'24 GA WR Mike Matthews (Tennessee)

[sjt18]

Why fix something that isn’t broken?

Well, because it is. They were thin at WR this year then once a couple of guys got injured they were forced to play guys who weren't ready.

 

[chavisut]

The Vols have to start playing more WRs. I have very few complaints with Heupel's O but this one seems self-evident.

Why? The offense is built around not subbing players. You want guys like Squirell or Bru, before injury, out for entire series?

 

[ALLVOL 4LIFE]

Did his dad play ball at a high level somewhere?

Dude looks like a beast

That swelling element happens as you get older.

I got asked if I had any eligibility left one time. That would be the smallest issue though, it would have taken all of my eligibility to get back into shape.

 

[JRVOL11]

Did his dad play ball at a high level somewhere?

Dude looks like a beast

seen somewhere his dad played basketball at sienna and overseas

 

[LouderVol]

Well, because it is. They were thin at WR this year then once a couple of guys got injured they were forced to play guys who weren't ready.

Who, realistically, has a proven two/three deep?

When Lad McConkey (sp) went done, UGA had a bunch of unproven guys.
When the woman beater wasn't in the game, Bama was playing true freshman who looked like true freshman.
Ohio State had Marvin Harrison Jr and maybe one other guy, then a bunch of guys who looked rough.
Washington has a couple guys but they threw 100 more passes than we did.
LSU had Nabors and one other guy, but then would look rough.

I really want to see an example of this "Ideal" bell curve you think exists. because I don't think it does.

 

[sjt18]

Who, realistically, has a proven two/three deep?

When Lad McConkey (sp) went done, UGA had a bunch of unproven guys.
When the woman beater wasn't in the game, Bama was playing true freshman who looked like true freshman.
Ohio State had Marvin Harrison Jr and maybe one other guy, then a bunch of guys who looked rough.
Washington has a couple guys but they threw 100 more passes than we did.
LSU had Nabors and one other guy, but then would look rough.

I really want to see an example of this "Ideal" bell curve you think exists. because I don't think it does.

Hyperbole your thing this morning?

I didn't say there was a perfect system. Not sure what the "ideal" bell curve is. I'm just pretty sure rotating only 4 guys then having to hope that 2 other guys step in cold off the bench and perform when injuries happen isn't it. And you really do have to consider whether guys with talent and potential will stay around knowing you only play 3 or 4 WRs. UT can't be perpetually thin at WR. The loss of two guys this year probably cost the Vols a game.

I love Heupel and how he runs his O. But the Vols ran 3 legit options at RB with only one spot. Until forced by injury, they ran 4 guys for 3 spots at WR. That's a hole... a flaw at least in terms of developing and retaining depth.

Did you really just try to use UGA as an example of "unproven" guys stepping in? You might want to take another look at their roster. Bama too for that matter. They play A LOT of WRs. They aren't all stars. But they're all getting time and feel for the game.

 

[sjt18]

Why? The offense is built around not subbing players. You want guys like Squirell or Bru, before injury, out for entire series?

I'll try to explain it again. They could have been playing Nimrod and Webb a series or two at different times without subbing. It isn't a matter of what I might "want". I don't want guys to get injured or tired or have off games or any of the other things that makes it necessary to develop depth.

Wright was one of the best and maybe the best RB in the SEC this year. They subbed him out for entire series. Small played whole series and sat whole series. Same with Sampson. By doing that, it was pretty seamless when Wright got nicked up or someone else had the hot hand. The same thing can be done with WRs.

I believe the average is around 8-12 series per game, right? Playing a slot and two WRs that's 30 man-series available. Do you think it is unreasonable to put your developing back ups in for 2 each?

 

[butchna]

I'll try to explain it again. They could have been playing Nimrod and Webb a series or two at different times without subbing. It isn't a matter of what I might "want". I don't want guys to get injured or tired or have off games or any of the other things that makes it necessary to develop depth.

Wright was one of the best and maybe the best RB in the SEC this year. They subbed him out for entire series. Small played whole series and sat whole series. Same with Sampson. By doing that, it was pretty seamless when Wright got nicked up or someone else had the hot hand. The same thing can be done with WRs.

I believe the average is around 8-12 series per game, right? Playing a slot and two WRs that's 30 man-series available. Do you think it is unreasonable to put your developing back ups in for 2 each?

Liked the opposing view, but I’ll weigh in with Heupel has two annoying (to me) proclivities that extends to the entire coaching staff. Unwavering TRUST in players who’ve practiced to his standard and a tendency to become enamored with gifted, physical metrics. Milton is an obvious example for both. McCollough a glaring example of the former, and Thornton (playing at slot) the latter. RG and BJM are outliers in the staff with that approach. The DL and linebackers are much more opportunistic play based imo.

 

[LouderVol]

Hyperbole your thing this morning?

I didn't say there was a perfect system. Not sure what the "ideal" bell curve is. I'm just pretty sure rotating only 4 guys then having to hope that 2 other guys step in cold off the bench and perform when injuries happen isn't it. And you really do have to consider whether guys with talent and potential will stay around knowing you only play 3 or 4 WRs. UT can't be perpetually thin at WR. The loss of two guys this year probably cost the Vols a game.

I love Heupel and how he runs his O. But the Vols ran 3 legit options at RB with only one spot. Until forced by injury, they ran 4 guys for 3 spots at WR. That's a hole... a flaw at least in terms of developing and retaining depth.

Did you really just try to use UGA as an example of "unproven" guys stepping in? You might want to take another look at their roster. Bama too for that matter. They play A LOT of WRs. They aren't all stars. But they're all getting time and feel for the game.

They get time, but they don't get passes thrown their way. I ran through the numbers last year and you ignored it instead of changing your opinion or acknowledging you were wrong. not sure its worth the effort this year, but the pattern holds up, we spread the ball around AT LEAST as good as anyone.

we had 10 players with more than 10 catches. 7 WRs, 2 TEs, 1 RB
Bama had 8 players with more than 10 catches, 5 WRs, 1 TE, 2 RB
Georgia had 10 players with more than 10 catches, 6 WRs, 2 TEs, 2 RBs
Washington had 9 players with more than 10 catches, 6 WRs, 2 TEs, 1 RB
Oregon had 9 players with more than 10 catches, 6 WRs, 2 TEs, 1 RB
LSU had 7 players with more than 10 catches, 5 WRs, 1 TE, 1 RB

pretty much every single one of those schools attempted more passes than we did. Our guys may not get the same amount of "playing time", but they are getting MORE catches, which would really seem to be the more important experience to have.

we have a very small amount of time of possession, and it doesn't hold back our offense, I have no idea why you are so obsessed with our guys not spending X amount of TIME on the field. they are getting catches, they are actually playing and not just out there to be out there.

 

[sjt18]

They get time, but they don't get passes thrown their way. I ran through the numbers last year and you ignored it instead of changing your opinion or acknowledging you were wrong. not sure its worth the effort this year, but the pattern holds up, we spread the ball around AT LEAST as good as anyone.

we had 10 players with more than 10 catches. 7 WRs, 2 TEs, 1 RB
Bama had 8 players with more than 10 catches, 5 WRs, 1 TE, 2 RB
Georgia had 10 players with more than 10 catches, 6 WRs, 2 TEs, 2 RBs
Washington had 9 players with more than 10 catches, 6 WRs, 2 TEs, 1 RB
Oregon had 9 players with more than 10 catches, 6 WRs, 2 TEs, 1 RB
LSU had 7 players with more than 10 catches, 5 WRs, 1 TE, 1 RB

pretty much every single one of those schools attempted more passes than we did. Our guys may not get the same amount of "playing time", but they are getting MORE catches, which would really seem to be the more important experience to have.

we have a very small amount of time of possession, and it doesn't hold back our offense, I have no idea why you are so obsessed with our guys not spending X amount of TIME on the field. they are getting catches, they are actually playing and not just out there to be out there.

So to be clear... you are arguing against virtually everyone else to claim that UT plays its 2nd line of WRs in competitive situations as much as anyone else?

I love Heupel. I really do. I haven't been posting much because of some particular negative posters who've already started to beat their drum. But WR depth is an issue. Maybe you are right and they simply haven't had more than 3 or 4 guys able to play in competitive games.

I wouldn't mind seeing it (and would gladly admit I was wrong) if you could show me some data proving that the 2nd tier guys played meaningful minutes prior to the injuries. Not sure where your numbers came from but UT had 6 WRs with 10 or more catches. Eight total WRs had catches... the other two were walk ons. Most of the catches made by Nimrod and Webb were not in competitive circumstances/games.

 

[Vols410]

So to be clear... you are arguing against virtually everyone else to claim that UT plays its 2nd line of WRs in competitive situations as much as anyone else?

I love Heupel. I really do. I haven't been posting much because of some particular negative posters who've already started to beat their drum. But WR depth is an issue. Maybe you are right and they simply haven't had more than 3 or 4 guys able to play in competitive games.

I wouldn't mind seeing it (and would gladly admit I was wrong) if you could show me some data proving that the 2nd tier guys played meaningful minutes prior to the injuries. Not sure where your numbers came from but UT had 6 WRs with 10 or more catches. Eight total WRs had catches... the other two were walk ons. Most of the catches made by Nimrod and Webb were not in competitive circumstances/games.

If you look at routes run for the WRs:

Tennessee (2021): 5 receivers over 100 routes, 6 over 50
Tennessee (2022): 5 over 100, 6 over 50
Tennessee (2023): 5 over 100, 6 over 50
Georgia: 6 over 100, 7 over 50
Vandy: 5 over 100, 6 over 50
Florida: 4 over 100, 6 over 50
South Carolina: 4 over 100, 6 over 50
Missouri: 4 over 100, 4 over 100
Kentucky: 3 over 100, 4 over 50

We've been rotating receivers as much as anyone in the SEC East. It does feel like we rotate less but the numbers don't bear that out at all.

 

[iuvol]

Wow, wouldn't have believed that without seeing it. It sure didn't seem like it right? Thanks for the post

 

[LouderVol]

So to be clear... you are arguing against virtually everyone else to claim that UT plays its 2nd line of WRs in competitive situations as much as anyone else?

I love Heupel. I really do. I haven't been posting much because of some particular negative posters who've already started to beat their drum. But WR depth is an issue. Maybe you are right and they simply haven't had more than 3 or 4 guys able to play in competitive games.

I wouldn't mind seeing it (and would gladly admit I was wrong) if you could show me some data proving that the 2nd tier guys played meaningful minutes prior to the injuries. Not sure where your numbers came from but UT had 6 WRs with 10 or more catches. Eight total WRs had catches... the other two were walk ons. Most of the catches made by Nimrod and Webb were not in competitive circumstances/games.

I am saying we actually use our guys at least as much as everyone else. and we have the stats to back that up. I have no idea what you mean by competitive situations, but it can't be any different than anyone else. and I have no problem thinking different from everyone else. Our fans and most of college football still think we are a pass first offense, despite three years of being run heavy and first.

I don't really see what benefit a Nimrod or Webb would have to just go out and run an empty route against UGA or Bama. especially if it means stopping our play to do so. Our Offense runs as fast as it can, if you want them to experience that you can't stop every other play to sub someone in or out. it defeats the whole purpose and then you are just sacrificing the efficiency of our scheme to try and get guys to see what their 40 looks like in a game.

Its going to be that way for every school. No one is pulling their starters during competitive moments or games just to get the 2/3s time.

and you are right, we did "only" have 6 WR with 10 catches. it was 2 RBs and 2 TEs.

Tennessee Volunteers 2023 College Football Players Stats - ESPN

Get the full Players stats for the 2023 Tennessee Volunteers on ESPN. Includes team statistics for scoring, passing rushing and offense.

www.espn.com

still falls right in line with everyone else.

 

[sjt18]

I am saying we actually use our guys at least as much as everyone else. and we have the stats to back that up.

OK. Post them. Demonstrate that UT is playing as many guys and rotating as many guys with their 1st team.

I have no idea what you mean by competitive situations, but it can't be any different than anyone else.

Really? You don't understand why playing time and catches in junk time vs UConn differs from making catches when games are in question?

I don't know where you would get that information or if there is a public database showing when guys played or the number of plays they had in each game. But Nimrod and Webb were NOT getting rotated in with the 1st team routinely before the injuries.

I don't really see what benefit a Nimrod or Webb would have to just go out and run an empty route against UGA or Bama. especially if it means stopping our play to do so. Our Offense runs as fast as it can, if you want them to experience that you can't stop every other play to sub someone in or out. it defeats the whole purpose and then you are just sacrificing the efficiency of our scheme to try and get guys to see what their 40 looks like in a game.

PLEASE read this. I am NOT talking about subbing guys in during a drive. I AM saying that they could have given each guy a couple of series per game to get used to being under game stress before they HAD TO.

You cannot see what benefit it might have had if Nimrod and Webb had been ready and confident when the other guys went down?

Its going to be that way for every school. No one is pulling their starters during competitive moments or games just to get the 2/3s time.

Yet they do. Teams typically rotate 6 guys at least at WR. Some get more time. Some get less. Some never come out.

and you are right, we did "only" have 6 WR with 10 catches. it was 2 RBs and 2 TEs.

Tennessee Volunteers 2023 College Football Players Stats - ESPN

Get the full Players stats for the 2023 Tennessee Volunteers on ESPN. Includes team statistics for scoring, passing rushing and offense.

www.espn.com

still falls right in line with everyone else.

You have to put stats in context to have meaning. With genuine respect, you aren't doing that.

 

[LouderVol]

OK. Post them. Demonstrate that UT is playing as many guys and rotating as many guys with their 1st team.

Really? You don't understand why playing time and catches in junk time vs UConn differs from making catches when games are in question?

I don't know where you would get that information or if there is a public database showing when guys played or the number of plays they had in each game. But Nimrod and Webb were NOT getting rotated in with the 1st team routinely before the injuries.

PLEASE read this. I am NOT talking about subbing guys in during a drive. I AM saying that they could have given each guy a couple of series per game to get used to being under game stress before they HAD TO.

You cannot see what benefit it might have had if Nimrod and Webb had been ready and confident when the other guys went down?

Yet they do. Teams typically rotate 6 guys at least at WR. Some get more time. Some get less. Some never come out.

You have to put stats in context to have meaning. With genuine respect, you aren't doing that.

And neither are you. you don't have ANY stats. you are just making stuff up based on what you feel other teams are doing. and all you are doing is just ignoring what I am ACTUALLY saying, and changing my argument to fit your limited defense.

Again our Top 6 is getting similar catch numbers as everyone else, and this is despite being a run first team with fewer passing attempts. Other teams deal with injuries too, its part of the game, so Nimrod and Webb "only" getting meaningful stats AFTER another player got injured isn't a "gotcha". every teams second and third string see's a similar boost.

The argument isn't catches vs UConn against catches vs Bama. The argument is catches vs UConn vs playing time WITHOUT catches or targets against Bama. and again every single team is going to have their second and third string see more action against UConn than they would against Bama. this isn't a fault of Huepel's system. I would assume even in that situation a catch vs UConn is better experience than simply getting on the field against Bama.

Bama had 8 players targeted against UGA. 2 RBs and 1 TE, 5 WRs. they didn't get very deep in the WR depth chart for that. I think 1 of those WR didn't actually make a catch, but they were targeted.

Georgia targeted 9 different players. 2 Rbs, and 2 TEs, 5 WRs. and again not all of them got catches. and of course you won't count some of that playing time because Bowers and McConkey were injured, so I guess I should negate at least 2 other players right?

NO ONE gets their #9 guy much playing, NO ONE throws to their #9. unless you are able to prove your assertion that guys are out there getting reps that matter you have NOTHING to come back to me with.

 

[sjt18]

And neither are you. you don't have ANY stats. you are just making stuff up based on what you feel other teams are doing. and all you are doing is just ignoring what I am ACTUALLY saying, and changing my argument to fit your limited defense.

Not exactly. And it isn't my job to disprove a negative. You made the claim. You own the burden of proof.

I think you would find a consensus among guys who report on the Vols that there's a pretty big difference. And some you can just observe. It is a key difference that other teams sub more during drives. But they also sub more because of it and make more situational subs which by nature get more players involved.

I don't want Heupel to change his O or start subbing within a drive. I do think there would be some value in having your #4, 5, 6, and maybe 7 WR get a couple of series per game and more if they play well. I would LOVE to see Heupel able to platoon his WRs the way he does his RBs. Wouldn't you?

Again our Top 6 is getting similar catch numbers as everyone else, and this is despite being a run first team with fewer passing attempts. Other teams deal with injuries too, its part of the game, so Nimrod and Webb "only" getting meaningful stats AFTER another player got injured isn't a "gotcha". every teams second and third string see's a similar boost.

You made the claim. You have to provide real proof and that isn't it. You have to demonstrate that those catches by WRs (the actual topic here) were made in competitive situations and not in "junk" time.

The argument isn't catches vs UConn against catches vs Bama. The argument is catches vs UConn vs playing time WITHOUT catches or targets against Bama. and again every single team is going to have their second and third string see more action against UConn than they would against Bama. this isn't a fault of Huepel's system. I would assume even in that situation a catch vs UConn is better experience than simply getting on the field against Bama.

False dichotomy. It is good to have "success" against UConn and a challenge against Bama's DBs.

Bama had 8 players targeted against UGA. 2 RBs and 1 TE, 5 WRs. they didn't get very deep in the WR depth chart for that. I think 1 of those WR didn't actually make a catch, but they were targeted.

Georgia targeted 9 different players. 2 Rbs, and 2 TEs, 5 WRs. and again not all of them got catches. and of course you won't count some of that playing time because Bowers and McConkey were injured, so I guess I should negate at least 2 other players right?

NO ONE gets their #9 guy much playing, NO ONE throws to their #9. unless you are able to prove your assertion that guys are out there getting reps that matter you have NOTHING to come back to me with.

We aren't talking about the #9 WR. Butch Jones and his merry band of clowns once stated a goal of playing 9 WRs in their rotation.... but I don't think many do that. We're talking about #4, 5, or 6... they guys who have to step up into a role if #1, 2, or 3 go down.

 

[Vols410]

Not exactly. And it isn't my job to disprove a negative. You made the claim. You own the burden of proof.

I think you would find a consensus among guys who report on the Vols that there's a pretty big difference. And some you can just observe. It is a key difference that other teams sub more during drives. But they also sub more because of it and make more situational subs which by nature get more players involved.

I don't want Heupel to change his O or start subbing within a drive. I do think there would be some value in having your #4, 5, 6, and maybe 7 WR get a couple of series per game and more if they play well. I would LOVE to see Heupel able to platoon his WRs the way he does his RBs. Wouldn't you?

You made the claim. You have to provide real proof and that isn't it. You have to demonstrate that those catches by WRs (the actual topic here) were made in competitive situations and not in "junk" time.

False dichotomy. It is good to have "success" against UConn and a challenge against Bama's DBs.

We aren't talking about the #9 WR. Butch Jones and his merry band of clowns once stated a goal of playing 9 WRs in their rotation.... but I don't think many do that. We're talking about #4, 5, or 6... they guys who have to step up into a role if #1, 2, or 3 go down.

Out of curiosity, did you read my post? PFF tracks snaps / routes, and we rotate every bit as much as every team in the SEC East. The numbers are there to demonstrate @LouderVol's point.

 

[sjt18]

Out of curiosity, did you read my post? PFF tracks snaps / routes, and we rotate every bit as much as every team in the SEC East. The numbers are there to demonstrate @LouderVol's point.

Not unless they show when and under what circumstances guys are playing. I would be interested in those numbers since those would be far more meaningful. Do they account for special teams plays?

 

[Vols410]

Not unless they show when and under what circumstances guys are playing. I would be interested in those numbers since those would be far more meaningful. Do they account for special teams plays?

No, those are purely routes run. So they wouldn’t capture garbage time when we just run the ball till the clock goes out.

Still, at a minimum this indicates that teams across the board aren’t rotating 6 receivers in critical situations, because they’re not giving routes to 6 receivers in any situations.

 

[Golf freak]

Nobody bats an eye when Rick Barnes says so and so didn't play because his effort in practice wasn't good enough.Maybe same scenario with Coach H but he doesn't call them out .

 

[sjt18]

Nobody bats an eye when Rick Barnes says so and so didn't play because his effort in practice wasn't good enough.Maybe same scenario with Coach H but he doesn't call them out .

Could be. That's a more likely possibility than what has been argued so far. Maybe those guys aren't getting PT and catches in competitive situations because they aren't good enough. I don't want that to be true but if we're honest neither guy really stepped into the gap completely when given the opportunity.

 

[Vols410]

OK. Post them. Demonstrate that UT is playing as many guys and rotating as many guys with their 1st team.

Really? You don't understand why playing time and catches in junk time vs UConn differs from making catches when games are in question?

I don't know where you would get that information or if there is a public database showing when guys played or the number of plays they had in each game. But Nimrod and Webb were NOT getting rotated in with the 1st team routinely before the injuries.

PLEASE read this. I am NOT talking about subbing guys in during a drive. I AM saying that they could have given each guy a couple of series per game to get used to being under game stress before they HAD TO.

You cannot see what benefit it might have had if Nimrod and Webb had been ready and confident when the other guys went down?

Yet they do. Teams typically rotate 6 guys at least at WR. Some get more time. Some get less. Some never come out.

You have to put stats in context to have meaning. With genuine respect, you aren't doing that.

Just going to address this here. I can't filter down completely to what you might consider meaningful situations, but I can filter down to SEC teams competing in conference games and I'd wager that's as close as we'll get and is still more reliable than whatever perceptions we might get from catching a stray quarter of an SEC game here or there.

SEC teams really don't rotate much at receiver. Over the past two years, the top 3 receivers get ~75% of the routes run in conference, 4-5 get another 20% or so and the #6 receiver averages about 4 routes per game. Less than 3% of routes are going to players below the top 6 on teams.

Tennessee is almost exactly in line with that. Our top 3 receivers get ~78% of the routes run (so a bit more but barely), 4-5 get about 19% of the routes, and our #6 receiver gets about 3 routes per game.

Again, all of this is in conference play. Really not all that different from what other teams are doing.

 

[sjt18]

Just going to address this here. I can't filter down completely to what you might consider meaningful situations, but I can filter down to SEC teams competing in conference games and I'd wager that's as close as we'll get and is still more reliable than whatever perceptions we might get from catching a stray quarter of an SEC game here or there.

SEC teams really don't rotate much at receiver. Over the past two years, the top 3 receivers get ~75% of the routes run in conference, 4-5 get another 20% or so and the #6 receiver averages about 4 routes per game. Less than 3% of routes are going to players below the top 6 on teams.

Tennessee is almost exactly in line with that. Our top 3 receivers get ~78% of the routes run (so a bit more but barely), 4-5 get about 19% of the routes, and our #6 receiver gets about 3 routes per game.

Again, all of this is in conference play. Really not all that different from what other teams are doing.

The reason I am resistant to those kinds of high level proofs is that those reporting on the Vols seem to acknowledge that UT's first 3 or 4 guys get almost all of the competitive snaps (game on the line).

 

[Vols410]

The reason I am resistant to those kinds of high level proofs is that those reporting on the Vols seem to acknowledge that UT's first 3 or 4 guys get almost all of the competitive snaps (game on the line).

As they should. If it's 4th and 5 against Bama and Leacock is on the field over Bru this board would be shouting "FAHHHHR HEUPEL" to the skies lol.

 

[LouderVol]

The reason I am resistant to those kinds of high level proofs is that those reporting on the Vols seem to acknowledge that UT's first 3 or 4 guys get almost all of the competitive snaps (game on the line).

again, what school puts in their 2nd or 3rd string when the game is on the line? This is why I keep saying your ideal situation doesn't exist.

Georgia against Alabama on their final offensive drive was all Bowers and McConkey. Alabama was all Burton and their #2.