Recruiting Forum Football Talk XXXI

[Darth_Shiveman]

We have put a lot of focus on the offensive staff but this doesn't look too bad...yes this is accepting reality a bit.

Scott - OC
Canales - QB
Wells - OL
G - RB
Z - WR/ST

The real upgrades are needed on other side of ball.

I'd rather bring in someone at QB coach who seems to bring more to the table than Canales, but honestly I can't blame Butch for bringing in one of his guys he's comfortable with in such a big year.


The hires he makes over the next month have the potential to make or break his career here. We all thought Shoop was a home run last year around this time, but obviously bringing in someone who didn't mesh well with the rest of the staff hurt the defense to some extent.

I get why he'd be apprehensive about making the same mistake this time around when it could potentially mean him having to uproot his family (as frustrating as it may be for me as a fan).

 

[Big Sun]

He already asked you to move on. At least take it to off topic but that wouldn't give you the satisfaction of cluttering this thread

i'm enjoying the dialogue myself. and, not much posting going on anyway....

for the record: man's law does not equal morality.

 

[Glitch]

I wanna watch good football, not get warm fuzzies about our coach being a swell guy who doesn't put up with kids who smoke a little reefer

As an officer in the Army, I have had to sit down and fill out thick packets of paper with Soldiers when they fail a drug test. Most of the time it is for MJ. Everyone says MJ is no big deal and I personally don't think it is any worse then cigarettes or alcohol but it is still illegal. If a kid is failing multiple drug tests, even for MJ, then the coach should step in and make an effort to educate the kid. The AA should place a standard on the discipline required for failed drug tests. It is ridiculous that some coaches don't do squat while others dismiss players. Mostella was just got dismiss from our BB team for MJ. Do you think that would happen at KY? Winning programs sometimes compromise their integrity and morals to get wins. I'm glad that our coaches don't do that.

 

[nashvol1]

I'd rather bring in someone at QB coach who seems to bring more to the table than Canales, but honestly I can't blame Butch for bringing in one of his guys he's comfortable with in such a big year.


The hires he makes over the next month have the potential to make or break his career here. We all thought Shoop was a home run last year around this time, but obviously bringing in someone who didn't mesh well with the rest of the staff hurt the defense to some extent.

I get why he'd be apprehensive about making the same mistake this time around when it could potentially mean him having to uproot his family (as frustrating as it may be for me as a fan).

If we were sitting here last year with he thought of upgrading debord, Sheridan, and Mahoney with Scott, Canales, and Wells we would have been happy. Issue is we all got anchored on Helfrich and the shine rubbed off of Scott.

 

[Glitch]

Because smoking pot is SUCH a morality issue.

It is about preparing those young men for life. As of today, smoking weed is still illegal in most states and companies drug test prior to employment as well. Until weed is as legal as cigarettes then players should abide by the law. We don't get to pick and choose which laws we follow. We can debate them and push for change but until that change occurs we have to follow them or we should be punished.

The schools need to tighten their reigns as well. If these kids are getting free educations they should be held to higher standards.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

As an officer in the Army, I have had to sit down and fill out thick packets of paper with Soldiers when they fail a drug test. Most of the time it is for MJ. Everyone says MJ is no big deal and I personally don't think it is any worse then cigarettes or alcohol but it is still illegal. If a kid is failing multiple drug tests, even for MJ, then the coach should step in and make an effort to educate the kid. The AA should place a standard on the discipline required for failed drug tests. It is ridiculous that some coaches don't do squat while others dismiss players. Mostella was just got dismiss from our BB team for MJ. Do you think that would happen at KY? Winning programs sometimes compromise their integrity and morals to get wins. I'm glad that our coaches don't do that.

I don't see it as a matter or morals though.


And I don't think a kid failing multiple drug tests necessarily means that a coach hasn't stepped in and tried to explain to the kid that he needs to learn to abstain (at least enough to pass the drug tests they know are coming). And I don't think that kicking a kid off the team or suspending them for large amounts of the season is necessarily the best move for their future either.


If a kid comes from a well off family like Johnny Manziel, then finding top of the line treatment for substance abuse is always on the table. If a kid comes from a low income family, getting a contract with guaranteed money from the NFL ( or whatever sports league) may be his only chance at getting the means to acquire whatever type of treatment he may need (whether it's AA, or psychotherapy, or whatever) to overcome substance abuse.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

It is about preparing those young men for life. As of today, smoking weed is still illegal in most states and companies drug test prior to employment as well. Until weed is as legal as cigarettes then players should abide by the law. We don't get to pick and choose which laws we follow. We can debate them and push for change but until that change occurs we have to follow them or we should be punished.

I totally understand this point and i think it's one of the stronger ones for kids being suspended for marijuana use.

Though I do think there's a bit of a gray area not being addressed by the NCAA currently for the states where it's legal or decriminalized or in the case of players who qualify for medicinal marijuana.

The schools need to tighten their reigns as well. If these kids are getting free educations they should be held to higher standards.

Here I disagree though. Why randomly test athletes for marijuana use when kids getting full rides for academics don't have to worry about it? Tax dollars are paying for both kids' educations. Kids who get the hope scholarship don't have to take drug tests.

Kids receiving athletic scholarships are held to a higher standard regarding drug abuse than others receiving free educations even though their scholarship activity puts them at a higher risk to suffer from drug abuse than other students. I'm not sure that's a good look for the NCAA

 

[Glitch]

I'd rather bring in someone at QB coach who seems to bring more to the table than Canales, but honestly I can't blame Butch for bringing in one of his guys he's comfortable with in such a big year.


The hires he makes over the next month have the potential to make or break his career here. We all thought Shoop was a home run last year around this time, but obviously bringing in someone who didn't mesh well with the rest of the staff hurt the defense to some extent.

I get why he'd be apprehensive about making the same mistake this time around when it could potentially mean him having to uproot his family (as frustrating as it may be for me as a fan).

It has been stated that much of the issues on the defensive side of the ball were caused by poor staff cohesiveness. If Scott is the OC, which I think he is, then Canales makes the most sense because they worked together at USF and Scott probably feels more comfortable with him. This hire may be more about staff cohesiveness than swinging for the fences. It makes sense because this is a critical year for Butch. He needs everyone clicking together on both sides of the ball.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

If we were sitting here last year with he thought of upgrading debord, Sheridan, and Mahoney with Scott, Canales, and Wells we would have been happy. Issue is we all got anchored on Helfrich and the shine rubbed off of Scott.

I'm not sure that's necessarily true with regards to Canales and Wells.

I think the issue is the perception that Butch doesn't like making offensive hires he doesn't have history with or who have no history within his personal coaching network.


In 2015 Scott was outside those criteria being hired as TE coach, but a year under Butch and Debord means you can't say the same for him being hired as OC.


Gillespie hadn't worked with Butch before being hired, but worked for Holgerson prior to UT. So (justified or not) his hire lends to the perception Butch is unwilling to make hires outside of his own network.


Personally, it's frustrating for me because I think the staff could be upgraded in a big way if he more seriously considered guys from outside his own network for offensive hires.


But at the same time, Gillespie and Debord were solid hires(though I do think Debord was a poor playcaller at times and some of his personnel decisions weren't the best in hindsight) and the jury is still out on Scott.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

It has been stated that much of the issues on the defensive side of the ball were caused by poor staff cohesiveness. If Scott is the OC, which I think he is, then Canales makes the most sense because they worked together at USF and Scott probably feels more comfortable with him. This hire may be more about staff cohesiveness than swinging for the fences. It makes sense because this is a critical year for Butch. He needs everyone clicking together on both sides of the ball.

Personally, I think he should be able to find someone who can bring more to the table as a QB coach, bring a bit more of an outside perspective, and help Scott develop and grow as an OC.


But I totally get the reasoning for just going with Canales because of the familiarity aspect.

 

[Big Sun]

It is about preparing those young men for life. As of today, smoking weed is still illegal in most states and companies drug test prior to employment as well. Until weed is as legal as cigarettes then players should abide by the law. We don't get to pick and choose which laws we follow. We can debate them and push for change but until that change occurs we have to follow them or we should be punished.

The schools need to tighten their reigns as well. If these kids are getting free educations they should be held to higher standards.

people need to get over their infatuation with external authority. obedience is not a virtue.

the Golden Rule is the only law: Do unto others as you would have them do to you. if you don't abide by this law than the universe will adjust accordingly. it's not visible like man's law, so folks have a hard time understanding its repercussions. that's Universal Law; Natural Law; Law of Attraction; the Law of Morality; Karmic Law; the Law of Cause and Effect.

 

[Glitch]

I totally understand this point and it's the targets one for kids being suspended for marijuana use.

Though I do think there's a bit of a gray area not being addressed by the NCAA currently for the states where it's legal or decriminalized or in the case of players who qualify for medicinal marijuana.



Here I disagree though. Why randomly test athletes for marijuana use when kids getting full rides for academics don't have to worry about it? Tax dollars are paying for both kids' educations. Kids who get the hope scholarship don't have to take drug tests.

Kids receiving athletic scholarships are held to a higher standard regarding drug abuse than others receiving free educations even though their scholarship activity puts them at a higher risk to suffer from drug abuse than other students. I'm not sure that's a good look for the NCAA

It is a slippery slope to be sure. I have long thought that the receipt of public assistance, such as welfare, should come with testing for drugs, tobacco, and alcohol. That is a much more complex issue though. If a student gets public funds to attend school they should have to obey the laws. I wouldn't be opposed to test them as well. This does get expensive which is why I prefer the government to stay out of stuff as much as possible. They tend to muck it all up.

 

[butchna]

We have put a lot of focus on the offensive staff but this doesn't look too bad...

Scott - OC
Canales - QB
Wells - OL
G - RB
Z - WR/ST

The real upgrades are needed on other side of ball.

I can understand the meh reaction from this scenario...prolly share it. If it ends up working, awesome. If not, we'll notice.

 

[jbr82]

We get you want to let Butch go. Who is your replacement?

Blackburn may know

 

[MrVolton]

If we were sitting here last year with he thought of upgrading debord, Sheridan, and Mahoney with Scott, Canales, and Wells we would have been happy. Issue is we all got anchored on Helfrich and the shine rubbed off of Scott.

My unhappiness stems from looking at our coaching staff compared to our rivals.

 

[jbr82]

My unhappiness stems from looking at our coaching staff compared to our rivals.

Just compare them with the bottom feeders lol

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

It is a slippery slope to be sure. I have long thought that the receipt of public assistance, such as welfare, should come with testing for drugs, tobacco, and alcohol. That is a much more complex issue though. If a student gets public funds to attend school they should have to obey the laws. I wouldn't be opposed to test them as well. This does get expensive which is why I prefer the government to stay out of stuff as much as possible. They tend to muck it all up.

I'm personally of the opinion that if a student receiving public aid (academic or sports related) can make the grades necessary to maintain the scholarship and avoid trouble with the law, then the school and government should just keep out and let them go about their business.


If a kid gets in trouble and shows warning signs like arrests or citations (which, let's be honest, aren't hard to avoid if you're smart and/or careful) that show him to be at risk for substance abuse, then I can see them being justified in stepping in.


Otherwise, I don't see any reason the government or school system should jump in and punish a kid who is fulfilling all the obligations of his financial aid for smoking a little pot (especially in the case of football players who are often handed more powerful painkillers like candy).

Our government and the private sector is built upon the backs of many high functioning alcoholics/substance abusers. It just seems hypocritical to me to hold 18-22 year old kids to a higher standard than many other receiving pay or benefits from public funds.

 

[jave36]

Just compare them with the bottom feeders lol

LOL Vandy got nothing on our staff

 

[Glitch]

I'm personally of the opinion that if a student receiving public aid (academic or sports related) can make the grades necessary to maintain the scholarship and avoid trouble with the law, then the school and government should just keep out and let them go about their business.


If a kid gets in trouble and shows warning signs like arrests or citations (which, let's be honest, aren't hard to avoid if you're smart and/or careful) that show him to be at risk for substance abuse, then I can see them being justified in stepping in.


Otherwise, I don't see any reason the government or school system should jump in and punish a kid who is fulfilling all the obligations of his financial aid for smoking a little pot (especially in the case of football players who are often handed more powerful painkillers like candy).

Our government and the private sector is built upon the backs of many high functioning alcoholics/substance abusers. It just seems hypocritical to me to hold 18-22 year old kids to a higher standard than many other receiving pay or benefits from public funds.

Yeah. A scholarship to attend college is different than a welfare handout. I agree with you here.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

LOL Vandy got nothing on our staff

The fact that we've come to pointing that out is disappointing, though.

 

[sjt18]

"Reduced" to landing Trey Smith? Saban really wanted him.

Blah, Blah Blah... ignore many things someone says then yank something out of context... blah, blah, blah.

 

[sjt18]

We get you want to let Butch go. Who is your replacement?

If your stock broker was losing money for you in a favorable market would you have to know for certain who the next guy was or would you fire him, put your money in the bank, and then find the next guy?

In short, if Jones is not meeting the standard then he should be fired. The replacement comes after.

However, there are guys I think UT should look at should that happen. One is James Franklin. Players love him and he's done more with less at two P5 programs now.

I don't know if UT can outbid VT for Fuentes but he would be at the top of my list.

I have always thought that Larry Fedora would be a great fit at UT.

If you want to take more risk but on a PROVEN winner then Scott Satterfield is someone who appears to have a pay day coming.

None of these guys require UT to empty the bank and all appear to be very talented guys with varying levels of risk.

If the boosters want low risk.... then they can pony up and go after one of the 8-10 guys who are elite and nearly sure thing coaches or try to pull an NFL HC back to college.

 

[sjt18]

No need to replace yet.

We all agree that the class has been less than expected. Still time to improve. Who are the 4 stars with academic issues? Think I only saw 1.

IIRC, two of the WR's have some issues. Payton has "work to do". I think I read the WR from E StL is an academic risk.

The major difference between Butch and Dooley is line of scrimmage, QB, and speed recruiting on D. Dooley was an epic fail in these areas. We might have an O line in 2018 with 3 5 five stars and 2 4 stars. We have 3 top 10 QBs on the roster. This is a LOS and QB league. Do those two things well and you will win a lot of games.

I don't know that you really say there's just that. Dooley left 5 guys better than anyone Jones has had. But on the whole, Jones has brought in more talent.

He simply has simply underachieved the potential of that talent in each year.

Next year sets up great especially in state with Mays, Taylor in the fold to drive recruiting. We could have 7 or 8 in state 4 stars and we all know the draft will help greatly in showing our ability to put players in the league. And we are expected to upgrade our staff in critical areas.

Honestly, you could be right. But we've heard that in some form for each of Jones 5 classes. Even if you give him a pass on the first year, he's only seemed to get the state's better players in the year he signed Hurd and Malone. I realize there's a catch-22 when it comes to investing time to recruit TN kids as opposed to ATL or FL. There aren't many football factory HS's in TN and developing pipelines with them hasn't happened even going back to Fulmer. So where do you invest your time?

That said, TN HSFB is improving and UT needs to somehow win more of those players and build pipelines to those schools and conferences.

That's another reason the subpar results this season matter so much. Had UT been in the championship game and even gotten a win in one of the Bama games.... they'd have gotten the attention of instate players. Regardless of anyone's willingness or ability to rationalize what happened, this season was a major setback for the program under Jones. If he DOESN'T overachieve this fall then it probably just becomes a matter of time. He won't be able to get enough talent.

 

[VOL-uh-tile]

If your stock broker was losing money for you in a favorable market would you have to know for certain who the next guy was or would you fire him, put your money in the bank, and then find the next guy?

In short, if Jones is not meeting the standard then he should be fired. The replacement comes after.

However, there are guys I think UT should look at should that happen. One is James Franklin. Players love him and he's done more with less at two P5 programs now.

I don't know if UT can outbid VT for Fuentes but he would be at the top of my list.

I have always thought that Larry Fedora would be a great fit at UT.

If you want to take more risk but on a PROVEN winner then Scott Satterfield is someone who appears to have a pay day coming.

None of these guys require UT to empty the bank and all appear to be very talented guys with varying levels of risk.

If the boosters want low risk.... then they can pony up and go after one of the 8-10 guys who are elite and nearly sure thing coaches or try to pull an NFL HC back to college.

I think John Oliver did a show on how you would be better off randomly picking a stock than going with a stock broker anyway. And football isn't stocks. And by calling Satterfield a PROVEN coach you would have to call Butch one as well before he came here, since they had very similar records in similar conferences. Point is Butch is the best guy for the job next year.

 

[butchna]

Yes, it is hystrionics. Moreover, it is not true. To imply, as you did, that we never win a recruiting battle is simply not true. To imply, as you did, that we only get players no D1 program wants is not true. I imagine you know that. I imagine acknowledging that twarts your rant before it starts. So I understand why you don't acknowledge it.

After he declares a point, he'll bend heaven and earth to make it stick. Declared that Butch has never upset a more talented team and when I brought up 2013 SC, he honestly posted that we were more talented. That 2013 Vols team that had a kicker outrun the fastest DB on a pro day. :blink: