The beginning of the end

[dan4vols]

Well heres my opinion. I think jewelry of any kind has no place on a ball field. And while I'm at it long hair hangin out of the helmet (Ricky Williams) looks tacky and thugish. It shows the individual and not the team, and to me illustrates selfishness and a me 1st attitude. If it were up to me theyrd be no names on the jersey back unless it was ''Tennessee''

 

[wilburnVol]

Originally posted by dan4vols@Nov 21, 2005 2:19 PM
Well heres my opinion. I think jewelry of any kind has no place on a ball field. And while I'm at it long hair hangin out of the helmet (Ricky Williams) looks tacky and thugish. It shows the individual and not the team, and to me illustrates selfishness and a me 1st attitude. If it were up to me theyrd be no names on the jersey back unless it was ''Tennessee''

[snapback]198661[/snapback]​

I think all players should wear buzz cuts, we should recruit only from one race <pick except Hispanics>, all players should meet for church every morning and then proceed to mantra Gen Neyland&#39;s maxims ten times in Volunteer park.

There should be no sex allowed, no smoking, no women and lights out at 10PM.

They should keep their helmets on at all times, pffft on dehydration and blocked hearing. RB&#39;s that fumble should carry balls around campus as they go to class and the students should be taught to jeer and ridicule them (take a hint from The Citadel here). :rock:

 

[CSpindizzy]

Originally posted by brg72@Nov 21, 2005 11:46 AM
A great quarterback doesnt worry about competition or being pulled. He handles it on the field and takes care of business. Now if we are excusing ainge for hurting his feelings becasue he got yanked then he should not be a division 1 qb.

[snapback]198659[/snapback]​

So you&#39;re telling me that every good or great QB comes ready to play day one? If that&#39;s the case why was Crompton red-shirted? Why did UGA and countless others in the NCAA red-shirt the new guys? They don&#39;t come ready to play. SOme have the skills but not the maturity. Some have the mental prep but not the skills. As others have pointed out booting a guy for a bad season would have caused quite a few of the top QBs out there to get tossed as well. Where would Vick be at VT? Quinn at ND? I could go down a long list of QBs that had an awful year somewhere in their career. Take a look at the NFL. Even there players go through this problem.

You&#39;d be foolish to think a player walks on campus with the mental and testicular fortitude to go play a Heisman year right off the bat. Some teams are lucky. Some are not.

if you say Ainge should be tossed for his quality of play this year then you might as well toss the entire team with an exception in just a few positions, at least on Offense.

Ainge had his chance and so did Clausen. So did Hannon. Riggs, etc. etc. Most didn&#39;t step up. That should not qualify or disqualify anyone. Honestly, what if Cutcliffe comes in and turns Ainge around? Will all of you step up and accept that and admit you were wrong?

 

[Low Country Vol]

So you&#39;re telling me that every good or great QB comes ready to play day one?
Ainge was ready to play day one on campus. That is why is and shaeffer were given first team status. He then beasically made shaeffer non-existant after the florida game. Ainge hada season under his belt and completely blew his chance this year whenever he had one. All this hurting his feeling is BS. He had the expereince from last year to take control of the qb situation his sophomore year and he failed to so. If he cant get over being benched then he should move on and cry somewhere else or take it like man and show it on the field.


If that&#39;s the case why was Crompton red-shirted?
He had season-ending shoulder surgery before the season ended or else he who have played. Have you read the news? I like crompton&#39;s attitude. He said it was his job to lose. That is the attitude we need to have.

 

[Low Country Vol]

Ainge had his chance and so did Clausen. So did Hannon. Riggs, etc. etc. Most didn&#39;t step up. That should not qualify or disqualify anyone. Honestly, what if Cutcliffe comes in and turns Ainge around? Will all of you step up and accept that and admit you were wrong?

Im just saying he needs to quit harping why he was benched and show it on the field. I never said he will never be good again. I want him to not be good. If he cant over come what is bothering him, he should not be here. He has the talent to succeed and i have as much in him that he will turn it around.

 

[vol151]

You guys are missing my point -

If Rick Clausen is an SEC caliber quarterback - then I am ready to suit up for Hendricks Motorsports next year.

Rick should never have even been in the mix. The only reason he was there was to make the Clausens feel good and hopefully they would coax their son to come here. If I am Ainge - after what I did to Georgia - I am shattered - and you cannot hold that against him.

As for the earring thing - there is no I in Team - WilburnVol - do you understand that? It is not racism or politics - it is fundamental team sports.

These kids can wear anything they want during the week - but when they step on the field - they should look like a team -

Ainge may never get over this year - he may be done. Crompton was redshirted because of the shoulder was my understanding. Is that not true?

 

[vol151]

Originally posted by wilburnVol@Nov 21, 2005 11:38 AM
It was the earring per se that you posted about, no qualifying statements, you just shot your mouth off about a piece of jewelry and attributed/linked certain character flaws with the wearing of one.

Now you&#39;re back peddling so fast, I hope you have rear view mirrors attached to your shoulders.  :whistling:

[snapback]198652[/snapback]​

I did not shoot my mouth off - I have a valid opinion that nothing belongs on a football player during a game other than the required uniform. It is a fundamental of team sports. As for the insinuations about character flaws associated with those who choose to wear an earring - I did not say that - you did.

 

[OWB]

Originally posted by vol151@Nov 21, 2005 3:29 PM
I did not shoot my mouth off - I have a valid opinion that nothing belongs on a football player during a game other than the required uniform.  It is a fundamental of team sports.  As for the insinuations about character flaws associated with those who choose to wear an earring - I did not say that - you did.

[snapback]198821[/snapback]​

I hope that you know I was only joking around with my earring post. Having said that, I agree with you that this team needs to get back to being a team. Chris Browns mom said that some of the players don&#39;t even know each other and that&#39;s what it looks like. If it has to start with something small like earrings, that&#39;s fine with me...whatever works.

 

[vol151]

Originally posted by Orangewhiteblood@Nov 21, 2005 3:32 PM
I hope that you know I was only joking around with my earring post.  Having said that, I agree with you that this team needs to get back to being a team.  Chris Browns mom said that some of the players don&#39;t even know each other and that&#39;s what it looks like.  If it has to start with something small like earrings, that&#39;s fine with me...whatever works.

[snapback]198825[/snapback]​

no problem man - As a guy who spent some years in the army - discipline is very important to everything I do. I don&#39;t let my kids walk out looking like hooligans (my mother&#39;s word not mine) and when I played high school basketball - my coach made us wear the same shoes - the same everything - we only lost one game in three years. We had no one that went on to play in college - we just took the team concept seriously.

 

[gonygonygo]

Originally posted by Orangewhiteblood@Nov 20, 2005 6:25 PM
I had an earring once and I went crazy.  Before I went to church every Sunday, respected people, was easy to get along with, gave to charity, I was just a great human being and a pleasure to be around.  After I got my ear pierced, everything went to hell in a handbasket.  I found myself hanging out in opium dens, mugging people on the street, taking grocery bags from old ladies walking down the sidewalks, I kicked a dog....you get the point.  Those earrings should definitely come out man.  They&#39;re bad, REAL BAD. 

Don&#39;t even get me started on those mp3 players...

Welcome to the board.. :hi:

[snapback]198084[/snapback]​

There&#39;s nothing wrong with earrings and mp3 players&#33;&#33;&#33;

Just like people get tatoos, earrings are something that people do for self-expression or whatever. I personally dont see it as a factor that contributes to a player&#39;s focus, or lack thereof. When I played football in high school, we were allowed to listen to walkmans or cd players (before mp3 players came along) before a game. Coach told us to do whatever it took for us to be mentally ready ON OUR OWN. It was their job to prepare us, and it was our job to be mentally ready (not X&#39;s and O&#39;s, but energy and enthusiasm and focus).

You can take that stuff away for disciplinary actions when players are in need of that sort of thing.

As for your own personal problems, earrings dont make you have certain actions, you do them yourself. Remember the saying, "Guns dont kill people, people kill people."??? No offense, but people that blame their actions on things that can&#39;t walk and talk and make you high are weak minded and refuse to take responsibilty of their actions.

You can&#39;t say I did bad things. You say I did bad things BECAUSE.... That&#39;s excuses. We aren&#39;t dealing with drugs or alcohol, even though I think that is an excuse too. You are who you are. You may hide or keep in your true self when in one state of mind, but your actions and true person inside becomes manifested when under the influence of some drug.

Do things like that put a spell on you? Do you become hypnotized to do bad things because of a metal rod through your ear?

I have my ears pierced, and it doesn&#39;t affect my actions. And what about all the women in the world???
:nono:

 

[gonygonygo]

Originally posted by wilburnVol@Nov 21, 2005 11:43 AM
I think that all Vol football players need to wear a uniform to class that is specifically designed by the Nuns Of The Holy Jesus Who Do Good Works, something with a fleur de lis all over it, black belt, navy blue pants, white  button down shirt with fleur de lis tie, that sort of thing.

Whaddya think?  :huh:

[snapback]198657[/snapback]​

What you wear or look like on the outside does not make the person on the inside. Just like they say, you can take a thug out of the streets, but you can&#39;t take the streets out of the thug when in a better environment.

Example: NBA
:birgits_giggle:

 

[secfanclub]

Originally posted by gonygonygo@Nov 21, 2005 5:20 PM
There&#39;s nothing wrong with earrings and mp3 players&#33;&#33;&#33;

Just like people get tatoos, earrings are something that people do for self-expression or whatever.  I personally dont see it as a factor that contributes to a player&#39;s focus, or lack thereof. 

[snapback]198887[/snapback]​

I don&#39;t think there is any wrong with MP3 players or earrings either. However, as a coach I wanted all my players to follow a certain dresscode which included a shirt and tie along with dress pants and shoes, and nothing more. A group of players look and act more like a team when they dress alike without all the extras like earrings. Why do you think Penn State has just the "basic" uniform? In my opinion, there is no room for individuality expression for anyone playing on a team.

 

[vol151]

Originally posted by secfanclub@Nov 21, 2005 5:40 PM
I don&#39;t think there is any wrong with MP3 players or earrings either.  However, as a coach I wanted all my players to follow a certain dresscode which included a shirt and tie along with dress pants and shoes, and nothing more.  A group of players look and act more like a team when they dress alike without all the extras like earrings.  Why do you think Penn State has just the "basic" uniform?  In my opinion, there is no room for individuality expression for anyone playing on a team.

[snapback]198901[/snapback]​

Very well put SEC - this is not a debate about earrings, mp3 players, the clothes, or anything else a player does on his off time - I am suggesting that UT policy for athletes be changed to develop uniformality among team members - once you have that basic fundamental of discipline - you build on it from there.

 

[evolved]

Crompton was redshirted because of the shoulder was my understanding. Is that not true?

This is true. Had surgery in August.

 

[hatvol96]

Originally posted by secfanclub@Nov 21, 2005 5:40 PM
I don&#39;t think there is any wrong with MP3 players or earrings either.  However, as a coach I wanted all my players to follow a certain dresscode which included a shirt and tie along with dress pants and shoes, and nothing more.  A group of players look and act more like a team when they dress alike without all the extras like earrings.  Why do you think Penn State has just the "basic" uniform?  In my opinion, there is no room for individuality expression for anyone playing on a team.

[snapback]198901[/snapback]​

Yeah, individual expression has really hurt USC, Miami, and Oklahoma in recent years. The bottom line is we have guys who want the accolades without the necessary accomplishments. There has never been a player who "expressed" himself more than Michael Irvin. There&#39;s also never been a fiercer competitior.

 

[vol151]

Originally posted by hatvol96@Nov 21, 2005 5:52 PM
Yeah, individual expression has really hurt USC, Miami, and Oklahoma in recent years. The bottom line is we have guys who want the accolades without the necessary accomplishments. There has never been a player who "expressed" himself more than Michael Irvin. There&#39;s also never been a fiercer competitior.

[snapback]198916[/snapback]​

Do we want guys like Michael Irvin to go to the University of Tennessee - I dont know about you guys - but I don&#39;t want the national title in Knoxville if it means having a bunch of undisciplined thugs on our team.

This is not about race. This is about character.

 

[secfanclub]

Originally posted by vol151@Nov 21, 2005 5:55 PM
Do we want guys like Michael Irvin to go to the University of Tennessee - I dont know about you guys - but I don&#39;t want the national title in Knoxville if it means having a bunch of undisciplined thugs on our team.

This is not about race.  This is about character.

[snapback]198920[/snapback]​

I agree Vol151. It is all about character. I would much rather coach a team of "team players" with mediocre talent than a team of "indivdual players" with superb talent.

 

[hatvol96]

Originally posted by secfanclub@Nov 21, 2005 6:00 PM
I agree Vol151.  It is all about character.  I would much rather coach a team of "team players" with mediocre talent than a team of "indivdual players" with superb talent.

[snapback]198927[/snapback]​

Name the last team in either D-I football or men&#39;s basketball to win anything with mediocre talent. I&#39;m sure it&#39;s more comfortable for a coach to deal with a group of well intentioned also-rans, but those guys don&#39;t produce championships.

 

[Lexvol]

We seem to have plenty of team players...on defense. I don&#39;t think it is merely chance that this explosion of offensive individualism occurs when Cut leaves and Sanders takes over.

The real irony of that situation is found in RS supporters cry that he didn&#39;t have the players that Cut had. If that is true, then why in the heck are they so cocky? Seems to me that the drop off in talent should translate into a drop of attitude as well. Cutcliff may not have had anything to do with Manning&#39;s success, but he surely managed the attitudes of the superstars on his offense. These offensive coaches have allowed the Clausens to think they have Manning&#39;s talent, not to mention allowing receivers like Stallworth and Washington act like the second coming of Willy Gault.

 

[secfanclub]

Originally posted by hatvol96@Nov 21, 2005 6:03 PM
Name the last team in either D-I football or men&#39;s basketball to win anything with mediocre talent. I&#39;m sure it&#39;s more comfortable for a coach to deal with a group of well intentioned also-rans, but those guys don&#39;t produce championships.

[snapback]198930[/snapback]​

There have been many teams of the past who have played beyond expectations and have won a championship. You ask me to name one? I don&#39;t know right off the bat, but I can tell you that I have had several teams with mediocre talent who because they played together as a team, beat teams who were talent-laden.

 

[hatvol96]

Originally posted by Lexvol@Nov 21, 2005 6:06 PM
We seem to have plenty of team players...on defense.  I don&#39;t think it is merely chance that this explosion of offensive individualism occurs when Cut leaves and Sanders takes over.

The real irony of that situation is found in RS supporters cry that he didn&#39;t have the players that Cut had.  If that is true, then why in the heck are they so cocky?  Seems to me that the drop off in talent should translate into a drop of attitude as well.  Cutcliff may not have had anything to do with Manning&#39;s success, but he surely managed the attitudes of the superstars on his offense.  These offensive coaches have allowed the Clausens to think they have Manning&#39;s talent, not to mention allowing receivers like Stallworth and Washington act like the second coming of Willy Gault.

[snapback]198933[/snapback]​

When healthy, Kelly Washington was MUCH more productive than Gault. Carl Pickens is the gold standard for Tennessee receivers.

 

[secfanclub]

Originally posted by hatvol96@Nov 21, 2005 6:08 PM
When healthy, Kelly Washington was MUCH more productive than Gault. Carl Pickens is the gold standard for Tennessee receivers.

[snapback]198936[/snapback]​

I disagree. Kelly did more harm to the team concept at UT. Gault and Pickens were more team players.

 

[Lexvol]

Originally posted by hatvol96@Nov 21, 2005 6:08 PM
When healthy, Kelly Washington was MUCH more productive than Gault. Carl Pickens is the gold standard for Tennessee receivers.

[snapback]198936[/snapback]​

Kelly Washington was hardly ever healthy. Don&#39;t see how you can make that comparison especially considering that Washington is in a weekly fight for his professional life in Cinci.

The bigger question is: Why weren&#39;t any of those egos managed under RS?

 

[hatvol96]

Originally posted by secfanclub@Nov 21, 2005 6:11 PM
I disagree. Kelly did more harm to the team concept at UT.  Gault and Pickens were more team players.

[snapback]198942[/snapback]​

Pickens being called a team player? Now that&#39;s a first. Carl was one of the original WR divas. As a matter of fact, so was Gault. He was more concerned with being a model than becoming a complete receiver. How many balls did he catch going over the middle at UT or in the NFL. Jim McMahon hated the guy.

 

[secfanclub]

Originally posted by hatvol96@Nov 21, 2005 6:16 PM
Pickens being called a team player? Now that&#39;s a first. Carl was one of the original WR divas. As a matter of fact, so was Gault. He was more concerned with being a model than becoming a complete receiver. How many balls did he catch going over the middle at UT or in the NFL. Jim McMahon hated the guy.

[snapback]198950[/snapback]​

Then again, how many balls were thrown over the middle? I don&#39;t remember Gault being so self-centered as Washington.