Recruitment 2016

#1

teacherdean

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2014
Messages
3,098
Likes
5,536
#1
Has anyone noticed that the Lady Vols. do not have any verbals in the ESPN top 100 2016 class. I noticed that Geno came into Tennessee and picked up a very good guard.
 
#2
#2
We need Post/Bigs from that class more so than anything else. i don't really know if we are favorities to land the players we are recruiting. I do know that Alecia Sutton and Kaila Charles have Tennessee on their lists.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4
#4
Whether we like it or not. Geno is and has been the best ladies basketball coach for several years. The Lady Vols need a coach bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#5
#5
Whether we like it or not. Geno is and has been the best ladies basketball coach for several years. The Lady Vols need a coach bad.

Wait...thought we had one. So, I guess you're not sold on Holly? I guess the honeymoon is over. :)
GO VOLS!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6
#6
Holly is an old school coach in the Fulmer mold. She recruits athletes. She has been schooled on the X's and O's by several coaches, to include others off the Summit coaching tree. In modern basketball, you need the X's and O's. You have to been able to call plays, offensively and defensively, to varying situations. There are too many good coaches out there to just rely on athleticism. She is a good coach, but not great for this reason imo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#7
#7
Holly is an old school coach in the Fulmer mold. She recruits athletes. She has been schooled on the X's and O's by several coaches, to include others off the Summit coaching tree. In modern basketball, you need the X's and O's. You have to been able to call plays, offensively and defensively, to varying situations. There are too many good coaches out there to just rely on athleticism. She is a good coach, but not great for this reason imo.

The game passed by Summitt for precisely the same reason: She was very used to simply having better athletes than almost every other team, in an era when everybody had trouble scoring. And so we beat teams with defense and rebounding. PS's offensively philosophy was twofold and very simplistic: If we had a superstar, throw it to her and hope that she could score. Otherwise, just throw the ball up near the basket, we'll get the offensive rebound with our better athletes and put the ball in the basket for a score.

Over time that caught up with her and us. Coaches like Geno came along who knew/know how to coach good team/half-court offense; players got better, offenses got better. There was more competition. You couldn't just expect to win games with offensive rebounding or defense or raw talent. That is something that PS was too old, and too old school, to get--and IMO Warlick is much the same, and really just too much of a player's coach to be good.

This is why good teams and excellent coaches TOTALLY school us; hell, even merely above average teams like texas beat us. We not only don't beat anybody good anymore, we aren't even competitive with the top teams. Notre Dame came to Knoxville two years ago and embarrassed us. We folded early against Louisville. I think last year's UNC win was Warlick's best win--and that was a /very/ young north carolina team. We've also beaten an overrated lsu team a couple of times.

The texas game was a template for how UT has played for a long time. That is how we have played against respectably good teams for years: Our offense is total crap, we look terrible, fall behind--and then try futilely to rally in the second half. This is what we do. The sharpness, the smarts, the fundamentals--the good coaching--is not there. And yet all Warlick ever wants to talk about is effort. The first step in dealing with a problem is awareness of what the problem really is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#8
#8
The game passed by Summitt for precisely the same reason: She was very used to simply having better athletes than almost every other team, in an era when everybody had trouble scoring. And so we beat teams with defense and rebounding. PS's offensively philosophy was twofold and very simplistic: If we had a superstar, throw it to her and hope that she could score. Otherwise, just throw the ball up near the basket, we'll get the offensive rebound with our better athletes and put the ball in the basket for a score.

Over time that caught up with her and us. Coaches like Geno came along who knew/know how to coach good team/half-court offense; players got better, offenses got better. There was more competition. You couldn't just expect to win games with offensive rebounding or defense or raw talent. That is something that PS was too old, and too old school, to get--and IMO Warlick is much the same, and really just too much of a player's coach to be good.

This is why good teams and excellent coaches TOTALLY school us; hell, even merely above average teams like texas beat us. We not only don't beat anybody good anymore, we aren't even competitive with the top teams. Notre Dame came to Knoxville two years ago and embarrassed us. We folded early against Louisville. I think last year's UNC win was Warlick's best win--and that was a /very/ young north carolina team. We've also beaten an overrated lsu team a couple of times.

The texas game was a template for how UT has played for a long time. That is how we have played against respectably good teams for years: Our offense is total crap, we look terrible, fall behind--and then try futilely to rally in the second half. This is what we do. The sharpness, the smarts, the fundamentals--the good coaching--is not there. And yet all Warlick ever wants to talk about is effort. The first step in dealing with a problem is awareness of what the problem really is.



Let Holly keep coaching and once Tyler had proven himself at La. Tech and is ready for S.E.C. basketball, then hire him. He will likely have a rebuilding project ahead of him but a few years after his hire we will be back. Of course, Geno will have to retire....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#11
#11
The game passed by Summitt for precisely the same reason: She was very used to simply having better athletes than almost every other team, in an era when everybody had trouble scoring. And so we beat teams with defense and rebounding. PS's offensively philosophy was twofold and very simplistic: If we had a superstar, throw it to her and hope that she could score. Otherwise, just throw the ball up near the basket, we'll get the offensive rebound with our better athletes and put the ball in the basket for a score.

Over time that caught up with her and us. Coaches like Geno came along who knew/know how to coach good team/half-court offense; players got better, offenses got better. There was more competition. You couldn't just expect to win games with offensive rebounding or defense or raw talent. That is something that PS was too old, and too old school, to get--and IMO Warlick is much the same, and really just too much of a player's coach to be good.

This is why good teams and excellent coaches TOTALLY school us; hell, even merely above average teams like texas beat us. We not only don't beat anybody good anymore, we aren't even competitive with the top teams. Notre Dame came to Knoxville two years ago and embarrassed us. We folded early against Louisville. I think last year's UNC win was Warlick's best win--and that was a /very/ young north carolina team. We've also beaten an overrated lsu team a couple of times.

The texas game was a template for how UT has played for a long time. That is how we have played against respectably good teams for years: Our offense is total crap, we look terrible, fall behind--and then try futilely to rally in the second half. This is what we do. The sharpness, the smarts, the fundamentals--the good coaching--is not there. And yet all Warlick ever wants to talk about is effort. The first step in dealing with a problem is awareness of what the problem really is.

So we scored because we had better athletes. But defense and rebounding is also due to athleticism? Or is effort and execution something that the coaches get credit for?

I'm not saying Pat was a perfect Xs and Os coach but I'd say you don't win 8 titles just on athletic ability alone. Ask John Calipari.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#12
#12
The game passed by Summitt for precisely the same reason: She was very used to simply having better athletes than almost every other team, in an era when everybody had trouble scoring. And so we beat teams with defense and rebounding. PS's offensively philosophy was twofold and very simplistic: If we had a superstar, throw it to her and hope that she could score. Otherwise, just throw the ball up near the basket, we'll get the offensive rebound with our better athletes and put the ball in the basket for a score.

Over time that caught up with her and us. Coaches like Geno came along who knew/know how to coach good team/half-court offense; players got better, offenses got better. There was more competition. You couldn't just expect to win games with offensive rebounding or defense or raw talent. That is something that PS was too old, and too old school, to get--and IMO Warlick is much the same, and really just too much of a player's coach to be good.

This is why good teams and excellent coaches TOTALLY school us; hell, even merely above average teams like texas beat us. We not only don't beat anybody good anymore, we aren't even competitive with the top teams. Notre Dame came to Knoxville two years ago and embarrassed us. We folded early against Louisville. I think last year's UNC win was Warlick's best win--and that was a /very/ young north carolina team. We've also beaten an overrated lsu team a couple of times.

The texas game was a template for how UT has played for a long time. That is how we have played against respectably good teams for years: Our offense is total crap, we look terrible, fall behind--and then try futilely to rally in the second half. This is what we do. The sharpness, the smarts, the fundamentals--the good coaching--is not there. And yet all Warlick ever wants to talk about is effort. The first step in dealing with a problem is awareness of what the problem really is.

I don't really agree with that. There is no evidence that is what was happening. If Pat had all her faculties and was still coaching today I have no doubt we'd still be competing for championships. She'd will her teams to win. We just really don't know when Pat started losing it. I think it was actually a couple of years before it was reported.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#13
#13
I don't really agree with that. There is no evidence that is what was happening. If Pat had all her faculties and was still coaching today I have no doubt we'd still be competing for championships. She'd will her teams to win. We just really don't know when Pat started losing it. I think it was actually a couple of years before it was reported.
Yes, remember the thinking it was the heavy meds for her arthritis. You're probably right.
 
#14
#14
I am in fear that if we wait for Mr. Summitt to make La Tech relevant, it will be way to late. Pat played inside basketball with an outside shooter. The problem we will have against the top lady teams is they have developed both a consistent inside and outside game. We have good shooters but they need to practice the skill in practice. Holly said in her last interview that the team placed more emphasis on defense and less time on offense. Holly has been far too committed to the inside game which only works on cupcakes. You have to change with the times or you will get blistered by most top ten teams. Another thing, Holly said Tucker is able to play. If that is the case, when will we see her? If she can shoot from the outside we really need her.
 
#15
#15
I am in fear that if we wait for Mr. Summitt to make La Tech relevant, it will be way to late. Pat played inside basketball with an outside shooter. The problem we will have against the top lady teams is they have developed both a consistent inside and outside game. We have good shooters but they need to practice the skill in practice. Holly said in her last interview that the team placed more emphasis on defense and less time on offense. Holly has been far too committed to the inside game which only works on cupcakes. You have to change with the times or you will get blistered by most top ten teams. Another thing, Holly said Tucker is able to play. If that is the case, when will we see her? If she can shoot from the outside we really need her.

There is a considerable part of the Lady Vol fan base that would not accept Tyler even if he proved himself because of his gender. You will hear repeatedly that this is a the women's team and that only a female coach should be considered. I got really slammed by a lot of them when I said we should interview the Louisville coach when Pat retired.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#16
#16
There is a considerable part of the Lady Vol fan base that would not accept Tyler even if he proved himself because of his gender. You will hear repeatedly that this is a the women's team and that only a female coach should be considered. I got really slammed by a lot of them when I said we should interview the Louisville coach when Pat retired.
I've never heard that from anyone. Who slammed you? That's just dumb. I want to win...don't want cheating, but win. Of course Pat's son would be nice:)
 
#17
#17
Right now Tyler is Derrick Dooley has the name but no experience in running a program. We need to see what he can do the next couple of seasons maybe three before we anoint him a wonderful coach. This season could be rough for him he has very little talent on that team. We will see if he can recruit down there he needs a lot of help on that roster. Having said that he had a pretty good showing at LSU only losing by 14. Considering his personnel and theirs seems he severely out coached Caldwell in that game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#18
#18
i reviewed the list of top ESPN post players to watch at the next level, in the class of 2015. There are 2 five stars left and a few 3 and 4 stars. 12 of the lower watch stars have already been signed by good programs like Baylor and Kentucky. Now as I review ESPN's top 27 post players to watch at the next level for 2016, teams like UCONN have verbals from lower stars. Do we not try to sign lower stars, especially for the post position, or do we only go after the 5 stars. Looking at the 5 stars we have is it their attitude or the attitude of the coaches that they are not playing up to the ability as advertise? Graves, for example played lights out as a freshman. She looked as though she had the ability to take over a game, she shows signs but not consistently. Do we feel that we can only succeed with players who do not need to be developed? The greater question is does our coaches lack the ability to develop lower star players? In reality it appears we a new coaching staff or the one we have needs to seriously upset their coaching style. If you can't get a 5 star get a top 4 star post and DEVELOP!!!!!!!:rock:
 
Last edited:
#19
#19
We probably need another Final Four run to land some top recruits. The kids we are recruiting today were 10 and 11 years old when we last won a championship. That is an eternity ago to them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#20
#20
Holly has been far too committed to the inside game which only works on cupcakes.

Holly's commitment to the inside game worked well against A&M and So. Carolina last year. If Harrison is clicking, they need to keep feeding it to her.

The problem is that they don't know how to run plays for their outside shooters. Even when they had Bjorklund and Spani, two of the best outside shooters to ever suit up for the LVs, they never ran plays to free them up. No screens, no movement...nada. Basically had them camp out in the corners and hang around waiting for the ball to come to them.

This year, they don't have long range shooters of that caliber (I'm not convinced Dunbar is good enough to fit in this category). Those girls need to practice their shot so that every game doesn't look like a repeat of the Maryland game where the entire opposing team swarms on the post players.
 
#21
#21
Let Vol fans tell UCONN and Texas A and M that this is a game that should be only coached by women. I coached women's sports for 16 years in high school and finished either number 1 or 2 in district play for 10 of my 16 coaching years. The only things you need to know besides the game is that female athletes are not men athletes nor should you expect them to be. However, you have to realize some female athletes are on the same level as many male athletes. In many environments, especially at the high school level, female athletes are more mature and take instructions better than a lot of male athletes. To win you must Honor and respect them to do what they do best. You have to be able to identify athletic abilities and put the team in a place where they have the best chance of winning. You must change with the times and stay on top of the game. Last but not least, you must develop and set the bar high.
 
Last edited:
#22
#22
Let Vol fans tell UCONN and Texas A and M that this is a game that should be only coached by women. I coached women's sports for 16 years in high school and finished either number 1 or 2 in district play for 10 of my 16 coaching years. The only things you need to know besides the game is that female athletes are not men athletes nor should you expect them to be. However, you have to realize some female athletes are on the same level as many male athletes. In many environments, especially at the high school level, female athletes are more mature and take instructions better than a lot of male athletes. To win you must Honor and respect them to do what they do best. You have to be able to identify athletic abilities and put the team in a place where they have the best chance of winning. You must change with the times and stay on top of the game. Last but not least, you must develop and set the bar high.

I'm not about to tell them that, any more than I'd tell Georgia or La Tech, past or present! A coach is a coach; you hit what they need to do to win.
 
#23
#23
I've never heard that from anyone. Who slammed you? That's just dumb. I want to win...don't want cheating, but win. Of course Pat's son would be nice:)

At the time almost universal on 'The Summitt" on TOS. Also got it in person from some supporters of the Lady Vols and I mean people who contribute.
 
#24
#24
At the time almost universal on 'The Summitt" on TOS. Also got it in person from some supporters of the Lady Vols and I mean people who contribute.
Wow! Never been on The Summitt and guess I never will. I know a lot of contributers, but never heard that from anyone. Maybe the ones I know have a brain as well as some disposable income:) Landers, Foster, Barmore, Mitchell, Wertz, Auriemma....So I guess they think none of them could coach women? Just dumb, and sexist IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#25
#25
The question of whether a man should coach a women's team is interesting. I don't think it's a coincidence that the vast majority of coaches are women. How many males coaches are there in the country? I can think of three--at georgia, kentucky and ct. Are there many more? I think there is a natural tendency to hire women, just as every men's team in the country is coached by a man. However, there isn't any real reason why a man couldn't or shouldn't be hired--and if Hart thought that a male candidate was by far the best choice, I would hope that he would offer him the job. I think the next hire needs to come SOON, and it will be a huge hire. Hart should be scouring the country for potential candidates.

If Tyler Summitt proves himself an exceptional coaches, he will get bigger jobs down the road--but anybody who think that he's going to save UT women's basketball because of his name is whistling Dixie. The game is tons more competitive than it was when PS was winning titles. She got a head start on most of the country--much like North Carolina in women's soccer. And in a much more competitive environment a premium is placed on coaching--you HAVE To have a first-rate coach and staff, not a second- or third-rate staff.
 

VN Store



Back
Top