Can the skill position talent offset the young lines?

#26
#26
SeniorDrill said:
Here is an excellent topic which can have a lot of different takes! We have a new offensive and defensive line that could make us very good if they are just average. However, when you look at the skilled positions on both offense and defense, we are loaded! Take the quarterbacks, the receivers, the linebackers, and the defensive backs and we don't look bad at all. This is not even considering the 32 newcomers adding to the strength. The kickers we know nothing much about how they will perform since they will be new also. Of course, that is a key but what if they are just average? Throw in the fact that we now have IMO one of the best coaching staffs in the country as an offset. They say hope springs eternal but if it all comes together this might be the turnaround year! Back to the basic question, can the skilled positions and coaching offset the young lines?
Click to expand...


Out at "Take the QB's".
 
#27
#27
BookVol said:
4 of our projected starting offensive linemen are upperclassmen.

Inexperienced does not mean young.
Click to expand...

And "non-starter" doesn't mean inexperienced or undeveloped either.

IMO, the DL is an enigma. The OL really isn't except for LT. UT should be solid in the middle OL.

Also, while it isn't normal to replace all 5 starters on the OL... it IS normal for OL's to develop for 2 or 3 years before playing. Just because UT has frequently been forced to start young players on the OL over the past 8-10 years doesn't mean it is "normal".
 
#28
#28
Give_All_Vol said:
Does anyone else think that our young TE's might be able to help out the offensive line some? I mean if you leave them in to block then they should be able to help in that way at least. And if you send them out on a passing route then hey, we might actually have a threat at TE again.

Quick passes to anyone helps out the OL. Quick passes to the TE when he is matched on a LB can make you look real good.
Click to expand...

I think the O will improve production across the board. IMO, they will score about a TD more per game this year than last. If that is the case then the D only has to tread water to get the 6th win.
 
#29
#29
Keep in mind we made it to a bowl game with two 250 lb walk-ons starting on the o-line and a converted DE with bad knees and a freshman walk-on starting on the d-line in 2009. The overall talent that Phil had left us that year was not great either. Oh yeah, and I think some chick was coaching us that year. Point is, anything can happen, especially if you have several guys that can take it to the house with one touch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#30
#30
I believe the oline is going to be fine! The dline is more concerning to me. I'm saying seven wins
 
#31
#31
gogators13 said:
Since the skilled positions depend on the lines to make their job easier. It would be especially tough in the SEC. Good line play on Offense gives the QB time and makes the running backs holes. Good line play on defense shortens the time the DBs have to cover and keeps the O-Line off the LBs. If those things do not happen than it makes a long day.
Click to expand...

When you have quick hit WR's that can take it a quick screen, out, or slant to the end zone in a blink of an eye...the defense has to account for it. Spread a defense out to cover Howard, Malone, VP, North, and Lane/Hurd out of the backfield for instance....with the QB as a runner in this offense now the defense has to account for him as well. With zone blocking and this helps make the linemen's job easier. Also these are not a bunch of freshmen....everyone is acting like there will be 5 freshmen out there.
 
#32
#32
10acvols said:
I agree. Youth can be overcome to a large degree, and lets not forget the biggest factors heart, desire, hunger and will power. People always forget the human element. These are the things make the great players great. GBO:peace2:
Click to expand...

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say the literal biggest factor will be our big WRs. North and Croom are physical matchup nightmares for many DBs and should be able to simply take the ball in jump ball situations. Pearson's athletic ability is going to make him a serious headache to cover as well. Malone has amazing potential as well. With a few seconds to throw, and, let's say 60% accuracy, we should be able to get a man in the open. Don't forget we have athletic TEs now too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#33
#33
DERELICK_MY_VOLS said:
When you have quick hit WR's that can take it a quick screen, out, or slant to the end zone in a blink of an eye...the defense has to account for it. Spread a defense out to cover Howard, Malone, VP, North, and Lane/Hurd out of the backfield for instance....with the QB as a runner in this offense now the defense has to account for him as well. With zone blocking and this helps make the linemen's job easier. Also these are not a bunch of freshmen....everyone is acting like there will be 5 freshmen out there.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that other teams out there are worried about Worley running the ball on the zone read. You still have to run the ball in the SEC. If a team struggles with the running game than it makes the passing game very easy to shut down.
 
#34
#34
gogators13 said:
I'm not sure that other teams out there are worried about Worley running the ball on the zone read. You still have to run the ball in the SEC. If a team struggles with the running game than it makes the passing game very easy to shut down.
Click to expand...
This is exactly why IMO Josh Dobbs has the inside track to being the starter. With what teams with that scrambling QB did to us last year you can't stack the deck against us before the first play without that option. Worley is no Dobbs just like Manning was no Martin. Jones' offense needs the running QB option. Fulmer's did not!
 
#36
#36
oldfartvol said:
Don't ruin it for the "we're gonna suck" crowd.Being disappointed is a way of life for them and a habit they just can't break.They will be predicting 6 wins until hell freezes over.

VFE:angel:
Click to expand...

Also pay no attention to the type that will put stars in your eyes this year. Next year we will shine.
 
#37
#37
Answer to original question: no, our skill talent probably will not compensate for our totally inexperienced line play on both sides. And not to be negative, but it's not like our skill talent is all veteran and good. Our passing game was terrible last year, our QBs remain a question mark, and UT will be breaking in WRs who have never played. So it's not like our passing game will be a well-oiled machine--far from it.
 
#40
#40
I think the talent at the skill positions will make us better than most think. Maybe it is the optimist in me, but I see us being a much improved team. We have so many playmakers, albeit unproven. If only half of them live up to expectations, we will be very dangerous. We also have a deep and talented backfield for the first time in ages.
 
#41
#41
SeniorDrill said:
This is exactly why IMO Josh Dobbs has the inside track to being the starter. With what teams with that scrambling QB did to us last year you can't stack the deck against us before the first play without that option. Worley is no Dobbs just like Manning was no Martin. Jones' offense needs the running QB option. Fulmer's did not!
Click to expand...

There is almost no chance that Dobbs starts the first game. Maybe Worley gets injured or yanked... but if you have that many potential game changers at WR then you want you best passer at QB. That's Worley and from most reports... Dobbs has A LOT of ground to make up there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#42
#42
gogators13 said:
I'm not sure that other teams out there are worried about Worley running the ball on the zone read. You still have to run the ball in the SEC. If a team struggles with the running game than it makes the passing game very easy to shut down.
Click to expand...

Worley didn't run much but was effective when he did.

IMO he was told not to run in an effort to preserve the RS's of both Dobbs and Ferguson. Others say it is because he was afraid or didn't read it right or whatever. Regardless, he will need to run the ball effectively 2-4 times per game this fall to hold on to the job.

Again, everyone has been surprised by him when he has pulled it. He isn't Tebow but he isn't Bray or Ainge either.
 
#43
#43
The answer to the original question is a highly qualified yes. We have done it before although the examples I will cite can be justifiably considered to be comparing apples to oranges, given the fact that the current team does not have the overall across-the-board talent and depth as the ones I will offer as examples. Nevertheless, the Dickey and early Battle teams never had dominating defensive lines. They did, however, annually field a great back seven. In those years, we were turning out All-American linebackers and defensive backs left and right.

In particular, the 1970 and 1971 teams set single-season records which stand to this day in the following categories:

MOST OPPONENTS’ TURNOVERS
57—Tennessee, 1970 (21 fumbles recovered, 36 interceptions)

MOST YARDS GAINED ON INTERCEPTION RETURNS
782—Tennessee, 1971 (25 interceptions)

HIGHEST AVERAGE PER INTERCEPTION RETURN
(Min. 10-14 ints.) 36.3—Oregon St., 1959 (12 for 436)
(Min. 15 ints.) 31.3—Tennessee, 1971 (25 for 782)

MOST TOUCHDOWNS ON INTERCEPTION RETURNS
7—Tennessee, 1971 (25 interceptions; 287 pass attempts against)

Please note that, in the 1971 Sugar Bowl victory (34-13) over Air Force, we had an additional four fumble recoveries and four interceptions. See 1971 Game Recap / Allstate Sugar Bowl. Bowl games were not counted statistically in those days. Otherwise, our NCAA single season record for turnovers would be 65, not 57.

The 1970 and 1971 teams also finished 4th and 9th, respectively, in the final polls (College Football Rankings 1970's).
 
#44
#44
sjt18 said:
Worley didn't run much but was effective when he did.

IMO he was told not to run in an effort to preserve the RS's of both Dobbs and Ferguson. Others say it is because he was afraid or didn't read it right or whatever. Regardless, he will need to run the ball effectively 2-4 times per game this fall to hold on to the job.

Again, everyone has been surprised by him when he has pulled it. He isn't Tebow but he isn't Bray or Ainge either.
Click to expand...


I don't believe that it can be proven definitively, but I agree completely with your perspective on why Worley didn't run the ball more frequently last year. By all accounts, Butch was scared to death of the prospect of having to play either of his two freshman quarterbacks early in the season, so he did everything in his power to minimize the chance of injury to Worley. Unfortunately, the worst case scenario happened anyway and an already lethargic offense became more severely challenged as an inexperienced quarterback was saddled with an equally inexperienced receiver corps.
 
#45
#45
If we were only building up one area of the team I could see the optimism. Truly. What I see however is new guys (or guys with few starts) across the board, even in the skill positions. For example Worley hasn't played since October of last year. When he was playing they weren't all great.

Maggit is another good example of where we are as a team. He last played a game 11/2012. On paper he's a huge strength for this team but there are still question marks. Despite all his talent he has 1 years worth of rust plus a position change to get under his belt. He likely will but there are less talented guys needing to step up big in other areas for this all to work. The idea all of them will early is unlikely.

I could see this team being pretty good by the end of the season assuming they are resilient and hungry to win but I see the early part of the season being riddled with some big bumps in the road.
 
#46
#46
I'd sure like the idea better if we had an experienced QB that could quickly make the right reads and deliver the ball to the right place. (this includes handoffs actually) Peyton can make any line look like it protects better than it does because of how he sees the field. It's totally unfair to expect THAT level of play out of Worley/Dobbs/etc but it will absolutely matter how well the QB's do their job for the rest of them to have success.
 
#47
#47
oldfartvol said:
Don't ruin it for the "we're gonna suck" crowd.Being realistic is a way of life for them and a habit they just can't break.They will be predicting 6 wins until hell freezes over.

VFE:angel:
Click to expand...

There. I fixed it.

I'll predict more than 6 or 7 wins when it is realistic to do so. Anyone who predicts more than that with no evidence whatsoever to back up their claim is foolhardy and lacks credibility IMO.
 
#48
#48
Volosaurus rex said:
The answer to the original question is a highly qualified yes. We have done it before although the examples I will cite can be justifiably considered to be comparing apples to oranges, given the fact that the current team does not have the overall across-the-board talent and depth as the ones I will offer as examples. Nevertheless, the Dickey and early Battle teams never had dominating defensive lines. They did, however, annually field a great back seven. In those years, we were turning out All-American linebackers and defensive backs left and right.

In particular, the 1970 and 1971 teams set single-season records which stand to this day in the following categories:

MOST OPPONENTS’ TURNOVERS
57—Tennessee, 1970 (21 fumbles recovered, 36 interceptions)

MOST YARDS GAINED ON INTERCEPTION RETURNS
782—Tennessee, 1971 (25 interceptions)

HIGHEST AVERAGE PER INTERCEPTION RETURN
(Min. 10-14 ints.) 36.3—Oregon St., 1959 (12 for 436)
(Min. 15 ints.) 31.3—Tennessee, 1971 (25 for 782)

MOST TOUCHDOWNS ON INTERCEPTION RETURNS
7—Tennessee, 1971 (25 interceptions; 287 pass attempts against)

Please note that, in the 1971 Sugar Bowl victory (34-13) over Air Force, we had an additional four fumble recoveries and four interceptions. See 1971 Game Recap / Allstate Sugar Bowl. Bowl games were not counted statistically in those days. Otherwise, our NCAA single season record for turnovers would be 65, not 57.

The 1970 and 1971 teams also finished 4th and 9th, respectively, in the final polls (College Football Rankings 1970's).
Click to expand...


Its comparing apples to oranges in more than one way. the biggest one is that the landscape of the SEC was nothing like it is today with so many national powerhouses for UT to contend with. We could have a team that is twice as good as the one we have and it would still be tough as nails to have a winning season in the SEC.
 
#50
#50
Aerie Vol said:
True, but in a strange way in this context, you're actually arguing for the "line doesn't matter" side. It was widely stated that the Broncos had one of the best O-lines in the league. They got out-schemed and out-hearted by an inferior opponent who wanted it more.

I hope to see our "suspect" lines vastly outperform their highly touted predecessors with heart, determination, and preparation.

AV
Click to expand...
Didn't Seattle have the best defense in total yards, points, and turnovers last year? They didn't look inferior to me, they just put the broncos in a meat grinder with a smile on their face. I've been a broncos fan since 1976, that last line was hard to say. Might be different outcome this year, go broncos and go vols!
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top