Six to 10?

[Vol8188]

False.

If UT plays to the level of their talent in that game... and Vandy plays to the level of their talent... and coaching is "equal"... UT wins by two TD's.

I'll give the devil his due. Franklin has done a very good job of coaching up that team. They aren't talented in the sense of raw athletic ability.

Both coaches actually appeared to be using the same strategy. Both were playing "not to lose"... to keep it tight to win at the end. That was the correct strategy for Franklin. He had the inferior roster and knew it. Jones had the superior roster and didn't know it.


PS- all of this is moot if at any point Jancek had made a good adjustment to Vandy's WR screens.

Yeah giving up 14 was terrible!

 

[sjt18]

Yeah giving up 14 was terrible!

Vandy couldn't run the ball but were able to control clock and change field position all day long with those plays. They had nothing else going for them... but they ran that same handful of plays over and over. You could even see it coming by their alignments if you paid attention.

At a very minimum, you fake press coverage whenever they line up with twins and close spreads. At some point you put your off side CB in man and run a DB into that passing lane even if its just to send a message. Maybe even drop a DE into that passing lane a few times.

I didn't see them try any of this. Jancek just let the same play get VU out of trouble over and over.

 

[sjt18]

What you can't deny, is Jordan Matthews is/was one of the best receivers in the nation and Coleman is not good.

Coleman takes alot of heat and isn't as bad as some would like to claim.

Matthews is a very good receiver. He isn't a burner and he'll drop some passes here and there. But he's had the benefit of being the biggest fish in a very small pond for 4 years now.

No amount of coaching can prevent that match up from being disastrous.

Sure it can. You give help. You disguise giving help.... and you don't let them throw that stupid WR screen every other play without running someone into the passing lane to see if you can get a cheap pick 6.

That was an awful game, on both sides, but losing your best receiver and having a true freshman QB with no one else to throw to is a bad combination.

Sure. But that's an occasion that revealed some serious development issues with the other receivers. It also revealed that Young probably should have been playing more.

They should have run the ball more, sure. That is on the coaching. But they were handicapped on offense.

Remember the creativity in the USCe and UGA games? It changed the tone. It especially put UGA on their heels.

You have your bowl game chances on the line... Why not pull some of that out?

Your sole focus on the Vandy game is getting tiresome, though. I'm being civil when I say that.

That isn't my sole focus. But it is a very big deal. It was a tipping point between "good" and not good.

And as for getting tiresome... you should be on my end with the mass of posters denying the coaches were at all to blame and saying it was all "talent" deficiencies... in defense of a loss to an inferior Vandy roster.

 

[CostaCreeper]

Matthews is a very good receiver. He isn't a burner and he'll drop some passes here and there. But he's had the benefit of being the biggest fish in a very small pond for 4 years now.

Dear Lord... Yep, being the only wide receiver opposing defenses have to stop makes the fact that he broke receiving records somewhat less impressive. :no: And let's be fair, last year he had another NFL-level receiver in Chris Boyd and he still had a decidedly better year than Boyd. As a matter of fact, he put up more TDs and had a better receiving average last year. If he would have had that quality running mate this year, his stats would have only been better because he wouldn't be catching screens for 8-9 yard gains, he would have been abusing defenses 15 yards form the line of scrimmage. And don't even get me started on the QBs who have been getting him the ball. Larry Smith, Jordan Rodgers, Carta-Samuels, Patton Robinette, any drops he had in his career came from what I can only describe as sub-par-to-bad QBs. What he did in four years at Vanderbilt is beyond incredible. He's an elite WR. The AP seems to think he's better than the two non-SEC guys in the Biletnikoff final.

 

[WriterVol]

Both calls were probably correct in the end. Are you saying that Gordon should have been called down?

Wasn't entirely sure what you meant by payback. That's the only reason I separated it out.

If I'm not mistaken, the call on the field with the Gordon interception was TD, and they let it stand. Both calls this year were overturned, which I understood to require the highest burden of proof. Not sure that's the case anymore.

 

[flatiron]

you know, i forgot with regard to vandy, tennessee lost because instant replay reversed the spot of the ball on a 4th down play.

Dobbs also had a TD called back in the Vandy game due to a block in the back

 

[flatiron]

Not much. He was their back up. He has to be more ready than that.

I sympathize... but others have had tough situations too.

I don't really think the 4th string QB should be considered the "backup". Theres no way you can give a QB that far down the depth chart enough reps during the season to have him ready to go if his number gets called.

 

[Dougie_D]

1. first they have to get drafted.. we will see

2. under developed talent is still talent. NFL could take a flyer on someone that needs developing.

why under developed?

4 head coaches in 6 years

5 S&C coaches in 6 years

43 assistant coaches in 6 years.


anyone saying no talent doesn't understand.

anyone not recognizing under developed talent doesn't understand.

JMO

You should ask any of our past/current coaches if they understand under developed talent.

 

[Dougie_D]

Also,

Do we have great evaluators?

I know we have a great recruiting class, but we all know that we can't rely on Rivals, Scouts, ESPN rankings. There are always players that can be busts.

 

[Grizzly Vol]

Also,

Do we have great evaluators?

I know we have a great recruiting class, but we all know that we can't rely on Rivals, Scouts, ESPN rankings. There are always players that can be busts.

A player being a bust? There's no way. I thought all players performed up to their potential based on the stars they are given as recruits. There is no way underachieving talent exists. Or does it?

 

[MustafaRasta]

Yea, so I figured 26 pages in I would jump into this mess. Despite the fact everyone already seems to be firmly set on one side or another (I think even I took an earlier jab at sjt18 back on page somewhere before 10, but I'm a wise ass so whatevs) I think there is a middle line to be found here with the Talent vs no Talent argument all of VN seem to be focused on these days. It's also the reason I am quick to dismiss either side of the argument as either "sunshine pumpers" (as people like to refer to them as) or "**** dumpers" (as I like to call you) Really to be so fundamentally positive or negative is kinda scary....time to evolve people.

Anyway, I sort of have a point and here it is.

1]Talent. Yes, it's true we are stocked with talent. How can that be argued? We had a top notch veteran offensive line laden with future NFL men and a guy that had started every game from the time he set his foot on campus. That is serious talent. The players that were recruited were not a bunch of 3rd rate talentless shclubs. Thew were all top 20 classes. I find it offensive that everyone keeps on saying we have no talent based on these players and their play. The roster was talented, that's for damn sure. BUT, it wasn't loaded with talent. This roster had more holes than Tom after he steps on the the row of rakes that Jerry laid out for him and really has a hard time drinking his water.

2]Team 117 was forced to plug in roster spots with not only young players but players that were walk-ons. Seriously, walk on depth in the SEC? That being said this team needed those players and despite being over matched in many cases they gave their all for Tennessee. Go back and look at all the missed arm tackles against that sick nasty vomit inducing return that Arky did a few years back and now watch this team 117. They dove. They hustled. Did they come up short, yea they did. So let's get better, but why call the team "effortless"? I feel like I established this team had talent but had holes if you want to argue that - cool, but I'm moving on.

3] So if we had talent, despite "some holes" who is to blame for being 5-7? sjt18 would say the coaches and I think he's right. Just not these coaches. You see, if there is one thing that all you quarterback coaches would know if you actually set foot on a field in any sort of competitive manner is that when you are not yet comfortable or still learning and adjusting to a system you play slower. It's inevitable. Take into account that seniors have gone through 40+ changes on staff. Take into account walk on players that may or may not have had good High school training. Take into account a 3rd or 4rth string quarterback depending on which side of the war you're on. Take into account yet another brand new staff installing a brand new offense. Lastly, take into account this is happening in the SEC. Seriously, with the schedule they had to face...OOC vs. Oregon. A culture of losing.

So yea sunshine pumpers are totally wrong when they say we had no talent and I wish they'd shut it. Also, you **** dumpers are so overtly negative you ruin what could be used as a great recruiting tool, I'm referring to these forums. Show me another school with the passion and interest that Tennessee does. I'll wait.

 

[sjt18]

Wasn't entirely sure what you meant by payback. That's the only reason I separated it out.

If I'm not mistaken, the call on the field with the Gordon interception was TD, and they let it stand. Both calls this year were overturned, which I understood to require the highest burden of proof. Not sure that's the case anymore.

IIRC, the side judge blew his whistle and went in to spot the ball. Gordon was in the clear but Vandy stopped pursuing. After the review obviously showed he was not down, they allowed the TD. In reality, UT probably should have had to take it on O again. I believe inadvertent whistles still stop plays, right?

 

[sjt18]

Hat's off MustafaRasta... but I have never denied that UT had roster issues or thought that 8+ wins was a reasonable goal for that team. I do struggle with people who try to rationalize 5 wins. It was subpar... we move on and hope it is not indicative of the ability of the coaching staff.

 

[Vol8188]

Hat's off MustafaRasta... but I have never denied that UT had roster issues or thought that 8+ wins was a reasonable goal for that team. I do struggle with people who try to rationalize 5 wins. It was subpar... we move on and hope it is not indicative of the ability of the coaching staff.

Lol 5 wins was subpar? So we were supposed to beat USCjr?

 

[tm3]

That's a very selective way to look at history. Pay no mind that Bama's situation was similar insofar as they were left going down their list and were desperate to pick a struggling NFL coach. They had to dump the truck at his feet to get him to come. Bama was desperate after Rich Rod and knew that if Saban didn't come, they were out of options. As you said, it was a gamble that time has proven right. But there are many other times where coaches weren't worth anything they were paid, and that same gamble failed. It isn't always about money, it is about value. Just like if Texas gets Saban for 10million a year they have way over-paid. Saban will win games, but his real value is in recruiting, not in Xs and Os. Texas, like it or not, doesn't need a recruiter. They could find a coach who could recruit just as well, and win, for far cheaper.

I don't buy that the "powers that be" are hand-cuffing Tennessee in the way that many want to suppose, unless "the powers that be" is available cash/credit. I guess everyone needs to find that "man behind the curtain" and blame him. The problem with this argument is that it would require one to suppose that Butch was totally hand-cuffed on the staff he could hire, and that he didn't actually want to bring his OC and DC to UT. Do you believe that Butch was forced to bring Bajakian and Jancek? I don't. I think he wanted to bring them, and the market functions in such a way that they were rewarded for coming. You don't start off negotiating a salary by saying, here is all we can afford. You start off by saying, would you come for this? And the negotiations continue until you run out of their value or they accept. I bet they accepted at a dollar figure well below the cap for that position.

Neither of us was in on the negotiation, obviously, but I believe that CBJ was financially "forced" to bring his staff as there was only a $3mil allowance and he could not assemble superstars for that kind of cash.

And if the UT coach is not really handcuffed by admin, why did Charlie Strong turn down the $4mil offer from UT? Traditional SEC power, largest recruiting budget in the country, one of the largest stadiums, etc etc. There had to be some pretty powerful negatives in play to pass that up for Louisville.

 

[daj2576]

Neither of us was in on the negotiation, obviously, but I believe that CBJ was financially "forced" to bring his staff as there was only a $3mil allowance and he could not assemble superstars for that kind of cash.

And if the UT coach is not really handcuffed by admin, why did Charlie Strong turn down the $4mil offer from UT? Traditional SEC power, largest recruiting budget in the country, one of the largest stadiums, etc etc. There had to be some pretty powerful negatives in play to pass that up for Louisville.

You were correct in presuming that I wasn't in on any negotiation with Saban/Bama. That is all speculation based on media reports. Similarly, none of us were involved in on any negotiation with Strong/UT. It would be no less incorrect to start drawing conclusions from that sort of speculation. In my experience, it is very dangerous to start presuming that what we as fans find important about a coaching job are also as important to coaching candidates. It is a business, and the candidates passions might lie in other things. Frankly, if the 4$ million dollar figure is correct, Strong isn't worth that kind of money for UT (not in my opinion).

That being said, I can no more tell you why 4 million dollars wouldn't entice Strong away from Louisville anymore than I can tell you why Saban might turn away 10$ million a year from Texas, presuming those figures and stories are even real. Perhaps it was that he feels loyal to the first AD that gave him a job when others snubbed him, perhaps he and his wife believe that living in Knoxville would be difficult as an interracial couple, perhaps he looked at the current situation and knew it would take longer than three years to rebuild it correctly, and didn't want his coaching career cut short and his reputation killed because he thought the job was too difficult, maybe he is holding out for another specific job? Who knows why besides him and perhaps Dave Hart? Maybe the 300k difference between the supposed 4 million figure and what Louisville raised his salary to wasn't a big enough bump to be worth starting over?

Let's back away from speculation for a moment. What we really don't know is how much Strong was really offered, or how much money was discussed for assistants. We don't know that, and we don't know how much Butch was given in the same discussion. We have devolved to conjecturing on conjecture. It is public record how much Butch is paid and how much his assistants are paid, so we do know that. That doesn't mean that they were paid everything that was available to pay them. To extrapolate out from what this coaching staff is paid to saying that is all that any coaching staff could be paid by the UT administration is a huge leap in logic that I am not comfortable making, or believing.

As I said, what I believe is that Butch wanted to bring his assistants. This is conjecture based on my reading of the tea leaves and by putting myself in his shoes. If many of his assistants have been with him from the beginning, and he has had success, why would he dump them now? It seems logical to presume that he would want his coaching team with him, instead of jumping into a new job with real problems, and also learning/teaching a new staff. If I was him, knowing that there are some financial concerns at UT, I would make I offered "my team" enough to make coming with me beneficial to them, but would purposefully leave money on the table and assure them that when we get things turned around, we will all get substantial pay increases, that perhaps not being too greedy in this situation buys us a little more time. That seems the most pragmatic and logical conclusion to me.

 

[sjt18]

Lol 5 wins was subpar? So we were supposed to beat USCjr?

Please deal with your ignorance about the competition before asking more questions like this.

 

[tm3]

Let's back away from speculation for a moment. What we really don't know is how much Strong was really offered, or how much money was discussed for assistants.

um yes what really happened is only as valid as our sources.

 

[Vol8188]

Please deal with your ignorance about the competition before asking more questions like this.

I'm extremely familiar with the competition, apparently you aren't if you truly believe we were supposed to win 6 games.

Name the 6 teams that we should have beat.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

I'm extremely familiar with the competition, apparently you aren't if you truly believe we were supposed to win 6 games.

Name the 6 teams that we should have beat.

He thinks we had a 7 game winning roster of talent this year. Basically because of the coaches, we only won 5 games. It has nothing to do with the schedule or anything else. Trust me you're arguing with the wall with this guy.

 

[sjt18]

He thinks we had a 7 game winning roster of talent this year. Basically because of the coaches, we only won 5 games. It has nothing to do with the schedule or anything else. Trust me you're arguing with the wall with this guy.

Correct. Walls are objective, solid things. Contrary to the wishful thinking you all engage in so frequently.

So we didn't know Mizzou or Auburn were going to be good? Well we didn't know that UF and UGA were going to stink either, right? In retrospect, UT almost won one of those games and probably should have won the other if not for the decision to start Peterman.

There's your 7 wins even IF you think Mizzou was just SO talented that UT should not have at least given them a game.

 

[knoxvols11]

There is absolutely no way this many players could be drafted! Compare it to the draft following Kiffs only year then look at where and how many were drafted!

 

[checkerboards09]

Correct. Walls are objective, solid things. Contrary to the wishful thinking you all engage in so frequently.

So we didn't know Mizzou or Auburn were going to be good? Well we didn't know that UF and UGA were going to stink either, right? In retrospect, UT almost won one of those games and probably should have won the other if not for the decision to start Peterman.

There's your 7 wins even IF you think Mizzou was just SO talented that UT should not have at least given them a game.

sjt, don't waste your time. Patience = 10 years + the same mediocre results now at UT. We have to have "stability".

 

[plowboy689]

When we have a first round qb and don't make a bowl.....then I'll be for change. Give them a chance guys.

 

[ukvols]

Article supports DAJ2576's theory of the Vols underperforming -2 games in 2013 based on talent level.

I find it amazing that per the article Jacques Smith has more NFL potential than Corey Miller. Miller had more sacks in the Ky game than Smith had in his 4 years.

Miller also had more sacks in the KY game than Miller had in his four years prior to that.