Coaching vs Talent.

[daj2576]

We should have beaten Candy, I will admit that one.

I'll also argue, though that we beat an SC team we should not have beaten.

Otherwise, we lost in games we were expected to lose and won games we were expected to win. In preseason I was expecting 6-7 wins but I was also not expecting Auburn and Mo to be good enough to be in the SECCG.

I'd say the jury is still out on these coaches. One thing that IS obvious is Butch is much better than Dooley. Question is how much better.....

Using raw talent averages he is right. I have been a proponent of those for years, but there are always exceptions. I thought I had good data that suggested that Tennessee's attrition shouldn't affect the win/loss prediction of 7-5. Then, I broke down the two deep by the same sort of talent evaluation, and I was shocked. Not only that, but I am shocked at how the two-deep improves at almost every position group next year.

Ultimately our -2 game downward trend game with a roster that was very sub-par at key positions, against the two teams who have the highest rate of over-performance in the SEC.

 

[Spartacavolus]

Nope. You can attempt all the strawmen you like but I have never said this was an ideal roster... only that it could have won 7 games if well coached and should have won 6.

Have at it. Point to one place where I said there weren't deficiencies on this roster.

There is not strawman bs. You said we were more talented and faster than Mizzou, which makes that comment a ridiculously stupid comment, and continued to argue about it. That was one in many comments you had about us having the speed, but just can't seem to take good angles, unless playing Vandy and ky, shockingly.
If you want to act like you didn't, I don't give a ****. Everybody here read it, or at least saw you repeat it 100 times in classic War & Peace form.

 

[sjt18]

Roughly 70% of the time, the team who has a better four year recruiting average wins any game. That jumps to about 90% in BCS title games.

So, for all of you who think it is coaching, more than talent, there is no way to support an argument that it is "mostly" coaching, when the majority of games are won by teams with more talent.

Non sequitur. For this to hold true, you could not have ND under Weis, Texas for the last several years, USC under Kiffin, or UF under Muschamp this year.

It is obvious that you cannot win big without talent. It is just as obvious that you can grossly underperform with great talent and poor coaching. Coaching, development, and talent are ALL critical factors.

So... coaching matters but it doesn't matter... but it matters but it doesn't matter... its all talent but it isn't all talent....? Gotcha.

 

[sjt18]

There is not strawman bs.

Yes it is. You keep acting as if I said this was a great roster with no deficieincies that the coaches would have to deal with. I never said nor implied that. I have specifically said NUMEROUS times that there were holes in UT's roster.... going all the way back to the summer.

You said we were more talented and faster than Mizzou, which makes that comment a ridiculously stupid comment,

Nope. Just look at their roster. They play "fast". They know their schemes and responsibilities. But they are not loaded with great athletes and especially on D.

I actually still think MU would have been a close game or win with Worley instead of Dobbs. The coaches are STILL responsible for having their back ups ready to play but Worley would have made a big difference in that game IMO.

Interesting in this regard.... Auburn just outran Mizzou worse than they did UT. Mizzou's defenders were usually in position... they just weren't athletic enough to make the plays.

That was one in many comments you had about us having the speed,

UT on the whole had a faster roster in terms of raw speed than Mizzou. UT had a faster roster on the whole than Vandy or UK. They weren't as fast as Auburn, Bama, or Oregon.

If you want to act like you didn't, I don't give a ****. Everybody here read it, or at least saw you repeat it 100 times in classic War & Peace form.

I don't have to "act" like anything. I didn't say the were fast. I said they were "faster". I didn't say they were talented... I said they were talented "enough" if well coached to win 7 games.

So I burn your strawman down and now you want to get snotty? You're better than that.

 

[sjt18]

I'd say the jury is still out on these coaches. One thing that IS obvious is Butch is much better than Dooley. Question is how much better.....

The jury IS still out but how is that obvious?

Better than Dooley last year? Who isn't?

But the comparison is Dooley year 1 vs Jones year 1. Who did the better job of COACHING in year 1?

 

[armchair]

Most good college teams have mobile QBs--most of them have very athletic QBs. This is the starting point for our problems. Most of these spread offenses--which includes just about everybody--have backs with SPEED. We've had some decent/good backs--but we get VERY FEW big plays out of our backs because our backs have lacked breakaway speed. Look at Neal and Lane--two back who are pretty good at getting 6/8 yards but that's about it. How many runs did each have over 20 yards this year? I think very few. Good teams have QBs and backs making big plays--we haven't had that. Bray made big plays--but you are much better off having a QB who can run for a first down on, say, 3rd and 8 than trying to pass for it. Lots of things have to go right to complete a pass.

Defensively, we've been very weak at LB and corner and DE in recent years.

 

[VOLINVONORE]

Yes it is. You keep acting as if I said this was a great roster with no deficieincies that the coaches would have to deal with. I never said nor implied that. I have specifically said NUMEROUS times that there were holes in UT's roster.... going all the way back to the summer.

Nope. Just look at their roster. They play "fast". They know their schemes and responsibilities. But they are not loaded with great athletes and especially on D.

I actually still think MU would have been a close game or win with Worley instead of Dobbs. The coaches are STILL responsible for having their back ups ready to play but Worley would have made a big difference in that game IMO.

Interesting in this regard.... Auburn just outran Mizzou worse than they did UT. Mizzou's defenders were usually in position... they just weren't athletic enough to make the plays.

UT on the whole had a faster roster in terms of raw speed than Mizzou. UT had a faster roster on the whole than Vandy or UK. They weren't as fast as Auburn, Bama, or Oregon.



I don't have to "act" like anything. I didn't say the were fast. I said they were "faster". I didn't say they were talented... I said they were talented "enough" if well coached to win 7 games.

So I burn your strawman down and now you want to get snotty? You're better than that.

You can fool all the people some of the time. You can fool some of the people all the time. But you can not fool all the people all the time. However, I know you will keep trying.

 

[butchna]

The jury IS still out but how is that obvious?

Better than Dooley last year? Who isn't?

But the comparison is Dooley year 1 vs Jones year 1. Who did the better job of COACHING in year 1?

Noting that Butch had a signature win against a top ten program...then finished against a gauntlet including Bama, Mizzou and Auburn?...compared to Dooley crushing it against Memphis High, Ole Miss, Vandy and Kentucky?...I'll take the South Carolina win over Vandy....So my answer is Butch

 

[DERELICK_MY_VOLS]

Because Dooley didn't lose any games in his first season that he should not have lost... and he took a team under very similar circumstances to a bowl and lost it only on a fluke. And he had a near win vs an LSU team that was much better than UGA in '13... and his team at least showed up for a half vs Oregon and Bama.

Neither team had ideal rosters. They were similarly weak vs similarly difficult schedules. Neither guy worked any miracles... but one guy beat who he was supposed to beat and made a bowl. The other guy lost one he should not have lost and didn't.

Sorry but that is asinine.

We were supposed to beat Auburn and Mizzu too this year according to most also....so is that the Butch's fault too....you know the SEC West and East champions. Hey Kiffin beat South Carolina and Georgia...got to a bowl game also and ALMOST beat Alabama so is he a better coach than Butch Jones? So Kiffin and Dooley are better HC's according to this reasoning. :blink:

 

[92volalum]

I will take talent all day long.. Load me up with 4 n 5 stars n I will win a ton of games.. I might not win a chamionship every year..lol

Saying that I think we should hold all ut coaches to the same std fulmer was n be in sec cg 1 n 3 yrs.. Anyone accepts less than that well.. I'm not sure what to say...

 

[utvolpj]

Saying that I think we should hold all ut coaches to the same std fulmer was n be in sec cg 1 n 3 yrs.. Anyone accepts less than that well.. I'm not sure what to say...

it took Fulmer 5 years to reach the SECCG. If there's a standard it should start there and not what he did in his 15th season

 

[sjt18]

You can fool all the people some of the time. You can fool some of the people all the time. But you can not fool all the people all the time. However, I know you will keep trying.

Not trying to fool anyone. I have been here for 8 years. For most of that 8 years, people have accused me of tilting too much to the positive side of things. They were right. So if it offends you that I say 5-7 and what we saw on the field was not a "good" coaching job... I'm very sorry. The truth isn't always what we'd like it to be.

Going forward... I just want to see better from the coaches. Again, if that offends you... if you cannot handle the implication that the coaches weren't great this year... I'm sorry.

 

[sjt18]

it took Fulmer 5 years to reach the SECCG. If there's a standard it should start there and not start with what he did in his 15th season

I don't disagree with this. If Jones avg's 9.5 wins per season for the next 4 years then gets UT to the CG... I'll be more than satisfied.

Actually if he just shows some solid, tangible progress I will be satisfied.

IMHO, his first chance to truly compete for the East is '15. His '14 class will have a year in. The JUCO's will be Srs. His system should be fully implemented throughout the program. I am not saying he "should" win it but they should make some noise in the East.

 

[utvolpj]

I don't disagree with this. If Jones avg's 9.5 wins per season for the next 4 years then gets UT to the CG... I'll be more than satisfied.

give him the SEC and team Fulmer got in 93 and I have no doubts he would get there

 

[sjt18]

Noting that Butch had a signature win against a top ten program...then finished against a gauntlet including Bama, Mizzou and Auburn?...compared to Dooley crushing it against Memphis High, Ole Miss, Vandy and Kentucky?...I'll take the South Carolina win over Vandy....So my answer is Butch

That's not a bad argument. It doesn't show Jones is clearly better... but at least you cited some good reasoning.

 

[thadolphinman]

The jury IS still out but how is that obvious?

Better than Dooley last year? Who isn't?

But the comparison is Dooley year 1 vs Jones year 1. Who did the better job of COACHING in year 1?

I can't believe you are making that argument, and could possibly believe that Dooley coached better than Jones in year 1. Go look at the schedule and compare it to this one. Dooley didn't beat anybody that he wasn't supposed to beat. Jones did that in year one. UGA sucked that year, Florida sucked that year, Ole Miss sucked that year, Kentucky wasn't very good that year, Vandy wasn't anywhere near good as they are now, hell South Carolina wasn't as good that year as they are now.

I don't think we should have lost to Vandy, but Butch's recruiting and coaching against UGA and USCe tell me all I need to know about him as a coach. His previous record also tells me he is a good coach. The only thing that really worried me when he was hired was his recruiting ability. I have no doubts about that now.

 

[butchna]

That's not a bad argument. It doesn't show Jones is clearly better... but at least you cited some good reasoning.

Then we agree that nothing's CLEAR at this point...to be determined at a later date....that means future :salute:

 

[therealitytheory]

Without a good-to-great QB, it doesn't matter who the HC is.

The passer ratings for SEC QBs reflect the success or failure of the respective teams:
Top nine: Mettenberger (LSU), Manziel (Ta&m), McCarron (UA), Shaw (SC), Murray (GA), Franklin (MZ), Marshall (AU), Carta-Samuels (VU), Wallace (UM)

Bottom five: Smith (UK), Murphy (FL), Prescott (MSST), Worley (UT), Allen (ARK)

Tennessee's combined QB rating of 110 was easily the worst in the league. That level of quarterbacking guarantees failure, regardless of who the head coach is.

 

[sjt18]

give him the SEC and team Fulmer got in 93 and I have no doubts he would get there

I was messing with you a little.

I don't think it takes forever to turn a program around if you have the "right" guy because there are just way too many examples of it happening. UT needs an elite coach. An elite coach is more likely than not to turn it around within 3 years. Anything less than an elite coach will not be able to consistently get good talent to UT.

 

[DERELICK_MY_VOLS]

Without a good-to-great QB, it doesn't matter who the HC is.

The passer ratings for SEC QBs reflect the success or failure of the respective teams:
Top nine: Mettenberger (LSU), Manziel (Ta&m), McCarron (UA), Shaw (SC), Murray (GA), Franklin (MZ), Marshall (AU), Carta-Samuels (VU), Wallace (UM)

Bottom five: Smith (UK), Murphy (FL), Prescott (MSST), Worley (UT), Allen (ARK)

Tennessee's combined QB rating of 110 was easily the worst in the league. That level of quarterbacking guarantees failure, regardless of who the head coach is.

Yeah that is one of my favorites before this season....we don't have SEC Caliber D-Lineman....we don't have and SEC caliber QB....we don't have SEC caliber this and that....now it is all the new HC's fault....he is not a SEC caliber coach.

Guess we are never going to win again with all that lack of SEC....well everything.

 

[sjt18]

Then we agree that nothing's CLEAR at this point...to be determined at a later date....that means future :salute:

"Nothing clear" is actually the sum of every post I have made here recently about the coaching ability of this staff. I just have my eyes open to both good and bad possibilities now. Unfortunately, I end up having to answer the blindly optimistic folks more than the blindly pessimistic folks at this point.

Whether you guys believe it or not, I am still "hopeful". I would rather be operating on hope bolstered by a 7 win season that exceeded expectations. As it is... my hope is based on what I would truly like to believe Jones will do at UT.

I'm probably the one guy here who won't change their opinion much over the next couple of years if things seem to be going badly... or well for that matter. Let me give you this at least... if Jones is as good of a coach as I thought he was in August then I won't be surprised if he wins 10 games in '15. OTOH, if this year is more indicative of their real ability then I won't be surprised by 5-7 wins then.

I'm just watching... waiting... for something to hang some stronger hopes on. This recruiting class is one thing. Some genuine progress in the spring would be another. Leaving spring with a starting QB would be huge IMO so the summer work with WR's will be maxed out.

 

[sjt18]

Without a good-to-great QB, it doesn't matter who the HC is.

The passer ratings for SEC QBs reflect the success or failure of the respective teams:
Top nine: Mettenberger (LSU), Manziel (Ta&m), McCarron (UA), Shaw (SC), Murray (GA), Franklin (MZ), Marshall (AU), Carta-Samuels (VU), Wallace (UM)

Bottom five: Smith (UK), Murphy (FL), Prescott (MSST), Worley (UT), Allen (ARK)

Every player in the upper list had elite, seasoned WR's to throw to... at least one.

IMHO, UT's QB whoever it is will be no worse than mid-pack next year if the WR's come along as they should.

Tennessee's combined QB rating of 110 was easily the worst in the league. That level of quarterbacking guarantees failure, regardless of who the head coach is.

I think that is more a reflection of the receivers than the passers at this point. Four of UT's top 5 receivers had never caught a pass at UT prior to this year. The top WR was a wildcat QB in HS last year much of the time.

People argue patience for the coaces... I'd say that's far more in order for the QB's.

 

[sjt18]

I can't believe you are making that argument, and could possibly believe that Dooley coached better than Jones in year 1. Go look at the schedule and compare it to this one.

I have. Have you? They are pretty similar in difficulty.

Oregon actually turned out to be a better team that year. They lost to Auburn by 3 in the NC game. Bama was still a bear. LSU finished 11-2 that year after almost losing to Dooley. UF was much better than this year. UGA wasn't as good though. USCe had their only appearance in the SECCG that year.

Dooley didn't beat anybody that he wasn't supposed to beat. Jones did that in year one.

Dooley didn't lose to anyone he was supposed to lose to until UK of the 2nd year. Jones lost to Vandy.

UGA sucked that year, Florida sucked that year,

See above.

Kentucky wasn't very good that year,

They were a bowl team that year and MUCH worse this year.

Vandy wasn't anywhere near good as they are now,

No. They weren't. So what we have in the final analysis is roughly equal schedules as far as difficulty is concerned.

I don't think we should have lost to Vandy, but Butch's recruiting and coaching against UGA and USCe tell me all I need to know about him as a coach.

And it doesn't me any more than Dooley's first signing class and UNC/LSU games told us about him. There were some reasons for hope at the end of "year zero"... it was what he did after that really stank.

His previous record also tells me he is a good coach.

Beating up on weaklings doesn't make him a great coach. It doesn't say he's not a great coach either... but the combined record of the teams he beat at Cincy was pretty bad. He never beat a ranked team there.

The only thing that really worried me when he was hired was his recruiting ability. I have no doubts about that now.

I actually felt more confident about his coaching ability then than now. His recruiting has been the best UT has had since the heyday of Fulmer. It is nothing short of outstanding and that's not a strong enough term.

 

[therealitytheory]

Yeah that is one of my favorites before this season....we don't have SEC Caliber D-Lineman....we don't have and SEC caliber QB....we don't have SEC caliber this and that....now it is all the new HC's fault....he is not a SEC caliber coach.

Guess we are never going to win again with all that lack of SEC....well everything.

The point...ahem....is that Vince Lombardi would not have won the SEC East with his qbs racking up a rating of 110.

The chart of SEC QB ratings looks almost like the team standings. It is what it is. And anybody who watched our spring game last April shouldn't be shocked by Worley's (117) and Peterman's(42.5) numbers.

I love Butch's 2014 class, but there is a big goose-egg for QB commits. He obviously thinks he's already got a winner, and maybe we'll see signs of it THIS spring. (That was just a little break in the tibia, right?)

 

[daj2576]

I can't believe you are making that argument, and could possibly believe that Dooley coached better than Jones in year 1. Go look at the schedule and compare it to this one. Dooley didn't beat anybody that he wasn't supposed to beat. Jones did that in year one. UGA sucked that year, Florida sucked that year, Ole Miss sucked that year, Kentucky wasn't very good that year, Vandy wasn't anywhere near good as they are now, hell South Carolina wasn't as good that year as they are now.

I don't think we should have lost to Vandy, but Butch's recruiting and coaching against UGA and USCe tell me all I need to know about him as a coach. His previous record also tells me he is a good coach. The only thing that really worried me when he was hired was his recruiting ability. I have no doubts about that now.

Here is a comparison. In 2010 Vegas said that Dooley should have won 7 games, talent averages said he should have won 9, he won 6. That is a -1 to -3 under performance. This year talent said Butch should have won 7, Vegas said Butch should have won 5. So that is either a -2 or a par performance. If you average the two using both Vegas and talent averages as guides, Dooley was a -2 under-performer his first year, Butch was a -1 (or a 50% improvement over Dooley).

And as I said earlier, I actually believe that UT might be the exception to the attrition rule, that if you look at the chart that I posted above (http://www.volnation.com/forum/tennessee-vols-football/210829-coaching-vs-talent-2.html#post9623271), and compare it to the one below, that the two deep was not consistent with the talent left on the roster. In other words, if you specifically adjust for UT, the talent available on the field at specific groupings was far lower than it should be by just latent star ratings.