Bashing needs to stop

[volsohard99]

i don't blame anyone who bashes the coaches because they get paid very nicely to feel the heat and they signed up knowing how "passionate" TN fans are.

i don't think anyone should specifically call out players who are just kids trying their best. see bama fans tonight calling out their kicker and saying he should commit suicide, etc. I haven't seen anyone calling for that from a vol fan but sometimes the bashing can go too far. don't cyber bully these kids, there's enough pressure on them already.

 

[allvol123]

Answer the question then. You're the one slinging out superior intellect claims and childish name-calling. Prove it or shut it. It's simple.

I'm waiting on you. Let's discuss that scheme & we'll see who the dimwit is.

I never saw your question, on the road traveling for the holidays.

But I've never claimed to be an expert on schemes, so not going to answer it. Perhaps you can link me to your posts made prior to the Auburn game or even during the Auburn game where you explained what our defensive scheme for Auburn should be?

 

[Pig Skin]

I never saw your question, on the road traveling for the holidays.

But I've never claimed to be an expert on schemes, so not going to answer it. Perhaps you can link me to your posts made prior to the Auburn game or even during the Auburn game where you explained what our defensive scheme for Auburn should be?

Hope you had an enjoyable trip. No sarcasm.

That's my point. Dont call people a dimwit simply because they disagree with you. I don't agree with you. At all. But I'm not going to comment on your intellectual ability because I don't know you. I don't know how smart you are or are not.

If you want to go in-depth let me know & I will, but to keep it simple, running a 5 defensive back scheme against a team that had thrown one more pass in 2 weeks than you have fingers is counterproductive. They run. Attack the edge/off tackle. We pulled a linebacker, who has help contain responsibility, moved the remaining 'backers further inside, and brought in a walk-on defensive back and put him 2-3 times further away from the point of attack.


And we did it all day.

Again we can go deeper- much deeper- but just a sliver of evidence that I'm not stupid. Dont think I'm a master, but I'm no idiot.

 

[volfan411]

Hope you had an enjoyable trip. No sarcasm.

That's my point. Dont call people a dimwit simply because they disagree with you. I don't agree with you. At all. But I'm not going to comment on your intellectual ability because I don't know you. I don't know how smart you are or are not.

If you want to go in-depth let me know & I will, but to keep it simple, running a 5 defensive back scheme against a team that had thrown one more pass in 2 weeks than you have fingers is counterproductive. They run. Attack the edge/off tackle. We pulled a linebacker, who has help contain responsibility, moved the remaining 'backers further inside, and brought in a walk-on defensive back and put him 2-3 times further away from the point of attack.


And we did it all day.

Again we can go deeper- much deeper- but just a sliver of evidence that I'm not stupid. Dont think I'm a master, but I'm no idiot.

I watched the Alabama/Auburn game yesterday but I did not pay a lot of attention on how Bama defensed them did you and if you did will you break it down for us. I know they held Auburn to or below their average but not sure how they did it

 

[volfan411]

Hope you had an enjoyable trip. No sarcasm.

That's my point. Dont call people a dimwit simply because they disagree with you. I don't agree with you. At all. But I'm not going to comment on your intellectual ability because I don't know you. I don't know how smart you are or are not.

If you want to go in-depth let me know & I will, but to keep it simple, running a 5 defensive back scheme against a team that had thrown one more pass in 2 weeks than you have fingers is counterproductive. They run. Attack the edge/off tackle. We pulled a linebacker, who has help contain responsibility, moved the remaining 'backers further inside, and brought in a walk-on defensive back and put him 2-3 times further away from the point of attack.


And we did it all day.

Again we can go deeper- much deeper- but just a sliver of evidence that I'm not stupid. Dont think I'm a master, but I'm no idiot.

I have to leave for the day but one last question do you think the scheme UT used was wrong or it was wrong simply because we do not have the players to execute that scheme? I do not want to sound like it is on the player as it is the coaches job to recognize player ability and understand we do not have the talent to execute it.

For the record I think if we had a nickle back with the ability of one of the Berry boys coming in maybe it is a good scheme but I agree taking Brewer of the field for Swafford/Toney just does not make sense to me.

 

[Pig Skin]

I watched the Alabama/Auburn game yesterday but I did not pay a lot of attention on how Bama defensed them did you and if you did will you break it down for us. I know they held Auburn to or below their average but not sure how they did it

Bama plays a different scheme, 3-4, than we do, 4-3. Without getting too technical, they have one fewer defensive linemen and an extra linebacker. Actually, their outside linebackers are hybrid defensive ends/linebackers. This allows a ton of flexibility as to what front they can run- 3 man, 4 man, 5 man- and still do pretty much what they do. The 3-4 is very personnel specific. You have to have an anchor in the center of the line at the nose- think "Man Boobs" Terrence Cody. McCullers was brought in by Sunseri to do that for us. The problem was, we didn't have the hybrids on the edge to be effective, and we got what we got last year. Stupid move in a make or break year by a head coach that has demonstrated that he relies on name recognition rather than coaching ability.

Back to the UA/AU game. Auburn's run attack is tough. With their athletes, you're probably not going to shut them down, but you can contain them somewhat. Alabama relied on not getting outflanked on the edge by all the formation & motion (did you see the split screen chess match between Smart & Malzahn?). Alabama has 5 star athletes all over the field & Auburn was still able to do their thing. I hate the spread, but Malzahn's version is fun to watch- unless he's curb stomping your team with it. Alabama just did what they do in a 3-4. Plug the middle as best as possible & defend the edge with their end/'backer hybrids. Auburn was slowed, but they still got theirs. When bama broke responsibilities- see the option pass on the tying TD- Auburn got more. Defense always comes down to proper reads and being disciplined to do what your reads tell you. It's a lot more than 11 guys running around like a headless chicken.

In my lowly view, Jancek fell victim to what I call The Spread Con. The spread isn't a sling it 60 times/game. That's the Run-n-Shoot. The spread is a revamping of an old school triple option type offense designed to create havok in a defense by spreading wide receivers/wingbacks everywhere to thin out the tackle box on defense and create favorable blocking angles for the offense. Then they run the ball. Tons. It's football plus geometry. Why do you think Tebow was so successful in Meyer's spread scheme but couldn't throw to save his life in the NFL? He was a run QB running a run first offense.

Everyone, including NFL GMs, fell for the con. Just like Jancek did against Auburn by pulling a linebacker in favor of another defensive back that is at the very least twice as far away from Malzahn's point of attack. It's a matter of time & distance. Jancek doing that swung that advantage heavily to Auburn by playing exclusive 5 defensive back sets. And it was obvious.

 

[Pig Skin]

I have to leave for the day but one last question do you think the scheme UT used was wrong or it was wrong simply because we do not have the players to execute that scheme? I do not want to sound like it is on the player as it is the coaches job to recognize player ability and understand we do not have the talent to execute it.

For the record I think if we had a nickle back with the ability of one of the Berry boys coming in maybe it is a good scheme but I agree taking Brewer of the field for Swafford/Toney just does not make sense to me.

Against Auburn, this year- knowing what they do, I don't agree with taking out an outside linebacker who is 5 yards from the off tackle/edge point of attack to replace him with a defensive back 2-3 times further away from that point of attack. If they formation you into bad situations, go zone coverage. With the exception of Sutton, we had no business being in man coverage as much as we were anyway.

Our personnel sure didn't help anything either, but I just saw that we were putting too much on young players with fair to marginal ability by playing the way we did. My view and $5 might get you a 2 cheeseburger value meal at Ronald's place.

 

[volfan411]

Against Auburn, this year- knowing what they do, I don't agree with taking out an outside linebacker who is 5 yards from the off tackle/edge point of attack to replace him with a defensive back 2-3 times further away from that point of attack. If they formation you into bad situations, go zone coverage. With the exception of Sutton, we had no business being in man coverage as much as we were anyway.

Our personnel sure didn't help anything either, but I just saw that we were putting too much on young players with fair to marginal ability by playing the way we did. My view and $5 might get you a 2 cheeseburger value meal at Ronald's place.

Thanks I agree with all you have said and felt like our coaches at times this year did not put our young players in the best situation to be sucessful. I hope with better athletes and a year under their belt this staff can pull it together and bring the program back to the glory days I remember. Only time will tell but at this point I feel better than I ever did during the Dooley years.

 

[BanditVol]

I have to leave for the day but one last question do you think the scheme UT used was wrong or it was wrong simply because we do not have the players to execute that scheme? I do not want to sound like it is on the player as it is the coaches job to recognize player ability and understand we do not have the talent to execute it.

For the record I think if we had a nickle back with the ability of one of the Berry boys coming in maybe it is a good scheme but I agree taking Brewer of the field for Swafford/Toney just does not make sense to me.

You make some great points. I do wonder about our scheme vs. Auburn. At the same time, you do attribute the 5 DB set to wanting to stop the pass....I think we should give Jancek more credit than that. No one thought Auburn was going to throw the ball.

What I suspect is that Jancek played 5 DBs to get more speed on the field. That doesn't mean the scheme was right, but I do think that explanation makes a lot more sense. DBs are, or are supposed to be, faster than LBs. And for the record, Brewer was on the field a good deal of the time vs. Auburn. I was there and saw him playing.

What is also true is that, as broken down by a game day crew prior to Auburn's next game against Uga (I guess it was the CBS crowd), Marshall managed to repeatedly freeze our MLB (usually AJ) at the point of attack. AJ (and others) would commit to either the RB or QB prematurely and Marshall read it right almost every time and just killed us.

So for being able to read the spread as AU/Malzahn runs it, yes, coaching the players on discipline would help. But bammer got burned at least twice on big plays yesterday so it's hard not to give AU a lot of credit for just being good at it.

 

[volfan411]

You make some great points. I do wonder about our scheme vs. Auburn. At the same time, you do attribute the 5 DB set to wanting to stop the pass....I think we should give Jancek more credit than that. No one thought Auburn was going to throw the ball.

What I suspect is that Jancek played 5 DBs to get more speed on the field. That doesn't mean the scheme was right, but I do think that explanation makes a lot more sense. DBs are, or are supposed to be, faster than LBs. And for the record, Brewer was on the field a good deal of the time vs. Auburn. I was there and saw him playing.

What is also true is that, as broken down by a game day crew prior to Auburn's next game against Uga (I guess it was the CBS crowd), Marshall managed to repeatedly freeze our MLB (usually AJ) at the point of attack. AJ (and others) would commit to either the RB or QB prematurely and Marshall read it right almost every time and just killed us.

So for being able to read the spread as AU/Malzahn runs it, yes, coaching the players on discipline would help. But bammer got burned at least twice on big plays yesterday so it's hard not to give AU a lot of credit for just being good at it.

Sapp got schooled that day to as the commentators on TV broke down 2 plays in which he bought the fake and took himself out of the play. I cannot remember how much Brewer played and and agree with the speed to defend the spread what I do disagree with is playing so deep as you are basically giving them the edge and they made us pay numerous times. I think we will see a much different defense next year with the speed we should be able to put on the field and speed will cure a lot of the deficiencies we seen this year.


I think myself and many on here under estimated the speed of Auburn as they looked really fast yesterday against a very good Alabama defense.

 

[Pig Skin]

You make some great points. I do wonder about our scheme vs. Auburn. At the same time, you do attribute the 5 DB set to wanting to stop the pass....I think we should give Jancek more credit than that. No one thought Auburn was going to throw the ball.

What I suspect is that Jancek played 5 DBs to get more speed on the field. That doesn't mean the scheme was right, but I do think that explanation makes a lot more sense. DBs are, or are supposed to be, faster than LBs. And for the record, Brewer was on the field a good deal of the time vs. Auburn. I was there and saw him playing.

What is also true is that, as broken down by a game day crew prior to Auburn's next game against Uga (I guess it was the CBS crowd), Marshall managed to repeatedly freeze our MLB (usually AJ) at the point of attack. AJ (and others) would commit to either the RB or QB prematurely and Marshall read it right almost every time and just killed us.

So for being able to read the spread as AU/Malzahn runs it, yes, coaching the players on discipline would help. But bammer got burned at least twice on big plays yesterday so it's hard not to give AU a lot of credit for just being good at it.

More speed 3 times further away from the point of attack is futile. It's all about space. Defend someone inside a 10yd X 4 yd box or a 25yd X 35yd box?

I know which one I'm choosing.

 

[allvol123]

Hope you had an enjoyable trip. No sarcasm.

That's my point. Dont call people a dimwit simply because they disagree with you. I don't agree with you. At all. But I'm not going to comment on your intellectual ability because I don't know you. I don't know how smart you are or are not.

If you want to go in-depth let me know & I will, but to keep it simple, running a 5 defensive back scheme against a team that had thrown one more pass in 2 weeks than you have fingers is counterproductive. They run. Attack the edge/off tackle. We pulled a linebacker, who has help contain responsibility, moved the remaining 'backers further inside, and brought in a walk-on defensive back and put him 2-3 times further away from the point of attack.


And we did it all day.

Again we can go deeper- much deeper- but just a sliver of evidence that I'm not stupid. Dont think I'm a master, but I'm no idiot.

Don't take things so personally.

I don't think you are stupid but I vehemently disagree with the criticism of CBJ on here. My calling you a dimwit is no more serious than if I was hanging out with my best friends and we were arguing and disagreed about something.

You obviously have some in depth football knowledge. That said, I'm not a carpenter nor do I need to know the skills of one, to assess one's work.

CBJ is going to win here and I am annoyed by those that want to if, and, and but their way over predicting what he is going to do here.

If you think he is going to fail, then plant your flag and say it. Their isn't going to be a seismic shift in his abilities, knowledge, or philosophy. He is what he is. I'm obviously confident in my judgment of him.

 

[Pig Skin]

Don't take things so personally.

I don't think you are stupid but I vehemently disagree with the criticism of CBJ on here. My calling you a dimwit is no more serious than if I was hanging out with my best friends and we were arguing and disagreed about something.

You obviously have some in depth football knowledge. That said, I'm not a carpenter nor do I need to know the skills of one, to assess one's work.

CBJ is going to win here and I am annoyed by those that want to if, and, and but their way over predicting what he is going to do here.

If you think he is going to fail, then plant your flag and say it. Their isn't going to be a seismic shift in his abilities, knowledge, or philosophy. He is what he is. I'm obviously confident in my judgment of him.

I take none of this personally. How 'bout just saying you disagree rather than referencing intelligence at all? Instead, back your assertions with evidence to bolster that assertion or to counter the assertions of others. It works great.

I don't know what he'll do. I'm not calling anything on Jones. However, I do know what Jancek has done in the SEC. It wasn't pretty.

 

[allvol123]

I take none of this personally. How 'bout just saying you disagree rather than referencing intelligence at all? Instead, back your assertions with evidence to bolster that assertion or to counter the assertions of others. It works great.

I don't know what he'll do. I'm not calling anything on Jones. However, I do know what Jancek has done in the SEC. It wasn't pretty.

Defensively speaking, it was prettier than last year.

 

[Pig Skin]

Defensively speaking, it was prettier than last year.

Lol.

Yeah it was.

 

[SaintLouisVol]

That's not talent. That's coaching and development. Some folks here don't know the difference.

Talent is the raw material you have to work with... It is the "clay" that the potter works with.

Mizzou is not more "talented" than UT. . .

It's shades of grey at best.

The only way you could make such a claim is to base it on the rankings by the recruiting services. All that does is make a statement (more of an educated opinion really) about their "talent" as a snapshot in time. It cannot account for how these players mature physically and mentally once in school.

Is it completely fair to equate all of this maturity to "development" by the coaching staff? I don't think so. Was David Robinson "developed" into a great center in college? Perhaps to some degree, but the fact that he grew six inches sure helped.

Further, what do you include in the "talent" discussion? It is simply and exclusively limited to size, speed and strength? Obviously some are more gifted with speed and strength than others, but it is certainly developed at the college level.

Would you include things like football IQ, mental toughness, aggressiveness? Some have more of these qualities naturally, but these very important traits can be developed as well.

It doesn't really matter that much to me. I am absolutely exhausted with any discussion of "talent." It is futile. EVERY player's contribution is some combination of talent and development.

In the end, the way you win is to put as many GOOD FOOTBALL PLAYERS on the field as you possibly can. The degree to which they showed up at school that way or the coaches made them that way is not material as long as they are that way when you run them out there.

And, Tennessee doesn't have very many good football players.

 

[sjt18]

It's shades of grey at best.

The only way you could make such a claim is to base it on the rankings by the recruiting services.

Or size, speed, quickness, NFL draft prospects....

Is it completely fair to equate all of this maturity to "development" by the coaching staff?

For a particular player or small group of players? No. For a whole bunch of players on one side that were not considered very talented but were coached up and a bunch on the other side who were considered talented but never reached that potential? Yes.

I don't think so. Was David Robinson "developed" into a great center in college? Perhaps to some degree, but the fact that he grew six inches sure helped.

How many players on Mizzou's team experienced a body change that radical that was not the direct result of them being developed by the staff?

Further, what do you include in the "talent" discussion? It is simply and exclusively limited to size, speed and strength? Obviously some are more gifted with speed and strength than others, but it is certainly developed at the college level.

I would certainly include intelligence, instinct, quickness, frame, etc as innate talent. Those are somewhat harder to measure but coaches and REAL recruiting svcs make lots of money predicting them. A "real" recruiting svc is one coaches use and pay privately that are not for public consumption. IIRC, Dooley used the same one Saban uses.

Would you include things like football IQ, mental toughness, aggressiveness? Some have more of these qualities naturally, but these very important traits can be developed as well.

The last two much less than others. Those can be greatly impacted by coaching.

In the end, the way you win is to put as many GOOD FOOTBALL PLAYERS on the field as you possibly can. .

Too simplistic. That would suggest that game prep, playcalling, and many other coaching functions have no real value when in fact they are often more important than how many good football players you have on the field compared to the other guy. GSU didn't have more good football players than UF. They do have a great system and very good coaching.

Mizzou has beaten several teams this year with more good football players. They have executed a very good system and played their responsibilities.

I am not sure how good UT's O/D systems are or the degree to which the players are at fault for not executing them. I am certain that all of that is the responsibility of the coaching staff.

 

[knoxvols11]

I saw a bumper sticker yesterday that said "Johnny come home". It was on the back of a 73 Pinto!

 

[sjt18]

A) not throwing stones.
B) worley improved as the season went on

Worley played well vs UGA and USCe. How much credit do you give to the coaches for that?

C) running game is vastly improved.

I thought so too until I looked at the year over year stats. The biggest difference is that they've had to run it more. Last year was obviously a passing O and still avg'd only 28 ypg less. The ypc improved slightly from 4.66 to 4.92. Yds vs the SEC is generally a better indicator of improvement. They only improved 15 ypg there and the ypc was actually slightly worse.

D) D Young is becoming a good wide out

I like DY and consider him an underutilized player. But a single game does not mean he's improved and especially if the opponent is UK.

E) palardys year has been amazing. He improved as a punter every game with to nights game being his best.

Palardy improved... and is unfortunately graduating. What's behind him? FWIW, the kicker recruiting has been very bad of late.

F) Dobbs was terrible last week. He made a couple of money throws tonight that I didn't think he had in him (see Young TD catch )

Two comments. One, I hope that it is improvement and not just an indication of how hapless UK is. Two, why wasn't he utilized like that vs Vandy who if anything was in worse shape than UK in their secondary?

It is stuff like that that makes me REALLY uneasy about the staff.

I can continue but what's the point. I could list the problems too but you have that covered.

Actually, if some of you guys would simply acknowledge some specific coaching issues once in awhile then I wouldn't feel the need to pull so hard back in the other direction. Any answer of "wait and see" from those of us skeptical of staff based on this year is almost always met with choruses of baseless faith statements.

What you lack is an objective approach to your opinion.
The improvements may not be up to your standards but that would be a different debate.

You're kidding, right? I keep trying to bring you and others to the point of discussing the actual facts. I am the one who keeps asking you guys for good, tangible, well thought out reasons to believe that these guys aren't just another revolution of the coaching carousel for UT.... You all are the ones angrily attacking anyone who suggests the emperor may have no clothes on.

 

[sjt18]

Don't take things so personally.

Don't make things so personal when someone disagrees with you.

CBJ is going to win here and I am annoyed by those that want to if, and, and but their way over predicting what he is going to do here.

Your opinion based on whatever warm feeling you have plus his record before UT is your business. But then you attack people who simply point out that he did not win and did not look very competitive much of the time this past year. I can't predict either way. Sometimes slow starters turn out good... sometimes it is an indication of their real talent. What I can say is that he did not "succeed" as a coach this year with regard to winning or coaching this roster to its potential.

If you think he is going to fail, then plant your flag and say it. Their isn't going to be a seismic shift in his abilities, knowledge, or philosophy. He is what he is. I'm obviously confident in my judgment of him.

Why? What makes you think you are "smarter" for making a prediction about the future of a coach when so many unknown variables are involved?

 

[SaintLouisVol]

. . . CBJ is going to win here and I am annoyed by those that want to if, and, and but their way over predicting what he is going to do here.

If you think he is going to fail, then plant your flag and say it. Their isn't going to be a seismic shift in his abilities, knowledge, or philosophy. He is what he is. I'm obviously confident in my judgment of him.

There is a difference between "plant your flag and say it," and being skeptical.

If you review the body of work of the THIS TEAM THIS YEAR, there is reason to be skeptical.

I'll be the first to say that I think sjt18 can be argumentative simply for the sake of argument, but that is all in good fun. I have been in the middle - either actively or passively - of many of the more recent discussions, and he has hardly made definitive claims about whether or not CBJ will or will not succeed. In fact, his comments are very reasonably tempered compared to many.

But to QUESTION the future of the program and this staff, is ABSOLUTELY legitimate based on the results of this season. If you simply dismiss that, you are not being intellectually honest.

 

[Orangeslice13]

You're kidding, right? I keep trying to bring you and others to the point of discussing the actual facts. I am the one who keeps asking you guys for good, tangible, well thought out reasons to believe that these guys aren't just another revolution of the coaching carousel for UT.... You all are the ones angrily attacking anyone who suggests the emperor may have no clothes on.

You seem to think everyone that doesn't ***** and moan is on the other side of the arguement from you.
I have no idea if Coach Jones will be a winner here. I was simply pointing out some improvement that you say isn't there. I asked you to point out some yourself. Your inability to do so has me thinking you may be a troll.

It turns out I don't have an opinion on Coach Jones but I do have one on you.

 

[sjt18]

You seem to think everyone that doesn't ***** and moan is on the other side of the arguement from you.

You seem prone to exaggeration.

If someone angrily refuses to recognize any flaw in the staff... there's plenty of room for them to be objective before hitting "b***h and moan".

I have no idea if Coach Jones will be a winner here. I was simply pointing out some improvement that you say isn't there. I asked you to point out some yourself.

There have been a few nominal improvements but they are greatly outweighed by signs of regression and poor coaching. That isn't a workable equation going forward. They MUST do a MUCH better job of coaching and development to succeed.

Your inability to do so has me thinking you may be a troll.

Inability to do what? Being serious. Can you point me back to the question you asked me? I don't remember seeing it.

And please stop throwing that troll non-sense around. I've been posting here almost 9 years. For the most part, I've been the one trying to put a positive spin on things or at least hold back those with pitchforks.

Go back to Fulmer's last days. It was me and a few others making the last stand here. Some of us warned that it was better to give him a chance to turn it around than to risk a ride on the coaching carousel. You NEVER know when you'll get off. It isn't just a matter of finding the right coach. The timing has to be pretty near perfect also.

It is ALWAYS best for the current coach to succeed. This staff just did very, very little to inspire confidence in their coaching ability this fall.

That's one reason I thought Jones needed to do better both in the '13 recruiting class and season. He either needed good enough recruits to make noise in '14 or he needed to prove he could coach while he had all those experienced Srs around. He did neither and now needs to do something pretty impressive to not be on a pretty warm seat by '15.

It turns out I don't have an opinion on Coach Jones but I do have one on you.

Well that's a real shame because I'm a pretty nice guy.

 

[Orangeslice13]

You should know that I don't read beyond 3 sentences.
I'm sure you made some great points though.

 

[allvol123]

There is a difference between "plant your flag and say it," and being skeptical.

If you review the body of work of the THIS TEAM THIS YEAR, there is reason to be skeptical.

I'll be the first to say that I think sjt18 can be argumentative simply for the sake of argument, but that is all in good fun. I have been in the middle - either actively or passively - of many of the more recent discussions, and he has hardly made definitive claims about whether or not CBJ will or will not succeed. In fact, his comments are very reasonably tempered compared to many.

But to QUESTION the future of the program and this staff, is ABSOLUTELY legitimate based on the results of this season. If you simply dismiss that, you are not being intellectually honest.

Why wold this year's work make one skeptical?

I said 6-6 would be a struggle. I saw nothing out of the ordinary from what I expected.

Again, look at the NFL skill players we lost. Add Oregon and take away NC State, and come back with essentially the same personnel from the worst defense I have ever seen at UT.

People expecting something drastically different are not seeing the actual situation at hand.