|
Title: I was hoping we would at least do as well as last year Post by: BanditVol on February 07, 2013, 05:24:11 EST We were 17th on Rivals in Dooley's last year, and 20th this year. Given that a new HC usually shows considerable improvement in the 2nd year, I wanted us to at least match last year. Interestingly, Dooley was a bit worse every year. His three Rivals rankings were 9, 13 and 17, in that order. Of course, Kiffin gets some of the credit for the 9th place in 2009, and of course Dooley shares some of the blame for this year. It was pretty much in line with what he was doing, which was slightly worse every year.
Rivals is only one recruiting service, and though we are one notch behind Vandy (they were 19th), we have only 21 signees and they have 26, and numbers matter to the ranking. Who knows, we might sign one or two late and edge up a notch or two. But for the most part this year is history, if Butch can make a big improvement next year, we have a legit shot at top 10 and he seems to already be off to a great start with that. I guess at the end of the day, 20th is more or less in line with where Dooley had us. Title: Re: I was hoping we would at least do as well as last year Post by: VinnieVOL on February 07, 2013, 10:39:16 EST We were 17th on Rivals in Dooley's last year, and 20th this year. Given that a new HC usually shows considerable improvement in the 2nd year, I wanted us to at least match last year. Interestingly, Dooley was a bit worse every year. His three Rivals rankings were 9, 13 and 17, in that order. Of course, Kiffin gets some of the credit for the 9th place in 2009, and of course Dooley shares some of the blame for this year. It was pretty much in line with what he was doing, which was slightly worse every year. Rivals is only one recruiting service, and though we are one notch behind Vandy (they were 19th), we have only 21 signees and they have 26, and numbers matter to the ranking. Who knows, we might sign one or two late and edge up a notch or two. But for the most part this year is history, if Butch can make a big improvement next year, we have a legit shot at top 10 and he seems to already be off to a great start with that. I guess at the end of the day, 20th is more or less in line with where Dooley had us. Me and a coworker were talking about this yesterday. I made the observation that, it's going to come down to what kind of a gameday coach Butch is. If he's a heckuva coach, he'll get something good out of this class. And if he's not, a top 10 class isn't much good. Still, I wouldn't have minded getting the top 10 class. :dcool: Title: Re: I was hoping we would at least do as well as last year Post by: PirateVOL on February 07, 2013, 12:12:55 EST We were 17th on Rivals in Dooley's last year, and 20th this year. Given that a new HC usually shows considerable improvement in the 2nd year, I wanted us to at least match last year. Interestingly, Dooley was a bit worse every year. His three Rivals rankings were 9, 13 and 17, in that order. Of course, Kiffin gets some of the credit for the 9th place in 2009, and of course Dooley shares some of the blame for this year. It was pretty much in line with what he was doing, which was slightly worse every year. A couple of pointsRivals is only one recruiting service, and though we are one notch behind Vandy (they were 19th), we have only 21 signees and they have 26, and numbers matter to the ranking. Who knows, we might sign one or two late and edge up a notch or two. But for the most part this year is history, if Butch can make a big improvement next year, we have a legit shot at top 10 and he seems to already be off to a great start with that. I guess at the end of the day, 20th is more or less in line with where Dooley had us. 1) the difference between 17th and 20th is minimal at most, start looking to the right of the decimal for the deltas 2) We finished 1 position benind them with a 5th less signees. The reality is we had a better quality class IMO Title: Re: I was hoping we would at least do as well as last year Post by: BanditVol on February 07, 2013, 03:51:08 EST A couple of points 1) the difference between 17th and 20th is minimal at most, start looking to the right of the decimal for the deltas 2) We finished 1 position benind them with a 5th less signees. The reality is we had a better quality class IMO Per no. 2, that was my point. As for 1, that was basically my conclusion. I still would have felt better at 17 though. :naughty: Title: Re: I was hoping we would at least do as well as last year Post by: 101stDad on February 07, 2013, 05:37:35 EST A couple of points 1) the difference between 17th and 20th is minimal at most, start looking to the right of the decimal for the deltas 2) We finished 1 position benind them with a 5th less signees. The reality is we had a better quality class IMO Pretty much my take, too, which is scary that Pirate and I think that much alike. :dunno: That said, Butch gets a mulligan from me for this year. He and his staff came in so far behind the 8 ball from the start, just getting this class to a decent mode after the recruiting cesspool that Dooley left him is admirable. Everything I hear indicates that this staff has a solid start with the class of 2014, which is a very good class instate, by the way. I am withholding judgement on their recruiting abilities until we see how they recruit to UT with a full year to repair the relationships that Dooley destroyed. |