(09-12-2013 12:14 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  UTEPDallas, you obviously haven't been paying attention. I never said Tennessee was a better job than Texas. But I don't think Texas is a better job than Tennessee. IMO they're about equal...

(09-12-2013 12:04 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(09-12-2013 10:37 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  How is Texas a better job than Tennessee, just because the state has a bunch more recruits than Tennessee?

It's more than that. It's not just the mere fact of being within the state of Texas. No one is saying that SMU or Texas State is a better job than the Tennessee job. The Horns have more money than anyone, more of a hold on CFB fans within their football-crazy state than any other single team in any large state, and a more advantageous position within one of the top three talent states for recruits than any other team in a recruit-rich state has.

I put Tennessee in a group of teams that have a high profile, and are top dog in their own state, but have to recruit heavily out of state to build a winning roster and compete often against other big-name schools to get those out of state recruits. (Wisconsin is a good example of another team in this category.) It's more of a challenge for Tennessee to recruit 4-star players in Florida or Georgia than it is for the Horns to recruit 4-star players in Texas.

But that's not quite true. Texas has to fight against all the FBS schools in Texas, other B12 schools, and now SEC schools. The competition for recruits is just as tough for Texas as it is for Tennessee. They have a slight advantage being the University of Texas. But the advantage isn't what it used to be, and probably never will be again...

The Great State of Texas offers more than enough 4 and 5 star recruits for the Big XII, SEC and other conferences to recruit. DFW alone has more FBS recruits than many states. Same for Houston. Bevo can't get them all. A&M, Tech, Baylor and TCU have the advantage of recruiting at the highest level because of their conference affiliations especially A&M in the SEC now. The rest, Houston, Rice, SMU, UTEP, UTSA, Texas State and North Texas get the rest and we're just talking about in state schools. Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, K-State, Tulsa, etc. recruit Texas heavily. I'm sure West Virginia will do the same now.

Texas (the state) has enough talent for the Power 5 schools to recruit then the rest go to the Gang of Five schools. Tennessee (the state) does not offer as many FBS recruits as large states like Texas, Florida and California. That's why schools like Texas have the advantage even though there's competition in and out of state for Texas recruits. Add the resources, wealth, flagship status, brand, etc and it's easy too see why Texas would always be one of the top dogs in football. Do I like it? No. Do I enjoy seeing their fans eating some humble pie lately? Absolutely. But mediocrity won't last long so I'll enjoy it for now seeing Texas fans going nuts with their leadership.

(09-12-2013 12:14 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Texas has to fight against all the FBS schools in Texas

TAMU, ok, but UT ought to be winning the lion's share of head-to-head recruiting battles with every other Texas school. If UT "has to fight" often against the other Texas schools, then they need a new coaching staff with better recruiters.

(09-12-2013 12:14 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  , other B12 schools, and now SEC schools. The competition for recruits is just as tough for Texas as it is for Tennessee.

It's not just as tough. Texas is one of the most attractive head-coaching jobs because it has definite advantages, which are a head start and not a guarantee of success.

If the guys in Austin are bad recruiters, sure, they could screw it up and fritter away their advantage, but if coaches recruited equally well at several different schools, the Horns would get a better crop of recruits than just about everyone due to their advantages. They still have to coach the players and not mess that up, but like I said, it's a head start and not a guarantee of success.

(09-12-2013 12:14 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  UTEPDallas, you obviously haven't been paying attention. I never said Tennessee was a better job than Texas. But I don't think Texas is a better job than Tennessee. IMO they're about equal...

(09-12-2013 12:04 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(09-12-2013 10:37 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  How is Texas a better job than Tennessee, just because the state has a bunch more recruits than Tennessee?

It's more than that. It's not just the mere fact of being within the state of Texas. No one is saying that SMU or Texas State is a better job than the Tennessee job. The Horns have more money than anyone, more of a hold on CFB fans within their football-crazy state than any other single team in any large state, and a more advantageous position within one of the top three talent states for recruits than any other team in a recruit-rich state has.

I put Tennessee in a group of teams that have a high profile, and are top dog in their own state, but have to recruit heavily out of state to build a winning roster and compete often against other big-name schools to get those out of state recruits. (Wisconsin is a good example of another team in this category.) It's more of a challenge for Tennessee to recruit 4-star players in Florida or Georgia than it is for the Horns to recruit 4-star players in Texas.

But that's not quite true. Texas has to fight against all the FBS schools in Texas, other B12 schools, and now SEC schools. The competition for recruits is just as tough for Texas as it is for Tennessee. They have a slight advantage being the University of Texas. But the advantage isn't what it used to be, and probably never will be again...

We just agree to disagree. I really feel dirty typing any positive things about Texas but they're the top brand in the nation. It's hard to argue with that fact. Like I said before, Tennessee is a good school but I wouldn't compare it to Texas. I would compare Texas to Florida or Ohio State before I would compare it to Tennessee. I would compare Tennessee to perhaps Wisconsin, LSU, South Carolina, probably Washington or Clemson.

Texas and Tennessee are equals with the right coach for the job. Besides most would rather play in the SEC than the Big 12. Do not be surprised, if the SEC raids the B12 for Texas and Oklahoma and beats the rest to 16 teams first.

Wilkie, I doubt that Oklahoma and Texas move to the SEC together. One or the other might happen - MIGHT - but not both...

And as far as the Texas-Tennessee argument goes, I don't think either is better than the other, and arguing about which is best is stupid. I haven't been trying to say Tennessee is superior to Texas. I'm simply saying Texas isn't superior to Tennessee. How you guys turned it into a long running discussion on oneupmanship is beyond me...

Frankly, I think the entire conversation is ludicrous. But it's been highly amusing for me today, and I really needed that...