Sports Source poll from yesterday's show

#51
#51
VolArmy74 said:
I don't know about that. Look at it this way, Tennessee went 38-3 at home this year and one of those losses was a lopsided loss to a Lipscomb team that finished 12 games below .500.

Multiple NBA teams have finished with a winning percentage under 20 percent for the season, 36 since 1969.

In MLB only 3 teams since 1962 have won less than 30 percent of their games.

The old saying across all levels of baseball is you win 1/3rd, you lose 1/3rd and the other 1/3rd makes or breaks your season.
Click to expand...
It's hard to compare, but stating baseball has "far more parity" isn't remotely true. Far more games in baseball. Winning a series in baseball is like winning one game in basketball. Think about the best teams in college basketball losing by 20 to the worst teams. Happens all the time in a regular season in college basketball. Rarely in baseball, do you see a bad team taking a series from an elite team
 
Last edited:
#52
#52
TrippieRedd said:
Rod Delmonico (3 sec chips / 3 regionals) - Raleigh (meh) - Serrano (meh) - Vitello

Pearl - Counzo (meh) - Tyndall (meh) - Barnes

Very similar paths.

Barnes and Vitello’s success is also similar. It’s gotta be even.
Click to expand...
Pearl: great on-court success but brought shame on himself and our program which tarnished his legacy

Cuonzo: underachieved and lit the dumpster on fire as he exited

Tyndall: in way over his head and poured gasoline on said dumpster fire
 
  • Like
Reactions: Volfan1000, cardvolfan and chuckiepoo
#53
#53
BernardKingGOAT said:
I'm not sure there isn't more parity in basketball. More often than in baseball, the FF in college basketball has smaller schools. There's far more frequency of bad teams beating good teams during a regular season of college basketball than in college baseball
Click to expand...
For sure baseball I would say has less parity than any of the major sports. It's the SEC vs everyone else. almost all of the top 10 are SEC teams. So there is parity in the SEC but not elsewhere. Also, college baseball is not really covered outside of the CWS and you have to dig to find news on even that. I have issues finding news on UT baseball in the baseball section of these forums lol. Its really weird
 
  • Like
Reactions: BernardKingGOAT
#54
#54
MinisterofDef#92 said:
Pearl: great on-court success but brought shame on himself and our program which tarnished his legacy

Cuonzo: underachieved and lit the dumpster on fire as he exited

Tyndall: in way over his head and poured gasoline on said dumpster fire
Click to expand...
I think Counzo and Tyndall get too much flak.. they were transitional coaches and did an ok job post Pearl not making total asses of themselves. Barnes was the answer what we wanted pearl to be but Pearl is Pearl and I personally never liked him as coach he did not and does not develop players. He can take great players and get good results. Barnes can mold players and make a program that's gonna last. To me Pearl is like coach cal but better with X' and O's than Cal. I like Barnes approach because its more sustainable. Most of the team is 3-4 year guys and sprinkle in 1 maybe 1 and done type guy each cycle. With that you can build consistency. Back when the blue bloods were winning nattys the were doing it with mostly 3-4 year guys they fell off when they started filling rosters with 1 and done hopefuls.

I was watching a video the other day on the youtube with Greg Olsen (bear with me) he was talking to Patrick Beverly about the whole drama that came about with Austin Rivers comment about how they could take 30 guys fro the NBA and put them in the NFL. Greg Olsen said something pretty deep. In football you can come late. You can pick up football like your senior year in high school (for pretty much any position except for QB) its a sport based on pure physicality. Basketball is not like that physicality only takes you so far it takes years to build up the skills and muscle memory. How many stories have you heard of some guy that picked up basketball late in life and went to the NBA...I cant think of any off the top of my head I'm sure there are some especially back in the day. But it kinda makes the point. For the most part for a team to be successful in college basketball its the 3-4 year players that make the difference. But at the same time the NBA wants the one and done kinda wild. Sort of how the NFL treats RB's these days... they don't want the guy with a lot of miles on him because time has shown us RB's don't last long and if they have rushed for 7000 yards in college they don't have much tread left on the tires.
 
#56
#56
Volfan1000 said:
Who was the better hire?

Barnes or Vitello?

They have both brought stability to their respective sport.

What does Vol Nation have to say?
Click to expand...

Barnes on a pure record basis prior to coming to Tennessee was the best hire our basketball program ever made as he was the most accomplished coach at the time of hiring.

Vitello is the more transformative hire and prolly the better hire in my book because he took it from the gutter to levels not really seen in decades if at all.

Barnes took the job at time that was only 5-6 years away from the national stage and a time where people saw what the Tennessee Hoops program could be (2007-2008 seasons)...

I guess I'm saying the road for Barnes to get the program to top national contention was much shorter than Vitello's
 
  • Like
Reactions: K-town Vol Fan
#57
#57
pimo1 said:
I think Counzo and Tyndall get too much flak.. they were transitional coaches and did an ok job post Pearl not making total asses of themselves. Barnes was the answer what we wanted pearl to be but Pearl is Pearl and I personally never liked him as coach he did not and does not develop players. He can take great players and get good results. Barnes can mold players and make a program that's gonna last. To me Pearl is like coach cal but better with X' and O's than Cal. I like Barnes approach because its more sustainable. Most of the team is 3-4 year guys and sprinkle in 1 maybe 1 and done type guy each cycle. With that you can build consistency. Back when the blue bloods were winning nattys the were doing it with mostly 3-4 year guys they fell off when they started filling rosters with 1 and done hopefuls.

I was watching a video the other day on the youtube with Greg Olsen (bear with me) he was talking to Patrick Beverly about the whole drama that came about with Austin Rivers comment about how they could take 30 guys fro the NBA and put them in the NFL. Greg Olsen said something pretty deep. In football you can come late. You can pick up football like your senior year in high school (for pretty much any position except for QB) its a sport based on pure physicality. Basketball is not like that physicality only takes you so far it takes years to build up the skills and muscle memory. How many stories have you heard of some guy that picked up basketball late in life and went to the NBA...I cant think of any off the top of my head I'm sure there are some especially back in the day. But it kinda makes the point. For the most part for a team to be successful in college basketball its the 3-4 year players that make the difference. But at the same time the NBA wants the one and done kinda wild. Sort of how the NFL treats RB's these days... they don't want the guy with a lot of miles on him because time has shown us RB's don't last long and if they have rushed for 7000 yards in college they don't have much tread left on the tires.
Click to expand...

Cuonzo would be a very well liked former coach right now had he been able to keep his mouth shut and moved on with some class. Fans might have even forgiven him for his players versus fans approach with his final team. TN gave him a huge opportunity and he chose to exit crying about being treated poorly. It’s almost like he was oblivious to how much Pearl was loved and fans were still mad as **** at the NCAA for hammering the program. A BBQ. GTFO NCAA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: garyp194, chuckiepoo and Volfan1000
#60
#60
pimo1 said:
I think Counzo and Tyndall get too much flak.. they were transitional coaches and did an ok job post Pearl not making total asses of themselves. Barnes was the answer what we wanted pearl to be but Pearl is Pearl and I personally never liked him as coach he did not and does not develop players. He can take great players and get good results. Barnes can mold players and make a program that's gonna last. To me Pearl is like coach cal but better with X' and O's than Cal. I like Barnes approach because its more sustainable. Most of the team is 3-4 year guys and sprinkle in 1 maybe 1 and done type guy each cycle. With that you can build consistency. Back when the blue bloods were winning nattys the were doing it with mostly 3-4 year guys they fell off when they started filling rosters with 1 and done hopefuls.

I was watching a video the other day on the youtube with Greg Olsen (bear with me) he was talking to Patrick Beverly about the whole drama that came about with Austin Rivers comment about how they could take 30 guys fro the NBA and put them in the NFL. Greg Olsen said something pretty deep. In football you can come late. You can pick up football like your senior year in high school (for pretty much any position except for QB) its a sport based on pure physicality. Basketball is not like that physicality only takes you so far it takes years to build up the skills and muscle memory. How many stories have you heard of some guy that picked up basketball late in life and went to the NBA...I cant think of any off the top of my head I'm sure there are some especially back in the day. But it kinda makes the point. For the most part for a team to be successful in college basketball its the 3-4 year players that make the difference. But at the same time the NBA wants the one and done kinda wild. Sort of how the NFL treats RB's these days... they don't want the guy with a lot of miles on him because time has shown us RB's don't last long and if they have rushed for 7000 yards in college they don't have much tread left on the tires.
Click to expand...
Cuonzo deserves any flak he gets imo for trying to paint our program, donors, and fanbase as racists. Tyndall was a disaster but he was in over his head although I really blame our AD for that one as Tyndall was not qualified and never should have been hired in the first place.

Agree in general with your Pearl comments...he knows how to create mismatches and opportunities which benefit his team. And we all know what a great motivator he is...almost always gets more out of his teams that they would otherwise be capable of especially in big games.

100% on the difference between basketball and football...basketball is much more finesse and skill in comparison which almost always requires years of development to compete at the highest level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: garyp194 and walkenvol
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top