2013 12:55 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote: [ -> ] (07-16-2013 09:05 PM)He1nousOne Wrote: [ -> ] (07-16-2013 09:31 AM)vandiver49 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-15-2013 03:31 PM)He1nousOne Wrote: [ -> ]You may be right, I may be wrong but the damage is done and it is very obvious. Perhaps my perspective from the outside does not allow me to see enough to know what I am talking about, or perhaps my perspective from the outside allows me to provide unbiased judgement on the situation.
It doesn't look good for Tennessee at all. They couldn't lure away Louisville's Head Coach. With his contacts down in Florida that would have been awesome for Tennessee yet...they didn't have the clout to pull him away from Louisville. That does not speak highly for what is going on at Tennessee and their viewed potential with those in the know. Top coaches are not jumping to go there because of their situation.
If the SEC gave Tennessee a new division, then that massive brand with it's massive following could once again fluorish. Why? Because they wont continuously be beat down out of the running for the conference championship or tournament. If they are competing in a division that is more equal for them then they immediately become the perceived dominant power in that conference and recruits are going to like that. Tennessee will be seen as the favorite to make it to any future SEC Tournament from their "Northern Border" division. That is not just a positive thing for Tennesse, in my opinion, it is necessary.
With regard to the HC search, I think Strong felt a certain loyalty to Jurich for providing him his first HC opportunity. The Vols missed on Strong after the Kiffin debacle when they doubled down and hired Dooley.
I guess my question is why would your proposed 'Boarder' division give the Vols a better chance to win than staying with 'Bama? (UF was only a big rivalry in the 90's. Historically, the Vols have played most of the teams that now make up the SEC West). Vandy, UK and Mizzou are all better than Tennessee right now. WVU and VT have out-perfored the Vols in the last 5 years as well.
I just don't think you can create a division that would be favorable to the Vols that would accomplish what you're suggesting.
Tennessee has a stadium that dwarfs the stadiums of Missouri, Kentucky and Vanderbilt. I don't know about other applicable facilities to compare but I cant see how Tennessee wouldn't have similar and/or better facilities than those three schools based simply off of history, support and alumni backing.
Tennessee has all the right building blocks in place to be successful, they have the more expensive stuff in place. I personally wouldn't worry that much about performance in the past five years as you bring up.
Now, to the big question you asked. Why would Tennessee do better in such a division than what they are in now? Tennessee is closer to the heart of SEC recruiting grounds than Missouri, Kentucky and West Virginia. The problem for them is that they have to compete directly against the schools that inhabit those prime recruiting grounds yet in the recruiting competition it is not an even battle. If Tennessee was in it's own division with those schools farther north than it then the same scenario that has worked against Tennessee is now switched and works For them.
SEC hopeful recruits are more pro-SEC than recruits for any other conference in my opinion. They want to be on an SEC team that is going to be successful and reach the highly respected aspects of the post season. That means the SEC Championship game and the Major Bowls that the SEC has agreements with. In this scenario it means an SEC Tournament. That means four teams instead of just two. If Tennessee is suddenly in what is perceived as a dominant position in their division then their recruiting ability goes up dramatically. Any perspective coaches that Tennessee might want to woo will see that dramatic change too.
That change of division situation for Tennessee could be huge! Recruits will see it as a strong pipeline to getting into the future prestigious SEC Tournament. Right now it is not a strong pipeline for post season coverage because it has a locked in game against Alabama and it is outmatched in the East most years by Florida, Georgia and now South Carolina as well.
UT should have everything a kid would want. They have a mammoth stadium, big crowds, beautiful campus, beautiful part of the country, and great weather. Speaking of dwarfing Missouri, UK, and Vandy, I think it dwarfs everyone except Michigan. The right moves by smart leaders could again make them a national champ.
Exactly, and yet finding a proper head coach is a serious problem. It is not like Strong is the only good coach out there. Tennessee has a huge fan base, a huge Gladiatorial Arena for a Stadium and a very decorated history in college football yet they still cant solve what would seem to be a simple problem in finding a proper head coach to lead this program. They have a very serious recruiting situation that has been growing and now with the bad performance the program has been having, it is not seen by recruits as a program in the SEC that can get you very far.
That will continue to be the case with cross rival as Alabama and quite frankly neither of the two divisions are any better for Tennessee. They will still face some schools in either division that will be having a major recruiting advantage over them. Only with a more northern "border" division will Tennessee be able to thrive again, just my opinion of course. I don't see any seriously accomplished coaches jumping for the Tennessee position the way Tennessee is positioning within the SEC currently.
Tennessee has two major problems in terms of in-state recruiting... location and Vanderbilt actually having a pulse in football. The state of Tennessee produces a good amount of SEC talent, but a good percentage of it is in or near Memphis. The shape of Tennessee makes it so that Memphis is closer to about half of the other SEC schools, especially the Mississippi schools. If UT was located in Nashville and Vanderbilt stayed at their Duke/Wake Forest level of football, UT would be in a great position to keep the vast majority of their in-state talent, which alleviates many of the recruiting problems that have been brought up recently. Aside from the occasional 4 or 5 star kid to come out of east Tennessee, they do not have a fool proof recruiting ground. They are pretty much splitting recruits with Vandy in Nashville now, which is a tremendous success for Vandy and a punch to the gut for UT.
(07-22-2013 02:14 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote: [ -> ]Tennessee has two major problems in terms of in-state recruiting... location and Vanderbilt actually having a pulse in football. The state of Tennessee produces a good amount of SEC talent, but a good percentage of it is in or near Memphis. The shape of Tennessee makes it so that Memphis is closer to about half of the other SEC schools, especially the Mississippi schools. If UT was located in Nashville and Vanderbilt stayed at their Duke/Wake Forest level of football, UT would be in a great position to keep the vast majority of their in-state talent, which alleviates many of the recruiting problems that have been brought up recently. Aside from the occasional 4 or 5 star kid to come out of east Tennessee, they do not have a fool proof recruiting ground. They are pretty much splitting recruits with Vandy in Nashville now, which is a tremendous success for Vandy and a punch to the gut for UT.
That is part of the problem, but that also signifies an even greater problem. I dont think with in state recruiting alone could Tennessee level the playing field. So Vanderbilt is not causing the problem, they are just making it worse. If Tennessee had it's own division and a much stronger chance to get into SEC post season then it could do much better in out of state recruiting.
Look at the current rankings for their recruiting. I just saw today that in one of the rankings Tennessee is ranked 4th in recruiting with having 24 recruits committed already. That would be impressive except...the number one ranked program is Michigan with only 14 recruits. That means Tennessee is just not getting the same quality of recruits as top programs. It is getting quick signings and lots of them which likely means guys that didnt get a whole lot of other top program scholarship options. Talking heads are trying to make the situation look good for Tennessee but once other programs start getting their commit numbers up, Tennessee is gonna drop like a rock.
They need Something big to happen for them.
(07-22-2013 07:30 PM)He1nousOne Wrote: [ -> ] (07-22-2013 02:14 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote: [ -> ]Tennessee has two major problems in terms of in-state recruiting... location and Vanderbilt actually having a pulse in football. The state of Tennessee produces a good amount of SEC talent, but a good percentage of it is in or near Memphis. The shape of Tennessee makes it so that Memphis is closer to about half of the other SEC schools, especially the Mississippi schools. If UT was located in Nashville and Vanderbilt stayed at their Duke/Wake Forest level of football, UT would be in a great position to keep the vast majority of their in-state talent, which alleviates many of the recruiting problems that have been brought up recently. Aside from the occasional 4 or 5 star kid to come out of east Tennessee, they do not have a fool proof recruiting ground. They are pretty much splitting recruits with Vandy in Nashville now, which is a tremendous success for Vandy and a punch to the gut for UT.
That is part of the problem, but that also signifies an even greater problem. I dont think with in state recruiting alone could Tennessee level the playing field. So Vanderbilt is not causing the problem, they are just making it worse. If Tennessee had it's own division and a much stronger chance to get into SEC post season then it could do much better in out of state recruiting.
Look at the current rankings for their recruiting. I just saw today that in one of the rankings Tennessee is ranked 4th in recruiting with having 24 recruits committed already. That would be impressive except...the number one ranked program is Michigan with only 14 recruits. That means Tennessee is just not getting the same quality of recruits as top programs. It is getting quick signings and lots of them which likely means guys that didnt get a whole lot of other top program scholarship options. Talking heads are trying to make the situation look good for Tennessee but once other programs start getting their commit numbers up, Tennessee is gonna drop like a rock.
They need Something big to happen for them.
With regard to in-state talent He1nousOne you're absolutely correct. It wouldn't matter if UT were located in the middle division, the state itself just doesn't produce that much talent.
Vandy being good isn't nearly as damaging as a competitive SCAR, since it mean that you have 4 schools trying to draw talent out of the state of GA. Thus, I am intrigued by the prospect of recruiting the Ohio Valley more. Hopefully that will pan out.
Again, its not that I'm against the Boarder division, I just don't the possibility of winning said division offsets the loss of playing the likes of UGA, 'Bama and UF on a regular basis.
I still hold that Tennessee can hold its own if they can just own the state. For each of the past three years, the state has produced 8 players who are 4-5 stars and another 20-25 3 star players (about 35 players at 3 star or above in state). If they kept 75% of those players, that is a solid recruiting class, especially since UT is getting good results now on the highest guys. Just take a look at the 2012 results for all of Tennessee's 4 star recruits; this is why Tennessee has been in the gutter, not because we don't have the talent in state. There were 8 4-star recruits from Tennessee in 2012, and all the schools listed below got one. See a problem here? Butch Jones seems to be turning this around, though.
Auburn
Georgia
Pitt
Tennessee
Vandy
Stanford
Mississippi State
Ole Miss
See what I mean? There is no way that 8 different schools should have gotten the 8 4-star players out of the state. So far this year, UT has commitments from the only 5 star in state and the highest rated 4 star. The only other committed 4 star in state is going to Notre Dame, but that was expected (boy's prep player whose school historically sends kids to elite private schools).
(07-24-2013 07:06 AM)vandiver49 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-22-2013 07:30 PM)He1nousOne Wrote: [ -> ] (07-22-2013 02:14 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote: [ -> ]Tennessee has two major problems in terms of in-state recruiting... location and Vanderbilt actually having a pulse in football. The state of Tennessee produces a good amount of SEC talent, but a good percentage of it is in or near Memphis. The shape of Tennessee makes it so that Memphis is closer to about half of the other SEC schools, especially the Mississippi schools. If UT was located in Nashville and Vanderbilt stayed at their Duke/Wake Forest level of football, UT would be in a great position to keep the vast majority of their in-state talent, which alleviates many of the recruiting problems that have been brought up recently. Aside from the occasional 4 or 5 star kid to come out of east Tennessee, they do not have a fool proof recruiting ground. They are pretty much splitting recruits with Vandy in Nashville now, which is a tremendous success for Vandy and a punch to the gut for UT.
That is part of the problem, but that also signifies an even greater problem. I dont think with in state recruiting alone could Tennessee level the playing field. So Vanderbilt is not causing the problem, they are just making it worse. If Tennessee had it's own division and a much stronger chance to get into SEC post season then it could do much better in out of state recruiting.
Look at the current rankings for their recruiting. I just saw today that in one of the rankings Tennessee is ranked 4th in recruiting with having 24 recruits committed already. That would be impressive except...the number one ranked program is Michigan with only 14 recruits. That means Tennessee is just not getting the same quality of recruits as top programs. It is getting quick signings and lots of them which likely means guys that didnt get a whole lot of other top program scholarship options. Talking heads are trying to make the situation look good for Tennessee but once other programs start getting their commit numbers up, Tennessee is gonna drop like a rock.
They need Something big to happen for them.
With regard to in-state talent He1nousOne you're absolutely correct. It wouldn't matter if UT were located in the middle division, the state itself just doesn't produce that much talent.
Vandy being good isn't nearly as damaging as a competitive SCAR, since it mean that you have 4 schools trying to draw talent out of the state of GA. Thus, I am intrigued by the prospect of recruiting the Ohio Valley more. Hopefully that will pan out.
Again, its not that I'm against the Boarder division, I just don't the possibility of winning said division offsets the loss of playing the likes of UGA, 'Bama and UF on a regular basis.
Let me delve further into this for you.
A possible Tennessee schedule should this ever actually happen.
Game 1 - Middle Tennessee State
Game 2 - Fill in the Blank OOC match up
Game 3 - Arkansas
Game 4 - Texas A&M
Game 5 - Ole Miss
Game 6 - Vanderbilt
Game 7 - Florida
Game 8 - South Carolina
Game 9 - Third and final OOC match up
Game 10 - Kentucky
Game 11 - Missouri
Game 12 - West Virginia
Three OOC games, two games against each of the other 3 divisions and then finishing the season with three division games that count for all the marbles.
Two OOC games at the beginning of the season to tune up with or hold an out of conference rivalry game.
Then you have back to back games against each of the other divisions, in this example Tennessee's division first plays the "West" division, then the "Central" division and then finally the "East" division.
They play traditional rivals Vanderbilt and Florida in this schedule despite being in different divisions. The next year they would play Alabama instead of Vanderbilt and Georgia instead of Florida. I personally don't see how playing those teams every other year is all that bad for Tennessee.
They finish off with those three vitally important games in division. By then we will know who the contenders are based upon schedules as only three games are left. That makes every single one of those divisional matchups extremely important and that is how rivalries are made. You even get a nice soft OOC match up before those games start so you can rest some of your guys for a good portion of the game in order to get in the best shape possible for those important division games.
That methodology turns the match ups against Kentucky, Missouri and West Virginia into instant rivalries. We see that in EVERY division in the NFL. The same mechanism works in this scenario too.
If Tennessee beats out West Virginia, Missouri and Kentucky then they land in the SEC Tournament of division champs. How is it bad for Tennessee to have to beat out those programs instead of the likes of Florida, Georgia and South Carolina? I guarantee that would help them land a better coach who would see much more potential of success at Tennessee.
(07-24-2013 01:21 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote: [ -> ]And this... FSU and the Vols now #1 and #2 in Recruiting.
http://insider.espn.go.com/college-sport...ssrankings
Look at the numbers of recruits committed. If that graph was based on average value of each recruit, neither Tennessee or FSU would be in those positions.
Both of them will drop considerably before it's all said and done.
Look at the schools that have that many.
First is Texas. They ALWAYS have their pick in the State of Texas and they traditionally can sign them fast. It is interesting that Texas has landed that low for having that many. Texas A&M is definitely having an affect. Texas A&M is only three slots lower than Texas while having 7 less commits. Very impressive for A&M.
Anyways back to Tennessee.
Compare them to FSU and Miami. Miami always over recruits. I have no idea how they are able to land as many as they do. I guess they lose a lot of guys on scholarship to academic problems and other problems so that opens up scholarships early for them. They too traditionally fill up fast as they take a lot of guys that many of the SEC programs won't even look at due to certain issues.
I hope that isn't the case with FSU. FSU traditionally has a lot of success in recruiting, the problem is that they get a lot of studs who don't mold well into a team full of ego. We will see just how strong those 22 commits are. FSU may maintain or they may fall but they too traditionally recruit fast.
Everyone else of note is down in the middle teens. The fact that Tennessee, in a region that isnt a recruiting hotbed, has filled up that fast to 24 recruits doesn't really bode well for the level of quality in those recruits. That isn't to say they aren't good players but you have over 10 extremely strong traditional programs that are in the mid teens having 8-10 less signings than Tennessee. They are going to get those signings and then they are going to pass up Tennessee in the rankings.
I really hope Vol fans aren't getting overly excited about this ranking just yet.
Heinous, I agree that when a conference decides to get as big as the SEC, no team can gripe about losing their lower tier rivals. With 14 teams, it is possible for everyone to get their first choice rival year in and year out even in a pod system, but rivals #2, 3, 4, and so on may have to be sacrificed. That is a big reason why I was really hoping to add UNC to the SEC. That would give USC a natural rival so that the following could occur:
USC-UNC
UF-UGA
Bama-Auburn
Ole Miss - Miss. St.
UT-UK
Mizzou - Ark.
TAMU - LSU
Those are perfect, and it leaves Vandy as the odd man out. A package deal with UNC to include Duke would have given Vandy the best natural rival possible. Oh, well... what might have been.
(07-25-2013 09:35 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote: [ -> ]Heinous, I agree that when a conference decides to get as big as the SEC, no team can gripe about losing their lower tier rivals. With 14 teams, it is possible for everyone to get their first choice rival year in and year out even in a pod system, but rivals #2, 3, 4, and so on may have to be sacrificed. That is a big reason why I was really hoping to add UNC to the SEC. That would give USC a natural rival so that the following could occur:
USC-UNC
UF-UGA
Bama-Auburn
Ole Miss - Miss. St.
UT-UK
Mizzou - Ark.
TAMU - LSU
Those are perfect, and it leaves Vandy as the odd man out. A package deal with UNC to include Duke would have given Vandy the best natural rival possible. Oh, well... what might have been.
That would have been pretty darned strong. I'm not so sure we can still rule it out. Apparently there is some kind of ruffle in the harmony of the ACC over the support of stipends or full cost of tuition scholarships. Add to that Mack Brown's remarks yesterday and all of the sudden the realignment waters have ripples again. Whether or not those turn into waves we'll see.
(07-25-2013 10:10 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2013 09:35 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote: [ -> ]Heinous, I agree that when a conference decides to get as big as the SEC, no team can gripe about losing their lower tier rivals. With 14 teams, it is possible for everyone to get their first choice rival year in and year out even in a pod system, but rivals #2, 3, 4, and so on may have to be sacrificed. That is a big reason why I was really hoping to add UNC to the SEC. That would give USC a natural rival so that the following could occur:
USC-UNC
UF-UGA
Bama-Auburn
Ole Miss - Miss. St.
UT-UK
Mizzou - Ark.
TAMU - LSU
Those are perfect, and it leaves Vandy as the odd man out. A package deal with UNC to include Duke would have given Vandy the best natural rival possible. Oh, well... what might have been.
That would have been pretty darned strong. I'm not so sure we can still rule it out. Apparently there is some kind of ruffle in the harmony of the ACC over the support of stipends or full cost of tuition scholarships. Add to that Mack Brown's remarks yesterday and all of the sudden the realignment waters have ripples again. Whether or not those turn into waves we'll see.
Interesting... there is definitely a split in mindset (at least from the fans/alumni perspective) in the ACC. I would think FSU, Clemson, UNC, NC State, and Va. Tech will have zero issue with full cost of tuition scholarships for athletes. The other schools, I'm not so sure about. Wake Forest is the only one I think would be outright against it, and Boston College/Syracuse may not be far behind. I bet a lot of it will depend on how the B1G comes out about it.
One more note about UNC/Duke to the SEC... that is really the only addition I see that makes the move from 14 to 16 seem like perfect realignment rather than expansion. It fits two slots that, I believe, are desperately needed: a top rival for both South Carolina and Vanderbilt. They are the only schools that nobody truly feels that gut busting rivalry hatred toward. I hope JR is right on those ripples becoming waves.