Coach Z

[Easttnken]

I may have a very elementary view of the troubles in the passing game (or at least part of the problem), but it appears we had a perfect storm leading to inconsistency.

We had basically a young, inexperienced WR group who may have blossomed with a consistent, experienced QB. Instead, the young WR's had 3 different QB's, with 3 different throwing/delivery styles, velocity, and sense of timing. It seemed as though just about the time 1 QB might play enough to gain some rhythm with the WR's, he's injured and a new inexperienced QB takes his place.

We had 3 QB's play, all either relatively or completely inexperienced. The QB's could have benefited from experienced WR's who knew their routes, or at least had been in college long enough to play more by instinct instead of "thinking about" their routes. Seemingly, an inexperienced WR concentrating on his route has less time to concentrate on the ball.

The offensive line had multiple QB's to protect. Each of the QB's have different cadence, stay in the pocket longer, or not as long. Each QB may move in the pocket differently, roll out to different sides, may hold the ball longer or one may break out and run.

It seems to me that no one on the offense had much experience or consistency around them to enable them to ever play with any degree of comfort.

The coaches can't coach experience...and I'm neither defending or condemning the coaches. I'm also not meaning to throw players under a proverbial bus. It just seems that both the players and coaches were caught in a revolving door of lack of experience and leadership.

 

[sjt18]

Your last statement is where I agree with you. I see no reason to jump on players and call them "garbage" either. You seem overly intent on hammering the coaches though,

No. Just a reaction to those who are determined to avoid blaming them at all. On MULTIPLE occasions in this very thread I have acknowledged that experience and talent were factors. I do not expect him to "create" talent... I simply expect him to improve the talent that is there.

maybe to make up for your fool love over Dooley, I dunno.

This may be the most abjectly STUPID thing you've posted here. I advocated withholding judgment on Dooley until he proved he was going to get it done within three years. I argued that criticism should wait til then... much like some others here are now.

I WAS WRONG. Respectfully criticizing coaches and having high expectations for THEIR performance... harms absolutely NOTHING.

Regardless, you make statements like " SHOW ME THE IMPROVEMENT" and then somebody does and you ignore it and group that person in with whoever you see as a sunshine pumper.

Please cite where I called someone a sunshine pumper. I didn't ignore anything... they didn't show any kind of significant improvement. I have acknowledged that running the wrong route errors improved. But the quality of the routes didn't improve much if any... nor did drops.

For someone so intent are debating you have very little clue on how a debate actually works.

LOL@U.

 

[sjt18]

What are you basing "improvement" off of exactly? You hadn't seen any of those guys play receiver for more than a few snaps.

Improvement from game one to game 12. Fewer errors and drops. Vandy was down to their back ups all over the secondary... they held UT to 53 yards passing.

What would it have taken for you to not see Azzani as a bad coach? I'm not saying I think he is a great WR coach or anything. I just think we won't really be able to judge him until after next season.

We can judge what he did and didn't do THIS season now. Can you quote where I said he was a bad coach? I said he bears a good portion of the responsibility for the lack of improvement. I have been pretty clear about that. I do not think it is even productive to try to say whether he is or is not a bad coach at this point since he will be the WR coach next fall regardless.

I do not like what I saw from him this season and I do not blame the players alone for it.

 

[Spartacavolus]

Your attempting to change the argument. We're talking about catching the ball, remember?

he's had to be redirected multiple times now and still goes off on his tangent that has nothing to do with the discussion

 

[BigTXVolFan]

Vols WR Coach Staying Put At Tennessee

To be completely honest especially while sitting here watch Kingsbury's success, Chad Morris's success, and some of the other young OC's bringing excitement into these kids and their football style! If Azzanni got our OC job next season we could be deadly in the '14's recruiting classes second season!

 

[oregonvol]

Vols WR Coach Staying Put At Tennessee

To be completely honest especially while sitting here watch Kingsbury's success, Chad Morris's success, and some of the other young OC's bringing excitement into these kids and their football style! If Azzanni got our OC job next season we could be deadly in the '14's recruiting classes second season!

What makes Azzani anything like Chad Morris or Kliff Kingsbury? Your comparison makes no sense. Those guys have had major success. Azzani has hardly any success at all to point to. Ask Florida fans about how valuable he was coaching their receivers. Wisconsin fans too. Our passing game was dreadful this year. Why on earth would he be in line for a promotion? Just utter nonsense.

 

[thadolphinman]

I have only this question to ask?

Let's set a hypothetical scenario like this. A small town grocery store has recently gone through horrible times. These times included 4 different store managers and 44 different employee's (when only eight are needed to run the store) in an extremely short period of time.

Is it reasonable to expect the new store manager and employee's to compete and be just as profitable as the Wal-Mart in the town?

And if they are not anywhere near as profitable, was it the store manager and employee's fault for not doing it?

I don't know about everybody here, but I think we can all say that there really can't be a conclusion drawn from that.

 

[oregonvol]

I have only this question to ask?

Let's set a hypothetical scenario like this. A small town grocery store has recently gone through horrible times. These times included 4 different store managers and 44 different employee's (when only eight are needed to run the store) in an extremely short period of time.

Is it reasonable to expect the new store manager and employee's to compete and be just as profitable as the Wal-Mart in the town?

And if they are not anywhere near as profitable, was it the store manager and employee's fault for not doing it?

I don't know about everybody here, but I think we can all say that there really can't be a conclusion drawn from that.

No one asked them to compete with Walmart. To make your analogy somewhat accurate, you would have to ask, does anyone expect them to compete with the store down the road that has half the capacity, a comparatively miniscule budget, and fewer supplies? Or do folks figure its cool to get outperformed and embarrassed by them?

 

[thadolphinman]

No one asked them to compete with Walmart. To make your analogy somewhat accurate, you would have to ask, does anyone expect them to compete with the store down the road that has half the capacity, a comparatively miniscule budget, and fewer supplies? Or do folks figure its cool to get outperformed and embarrassed by them?

It is an accurate analogy. The whole basis of the argument for a poster on here is why didn't we compete better against these great teams. You could, and should, say that Vandy (granted they beat some good teams this year) and South Alabama aren't great teams, but we beat South Alabama (even big schools struggle against little ones when they are down, look at Alabama 2007, Michigan, etc.) The difference between our talent and the talent of Oregon, Alabama, Florida (yes they had a horrible year, but they were healthy when they played us and are more talented than us) Georgia, South Carolina, and even Missouri, is like the difference between Wal-Mart and a small grocery store in the same town.

I thought we had better talent to begin the year, but boy was I wrong. The main thing is that it is way to early to base a judgment on coaching compared to the other teams we played, especially when your bringing a knife to a gun fight.

 

[oregonvol]

It is an accurate analogy. The whole basis of the argument for a poster on here is why didn't we compete better against these great teams. You could, and should, say that Vandy (granted they beat some good teams this year) and South Alabama aren't great teams, but we beat South Alabama (even big schools struggle against little ones when they are down, look at Alabama 2007, Michigan, etc.) The difference between our talent and the talent of Oregon, Alabama, Florida (yes they had a horrible year, but they were healthy when they played us and are more talented than us) Georgia, South Carolina, and even Missouri, is like the difference between Wal-Mart and a small grocery store in the same town.

I thought we had better talent to begin the year, but boy was I wrong. The main thing is that it is way to early to base a judgment on coaching compared to the other teams we played, especially when your bringing a knife to a gun fight.

Missouri is hardly Walmart. They got the most out of lower grade resources.

Florida was not healthy when they played us. In fact, one could argue that they were in even more of a bind than they were later in the season, given that they had to rely on a QB who had not gotten starter reps in practice, who they had not figured in their game plan, and who had never completed a pass in college.

And your analogy seem superfluous anyway, because I don't see many on here these days complaining that we lost to Oregon or Alabama. I do see people complaining that we lost, at home, to Vanderbilt. And they definitely have fewer resources than we do.

 

[Spartacavolus]

Vanderbilt was the better football team the last 2 years. Period. Call it whatever, but they have @ the same number of NFL players on the field, more on D than us, and have been together longer in a system with a good coach and assistants where everyone is on the same page.

That's not hard for me to say, and I don't understand why others struggle with it. It hasn't been like that forever and won't be like that soon. Get over it.

 

[oregonvol]

Vanderbilt was the better football team the last 2 years. Period. Call it whatever, but they have @ the same number of NFL players on the field, more on D than us, and have been together longer in a system with a good coach and assistants where everyone is on the same page.

That's not hard for me to say, and I don't understand why others struggle with it. It hasn't been like that forever and won't be like that soon. Get over it.

They do not have better talent or depth. No objective recruiting or scouting service will tell you that. They do not have more resources. They do have better coaching. And if you think that is acceptable or excusable, then you're probably more in love with the coaches than you are the program.

Also, they will always have "been together longer" as long as Franklin is there (I know ExcusaVols love this excuse, because they can keep using it every year, but it's very silly, no one wins simply because of longevity).

 

[Spartacavolus]

They do not have better talent or depth. No objective recruiting or scouting service will tell you that. They do not have more resources. They do have better coaching. And if you think that is acceptable or excusable, then you're probably more in love with the coaches than you are the program.

Also, they will always have "been together longer" as long as Franklin is there (I know ExcusaVols love this excuse, because they can keep using it every year, but it's very silly, no one wins simply because of longevity).

I don't really care what your opinion is when you base if off of recruiting services from when players were in highschool. Same ones that don't measure anything after signing day when the players actually show up on campus. You form your opinion that way while I look at the differenct aspects that make up a football team/program and watch the teams play each week to determine talent level and how good/bad a team is.

You are in denial about too many things to be objective.

 

[VOLorNuttin]

It is an accurate analogy. The whole basis of the argument for a poster on here is why didn't we compete better against these great teams. You could, and should, say that Vandy (granted they beat some good teams this year) and South Alabama aren't great teams, but we beat South Alabama (even big schools struggle against little ones when they are down, look at Alabama 2007, Michigan, etc.) The difference between our talent and the talent of Oregon, Alabama, Florida (yes they had a horrible year, but they were healthy when they played us and are more talented than us) Georgia, South Carolina, and even Missouri, is like the difference between Wal-Mart and a small grocery store in the same town.

I thought we had better talent to begin the year, but boy was I wrong. The main thing is that it is way to early to base a judgment on coaching compared to the other teams we played, especially when your bringing a knife to a gun fight.

It's an absurd analogy. Comparing Bama and LSU to Walmart and UT as a mom and pop shop....GTFOH! :loco:

 

[Spartacavolus]

and just quickly, their depth and talent on the OL and DL was comparable to us, especially DL. Deeper at LB and more talented in the 2 deep. Deeper at WR and more talented in the first 6. Better and deeper at TE. RB is us or a push. And though they were down to 2nd and 3rd string dbs, they still weren't down to multiple walkons or track kids in the 2 deep as we were in some of our base packages.
Then again, that's reality. Go ahead and give me recruiting #'s from 2 years ago to support your argument, rather than look at reality.

 

[oregonvol]

and just quickly, their depth and talent on the OL and DL was comparable to us, especially DL. Deeper at LB and more talented in the 2 deep. Deeper at WR and more talented in the first 6. Better and deeper at TE. RB is us or a push. And though they were down to 2nd and 3rd string dbs, they still weren't down to multiple walkons or track kids in the 2 deep as we were in some of our base packages.
Then again, that's reality. Go ahead and give me recruiting #'s from 2 years ago to support your argument, rather than look at reality.

Your version of "reality" is basically just to say "Oh, we weren't as successful as X team, so they must have more talent, despite what any objective scouting service says." Absent of any real logic, it's an easy way for you to dismiss any game we ever lose. In the imaginary world you've set up for yourself, it's clear that coaches aren't responsible for how players progress or perform or, really, anything. And since that's the case, I really don't understand why you care so much about these coaches that you're on here every day denouncing anyone who has anything other than praise for them and denigrating the players and the program just to give them one more excuse.

 

[Spartacavolus]

good gracious. "On here everyday denouncing anyone who has anything but praise.."
What a lying ass drama queen.
I'm talking about watching Vandy play almost every game over the past 3 years and ours as well to decide which team is better. That's obviously too complicated for some, so you have to go the crybaby bipolar route.

 

[sjt18]

I have only this question to ask?

Let's set a hypothetical scenario like this. A small town grocery store has recently gone through horrible times. These times included 4 different store managers and 44 different employee's (when only eight are needed to run the store) in an extremely short period of time.

Is it reasonable to expect the new store manager and employee's to compete and be just as profitable as the Wal-Mart in the town?

And if they are not anywhere near as profitable, was it the store manager and employee's fault for not doing it?

I don't know about everybody here, but I think we can all say that there really can't be a conclusion drawn from that.

Would it at least be reasonable to expect them to improve over what the group that just got fired did? Would it not be reasonable to see some sign of tangible improvement with little regression after 10 months?

You guys keep setting up this straw man. (a form of lying btw)

No one I know of expected them to compete with Walmart... Bama. Most just expected them to be something better than homecoming fodder and to beat Vandy with two weeks to prepare and playing at home.

 

[oregonvol]

good gracious. "On here everyday denouncing anyone who has anything but praise.."
What a lying ass drama queen.
I'm talking about watching Vandy play almost every game over the past 3 years and ours as well to decide which team is better. That's obviously too complicated for some, so you have to go the crybaby bipolar route.

Oh no, you have countered my reliance on objective scouting services with third grade level name calling. You really got me this time.

 

[sjt18]

Your version of "reality" is basically just to say "Oh, we weren't as successful as X team, so they must have more talent, despite what any objective scouting service says." Absent of any real logic, it's an easy way for you to dismiss any game we ever lose. In the imaginary world you've set up for yourself, it's clear that coaches aren't responsible for how players progress or perform or, really, anything. And since that's the case, I really don't understand why you care so much about these coaches that you're on here every day denouncing anyone who has anything other than praise for them and denigrating the players and the program just to give them one more excuse.

The thing about this line of excuse is... the one thing we all feel good about with Jones is recruiting... which is based on the same scouting evaluations that are oh so inconvenient when talking about the performance of this past team.

They again have to apply a double standard. Those recruiting services matter when it comes to the '14 class but not for '09 through '13.

 

[Spartacavolus]

Oh no, you have countered my reliance on objective scouting services with third grade level name calling. You really got me this time.

people tend to be treated the way they act or approach things.
I'm talking about which football team is better. You want to argue that UT is after a coaching change, btb losing seasons and btb losses to a Vandy team that may win 10 games and has been to btbtb bowls and winning seasons.
That pretty much sums it up, but it's drama and conspiracy free, so too much for you to handle.

 

[oregonvol]

The thing about this line of excuse is... the one thing we all feel good about with Jones is recruiting... which is based on the same scouting evaluations that are oh so inconvenient when talking about the performance of this past team.

They again have to apply a double standard. Those recruiting services matter when it comes to the '14 class but not for '09 through '13.

Exactly. For some reason, scouting services are the ultimate word when it comes to the 2014 class. But when you have an embarrassing loss (and let's remember, the coaches are never ever at fault at TN) then those services are far less objective and credible than a fan looking for an excuse.

 

[Spartacavolus]

The thing about this line of excuse is... the one thing we all feel good about with Jones is recruiting... which is based on the same scouting evaluations that are oh so inconvenient when talking about the performance of this past team.

They again have to apply a double standard. Those recruiting services matter when it comes to the '14 class but not for '09 through '13.

and the actual success/failure of this next recruiting class will be seen in a couple of years as well. Not hard to understand. A high ranking doesn't assure it's success, but having the best class by talent rating and #'s that UT has ever had isn't a negative right now.

 

[oregonvol]

people tend to be treated the way they act or approach things.
I'm talking about which football team is better. You want to argue that UT is after a coaching change, btb losing seasons and btb losses to a Vandy team that may win 10 games and has been to btbtb bowls and winning seasons.
That pretty much sums it up, but it's drama and conspiracy free, so too much for you to handle.

I haven't alleged any conspiracies. You're the one here trying to allege people said stuff they didn't and resorting to infantile name-calling.

The Vanderbilt program is in better shape than the UT program because they have hired better coaches, not because they have better resources or because they have recruited better talent. Anyone who cannot see that, is either being willfully ignorant or simply grasping at straws in desperation for any excuse possible.

 

[sjt18]

people tend to be treated the way they act or approach things.

So 3rd grad namecalling is acceptable for you if you think the other person deserves it... based on nothing much more than refusing to agree with you?

I'm talking about which football team is better.

Oh, so you mean which team had the better combination of coaching and players? Hint: UT had the more talented players.

You want to argue that UT is after a coaching change, btb losing seasons and btb losses to a Vandy team that may win 10 games and has been to btbtb bowls and winning seasons.

Jones was responsible for one of those Vandy losses. Vandy plays a cupcake schedule and you know that. In other arguments... you'd argue that too.

The win/loss record of previous teams has absolutely NO bearing on whether this past team won or lost particular games and ESPECIALLY not late in the season.

That pretty much sums it up, but it's drama and conspiracy free, so too much for you to handle.

Nope... just more excuse making that avoids what we saw to evade any and all criticism of the coaches.