I have to admit this situation is absurd to me.

#26
#26
In a little over a season and a half, the Lady Vols are 41-12 (.774) under Holly. That doesn't sound too bad until you take a closer look. It seems like we keep downgrading the out of conference schedule every year. We have no business playing half the teams we did this year. It makes me wonder if this is being intentionally done to pad the record a little. Add in that fact that the SEC as a whole is down this year from past seasons. With the talent recruited every year combined with the schedule, Tennessee should never lose more than 2-3 games a year.

Holly's best win would have to be either Texas A&M in senior night last year or at UNC this year. Neither of those are cause for excitement when you consider the losses to Stanford, Notre Dame, Louisville, Baylor, Kentucky and to A&M in the SEC championship game. She has yet to win what most would consider a big game. I want to see the Lady Vols successful as much as anyone, I just haven't seen anything yet to give me hope that we are not slipping away from the elite program status.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#30
#30
Looks like both the men's and women's bball programs are on board the Good Ship Lollipop and taking on water and sinking fast.
No more Pats out there. I remember watching a tourney game when C. Parker was a senior amd they had just gotten ahead and started to feel good about themselves and a time-out was called. The side line reporter behind the UT bench said, "I didn't expect to hear that". Pat started yelling at them and asking who was going to get 3 offensive rebounds and Parker said no we'll get 10. They immediately went back out started getting offensive rebounds and putbacks and pulled away. She could push the right buttons. One of a kind.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#31
#31
It is really hard to believe that Holly doesn't know basketball. She has been here when the team won National Championships. I would think she has the knowledge to give players the right instructions on defense and offense. It doesn't matter how much knowledge you give a player if they don't have the desire or the ability to execute what your taught them. I think she needs to look at every individual player and see what they have done this season. I think if she did that she would find she only has three to four players she can depend on and that is not enough to win against the better teams.
 
Last edited:
#32
#32
Good grief .......Connecticut quickly rose to prominence after Auriemma was hired in August 1985: they finished 12–15 in Auriemma's first season......so you see that was not so good a year.... you need to wait a bit more ,:eek:hmy:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#34
#34
bmj4life said:
In a little over a season and a half, the Lady Vols are 41-12 (.774) under Holly. That doesn't sound too bad until you take a closer look. It seems like we keep downgrading the out of conference schedule every year. We have no business playing half the teams we did this year. It makes me wonder if this is being intentionally done to pad the record a little. Add in that fact that the SEC as a whole is down this year from past seasons. With the talent recruited every year combined with the schedule, Tennessee should never lose more than 2-3 games a year.

Holly's best win would have to be either Texas A&M in senior night last year or at UNC this year. Neither of those are cause for excitement when you consider the losses to Stanford, Notre Dame, Louisville, Baylor, Kentucky and to A&M in the SEC championship game. She has yet to win what most would consider a big game. I want to see the Lady Vols successful as much as anyone, I just haven't seen anything yet to give me hope that we are not slipping away from the elite program status.
Click to expand...

The UNC win deserves a footnote as that was the second game of the season and since then the squads have gone in opposite directions. Were they to play now it would probably be a loss.

Of note is that UNC lost to Maryland (if you are trying to place them in the ACC pecking order) but handled SC pretty easily.
 
#35
#35
ruggy1 said:
Good grief .......Connecticut quickly rose to prominence after Auriemma was hired in August 1985: they finished 12–15 in Auriemma's first season......so you see that was not so good a year.... you need to wait a bit more ,:eek:hmy:
Click to expand...
Not a good comparison. Auriemma didn't inherit a stable of All Americans, and the team had never had a winning season at the time he was hired. After his first season, he never had a losing season. Holly probably had a hand in recruiting the current players and her long term status should have made the transition from Pat seamless.

IMO there is much too much nostalgia and pining for Pat. She's gone, it's in the past. It's difficult for a new coach to develop the team while trying to fight the opinion that no one can replace Pat. Any candidate for coach would have to think twice about taking the job because they probably wouldn't be able to overcome the aura of Pat no matter how good they were.

That's why I think the good coaches will not take the job and why Holly will remain, unless the stress becomes too much for her and she resigns. A strong possibility.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#36
#36
Florida
(13-5, 3-2 SEC)

#11 Tennessee
(14-4, 3-2 SEC)


well this should be a win,pretty even all around:whistling:
 
#37
#37
I'm beginning to think we don't have the players. If you think about it this is the exact same team as last year except for the freshmen who haven't played much this season. I think the expectations were to high because we have four or five players that have underachieved big time considering their ranking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#38
#38
We some player issues and we have some coaching issues. On the whole UT's basketball IQ is not very high and has not been very high for years. You can't beat good teams when you have 20 turnovers a game--and we've consistently had 20 turnovers a game, give or take a couple, for a long time. That's one consistent problem--we don't take care of the ball. Another is that we can't seem to play the strong man defense that used to be our forte. Our guards and perimeter people get beat. When we play zone we stand around and give up rebounds.

There is a lot more to coaching than "knowing basketball." You have to recognize who your best players are, what each players strengths and weaknesses are, play to team and individual strengths. Personnel decisions are huge, tactical decisions are huge: we played zone against the best shooting team in the country, which is generally considered unwise. And you've got to be a good, strong leader who knows how to motivate individuals and a collection of individuals.

It's hard to put a finger on it--but UT just cannot sustain good play anymore against good teams: Not offensively and not defensively. We commit turnovers, we give up layups. It starts with our guard play--which has been really erratic and fairly weak for a long time. It's better this year--Massengale has been playing at an AA level, but after making 5 early shots against ND she fell apart--I think she missed every shot she took after about the first 10 minutes of the game. We don't move the ball well enough to get open shots and get scoring out of a variety of players. Harrison is dependable--and then who? Simmons scores but has a four-year history of below-average shooting, mediocre defense and erratic play. She is finally learning that she can also create good shots for others (after four years!), that an assist is a nice thing--and while she had a good shooting night against ND, she also had 7 turnovers (huge number). We need to mature so that when adversity hits, we can slow things down and regroup and start playing better gain. Instead, under Warlick, when UT starts playing badly the team panics and it goes from bad to worse. Once ND got ahead of us, we just unraveled. If McGraw were coaching this group, would we be better, worse or the same?
 
#39
#39
armchair said:
We some player issues and we have some coaching issues. On the whole UT's basketball IQ is not very high and has not been very high for years. You can't beat good teams when you have 20 turnovers a game--and we've consistently had 20 turnovers a game, give or take a couple, for a long time. That's one consistent problem--we don't take care of the ball. Another is that we can't seem to play the strong man defense that used to be our forte. Our guards and perimeter people get beat. When we play zone we stand around and give up rebounds.

There is a lot more to coaching than "knowing basketball." You have to recognize who your best players are, what each players strengths and weaknesses are, play to team and individual strengths. Personnel decisions are huge, tactical decisions are huge: we played zone against the best shooting team in the country, which is generally considered unwise. And you've got to be a good, strong leader who knows how to motivate individuals and a collection of individuals.

It's hard to put a finger on it--but UT just cannot sustain good play anymore against good teams: Not offensively and not defensively. We commit turnovers, we give up layups. It starts with our guard play--which has been really erratic and fairly weak for a long time. It's better this year--Massengale has been playing at an AA level, but after making 5 early shots against ND she fell apart--I think she missed every shot she took after about the first 10 minutes of the game. We don't move the ball well enough to get open shots and get scoring out of a variety of players. Harrison is dependable--and then who? Simmons scores but has a four-year history of below-average shooting, mediocre defense and erratic play. She is finally learning that she can also create good shots for others (after four years!), that an assist is a nice thing--and while she had a good shooting night against ND, she also had 7 turnovers (huge number). We need to mature so that when adversity hits, we can slow things down and regroup and start playing better gain. Instead, under Warlick, when UT starts playing badly the team panics and it goes from bad to worse. Once ND got ahead of us, we just unraveled. If McGraw were coaching this group, would we be better, worse or the same?
Click to expand...

Much better. McGraw made adjustments during the game and our coach did not. The coach that made the adjustments won the game.
 
#40
#40
Volfan2012 said:
It is really hard to believe that Holly doesn't know basketball. She has been here when the team won National Championships. I would think she has the knowledge to give players the right instructions on defense and offense. It doesn't matter how much knowledge you give a player if they don't have the desire or the ability to execute what your taught them. I think she needs to look at every individual player and see what they have done this season. I think if she did that she would find she only has three to four players she can depend on and that is not enough to win against the better teams.
Click to expand...

Not everyone is meant to be a head coach. What did she display prior to being anointed head coach that made everyone believe she was head coach material other than Pat saying she supported Holly? And, what did everyone expect Pat to say?
 
#47
#47
I think the Lady Vols are gonna win over twenty five games this season. A coach does not get fired for winning that many no matter how high the fan expectations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#48
#48
Convoluted said:
Not a good comparison. Auriemma didn't inherit a stable of All Americans, and the team had never had a winning season at the time he was hired. After his first season, he never had a losing season. Holly probably had a hand in recruiting the current players and her long term status should have made the transition from Pat seamless.

IMO there is much too much nostalgia and pining for Pat. She's gone, it's in the past. It's difficult for a new coach to develop the team while trying to fight the opinion that no one can replace Pat. Any candidate for coach would have to think twice about taking the job because they probably wouldn't be able to overcome the aura of Pat no matter how good they were.

That's why I think the good coaches will not take the job and why Holly will remain, unless the stress becomes too much for her and she resigns. A strong possibility.
Click to expand...

an Elite 8 appearance and a good season season for the 10th ranked Lady Vols isn't exactly what i would call a bad start as a head coach

lets all just wait and see how this year plays out first,before all the talk of firing CHW and for a couple of more years as well,she isn't going anywhere soon
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#49
#49
Apparently Coach is trying new things to get the girls' attention. Burdick just tweeted that they finally got their locker room back today. Looks like Coach is trying some things that CPS used to do. Perhaps that helped them play better? Guess we'll see.

Also, I think Holly has learned some things over the last few games. I think she used her TOs wisely at A&M and she even talked about that in the presser after the game. It seems Simmons has learned to drive and I'd like to think it at least in part has something to do with the coaches encouraging her to do so. I think this staff is growing and learning...at least the last couple of games seem to indicate they are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#50
#50
it is good to know that CHW is doing some of the things that CPS did to get the attention of her teams
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top