Did Butch Jones do a good job coaching this season?

[Spartacavolus]

I thought the coaching or lack thereof was way more evident in the Oregon and Florida games, especially the Florida game. I'm not advocating coaching changes or throwing in the towel at this point, but there has got to be improvement coaching wise and I expect there will be.

I have seen hardly anyone that doesn't know the coaching could've been better and expect better. I'm one that thinks more time under a system and coaches with better players will help, but that's just me.
We aren't going to get any mistake free coaches because there aren't any. Evidently, I watch too much football because I see poor plays and poor coaching in every game I watch. I just want to get to the point where we have some players than can make up for mistakes and we don't have that right now.

 

[Sandvol]

What SEC coach actually commended Butch? Don't recall that.

I was alluding to Photovol's post about other SEC coaches giving Butch a B+. I'm not sure if any have commented on Butch or not. But, if any do commend him then in my opinion that's not good. That would be like Hitler commending Roosevelt.

 

[Sandvol]

It's really pathetic how so many on here, after the fact, want to excuse the Vandy loss by arguing that they had a pure talent advantage. There is no objective data to support this argument. The recruiting rankings of the players on the field for us were so much higher than the players for Vanderbilt, it's almost absurd. But of course these people will just ignore those rankings (it's funny how they don't do that when praising Butch's current class though).

Vegas thought we were better. The recruiting services said we were much much better. And the draft will probably show we were better. But, since we lost, coach lovers are desperate for any excuse to remove any single iota of accountability from the coaching staff. It's sad to see so many supposed UT fans so ready to bad mouth every possible thing about the program (even without a shred of objective evidence) as long as it makes the coaches look better in comparison. What is it with you people and your crazy man crushes?

They could argue that Vanderbilt had better talent by the time it had been in Franklin's system for three years versus Dooley's system for three years and Jones for one.

 

[WesternKyVol]

A year is enough time to get players up to their potential.

 

[Spartacavolus]

A year is enough time to get players up to their potential.

Not really man. Peyton seems to be just now playing to his potential and he's almost 40 and one of the best ever.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

It's really pathetic how so many on here, after the fact, want to excuse the Vandy loss by arguing that they had a pure talent advantage. There is no objective data to support this argument. The recruiting rankings of the players on the field for us were so much higher than the players for Vanderbilt, it's almost absurd. But of course these people will just ignore those rankings (it's funny how they don't do that when praising Butch's current class though).

Vegas thought we were better. The recruiting services said we were much much better. And the draft will probably show we were better. But, since we lost, coach lovers are desperate for any excuse to remove any single iota of accountability from the coaching staff. It's sad to see so many supposed UT fans so ready to bad mouth every possible thing about the program (even without a shred of objective evidence) as long as it makes the coaches look better in comparison. What is it with you people and your crazy man crushes?

Hmmmm I wonder what the talent difference is between Stanford and Utah? Or between Oregon and Arizona? Or how about Florida and Georgia Southern? Coaches make mistakes, even the greatest ones. Saban made one that costed him another SEC title. So all we would do is bash our new coach and place 100% of the blame on him? Yeah that seems fair. Another pathetic Butch hating post. It's getting old.

 

[UT_King]

If Butch wasn't killing it in recruiting there would be a lot more "no" answers. Looking simply at on-field coaching/results I say no.

 

[Sandvol]

Hmmmm I wonder what the talent difference is between Stanford and Utah? Or between Oregon and Arizona? Or how about Florida and Georgia Southern? Coaches make mistakes, even the greatest ones. Saban made one that costed him another SEC title. So all we would do is bash our new coach and place 100% of the blame on him? Yeah that seems fair. Another pathetic Butch hating post. It's getting old.

You who can't stand to read any counterpoint or differing views and then disparage people because of it are getting old. THAT IS WHAT A MESSAGE BOARD IS FOR. I like to read everybody's opinion. Go start a Pumpers Forum if you want. See how long it lasts.

 

[sjt18]

A year is enough time to get players up to their potential.

A year is enough time for you to see improvement. That's what disappointed me most. There was very little apparent improvement. Several examples of regression could be cited.

I doubt you reach potential with a player in that time but it should have been closer than it was.

 

[sjt18]

Every team that the Vols lost to had better talent. However, they beat one with more talent S. Carolina.

UT had more talent than Vandy. There is no rational, factual argument to the contrary. UT had more raw talent than Mizzou however it is legitimate to say Mizzou's system and development provided them an edge and that they were better at leveraging the talent of their best players.

 

[Sandvol]

UT had more talent than Vandy. There is no rational, factual argument to the contrary. UT had more raw talent than Mizzou however it is legitimate to say Mizzou's system and development provided them an edge and that they were better at leveraging the talent of their best players.

You could rationally argue from the point I made above:
They could argue that Vanderbilt had better talent by the time it had been in Franklin's system for three years versus Dooley's system for three years and Jones for one. Suppose all our recruits averaged 5.0 but had potential of 8.5 and Vandy's recruits averaged 4.0 with potential of 7.5 and we've only developed our recruits to 6.5 but Vandy has developed theirs to 7.0 then you could argue they have better talent based on better coaching development of players. That's probably same argument you are saying but I claim that is talent. How do you measure raw talent? Is it based upon a bunch of supposed gurus who know no more than typical football fan. Those recruiting services are off more than not.

 

[MADISONGAVOL]

For those questioning this coach go to read how many vols were selected on all sec team. Then tell me how he did.

 

[Wylo]

For those questioning this coach go to read how many vols were selected on all sec team. Then tell me how he did.

Then check how many Missouri had and how they did...


Oh wait.

That kills the argument. It goes both ways. Missouri had 3. All on defense.

It is not all on coaching, but to give them a free pass is ridiculous.

 

[24/7vol]

I am not convinced either way thus far on his coaching ability. I do know that he is an exceptional recruiter and tireless in marketing the program. I don't know if next year will convince me as we will be freshman, sophmore laden. I know if he can coach it will make for some fun Saturdays again in the future.

 

[oregonvol]

You could rationally argue from the point I made above:
They could argue that Vanderbilt had better talent by the time it had been in Franklin's system for three years versus Dooley's system for three years and Jones for one. Suppose all our recruits averaged 5.0 but had potential of 8.5 and Vandy's recruits averaged 4.0 with potential of 7.5 and we've only developed our recruits to 6.5 but Vandy has developed theirs to 7.0 then you could argue they have better talent based on better coaching development of players. That's probably same argument you are saying but I claim that is talent. How do you measure raw talent? Is it based upon a bunch of supposed gurus who know no more than typical football fan. Those recruiting services are off more than not.

So, by that logic, Butch has a built in excuse any time he faces a coach who has been at a school longer. Clever. After all, if he can't beat Franklin because Franklin has had 3 years to develop his lesser talent vs. Butch's 1 year, then I guess it will be the same excuse when Franklin has 4 years vs. Butch's 2. And so on. And if that's the case, if you set your standards and expectations so low that you expect to lose Vanderbilt every year, then why did we even let Dooley go?

Also, I'm cool with whoever wants to make the "recruiting services don't know anything" argument, as long as they also state that they are unimpressed with Butch's recruiting. It's so funny how little the recruiting services know when people want an excuse for losing to Vanderbilt, but how accurate they are when people want to praise our current recruiting class.

 

[utchs81]

I have to say yes. He was given a giant uphill to climb and he almost made a silk purse out of the proverbial sow's ear. A number of other cliches come to mind but with the task he had with the equipment given he did an admirable job. During the UGA and So Carolina games he was able to open things up and at least give us a glimpse of what his offence could do. It will only get better once we get the better athlete across the board.

 

[sjt18]

You could rationally argue from the point I made above:
They could argue that Vanderbilt had better talent by the time it had been in Franklin's system for three years versus Dooley's system for three years and Jones for one.

No. Definitions are important. Development and talent are distinct things. Even then... Vandy should have never beaten UT this year. Especially not in game 11 after 16 weeks under the coaches plus the spring.

That's probably same argument you are saying but I claim that is talent. How do you measure raw talent?

Size, speed, quickness, power, intelligence, etc. Natural attributes applied to football.

Another good measure is what the NFL thinks of them and NFL draft analysts. Vandy may have one draftee coming out this year. According to a guy published in the "Nooga" today, UT has between 6-10 that could be drafted. That's a considerable difference.

Is it based upon a bunch of supposed gurus who know no more than typical football fan. Those recruiting services are off more than not.

Vandy is not a talented team. They should not have beaten UT. I really do not like Franklin. But he's a solid coach who outcoached Jones this year. I just hope Jones learned his lessons and doesn't make a habit of the same mistakes.


BTW, are you willing to go on record right now and consistently say that the recruiting site gurus know no more than a typical football fan and that the recruiting services are off more than not?


The one thing most of us are willing to say Jones is doing well... is based off... the opinions of those gurus and their rankings which you seem to suggest are specious.

 

[sjt18]

For those questioning this coach go to read how many vols were selected on all sec team. Then tell me how he did.

“It’s amazing that a team not bowl-eligible has this many potential draftees, but Tennessee could easily have 6-10 draft picks,” he said.

That's what a draft analyst quoted today said about UT's players.

 

[Volfan2012]

We were two plays away from being 7 and 5. If Pig doesn't clip then Dobbs scores the winning touchdown against Vandy. If Pigs arms are a little longer we score a touchdown against Georgia and have a great chance at that win also. Considering we lost all our WR's and starting QB plus had some defensive plays injured we did ok.

 

[oregonvol]

We were two plays away from being 7 and 5. If Pig doesn't clip then Dobbs scores the winning touchdown against Vandy. If Pigs arms are a little longer we score a touchdown against Georgia and have a great chance at that win also. Considering we lost all our WR's and starting QB plus had some defensive plays injured we did ok.

3 plays away from 7-5

3 plays away from 3-9

 

[3rd_and_Jancek]

We were two plays away from being 7 and 5. If Pig doesn't clip then Dobbs scores the winning touchdown against Vandy. If Pigs arms are a little longer we score a touchdown against Georgia and have a great chance at that win also. Considering we lost all our WR's and starting QB plus had some defensive plays injured we did ok.

Pigs don't have arms.

 

[sjt18]

Pigs don't have arms.

Some Pigs are more equal than others...

 

[alltimevol2331]

“It’s amazing that a team not bowl-eligible has this many potential draftees, but Tennessee could easily have 6-10 draft picks,” he said.

That's what a draft analyst quoted today said about UT's players.

NFL most really be desperate these days. Outside of the oline none of these will make it in the NFL.

 

[Sandvol]

So, by that logic, Butch has a built in excuse any time he faces a coach who has been at a school longer. Clever. After all, if he can't beat Franklin because Franklin has had 3 years to develop his lesser talent vs. Butch's 1 year, then I guess it will be the same excuse when Franklin has 4 years vs. Butch's 2. And so on. And if that's the case, if you set your standards and expectations so low that you expect to lose Vanderbilt every year, then why did we even let Dooley go?

Also, I'm cool with whoever wants to make the "recruiting services don't know anything" argument, as long as they also state that they are unimpressed with Butch's recruiting. It's so funny how little the recruiting services know when people want an excuse for losing to Vanderbilt, but how accurate they are when people want to praise our current recruiting class.

I'm not necessarily making that argument but just saying it is a plausible argument. I still think they should have beaten Vandy because they had the home field advantage and the huge Neyland crowd making a lot of noise when Vandy had the ball. I just don't think it is cut and dry we had better talent.

 

[Sandvol]

"Another good measure is what the NFL thinks of them and NFL draft analysts. Vandy may have one draftee coming out this year. According to a guy published in the "Nooga" today, UT has between 6-10 that could be drafted. That's a considerable difference."

That really isn't a fair comparison because 5 of those are on the offensive line. At the skill positions I think overall talent you could make a case for Vandy. Their three wide receivers overall were better than ours (except North who was out), their running backs I think were about even but maybe slightly better, their offensive line maybe not NFL but blocked very well, and their secondary overall (even their second teamers) were better save Sutton who is only a freshman. I think our two safeties are a tad slow and even though Coleman has a good 40 time he gets beat constantly. And, you can have a team that has 6-10 draft picks and the other team none and the other team still has better overall talent. And, yes development and talent are two different definitions but if you develop the talent so that it achieves its full potential that is still what it is when it achieves that potential. I'm not talking about starting talent but developed talent. But, I'm not saying this is what I believe but this is an argument and it is not cut and dry that our talent is better. Last year I think yes.