How is it Tubs is so maligned by so many, yet some of the coaches of the following programs called "great"? Other's of the listed programs recently underwent coaching changes, or will soon. I would say, IMHO, every single team on this list underperformed in 2009 based on the talent they supposedly recruited the last 5 recruiting classes, with the possible exception of OSU, and they're a "also ran" team nationally.
Rival's Recruiting rankings of some selected programs 2005-2009, which includes RS Sr's. and their (2009 record.)
USC: 1, 1, 2, 8, 4 (8-4)
FSU: 2, 3, 21, 9, 7 (6-6)
Tenn: 4, 23, 3, 35, 10 (7-5)
Okla. 3, 9, 14, 6, 13 (7-5)
Mich: 6, 13, 12, 10, 8 (5-7)
UGA: 10, 4, 9, 7, 6 (7-5)
OSU: 12, 12, 15, 4, 3 (10-2)
Miami: 7, 14, 19, 5, 15 (9-3)
LSU: 22, 7, 4, 11, 2 (9-3)
Only OSU won a conf. title, and with a 10-2 record in the shameful Big 10.
Auburn's recruiting over that same time? 13, 10, 7, 20, 19 resulted in a 7-5 record. When you compare Tubs record during the listed years with the other programs listed...how does it compare? When you compare Tubs "bad losses" to the likes of Pete Carroll, and others, how does it compare? When you compare Auburn's 2009 record with the comparative talent Chizik had to work with, how does it compare, especially when you factor in their place in the SEC relative to recruiting rankings. Did LSU really underperform at 9-3? Remember a #10 national class (where we currently sit for the 2010 class) still puts us 6th in the SEC. That has to improve, but how? Is there a marked difference in a #8 class and a #10 class?
Finally, TX and bammer, both undefeated, play for the BCSC with the following ranked classes over the same time:
bammer: 18, 11, 10, 1, 1
UT: 20, 5, 5, 14, 5
Discussion...