Absolutley. I actually have no clue about UK's injury situation though.
Given the way they've played, I understand why they are favored.
No game thread?
- Thread starter Lurker123
- Start date
Absolutley. I actually have no clue about UK's injury situation though.
Given the way they've played, I understand why they are favored.
Why are you interjecting someone else's talking points to support your own - especially if you didn't agree with them?
lol you’re using average class rankings because Beamer has one really low class that skews the data. I’m guessing we outrecruited UK in the other 4 years?
Dear Hardy - Laurel was arguing that we should be favored in the contest against UK on Saturday because we out recruit them.
A team consists of 4/5 years of recruiting talent. 4-years would be 2020-2023.
How does the 2021 recruiting class not directly impact the team's composition just like any other year?
That’s the beauty of @Lurker123 ’s link in that the composite gives you a more accurate reflection of how that class impacted the current team.
Your class averages skewed the data. Your argument relies on skewed data.
Dear Teller - Penn's link has merit if you want to put your faith into one website's estimation model.
Regardless of what you choose, we are in the ballpark with UK overall in terms of recruiting.
We beat UK last season and also finished ahead of them in the standings.
This year, we've played a tough schedule and are underdogs.
In the end, we should probably wait to until the game is actually played before we analyze it.
You make lots of excuses.
But at the end of the day it doesn’t matter what happens in the game. I don’t find Kentucky to be a good team nor a well coached team. If you just want to be peers with Kentucky, you probably need to raise your ambition.
24/7 Talent Composite only has us ranked higher because we have 84 commits and they only have 77 commits.
Look at the AVG column. The players they have on average are higher rated than our players. 88.01 vs 87.71.
We are +1 on five stars. They are +5 on four stars. We are +7 on three stars, which basically means we have a few more bench warmers.
They are loaded with seniors on both sides the ball, and we have a ton of injuries. Nobody should be surprised that we are a 3.5 point dog.
Look at the AVG column. The players they have on average are higher rated than our players. 88.01 vs 87.71.
We are +1 on five stars. They are +5 on four stars. We are +7 on three stars, which basically means we have a few more bench warmers.
They are loaded with seniors on both sides the ball, and we have a ton of injuries. Nobody should be surprised that we are a 3.5 point dog.
I hope and pray no one on this board holds Stoops or UK as the standard……
If you don't want your peer to be Kentucky, then your "ambition" needs to extend to your pocketbook. Players don't take whining for payment.
I've been amazed at how many people I've met who think Teller can't talk lol. 🙂
I’ll gladly donate when we get a competent coach. Until then you’re just wasting resources.
Not true. If you build it, they will come. Coaches want immediate access to NIL resources to get the best talent, not promises that people will "gladly donate" in the future. Maybe.
Money talks, bullshit walks.
Wrong. That link also included avg player ratings too. Kentucky's is higher than ours. In fact, everyone in the SEC is higher except Vandy, Miss St, and Ole Piss. That clearly show what one tough year of recruiting can do to your talent score on average across the entire team. It's not just about number of players on the roster.
Interesting that the composite rankings only mattered when we were ranked lower. Yet are excused so quickly when we're not.
We are further ahead of UK than we are behind Florida, tenn and unc.
But you are right, on a team of over 80 players, the difference is basically 4 or 5 players being a single star apart.
Certainly the sort of "gap" that coaching can overcome.
What am I making excuses for?
You and Lurker have moved to criticizing our Vegas spreads.
We've won 3 of our last 10 against UK.
Beamer is 1-1. Muschamp was 1-4.
Let's see how it goes on Saturday.
Those ARE the composite rankings. Kentucky has slightly better players than us on average. We have a few more bench warmers. Injuries are a bigger factor for us.
And, yes, coaching can overcome that. Did anybody watch last year? Kentucky was favored by 10.5 last year, but Beamer got it done. At Kentucky. But I guess that doesn't matter.
And injuries do matter. It mattered last year when Levis was out for our game. It will matter this year with our deluge of injuries.
And, yes, coaching can overcome that. Did anybody watch last year? Kentucky was favored by 10.5 last year, but Beamer got it done. At Kentucky. But I guess that doesn't matter.
And injuries do matter. It mattered last year when Levis was out for our game. It will matter this year with our deluge of injuries.
Yes, the composite rankings. The ones you thought were so important when we were ranked 5 and 6 spots lower than an opponent, but now need to be diminished when we're 8 or 9 spots higher.
But I'll concede, any talk of a real "gap" in talent is minimal. It was when we were using it to make excuses for losses, and it is now.
Throw in that we have better NIL than them, and we're at home. I'm wondering why we're even playing the game.
Agree.
UK hanging through the earlier years with Stoops has improved their situation in the long run.
Spurrier also referenced this fact towards the end of their battles together.
That might not our recipe for success. However, it's hard to ignore the fact that they have gained a lot of ground us in the SEC over the past 10 years not churning staffs.
I never said coaching doesn't matter at all. I say it isn't our problem. Over these first 3 years, based on talent, we've beaten who we should. Beaten a few that we shouldn't. The team plays hard and leaves it all on the field. I don't see ANYTHING that makes me think any of our coaches are incompetent. Are they perfect? No. But that's not the standard. In fact, I've seen a lot more positive from Beamer and his staffs than I have seen negative.
On the other hand, I have seen many cases where we obviously were outtalented by a lot. And the quickest way to do that is pour the money into NIL and get better players. And even if Beamer doesn't work out in the long run with all that talent a higher ranked NIL program can bring in, a higher ranked NIL program and better players will make the job much more attractive to another coach.
"Spots" on the talent composite rankings don't tell the entire story. Who cares if we have 7 more benchwarmers that will never see the game? If any numbers are skewed, that is what skews them.
Actual player rating on average from the team talent composite for Kentucky is higher than South Carolina. So is Missouri. So is North Carolina. So is Florida. So is everybody we play except Vandy, Miss St, Furman, and Jacksonville St.
Not sure why some of our fans "feel" that we are so far above these teams. Definitely NOT the case. Like I said, delusions of grandeur.
Actual player rating on average from the team talent composite for Kentucky is higher than South Carolina. So is Missouri. So is North Carolina. So is Florida. So is everybody we play except Vandy, Miss St, Furman, and Jacksonville St.
Not sure why some of our fans "feel" that we are so far above these teams. Definitely NOT the case. Like I said, delusions of grandeur.
Spots don't matter until we need to use them to justify a different argument on a different day.
And if understand you correctly, the fact that we have more commits, more "benchwarmers" brings down our average. If we had the same 5 stars, 4 stars and 3 stars, but signed one hundred 1 stars, our 4 and 5 stars would be less talented, because the average would be down?
Imo, if you really want to compare, go with the number of 5,4 and 3 stars. That is a definite number. The average that is now suddenly supposedly important is in fact skewed, and thrown off by us having more benchwarmers.
Last edited:
I never said "spots" don't matter. I said they don't tell the entire story. Kentucky is VERY comparable to South Carolina in talent. So much so that coaching and injuries could be the difference. Some were very quick to point out last year that Levis being out helped us. And it did. A bunch of injuries could hurt us this year. Either way, "it's Kentucky and we should kill them" isn't valid in any scenario based on any metric.
I actually agree that we are very close to UK in talent. But to admit that, I also have to admit that we're just as close to UT, Missouri, UF and UNC, who score closer to us than UK.
What I'm using sarcasm to point out, is that we can't shake our heads, mumble "NIL" or "talent" and pretend some games are out of reach, if we can't turn around and pretend we're out of reach of other teams when the shoe is on the other foot.
UT, UF and to a lesser degree, UNC are ahead of us in terms of talent. The difference between a #24 ranked class versus a #17 ranked class is much different than a #17 ranked class versus a #10 ranked class. Both examples are separated by 7 spots. However, the difference in talent when you're moving higher in the Top 20 is far more significant.
Look what happened when Spurrier pushed us up 7-8 spots in recruiting. Suddenly, we had talent on the bench when OL went down, when players were gassed, etc. That's the vision for a Beamer. You can make fun of his personality and clowning all day, but if he continues to move us up the recruiting latter you'll appreciate it on the backend.
Most all games we play are not "out of reach." The odds improve significantly when we are playing them at home, we are healthy in the big skill positions, etc. Faulty thinking is believe we are going to beat these teams every year and especially on the road on any regular basis. Most believe we should beat a team like UK every time we see them even though we're 3-10 over the past decade. Again, UK is far better than they were when Spurrier was playing them until the very end when Stoops began to hit his stride.
Muschamp drove the car way off the road over the course of five seasons. Give Beamer a little more time to pull it back on track. If he can't do, we'll find someone else who can.
Last edited:
No, UT and UF and UNC don't score as close to us as UK.
The "spots" are based off the ranking of their score in the final column and the distance between spots isn't uniform. Using us a baseline.
Kentucky -25
Mizzou -12
UNC +42
Tenn +58
Florida +81
The point difference between #22 South Carolina and #16 Tennessee is the same point difference between #22 South Carolina and #43 Arizona.
And when considering average talent rating, all five of them are rated higher.
The "spots" are based off the ranking of their score in the final column and the distance between spots isn't uniform. Using us a baseline.
Kentucky -25
Mizzou -12
UNC +42
Tenn +58
Florida +81
The point difference between #22 South Carolina and #16 Tennessee is the same point difference between #22 South Carolina and #43 Arizona.
And when considering average talent rating, all five of them are rated higher.
Playing The Odds.
IMO, this would be been the best case scenario this year....especially if we had stayed healthy.
Home Games:
UT: Home field advantage helps mitigate talent gap.
UF: Home field advantage helps mitigate talent gap.
A&M: Home field advantage helps mitigate talent gap.
Missouri: Going across country to play a game is challenging when talent is similar.
Road Games:
UK: We play four road games. Would be nice to play at WB but they are beatable in their stadium.
VANDY: The most beatable team on the road in the SEC.
UGA: Good luck wherever you play these guys at this point. Might as well serve as a road game.
Mississippi State: (See UK)
IMO, this would be been the best case scenario this year....especially if we had stayed healthy.
Home Games:
UT: Home field advantage helps mitigate talent gap.
UF: Home field advantage helps mitigate talent gap.
A&M: Home field advantage helps mitigate talent gap.
Missouri: Going across country to play a game is challenging when talent is similar.
Road Games:
UK: We play four road games. Would be nice to play at WB but they are beatable in their stadium.
VANDY: The most beatable team on the road in the SEC.
UGA: Good luck wherever you play these guys at this point. Might as well serve as a road game.
Mississippi State: (See UK)
UNC, UT and UF are all ranked closer to us on that list than UK. That is just a simple fact.
But if you want to split hairs on the points, have at it. It's not unnoticed that this change is coming about after the Missouri game ruined the narrative of this list being a determing factor. Let's just hope UK doesn't do the same.
And again, we have more commits than all but one on that you listed. By your own logic more recruits brings down the average because of "benchwarmers".
(I also noticed your new best friend likes your delving into this ranking. But it surprises me when he called it a guess and irrelevant when he thought i was advocating it.)
Last edited:
The composite rank, Lurker. Outlets all over the country rank recruiting coming out of high school. You can easily take a moving average if you desire. It's transparent.
Why are you upset? You and Watson had been ganging up on anyone who offered any level of support for the team for awhile now. The criticism and lack of anything positive to say on the heels of a 41-point win was the icing on the cake. You didn't expect to get called out at some point? You can deliver criticism but not take it?
But we haven’t beaten who we should. We are 0-3 against Missouri who has less talent than we do. We’ve lost to Kentucky and Arkansas with less talent.
We haven’t even looked the impressive in our losses. When we lose we tend to lose by more than two score. We had one of the worst offenses in the county last year. We have one of the worst defense in college football this year.
Not sure how you can say we look well coached with a straight face.
Listen to what you’re saying. You’re admittedly “calling people out” because of a win over a team that’s 0-7 in the SEC?
When in doubt, just scream "tater". It's not transparent at all.
When you only focus on the negatives....
+ Blew out #5 UT
+ Beat #9 Clemson. First back-to-back wins versus Top 10 teams in history. Broke losing 7-game losing streak versus rival. Broke CU 40-game home winning streak.
+ Beat A&M; First Time in School History
+ Beat #13 UK in Lexington. First time we've beaten a ranked UK team in Lexington.
+ Beat Florida 40-17. Our biggest margin win ever versus the Gators.
+ Beat Auburn
+ Beat UNC in Bowl Game
We had the toughest schedule in the country this season. Unfortunate skill position injuries. Unfavorable home-road schedule.
Already covered that with the splitting hairs comment.
20 points on some arbitrary scale means we're basically even, but 40 points on that same arbitrary scale means it's an insurmountable difference... because.... we need it to be that way.
On top of the fact that we have more "benchwarmers" to bring our average down.
Similar threads
