Cal Golden Bears.Pre-season All Americans.

#2
#2
Seems like alot of love to give to a bunch of guys who ran up numbers against lesser competition.

If you didn't see my breakdown of their win/loss last year, Cal didn't beat a single team that finished with a winning record last year. The combined record of their defeated opponents including 6-6 BYU who they beat in the LV Bowl was 22-66. They were also beaten by 5-6 Oregon State.

No doubt these guys are good but if UT had played Cal's schedule last year it is hard to imagine them being any worse than 8-4.

Their OOC games were Sacramento State (2-9) 41-3, Illinois (2-9) 35-20, and New Mexico State (0-12) 41-13. Add to these UW @ 2-9 and Arizona @ 3-8 and you basically have them playing against air in almost half of their regular season games... and 5 of their 8 wins.
 
#3
#3
sjt18 said:
Seems like alot of love to give to a bunch of guys who ran up numbers against lesser competition.

If you didn't see my breakdown of their win/loss last year, Cal didn't beat a single team that finished with a winning record last year. The combined record of their defeated opponents including 6-6 BYU who they beat in the LV Bowl was 22-66. They were also beaten by 5-6 Oregon State.

No doubt these guys are good but if UT had played Cal's schedule last year it is hard to imagine them being any worse than 8-4.

Their OOC games were Sacramento State (2-9) 41-3, Illinois (2-9) 35-20, and New Mexico State (0-12) 41-13. Add to these UW @ 2-9 and Arizona @ 3-8 and you basically have them playing against air in almost half of their regular season games... and 5 of their 8 wins.
Click to expand...

What is your prediction for Tennessee in 2006?
 
#4
#4
I'm still predicting 9+ or 6/under wins. I am about 85% confident of 9+.

If Ainge plays confident, I am very optimistic about this team. Chavis has indicated some pretty good confidence that this will be a very good defense. But, during the Fulmer era, defense isn't the primary indicator of success. Points scored has been a reliable indicator. Fulmer has 8 10+ win seasons in his 14 years. In 7 of those seasons, the Vols have scored over 400 points.

Last year's 205 was the worst since the mid-80's when the Vols also went 5-6.

My primary reason for optimism is the coaching chemistry. Between Fulmer and the players you have to have a disciplinarian. Chavis has done a good job with the D but Sanders was never a strong enough leader to get discipline and execution from the O... Cutcliffe by all measures is very much strong on discipline, execution, consistency, and attention to detail.

I believe that Cutcliffe will fix the QB position and that Ainge now has a chance of being good due to Cut. Judging from the history of the program with and without him:
---From 92-98 the Vols scored 34 points per game and put up 400 points 5 of 7 years.
---From 98 to 05 the Vols scored 24.7 ppg and put up exactly 400 only once.

I was amazed to find that the defense over the two periods averaged exactly the same: 17.1 ppg.

The Vols won 10+ games 5 of Cut's 7 years. The are 3 of 7 since... Still good but not as good as possible.

The biggest threats on the schedule IMO are UGA and LSU.

I guess my biggest reason for optimism is that Cutcliffe knows how to put points on the board and take pressure off of defenses.
 
#5
#5
Oh, another thing that pumped Cal's numbers up is that one of the 3 winning teams they played and lost to was UCLA. They gave up a total of 410 points- an amazing 34.2 ppg avg for a 10-2 team.
 
#6
#6
sjt18 said:
I'm still predicting 9+ or 6/under wins. I am about 85% confident of 9+.

If Ainge plays confident, I am very optimistic about this team. Chavis has indicated some pretty good confidence that this will be a very good defense. But, during the Fulmer era, defense isn't the primary indicator of success. Points scored has been a reliable indicator. Fulmer has 8 10+ win seasons in his 14 years. In 7 of those seasons, the Vols have scored over 400 points.

Last year's 205 was the worst since the mid-80's when the Vols also went 5-6.

My primary reason for optimism is the coaching chemistry. Between Fulmer and the players you have to have a disciplinarian. Chavis has done a good job with the D but Sanders was never a strong enough leader to get discipline and execution from the O... Cutcliffe by all measures is very much strong on discipline, execution, consistency, and attention to detail.

I believe that Cutcliffe will fix the QB position and that Ainge now has a chance of being good due to Cut. Judging from the history of the program with and without him:
---From 92-98 the Vols scored 34 points per game and put up 400 points 5 of 7 years.
---From 98 to 05 the Vols scored 24.7 ppg and put up exactly 400 only once.

I was amazed to find that the defense over the two periods averaged exactly the same: 17.1 ppg.

The Vols won 10+ games 5 of Cut's 7 years. The are 3 of 7 since... Still good but not as good as possible.

The biggest threats on the schedule IMO are UGA and LSU.

I guess my biggest reason for optimism is that Cutcliffe knows how to put points on the board and take pressure off of defenses.
Click to expand...

The reason I asked is because based on UT's 2005 season, it would seem silly to outsiders for you and me to predict 9+ wins for UT. We are basing our predictions (I agree with 9+ for UT), we are putting some sort of weight into improvement, growth, and maturity, correct? Well, if UT can improve, grow, etc, why can't Cal or any other team in the nation?

All I'm saying is that looking at last season helps predict this season. However, as I am confident you know (you seem intelligent and you research well), 2005 isn't the tell-all of 2006. Cal's players will be as improved as UT's. So in the same breath you and I predict a 3+ win turnaround in 2006, Cal could easily make that same kind of tournaround. Knowwhatimean? :)
 
#7
#7
Sure and of course I could be wrong about this... but I don't buy the inflated praise their players are getting. Yes Lynch ran through poor defenses... but he gained only 87 against the only really good defense they faced: USC. He ran for 189 against Oregon but that was with a complete and total lack of a passing game.

For whatever it might be worth, Oregon gave up a 20 for 158 effort to Arizona's (3-8) Mike Bell the week before Cal.

As far as improvement, they almost certainly have gotten better but we don't really know how good they were to start with. USC beat them 35-10 so that's no good measuring stick.

Further, they run the risk of being complacent... of reading their own press releases. I've gotten some indication that they are starting at the very top. As Vol fans know, that is a dangerous thing.
 
#8
#8
You are absolutely right that last year proves nothing about this year, btw... But it is all we have until the first chin strap breaks... and results in a crowd roar that can be heard on Clingman's Dome.
 
#9
#9
Also, they seem to be following the typical pattern of the 1st O playing the second D and vice versa... so we really don't know how good or bad they are.
 
#10
#10
sjt18 said:
Sure and of course I could be wrong about this... but I don't buy the inflated praise their players are getting. Yes Lynch ran through poor defenses... but he gained only 87 against the only really good defense they faced: USC. He ran for 189 against Oregon but that was with a complete and total lack of a passing game.

For whatever it might be worth, Oregon gave up a 20 for 158 effort to Arizona's (3-8) Mike Bell the week before Cal.

As far as improvement, they almost certainly have gotten better but we don't really know how good they were to start with. USC beat them 35-10 so that's no good measuring stick.

Further, they run the risk of being complacent... of reading their own press releases. I've gotten some indication that they are starting at the very top. As Vol fans know, that is a dangerous thing.
Click to expand...

Mike Bell wasn't that bad though. He plays for the Broncos now, and Mike Shanahan knows a thing or two about RBs.
 
#11
#11
sjt18 said:
Sure and of course I could be wrong about this... but I don't buy the inflated praise their players are getting. Yes Lynch ran through poor defenses... but he gained only 87 against the only really good defense they faced: USC. He ran for 189 against Oregon but that was with a complete and total lack of a passing game.

For whatever it might be worth, Oregon gave up a 20 for 158 effort to Arizona's (3-8) Mike Bell the week before Cal.

As far as improvement, they almost certainly have gotten better but we don't really know how good they were to start with. USC beat them 35-10 so that's no good measuring stick.

Further, they run the risk of being complacent... of reading their own press releases. I've gotten some indication that they are starting at the very top. As Vol fans know, that is a dangerous thing.
Click to expand...

Mike Bell was named the starter for the Broncos as a rookie, so he's a good RB.

Yeah, Lynch gained a ton of yards against poor defenses. And yes, Tennessee should keep him under 100 and keep Cal somewhat in check. However, Cal has another guy as good as Lynch in Justin Forsett. That's why I think they have a potent attack against almost anyone.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top