Mickey Deastone

[LadyOrange]

This is a messy time for all women's sports. On one side there are fans and marketers who would prefer an image of Lady Vols as the Power-T & A, while at the same time, there are societal regulatory influences contending that the future of women's sports is a Y chromosome.

I don't know where all this shakes out, but this I do know: It takes two generations, 35-50 years, to build a new tradition. Tradition creates passion (witness the emotion of UTC player Abbey Cornelius) and the more teams jettison their own traditions, the stronger and more conspicuously ours will stand.

This is not the time to throw away good. Especially when it was built on, and is pursuing again, excellence.

The wonderful thing about language is that it can be subversive when it looks damaging. Many of our players, present and past, want people to know they are more than basketball players, and many players love dressing up, feminine style: nails, hair, clothes, etc. Their image subverts the common perception of “lady,” a positive image. They are both aggressive and receptive. And by the way, for those who believe there is equity in sports, do your homework.

 

[LadyOrange]

Yeah, just look how those ugly, old throwback uniforms have hurt 'Bama football.

(Apologies for reference to Humanity's Scourge).

I like that Bama sticks with the same uni. They have confidence without relying on hype.

 

[LadyOrange]

I appreciate Mickey Dearstone (or Deastone for some) for what he does. I get it some may not like his voice or his rugged good looks (haha) but he is the one doing it now, and IMO, getting it done. I guess, as a fan, its easy to expect perfection. I personally think that job would be pretty hard to do. Limited resources, budget constraints.... I doubt he makes a lot of money doing it so I appreciate him giving his considerable time and effort to bring the game to the fans.

He’s not the greatest announcer, but he loves the team, does his job, and is family.

 

[LadyOrange]

This is a messy time for all women's sports. On one side there are fans and marketers who would prefer an image of Lady Vols as the Power-T & A, while at the same time, there are societal regulatory influences contending that the future of women's sports is a Y chromosome.

I don't know where all this shakes out, but this I do know: It takes two generations, 35-50 years, to build a new tradition. Tradition creates passion (witness the emotion of UTC player Abbey Cornelius) and the more teams jettison their own traditions, the stronger and more conspicuously ours will stand.

This is not the time to throw away good. Especially when it was built on, and is pursuing again, excellence.

I’ll also say that the fan base that has been the foundation since the late 1979s is heavily invested in the logo. It means a lot to them. Simply for this reason the logo needs to stay. And perhaps more cynically, that fam base provides an enormous cash flow for the program….and they expect things for their investment.

 

[creekdipper]

One added benefit is that we never have to ask "men or women?" when reminded that the Vols are playing.

 

[glv98]

I’ll also say that the fan base that has been the foundation since the late 1979s is heavily invested in the logo. It means a lot to them. Simply for this reason the logo needs to stay. And perhaps more cynically, that fam base pr
provides an enormous cash flow for the program….and they expect things for their investment.

The metaphorical blue hair fan base. We owe them alot of gratitude and their loyalty is admirable. They are for sure the foundational stone, but they are not the future. Understandably but unfortunately, they're more interested in hanging onto every shred of the past than in planning for the next era. No doubt those donors since '79 are beloved and valued but demographically, the program should be developing a new cash flow stream. This one has a rapidly approaching end point.

They remind me of a grieving spouse who refuses to change anything about the house, personal possessions, etc. Certainly understandable (been there myself) but usually not particularly helpful to any kind of "moving on". Apparently the original LV fanbase feel any "moving on" somehow diminishes Pat's accomplishments and standing.

I totally disagree. There is zero that could ever diminish the life and career of Pat Summitt and we have the LEGIT statue and court name to prove it. No logo change could ever separate her from the program. Except maybe by holding onto the past so tenaciously that the program is permanently injured by decisions based on nostalgia. I think she'd hate that.

I don't think its a stretch to imagine that hanging onto the old school too much could impact recruiting. Always have to look at how much the historical LV brand helps recruit vs. the need to be forward thinking and cool. Of course the ideal is to be both. All of which I'm sure KJH and company are completely aware of and constantly working on.

 

[Orange Maniac]

I get tired of hearing about the "blue haired" fan base. If the program wins, fans will come. If they don't win, they won't come. It's pretty simple and age is not all that relevant. Yes, a lot of older people go because it's more affordable but winning cures all.

 

[LadyOrange]

The metaphorical blue hair fan base. We owe them alot of gratitude and their loyalty is admirable. They are for sure the foundational stone, but they are not the future. Understandably but unfortunately, they're more interested in hanging onto every shred of the past than in planning for the next era. No doubt those donors since '79 are beloved and valued but demographically, the program should be developing a new cash flow stream. This one has a rapidly approaching end point.

They remind me of a grieving spouse who refuses to change anything about the house, personal possessions, etc. Certainly understandable (been there myself) but usually not particularly helpful to any kind of "moving on". Apparently the original LV fanbase feel any "moving on" somehow diminishes Pat's accomplishments and standing.

I totally disagree. There is zero that could ever diminish the life and career of Pat Summitt and we have the LEGIT statue and court name to prove it. No logo change could ever separate her from the program. Except maybe by holding onto the past so tenaciously that the program is permanently injured by decisions based on nostalgia. I think she'd hate that.

I don't think its a stretch to imagine that hanging onto the old school too much could impact recruiting. Always have to look at how much the historical LV brand helps recruit vs. the need to be forward thinking and cool. Of course the ideal is to be both. All of which I'm sure KJH and company are completely aware of and constantly working on.

It’s simple. More people want the logo. Most could care less. A sliver have some need to make this into a huge issue, which it’s not.

 

[glv98]

Delete.

It’s simple. More people want the logo. Most could care less. A sliver have some need to make this into a huge issue, which it’s not.

It is a huge issue if it brands the program as a relic of the past in the eyes of current day recruits, the sliver that counts. Use the glorious past where its helpful, but quit dragging it along where its not. I'm sure its a balance the recruiting staff is always aware of and seeking to achieve.

 

[Rickster]

It’s simple. More people want the logo. Most could care less. A sliver have some need to make this into a huge issue, which it’s not.

Exactly. Just a cry for attention from a very small segment who feel they should make the decisions. That’s why we are treated to so much drama. Convert or be gummed to death (with long posts) I guess.

 

[VolunteerNut]

Bob Kesling made more than a few errors identifying Lady Vols and calling the Chattanooga game.

Taken out of context. I would rather listen to Bob call a football game than mickey a lady vols game. The best out of bunch is John Wilkerson hands down but he only does baseball now. No disrespect to mickey I just hate his game calls. Like listening to my 5th grade teacher and her boring us to death. Now he does get excited at times but few and far between IMHO. Just me.

 

[gule]

so, what time does the XX chromosome basketball Vols team play tomorrow?

 

[chuckiepoo]

so, what time does the XX chromosome basketball Vols team play tomorrow?

5:30 CT on SECN+

 

[creekdipper]

so, what time does the XX chromosome basketball Vols team play tomorrow?

(Checking quickly to make sure I have twenty chromosomes).

 

[creekdipper]

It is a huge issue if it brands the program as a relic of the past in the eyes of current day recruits, the sliver that counts. Use the glorious past where its helpful, but quit dragging it along where its not. I'm sure its a balance the recruiting staff is always aware of and seeking to achieve.

Of all the reasons a recruit might turn down Tennessee, I'd imagine the Lady Vol logo might come in around #1,000.

 

[chuckiepoo]

(Checking quickly to make sure I have twenty chromosomes).

…wydt….isi

 

[glv98]

Of all the reasons a recruit might turn down Tennessee, I'd imagine the Lady Vol logo might come in around #1,000.

Of course not just the logo specifically. Instead the possible perception overall that the program is more invested in the past and not as willing to modernize. Don't think that ever comes up?

 

[creekdipper]

Of course not just the logo specifically. Instead the possible perception overall that the program is more invested in the past and not as willing to modernize. Don't think that ever comes up?

I think style of play is looked at. Most players prefer high-scoring offense that allows them more scoring opportunities. The fans like that, too. Most people don't care for the grind-it-out, depend upon 2nd-chance scoring to efficient, organized offense (as most of us here have noted in various degrees of criticism). Then again, most probably don't care for run-and-gun, no defense, playground style of play, either.

So what do you mean by "modern?" Coach Sam and Coach Joy are active on Tik Tok, Instagram, Twitter, and other social media. Kellie does carpool karaoke. We change uniform designs. What have traditional powers Stanford, Connecticut, and Notre Dame done to "modernize" their program?

I'm genuinely curious to hear your ideas.

Edit: Are things such as "Boomer Sooner," "Hook 'em, Horns," Alligator chomps, leprechaun jigs, Cameron Crazies, Stanford band, etc. examples of modernization? Or corny but beloved traditions in which that twenty-first century young adults eagerly participate?

I hope you're not suggesti g that we take Smokey out behind the barn.

P.S. One tradition I wouldn't mind seeing go is standing until the first UT points are scored. The older I get, the less I appreciate it.

 

[glv98]

I think style of play is looked at. Most players prefer high-scoring offense that allows them more scoring opportunities. The fans like that, too. Most people don't care for the grind-it-out, depend upon 2nd-chance scoring to efficient, organized offense (as most of us here have noted in various degrees of criticism).

Agree completely. Ugly ball hurts us, both in attendance and recruiting. No one wants to play it or see it. But while we're growing out of that phase and getting our best player back, ugly sure beats losing. Ugly Offense can also get pegged by competing recruiters as lack of development.

So what do you mean by "modern?" Coach Sam and Coach Joy are active on Tik Tok, Instagram, Twitter, and other social media. Kellie does carpool karaoke. We change uniform designs. What have traditional powers Stanford, Connecticut, and Notre Dame done to "modernize" their program?

IMO its more about what the LVs won't quit doing than what others are doing. Like hanging onto the outdated and questionable "Lady" moniker and also the loud resistance to hiring a coach outside the PS family. I think its pretty widely known there's outsized influence on the program by some big donors who would rather see the program become La Tech than change a thing from the glory days.

 

[Darth_Vol]

I get tired of hearing about the "blue haired" fan base. If the program wins, fans will come. If they don't win, they won't come. It's pretty simple and age is not all that relevant. Yes, a lot of older people go because it's more affordable but winning cures all.

But, but, they're 11-1. Where are the fans... ?

 

[Orange Maniac]

But, but, they're 11-1. Where are the fans... ?

It's not instantaneous and you know it.

 

[Darth_Vol]

Agree completely. Ugly ball hurts us, both in attendance and recruiting. No one wants to play it or see it.

Bingo...

 

[creekdipper]

I believe Holly was Pat's hand-picked successor, and it was perhaps understandable that the PTB would consider her and give her the "trial" year when she was effectively interim coach. That was a somewhat unprecedented situation with an actively-declining legendary coach still the nominal head of the program. In hindsight, it seems obvious that a successful veteran coach would have been the right choice.

At the time of Kellie's hiring, UT wasn't willing to pay the big bucks to draw a "big-name" coach the way LSU did with Mulkey (another hometown girl even if not her alma mater), and Kellie had just made a big splash in The Tournament. She was beloved, affordable, and recently successful. Kara would have been much more of a stretch, having never run a college program. Many other names that were bandied about have yet to prove that they can reach the upper echelons even with solid recruiting efforts. And the biggest names, aside from KM, have either stayed in place or retired.

A lot of programs like to bring back favorite sons and daughters to coach. It's nice when it works out, but I don't think most fans, even us oldsters, are opposed to having "outsiders" come in. For instance, as much as I have loved Kellie as a Lady Vol, I thought Wes Moore might have been a great interim coach to right the ship and reestablish the proram to elite status while Kellie burnished her credentials.

As for the logo/name, it's a recognizable brand nationally and perhaps internationally. The name rolls off the tongue in a way that "Vols" just doesn't. The logo is like Coca-Cola...which learned its lesson about trying to mess with success. I doubt that many young people analyse the "lady" part too closely. I'd think they are more impressed by the fact that the women have their own logo and identity signified by the logo. That's just my speculation. Maybe we should get someone to do an independent survey and ask some younh athletes how they react to the logo.

 

[glv98]

I don't think most fans, even us oldsters, are opposed to having "outsiders" come in. For instance, as much as I have loved Kellie as a Lady Vol, I thought Wes Moore might have been a great interim coach to right the ship and reestablish the proram to elite status while Kellie burnished her credentials.

I also think most fans would feel ok w an "outsider" and I also thought Wes M would have been a good choice. But a vocal, longtime, big donating sliver of influential fans disagree both w outsider and male. The point was that group has too much influence, IMO.

doubt that many young people analyse the "lady" part too closely. I'd think they are more impressed by the fact that the women have their own logo and identity signified by the logo. That's just my speculation. Maybe we should get someone to do an independent survey and ask some younh athletes how they react to the logo.

I'd be very surprised if such a survey, at least informally, hasn't been done. Part of marketing the effort. I'd also be surprised if the use of "Lady" isn't pointed out and ridiculed on the recruiting trail the same way it is on other team's fan boards, etc.

None of this is to disparage KJH. She may well have been the best available option. I really like her and think she's done alot right and may well be the answer. I sure hope so. But overall, being constrained from considering the best available coaching option bc of gender or lack of PS connection just seems a very bad idea moving forward. As does the continued use of the badly outdated "Lady". The brand would be fine w/o it IMO.

 

[LadyOrange]

It is a huge issue if it brands the program as a relic of the past in the eyes of current day recruits, the sliver that counts. Use the glorious past where its helpful, but quit dragging it along where its not. I'm sure its a balance the recruiting staff is always aware of and seeking to achieve.

Until I hear a recruit say the logo is a turnoff, I’ll assume it isn’t.