- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Better coaching job: Let's compare programs
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:24 am
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:24 am
I like to always compare programs and see where they stand.
For purposes of this discussion, let's take the following things into consideration:
1. Facilities
2. Proximity to Recruits
3. Money
4. Fanbase
5. Exposure
6. Quality of life
UT Vs. OREGON
At first, this sounds like a no-brainer. Oregon, duh. Oregon has more money, better facilities, and pretty darn good exposure right now.
However, I feel Tennessee could become a major player with the right coach.
What's the difference in Tennessee and Alabama with Nick Saban? Sure, Bama has more money, but UT's facilities are just as nice, they have a premier stadium, UT is close to GA for recruits and just as close to FL as Bama is.
Tennessee's in-state talent is booming due to population growth in Nashville and central TN. UT doesn't have to share that talent with another major in-state school now that Franklin is gone.
So, I ask, what is REALLY the difference between UT and Bama when it comes to ability to win? IN other words, could Saban have done the same good job at UT as Bama?
Back to UT vs. Oregon....Oregon wins on $ and area, but it's proximity to recruits truly excludes a lot of recruits from them. It's partly the reason they struggle against top notch teams in the trenches.
IF UT wasn't such a dumpster fire and needing to start from scratch, I'd probably pick them over Oregon.
For purposes of this discussion, let's take the following things into consideration:
1. Facilities
2. Proximity to Recruits
3. Money
4. Fanbase
5. Exposure
6. Quality of life
UT Vs. OREGON
At first, this sounds like a no-brainer. Oregon, duh. Oregon has more money, better facilities, and pretty darn good exposure right now.
However, I feel Tennessee could become a major player with the right coach.
What's the difference in Tennessee and Alabama with Nick Saban? Sure, Bama has more money, but UT's facilities are just as nice, they have a premier stadium, UT is close to GA for recruits and just as close to FL as Bama is.
Tennessee's in-state talent is booming due to population growth in Nashville and central TN. UT doesn't have to share that talent with another major in-state school now that Franklin is gone.
So, I ask, what is REALLY the difference between UT and Bama when it comes to ability to win? IN other words, could Saban have done the same good job at UT as Bama?
Back to UT vs. Oregon....Oregon wins on $ and area, but it's proximity to recruits truly excludes a lot of recruits from them. It's partly the reason they struggle against top notch teams in the trenches.
IF UT wasn't such a dumpster fire and needing to start from scratch, I'd probably pick them over Oregon.
This post was edited on 9/17/14 at 8:25 am
7
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:26 am to Moustache
Any team in the South is better off long-term than a team in the Pacific Northwest
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:26 am to Moustache
quote:
Tennessee's in-state talent is booming due to population growth
Tennessee has NEVER been known for in state talent. They don't have very good high school football.
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:28 am to usc6158
quote:
Any team in the South is better off long-term than a team in the Pacific Northwest
Agree but oregon with that nike money is an exception. Tennessee is now a bottom tier SEC team so Oregon is the answer.
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:28 am to Moustache
Because Dooley fricked up the program
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:33 am to Moustache
How is this even a debate? The answer is
quote:
Oregon
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:35 am to Moustache
quote:
1. Facilities
Oregon
quote:
2. Proximity to Recruits
a wash, but advantage UO because they can recruit nationally
quote:
3. Money
Oregon
quote:
4. Fanbase
no clue. Never really interacted with either fanbase
quote:
5. Exposure
Oregon
quote:
6. Quality of life
Oregon
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:36 am to stout
quote:
Tennessee has NEVER been known for in state talent. They don't have very good high school football.
Tennessee used to produce a few quality players, but not as much as the other southern states.
It's a myth that Tennessee produces ZERO talent. It's also a myth today that most of that talent comes from Memphis. Memphis still has some players, but the elite HS programs and coaches in TN are in Central TN and Nashville now.
UT produces more talent than South Carolina and somehow USCe has been elite in the SEC East. UT can have more in-state talent than USCe, better facilities, and more attractive to out of state recruits.
The population boom in Nashville is significant. Look at some of the recent recruits from teh last 4 years:
2012- 10 4* recruits (only 3 of which are from Memphis, the rest are Central TN/Nashville)
2013- 2 5* recruits and 7 4* recruits (only 4 from Memphis, the rest Central TN/Nashville)
2014- 2 5* recruits and 7 4* recruits (none from Memphis, all from Central TN/Nashville or Kville)
2015- 1 5* recruits and 11 4* recruits (2 from Memphis, the rest cetnral TN/Nashville)
UT is still missing on about half the memphis players. I know Memphis is closer to a lot of schools, but Bama is getting them. Memphis players are bandwagoners. When UT is winning, Memphis is usually theirs. But they can win without Memphis.
However, UT needs a top notch coach like a Chip Kelly or Saban to win consistently adn be elite. The margin for error is low. I do think it will be easier, because their in-state talent is not all that far behind Alabama's and they don't have to share with another big in-state school now that Vandy is terrible.
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:37 am to harry coleman beast
quote:
Tennessee is now a bottom tier SEC team so Oregon is the answer.
For now. LSU was a bottom tier SEC school too before 2001.
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:39 am to Sevendust912
quote:
a wash, but advantage UO because they can recruit nationally
a wash? Seriously? UT is surrounded by talent in GA and their own in-state talent is doing great.
UT can recruit nationally too. Check out the past 2 years recruiting rankings. ('14 and '15)
quote:
o clue. Never really interacted with either fanbase
106000 stadium vs. 60000 stadium.
quote:
Oregon
SEC SEC SEC
quote:
Oregon
Possibly, but if you're a conservative it would be hard to be around that much retardedness. The smoky mountains and Tenn river are not exactly ugly.
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:39 am to Moustache
quote:
UT produces more talent than South Carolina and somehow USCe has been elite in the SEC East.
You're not too familiar with the in-state talent that South Carolina has had over the years aren't you?
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:43 am to Moustache
quote:
UT produces more talent than South Carolina
Not lately
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:50 am to c on z
quote:
You're not too familiar with the in-state talent that South Carolina has had over the years aren't you?
South Carolina has produced a few stars (Clowney, Lattimore, etc.) but the depth isn't there. USCe loads their roster up with players from GA, Maryland, NC, and FL.
Here's teh comparison:
Number of 4 and 5* players the past 4 years (12-15):
TENN-40
SC- 26
and Tennessee's population is growing A LOT faster than USCe and they don't have to recruit alongside Clemson. I don't see how people can say with a striaght face Tennessee has a talent problem in state but South Carolina is AWESOME.
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:50 am to Moustache
quote:
4. Fanbase
I don't think coaches really give a shite about this at all honestly. It's just message board fodder. I also think the "quality of life" thing is a little overrated.
And the answer to this right now is Oregon
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:52 am to stout
quote:
Not lately
Every recruiting site disagrees.
South Carolina USED to produce more talent than Tennessee annually. The past 7-10 years, that has just not been true.
This post was edited on 9/17/14 at 8:54 am
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:53 am to ShaneTheLegLechler
quote:
don't think coaches really give a shite about this at all honestly. It's just message board fodder. I also think the "quality of life" thing is a little overrated.
probably true. Making that much money, anywhere in the free world can be awesome. Though I wouldn't want to live in Lubbock or something like that.
quote:
And the answer to this right now is Oregon
Based on inheriting current rosters? Sure. Based on future potential, I"m not so sure.
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:54 am to Moustache
quote:
a wash? Seriously? UT is surrounded by talent in GA and their own in-state talent is doing great.
Oregon is right above Cali.
quote:
106000 stadium vs. 60000 stadium.
Autzen is known as a tougher venue to play than Neyland
quote:
SEC SEC SEC
So? Oregon gets much more exposure than Tennessee.
quote:
Possibly, but if you're a conservative it would be hard to be around that much retardedness. The smoky mountains and Tenn river are not exactly ugly.
Nah man, Eugene is the shite and I'm relatively conservative.
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:56 am to Sevendust912
quote:
Oregon is right above Cali.
Yes. But Cali is a big fricking state. Most of the talent in Cali is in SoCal, which is like saying UT is close to NYC.
quote:
So? Oregon gets much more exposure than Tennessee.
Right now. But they don't get more exposure than Alabama. If Tennessee was winning, they'd get more exposure.
quote:
Nah man, Eugene is the shite and I'm relatively conservative.
I'll take your word for it.
Posted on 9/17/14 at 8:59 am to Moustache
quote:
Right now. But they don't get more exposure than Alabama
Do they really? Hell, Mariota is on the cover of SI this week. Oregon might get more exposure than any program in the country, the media LOVES them.
quote:
If Tennessee was winning, they'd get more exposure.
I disagree but either way it's pure speculation.
This post was edited on 9/17/14 at 9:00 am
Posted on 9/17/14 at 9:03 am to Sevendust912
quote:
o they really? Hell, Mariota is on the cover of SI this week. Oregon might get more exposure than any program in the country, the media LOVES them.
Alabama has already been there,done that. They don't have the star player, but McCarron got more attention than Mariota last year and he's terrible compared to Mariota.
Alabama had ESPN covering their freaking practices with Inside the Alabama program.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News