Volsfaninva917
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2009
- Messages
- 21,217
- Likes
- 33,549
Monday at The Knoxville QB club Butch said, "...little victories, Jon Gruden called me this morning, and said 'I saw it'. I had about nine other head coaches call me and say, 'I saw it. That was your football team. I could see you wearing off on them'...Butch said, "Not one person had long sleeves on. That's a mentality. That's an attitude. And that's saying we're not effected by the elements."
I like the sound of that, but I'm afraid they were effected by the elements. However, if Chuckie is impressed by the sleeveless Vols, I am too!!!
Also, I'm pretty sure AJ had long sleeves on...
I wonder who the nine other coaches who called him were...
1. The ole ball coach ?
2. George Quarrels ?
3. Will Muschamp ?....
Go Vols! Go Butch! Tell Gruden I said Hi!
P.S. Smokescreen... haha
Nope. I give my opinions... I just don't claim to know things I have no ability to know. If you don't like honesty... that's your issue.
And for someone who sits on the fence... I've been getting quite a bit of hate lately for giving honest assessments of the coaching job this staff did this year.
Maybe gruden ask him if he played his instrument n band better than coach football...lol
Loosen the top button n then relax u r not in band any longer cbj.
We lost to candy people.. Freaking candy.. The qb club should have ask if they could help coaching our qb..
N that is freaking inexcusable n if we lose to kent.. Omg
I've said basically the same thing since we were discussing "what ifs" before the season even started.
I would consider UGA a relative "success" for this staff even though UGA got much worse after that. The Vandy game never should have depended on that one call. It should not have been that close. Jones' strategic decision to "play not to lose" lost that game. I respect his gumption for trying Peterman... but that strategic decision probably cost UT a shot at UF.
Be honest with yourself. How many times out of 100 would UT have beaten USCe this year? Not just "lost". Those were non-competitive games. UT was outplayed which I could live with. But they were also outcoached badly... that is harder to deal with when you really want to be hopeful about the near term future of the program... when you would REALLY like to find ANY tangible reason to believe this staff has what it takes to win big games in the SEC.
You really think losing to Vandy was "OK"? Really? Sorry. That was VERY poor coaching from the strategy to gameplanning to play calling to adjustments (or lack thereof). They played not to lose and that appeared to kill the enthusiasm of the O. The only positive I saw in that game is the D played their tails off only to come up short in "soft" coverage at the end.
I truly hope not. That's why I left open the possibility that he might do a 180 and actually prove he belongs in the SEC next year. I just cannot find an anchor point in the coaching we witnessed this season to latch on to. Player development? No. Unit development? No. Gameplanning, elite playcalling, great schemes,.... ? No.
I would rather have something that I can at least hang some hope on. If you can point to something tangible... please do. I saw a team that peaked vs UGA and USCe then sharply declined. They played poorly before those games and after.
That's great but you and I both know that you need both elite talent and elite coaching if you want to win championships. If they can hang on then they'll have SOME talent to work with. But even that can't hang on one class alone.
The first class was OK but nothing to get jacked up about. This class looks to be good. But if he doesn't prove next fall that he can coach players up and win some games that he isn't "supposed" to win... he's not going to keep getting the type of talent he's getting now. To compete for great out of state players on a continuing basis... YOU MUST win. Those kid are attracted to winners.
The roster UT has now was based on two mediocre classes and one pretty good one... with attrition.
That's simply not true. It was/is a roster with significant deficiencies. But they were NOT enough to excuse total lay downs vs Ore, Bama, MU, AU, and Vandy.... or a near miss vs USA.
Well coached teams LOOK faster and more talented than they are. Poorly coached teams LOOK slower and less talented than they are. The same guys who looked decent playing in Wilcox's D suddenly looked like they were running in wooden shoes I
n Sunseri's D. Did they just forget how to run... or was it the coaching?
And Fulmer.... often had plenty of Jimmy's and Joe's to compete with the best but was dominated by guys who understood the X's and O's.... and who realized it takes both.
You sir, suck. I can't imagine being a Vol "fan" so negative that when the team does well...other fans tell you " Told you so!" What a douche. Rot in your misery and despair.