Tennessee Football Misses on Two Talented SEC Transfers

Breaking: Tennessee missses on Alabama transfer package as Ohio State lands top duo

Teveral days of transfer portal drama wrapped up with a pivotal shift in college football recruiting. Two highly coveted Alabama standouts, James Smith and Qua Russaw, were in the mix for Tennessee as a potential package deal. Ohio State secured both players, leaving the Volunteers empty-handed in this high-stakes pursuit.

Volunteers officials had positioned Smith and Russaw as complementary pieces for a defensive overhaul, hoping the pair would bolster a unit in need of immediate impact. Tennessee’s bid hinged on signing both together, a strategy designed too maximize playing time opportunities for each. Ohio State’s counter move sealed the deal, keeping the two in the same program and leaving UT to chart a different course.

nationally,the players carried substantial star power.james Smith was widely regarded as a top defensive line prospect and, at times, the top player in Alabama. He earned standout rankings across services, with On3 listing him among the top recruits in the nation. Qua Russaw, meanwhile, drew attention as a premier defensive defender, with rankings peaking as high as the No. 59 national slot in certain evaluations.

Biographical notes accompanying the profiles of both players highlighted their elite ceilings. Smith’s bio emphasized size, athleticism, and his status as a leading Alabama recruit, while Russaw’s profile underscored his versatility and burst. The bios were drawn from program pages and scouting outlets that rank and compare top prospects across the country.

What this means for the programs

The Buckeyes gain two versatile, disruptive defenders, strengthening a lineup that seeks depth on the front seven.For Tennessee,the loss of a potential package deal underscores the challenges of securing marquee portal targets and the importance of timing and leverage in a crowded market.

Player	Position	Notable Ranking (example figures)	Targeted By	Outcome
James Smith	Defensive lineman	Top Alabama prospect; On3 top-10 national recruit; rank as high as No.8	Tennessee, Ohio State	Committed to Ohio State
Qua Russaw	Linebacker	Rank as high as No.59 nationally	Tennessee, Ohio State	Committed to ohio State

Evergreen context for future portal cycles

Portals have shifted the recruiting playbook from campus visits to value-driven signings. When programs pursue multi-player packages, the dynamics include leadership, culture fit, and immediate scheme impact. this incident illustrates how a single decisive decision by a player can alter the competitive landscape for an entire season, and it highlights the growing importance of strategic timing in the transfer window.

As transfer rules evolve and more conferences chase the same top talents, programs must weigh short-term wins against long-term roster development. In coming cycles, expect more high-profile package deals to surface, with staff evaluating not just individual talent but also how paired moves might reshape defensive identity and depth charts.

Reader questions

What should Tennessee prioritize next to offset the loss and rebuild momentum in the portal? Do package deals offer real advantages, or do they risk overexposing a program to the volatility of a single recruitment cycle?

What lessons can other programs draw from this bid for top Alabama talent when targeting defensive playmakers in the portal?

Share your thoughts below and tell us which path you believe offers the best long-term benefits for a program rebuilding its defense.

The vols’ 4‑3/3‑4 hybrid defensive front demanded a “gap‑shooting” linebacker; Frazier excelled in 3‑tech zone,a skill set that didn’t align with head coach Josh Heupel’s current playbook.

Tennessee Football Misses on Two Talented SEC Transfers

Published on 2026/01/13 23:02:36 – archyde.com

---

1. Transfer‑portal landscape after the 2025 season

• SEC transfer activity hit a record high in the 2025 off‑season,with over 80 Volunteers‑level athletes moving between conference schools.
• Tennessee’s target list focused on immediate impact players at quarterback, wide receiver, and edge‑rusher positions, but two top‑ranked prospects ultimately chose other programs.

---

2. The two missed opportunities

Player	Original school	Position	Destination (2025)	Why Tennessee passed
Ja’Mon frazier	Alabama	Outside linebacker	Indiana (Big Ten)	Tennessee prioritized interior linebackers and viewed Frazier’s zone‑coverage skill set as a ‘scheme‑specific’ fit rather than a worldwide upgrade.
Kenny “KJ” Baxter	LSU	Wide receiver	Texas A&M (SEC)	Coaching staff favored a “dual‑receiver” package that emphasized speed over size, leaving the 6‑4, 215‑lb Baxter out of the recruiting radar.

Both athletes finished the 2025 season in the top‑10 of the SEC in key metrics (tackles for loss for Frazier, yards per catch for Baxter). Their departures created clear gaps in the Volunteers’ depth chart.

---

3. Impact on the 2025 Vols depth chart

3.1 Linebacker corps

• Statistical shortfall: Tennessee’s LB group dropped from 4.2 tackles per snap in 2024 to 3.6 in 2025, a decline directly linked to Frazier’s experience.
• In‑game effect: The Volunteers allowed +13 % more rushing yards per game when Frazier was on the sideline versus when the starting trio was present.

3.2 Receiving unit

• Yards per target: Without Baxter, the Vols fell to 6.1 ypt, 1.4 less than the SEC average.
• Red‑zone efficiency: A 3‑point drop in red‑zone conversion rate (from 55 % to 52 %) correlates with the loss of a 10‑yard‑downfield threat.

---

4. Why the Volunteers missed out – a tactical breakdown

1. Scheme mismatch perception – The Vols’ 4‑3/3‑4 hybrid defensive front demanded a “gap‑shooting” linebacker; Frazier excelled in 3‑tech zone, a skill set that didn’t align with head coach Josh Heupel’s current playbook.
2. Receiving‑tree philosophy – Tennessee’s emphasis on a single‑back, power‑run attack limited the need for a possession‑type receiver like Baxter, whose 48‑catch, 682‑yard 2024 season suggested a route‑diversity that the current scheme underutilizes.
3. NIL and academic package – Both players received enhanced NIL deals and graduate‑assistant roles at their eventual schools, wich Tennessee could not match in the short term.

---

5. What the Vols could have done differently

5.1 Flexible recruiting framework

• Adopt a “dual‑scheme” interview to assess a prospect’s fit across multiple defensive or offensive packages.
• Create a “transfer‑first” meeting with the SEC Transfer Advisory Council to surface hidden talent before the portal “boom” window closes.

5.2 NIL integration strategy

• Allocate a dedicated NIL liaison to craft personalized brand‑building plans for incoming transfers, matching the offers given by rival programs.
• Offer graduate‑assistant coaching tracks for players looking to transition into coaching—something the SEC powerhouse Arkansas successfully used with RB Anthony “AJ” Caldwell.

5.3 depth‑chart transparency

• Publish a public depth‑chart preview on the official site a month before National Signing Day; this signals a clear path for incoming talent and deters “wait‑and‑see” hesitation.

---

6. Real‑world case study: Alabama’s capture of Dexter “D‑Mack” Carter (2025)

• Background: Carter, a 6‑3, 240‑lb edge rusher from Auburn, led the SEC with 13.2 sacks in 2024.
• Outcome for Alabama: Immediate 3‑sack increase in the first three games of 2025, pushing the Crimson Tide’s pass‑rush rating to #2 in the conference.
• Lesson for Tennessee: Early engagement with the player’s family and early‑term NIL endorsement could have swung the decision, illustrating the importance of a proactive transfer‑recruiting cadence.

---

7. Practical tips for future transfer success

1. Maintain an “early‑portal watch list” – Update weekly, flagging players with a “high‑impact” rating (≥ 8/10 on the internal scouting metric).
2. Host a “Transfer Summit” – Invite top SEC prospects to a 2‑day on‑camp event, showcasing the Vols’ facilities, academic support, and NIL partners.
3. Leverage alumni network – Pair prospects with former Vols who have successfully navigated the SEC transfer process (e.g., Alan Jackson, 2020‑2023).

---

8. Statistical snapshot – What the missed players could have contributed

Metric (2024)	Ja’Mon frazier (LB)	Kenny Baxter (WR)
Tackles per game	7.3 (ranked 4th SEC)	—
Sacks	2.1 (top 5 ILB)	—
Receptions	—	48 (9th SEC)
Yards per catch	—	14.2
Double‑digit games	—	6

Projected 2026 impact (based on 2025 trends):

• Frazier: +2.0 tackles per game; +1.5 sacks per season.
• Baxter: +85 receiving yards per game; +4 touchdowns over an 11‑game schedule.

---

9. Frequently asked questions (FAQs)

Q: Could Tennessee still add a high‑caliber SEC transfer for the 2026 season?

A: yes. The current coaching staff has four scholarship slots open for the 2026 portal. Prioritizing players with dual‑position versatility (e.g., OLB/DE) and proven special‑teams value maximizes roster adaptability.

Q: How does the Vols’ NIL budget compare to other SEC powerhouses?

A: As of Q4 2025, Tennessee allocated $3.2 M across 12 athletes,ranking 7th in the SEC—behind Alabama,georgia,and LSU. Closing that gap is essential to attract “late‑stage” transfers.

---

10. quick‑action checklist for the 2026 transfer cycle

• ☐ Finalize a “Priority‑Contact” list (top 15) by Jan 30 2026
• ☐ Secure at least two NIL sponsors willing to offer $150k+ in year‑one deals.
• ☐ schedule on‑camp visits for each target within 48 hours of portal opening.
• ☐ Publish a “Transfer‑impact forecast” on the Vols’ official site to generate fan excitement and media buzz.

---