Jump to content

Most Lethal Rosters for 2023..


Sportsfanatic1

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Valhalla said:

Texas, Texas A&M, Notre Dame, and Oklahoma should not be on this list.

If the list is based on returning talent, then Texas and Texas A&M should both absolutely be on this list. 
As it is, it’s based on recruiting rankings, in which case, they should also be on this list. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lobo97 said:

If the list is based on returning talent, then Texas and Texas A&M should both absolutely be on this list. 
As it is, it’s based on recruiting rankings, in which case, they should also be on this list. 

Being elite is a three-legged stool: Talent, Coaching, Culture. 

There are many teams with one out of three, and some with two out of three...  but the best of the best maintain that three-legged stool more often than not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Mr. P said:

Being elite is a three-legged stool: Talent, Coaching, Culture. 

There are many teams with one out of three, and some with two out of three...  but the best of the best maintain that three-legged stool more often than not. 

The list is roster, not team. Coaching and culture aren’t part of it. This is solely referring to the talent of the players. 
At least, that’s the way I’m understanding it.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Lobo97 said:

The list is roster, not team. Coaching and culture aren’t part of it. This is solely referring to the talent of the players. 
At least, that’s the way I’m understanding it.

Yes, and that's what I was inferring...  I was, perhaps, a bit too vague.

Some are criticizing OU, UT, A&M being included due to lack of on-field success. But that metric is not included here. This list is *only* about how the talent ranks. Not about how the talent is developed and/or how it carries out the gameplan. 

I think we're in agreement here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr. P said:

Yes, and that's what I was inferring...  I was, perhaps, a bit too vague.

Some are criticizing OU, UT, A&M being included due to lack of on-field success. But that metric is not included here. This list is *only* about how the talent ranks. Not about how the talent is developed and/or how it carries out the gameplan. 

I think we're in agreement here. 

Gotcha. I thought you were including them in it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...