fastest team to 4 losses since 1984

[1CHATTVOL]

Are you seriously trying to convince me (or yourself) that wins against the mighty JMU, ETSU, Tennessee State and Navy are quality wins?

Oh Lordie...

Mostly, I'm just trying to stand up for what's real. I'm saying that based on their Sagarin SoS as of today, TN has played the 8th toughest schedule. Folks forget that we played 5 of our 8 games on the road. And no, some of those wins might not be quality to throw around. But they are to to better RPI teams than most schools play across the board.

More than saying our wins are great, it's saying our losses aren't that bad. VA Tech on their court? They are 10-0 and have an RPI of 38. PSU on their court? They are 8-2 with an RPI of 55. Texas RPI of 15. Baylor RPI of 2.

I just want fans to be realistic instead of sowing discord. Hell, everyone wants better, but it's not going to hell in a handbasket.

 

[Amb3096]

Mostly, I'm just trying to stand up for what's real. I'm saying that based on their Sagarin SoS as of today, TN has played the 8th toughest schedule. Folks forget that we played 5 of our 8 games on the road. And no, some of those wins might not be quality to throw around. But they are to to better RPI teams than most schools play across the board.

More than saying our wins are great, it's saying our losses aren't that bad. VA Tech on their court? They are 10-0 and have an RPI of 38. PSU on their court? They are 8-2 with an RPI of 55. Texas RPI of 15. Baylor RPI of 2.

I just want fans to be realistic instead of sowing discord. Hell, everyone wants better, but it's not going to hell in a handbasket.

Using Sagarin's ratings, Tennessee's best win of the season was against #60 James Madison, with additional wins against #139 Navy #216 ETSU #275 Tenn State. They will probably beat #226 Appalachian State, and if they don't screw up, will win against #103 Troy. That's an average ranking of #179. None of these are tournament teams. They weren't expected to beat Baylor, and even Texas was viewed as the better team at the start of the season. But you will never convince me that #38 VT (who has beaten no one other than Tennessee this season) and #55 PSU (who has also not beaten anyone other than Tennessee) are not terrible losses. Have expectations for this program fallen so far that a loss to #38...who will probably finish the season in 6/7 place in the ACC...is not a bad loss? I remember how shocked I was when they lost to Duke in the E8 during Holdsclaw's senior year, but I guess the standard has been lowered since.

Take all the RPI calculations you want, but if the day comes when the selection committee is looking at Tennessee and Vandy with identical records and both on the bubble for the tournament, you can bet that everyone will pick Vandy no matter what the SOS or RPI says by virtue of their win against Duke. Like I said in my previous post, a tough SOS only matters when you beat some of the good teams. Having a strong SOS is meaningless when your best win is against the #60 team.

 

[1CHATTVOL]

Using Sagarin's ratings, Tennessee's best win of the season was against #60 James Madison, with additional wins against #139 Navy #216 ETSU #275 Tenn State. They will probably beat #226 Appalachian State, and if they don't screw up, will win against #103 Troy. That's an average ranking of #179. None of these are tournament teams. They weren't expected to beat Baylor, and even Texas was viewed as the better team at the start of the season. But you will never convince me that #38 VT (who has beaten no one other than Tennessee this season) and #55 PSU (who has also not beaten anyone other than Tennessee) are not terrible losses. Have expectations for this program fallen so far that a loss to #38...who will probably finish the season in 6/7 place in the ACC...is not a bad loss? I remember how shocked I was when they lost to Duke in the E8 during Holdsclaw's senior year, but I guess the standard has been lowered since.

Take all the RPI calculations you want, but if the day comes when the selection committee is looking at Tennessee and Vandy with identical records and both on the bubble for the tournament, you can bet that everyone will pick Vandy no matter what the SOS or RPI says by virtue of their win against Duke. Like I said in my previous post, a tough SOS only matters when you beat some of the good teams. Having a strong SOS is meaningless when your best win is against the #60 team.

Sometimes, it's also about no bad losses. And your complete schedule.

Oh, what about TN vs #12 Stanford? You didn't mention it, so are you thinking that's a loss? I don't.

JMU on the road is a decent win, not marquee. They are as good or better than half the sec right now. Vandy hasn't played anyone else and lost to #40 Indiana. Despite their 9-1 record and big Duke win @ home, they are still ranked 23 points below TN who's 4-4. So, no they probably won't get in over us with the same record. It doesn't work like that. That's exactly why they have RPI.

You speak of the Holdsclaw days as if that was that was a relevant measuring stick. That's once in program history kind of stuff. Didn't happen before or since. Yes, the game has changed tremendously since 1999.

All I'm really saying is that our coaches and players aren't perfect, but all reasonable goals are still out there.

And while folks need to vent or discuss, it feels like every post has become about throwing shade or downright demanding termination. And HW's employment is not for us fans to decide anyway.

Thanks for your input, Amb.

 

[Pat4life]

Sometimes, it's also about no bad losses. And your complete schedule.

Oh, what about TN vs #12 Stanford? You didn't mention it, so are you thinking that's a loss? I don't.

JMU on the road is a decent win, not marquee. They are as good or better than half the sec right now. Vandy hasn't played anyone else and lost to #40 Indiana. Despite their 9-1 record and big Duke win @ home, they are still ranked 23 points below TN who's 4-4. So, no they probably won't get in over us with the same record. It doesn't work like that. That's exactly why they have RPI.

You speak of the Holdsclaw days as if that was that was a relevant measuring stick. That's once in program history kind of stuff. Didn't happen before or since. Yes, the game has changed tremendously since 1999.

All I'm really saying is that our coaches and players aren't perfect, but all reasonable goals are still out there.

And while folks need to vent or discuss, it feels like every post has become about throwing shade or downright demanding termination. And HW's employment is not for us fans to decide anyway.

Thanks for your input, Amb.

Nice post!

 

[Amb3096]

Sometimes, it's also about no bad losses. And your complete schedule.

Oh, what about TN vs #12 Stanford? You didn't mention it, so are you thinking that's a loss? I don't.

JMU on the road is a decent win, not marquee. They are as good or better than half the sec right now. Vandy hasn't played anyone else and lost to #40 Indiana. Despite their 9-1 record and big Duke win @ home, they are still ranked 23 points below TN who's 4-4. So, no they probably won't get in over us with the same record. It doesn't work like that. That's exactly why they have RPI.

You speak of the Holdsclaw days as if that was that was a relevant measuring stick. That's once in program history kind of stuff. Didn't happen before or since. Yes, the game has changed tremendously since 1999.

All I'm really saying is that our coaches and players aren't perfect, but all reasonable goals are still out there.

And while folks need to vent or discuss, it feels like every post has become about throwing shade or downright demanding termination. And HW's employment is not for us fans to decide anyway.

Thanks for your input, Amb.

When the season was originally released, I saw four key out of conference games for Tennessee: Baylor, Texas, Stanford and Notre Dame (I expected them to be 6-0 heading into Baylor because I believed the first 6 teams were pretty weak competition). I predicted them to go 1-3. Baylor and ND were too good, Texas was good enough, and I thought the Stanford game was the one they could win. Based on season results so far, I have no reason to think they can beat Stanford, so yes...I expect that to be a loss.

Still don't agree on JMU as a "solid win". They aren't even in the Mid-Major top 10, and play in a weak conference. Committee has historically considered "top 50" to be good wins, since these are the teams that would be considered for at-large bids for the tournament. You're also wrong with regards to the Vanderbilt scenario, because wins against tournament teams trumps RPI and SOS. RPI is nothing more than a benchmark. Just because you are Top 64 RPI doesn't mean you will get an at-large bid over teams ranked below you. Whenever the Committee has explained why teams got in or were excluded, they go straight to wins against tournament teams. Vandy has a big scalp with Duke, and that will count a lot for them if they are a bubble team.

I also disagree about the Holdsclaw measuring stick. What were some of their other bad losses afterwards? Top 16 ranked Xavier beating them in the S16 in 2001, none again until Kentucky and Florida during Candace's freshman year in 2006, then none again until the year after the last NC. Losing to teams outside the top 15 has been a very rare occurrence for Tennessee until the last few years after their last championship.

I don't expect the coaches and/or players to be perfect, but when you underachieve as badly as Holly has the last 1 1/2 years, then it's no surprise that a lot of fans have turned on her. And while the wants of the fans won't directly decide Holly's fate, if enough fans stop supporting the team because they don't like what they see, it will catch up to her eventually.

 

[Volfan2012]

We don't have many options this season. Non performing players need to sit and one would be Reynolds but we don't have the replacements. When a player get to four turnovers she needs to sit but we have no one to put in. Looks like a tough season and it all goes back to two former years of failed recruiting.

 

[1CHATTVOL]

When the season was originally released, I saw four key out of conference games for Tennessee: Baylor, Texas, Stanford and Notre Dame (I expected them to be 6-0 heading into Baylor because I believed the first 6 teams were pretty weak competition). I predicted them to go 1-3. Baylor and ND were too good, Texas was good enough, and I thought the Stanford game was the one they could win. Based on season results so far, I have no reason to think they can beat Stanford, so yes...I expect that to be a loss.

Still don't agree on JMU as a "solid win". They aren't even in the Mid-Major top 10, and play in a weak conference. Committee has historically considered "top 50" to be good wins, since these are the teams that would be considered for at-large bids for the tournament. You're also wrong with regards to the Vanderbilt scenario, because wins against tournament teams trumps RPI and SOS. RPI is nothing more than a benchmark. Just because you are Top 64 RPI doesn't mean you will get an at-large bid over teams ranked below you. Whenever the Committee has explained why teams got in or were excluded, they go straight to wins against tournament teams. Vandy has a big scalp with Duke, and that will count a lot for them if they are a bubble team.

I also disagree about the Holdsclaw measuring stick. What were some of their other bad losses afterwards? Top 16 ranked Xavier beating them in the S16 in 2001, none again until Kentucky and Florida during Candace's freshman year in 2006, then none again until the year after the last NC. Losing to teams outside the top 15 has been a very rare occurrence for Tennessee until the last few years after their last championship.

I don't expect the coaches and/or players to be perfect, but when you underachieve as badly as Holly has the last 1 1/2 years, then it's no surprise that a lot of fans have turned on her. And while the wants of the fans won't directly decide Holly's fate, if enough fans stop supporting the team because they don't like what they see, it will catch up to her eventually.

I agree with your comments on some of the selection methodologies, but the committee isn't always clear or consistent. I think mostly I was objecting to the fact that you're using one criterion not the balance of evidence to doom a team (you support?) to miss the NCAAT after only 8 games.

 

[1CHATTVOL]

When the season was originally released, I saw four key out of conference games for Tennessee: Baylor, Texas, Stanford and Notre Dame (I expected them to be 6-0 heading into Baylor because I believed the first 6 teams were pretty weak competition). I predicted them to go 1-3. Baylor and ND were too good, Texas was good enough, and I thought the Stanford game was the one they could win. Based on season results so far, I have no reason to think they can beat Stanford, so yes...I expect that to be a loss.

Still don't agree on JMU as a "solid win". They aren't even in the Mid-Major top 10, and play in a weak conference. Committee has historically considered "top 50" to be good wins, since these are the teams that would be considered for at-large bids for the tournament. You're also wrong with regards to the Vanderbilt scenario, because wins against tournament teams trumps RPI and SOS. RPI is nothing more than a benchmark. Just because you are Top 64 RPI doesn't mean you will get an at-large bid over teams ranked below you. Whenever the Committee has explained why teams got in or were excluded, they go straight to wins against tournament teams. Vandy has a big scalp with Duke, and that will count a lot for them if they are a bubble team.

I also disagree about the Holdsclaw measuring stick. What were some of their other bad losses afterwards? Top 16 ranked Xavier beating them in the S16 in 2001, none again until Kentucky and Florida during Candace's freshman year in 2006, then none again until the year after the last NC. Losing to teams outside the top 15 has been a very rare occurrence for Tennessee until the last few years after their last championship.

I don't expect the coaches and/or players to be perfect, but when you underachieve as badly as Holly has the last 1 1/2 years, then it's no surprise that a lot of fans have turned on her. And while the wants of the fans won't directly decide Holly's fate, if enough fans stop supporting the team because they don't like what they see, it will catch up to her eventually.

Calling a 27 win coach with multiple elite 8 and SEC championships an underachiever is nonsense in today's WCBB. Agreed last year was messy, but postseason should've erased that mess for most folks. It did for administration, I assure you. Bet HW got a bonus, actually.

 

[1CHATTVOL]

When the season was originally released, I saw four key out of conference games for Tennessee: Baylor, Texas, Stanford and Notre Dame (I expected them to be 6-0 heading into Baylor because I believed the first 6 teams were pretty weak competition). I predicted them to go 1-3. Baylor and ND were too good, Texas was good enough, and I thought the Stanford game was the one they could win. Based on season results so far, I have no reason to think they can beat Stanford, so yes...I expect that to be a loss.

Still don't agree on JMU as a "solid win". They aren't even in the Mid-Major top 10, and play in a weak conference. Committee has historically considered "top 50" to be good wins, since these are the teams that would be considered for at-large bids for the tournament. You're also wrong with regards to the Vanderbilt scenario, because wins against tournament teams trumps RPI and SOS. RPI is nothing more than a benchmark. Just because you are Top 64 RPI doesn't mean you will get an at-large bid over teams ranked below you. Whenever the Committee has explained why teams got in or were excluded, they go straight to wins against tournament teams. Vandy has a big scalp with Duke, and that will count a lot for them if they are a bubble team.

I also disagree about the Holdsclaw measuring stick. What were some of their other bad losses afterwards? Top 16 ranked Xavier beating them in the S16 in 2001, none again until Kentucky and Florida during Candace's freshman year in 2006, then none again until the year after the last NC. Losing to teams outside the top 15 has been a very rare occurrence for Tennessee until the last few years after their last championship.

I don't expect the coaches and/or players to be perfect, but when you underachieve as badly as Holly has the last 1 1/2 years, then it's no surprise that a lot of fans have turned on her. And while the wants of the fans won't directly decide Holly's fate, if enough fans stop supporting the team because they don't like what they see, it will catch up to her eventually.

And yes, to a degree, I still think glory-day comparisons from over 10 years ago are not reasonable. I mean, I'd like to get to a place where we were one of 4 teams that were a F4 lock every year. But like we saw last year, I think those days have passed because of parity.

2009 was a bigger disaster of underachievement for TN under Pat than 2016 under Holly.

One reason I'm spending time being positive is because negativity is what breeds apathy. The overall team performance is below our standard, but shouldn't be enough for fans to give up.

I think it would have to become a ghost town in TBA before it would affect the administration.

Anyway, thank you, AMB. I appreciate your knowledge and comments.

 

[Amb3096]

I agree with your comments on some of the selection methodologies, but the committee isn't always clear or consistent. I think mostly I was objecting to the fact that you're using one criterion not the balance of evidence to doom a team (you support?) to miss the NCAAT after only 8 games.

I think it's too early to say whether Tennessee makes the NCAAT after just 8 games played, but I think that should they lose to Stanford, they will have to seriously make up for their lack of significant OOC wins with a strong run in the SEC. Anything less than 4th place will probably eliminate them from contention.

Calling a 27 win coach with multiple elite 8 and SEC championships an underachiever is nonsense in today's WCBB. Agreed last year was messy, but postseason should've erased that mess for most folks. It did for administration, I assure you. Bet HW got a bonus, actually.

I didn't back off supporting Holly until last year. It was difficult to support her after the poor job she did with a loaded roster. Even the tournament didn't ease that disappointment, given how thoroughly they were dismantled by a less talented Syracuse team. I'm sure there are bonus clauses for making the tournament and progressing each round, but it still does not change the fact that this was a team with FF talent that massively underachieved during the season and the tournament.

And yes, to a degree, I still think glory-day comparisons from over 10 years ago are not reasonable. I mean, I'd like to get to a place where we were one of 4 teams that were a F4 lock every year. But like we saw last year, I think those days have passed because of parity.

2009 was a bigger disaster of underachievement for TN under Pat than 2016 under Holly.

One reason I'm spending time being positive is because negativity is what breeds apathy. The overall team performance is below our standard, but shouldn't be enough for fans to give up.

I think it would have to become a ghost town in TBA before it would affect the administration.

Anyway, thank you, AMB. I appreciate your knowledge and comments.

I think some teams, Tennessee being one of them, should always be a favorite to be a FF team because of their recruiting. Same with UConn and ND. Alot of other teams come and go, but these three should be perennial favorites. Maybe not a lock, but when they have the talent, the expectation is that they should be there, just as was the case in the early 2000s after Catchings graduated and before they got Parker.

I think there's a difference between positivity and attacking posters that don't share positivity. I don't think you fall into the latter camp, but there are many on here who do the name calling crap against not just the incessant "Fire Holly!" posters, but even those showing their general displeasure to where the program's going. I appreciate having a civil discussion with you.

PS - sorry for calling you a hider handle :angel:

 

[proudone]

I'm a newbie to posting, but I've read these posts for several years. The negativity keeps getting more disconcerting and less productive. If I read these posts, what makes you think that the women who play for us don't, too? These are young people who need reinforcement and support--lord knows the coaches do, too. Do you think Holly does all this on purpose? Your posts make it sound that way. Frankly, you sound like spoiled fans who are contributing little to the team's quest to improve. I see "senior member" on some of the most negative posts. Some positive energy focused in the right place might help. Couldn't hurt, and it might even make you feel a little less grumpy.

 

[T_Vol376]

I think there's a difference between positivity and attacking posters that don't share positivity. I don't think you fall into the latter camp, but there are many on here who do the name calling crap against not just the incessant "Fire Holly!" posters, but even those showing their general displeasure to where the program's going.

Amb, for what it's worth....I do not mean to come off as an attacker - well, that's a lie - I do to those I feel are just blatantly Holly haters and say things that to me are clearly personal and with an agenda in mind. (And Lord knows I am not going to name names lest they come out and make my BP spike - which they probably will anyway!) I do NOT consider you one of those posters.

While I may not always share your sentiments, as 1CHATTVOL said, your posts do obviously contain a lot of BB knowledge and I respect that. I feel that several of "the nasties" on here like to jump on your posts in particular and agree with you (because of your BB knowledge) and use it to fuel the Holly hate train. I bet you have forgotten more about BB than most of these "latch-on posters" will ever know - certainly more than I will ever know!

Anyway, I respect and thank you for your knowledge. I would love nothing more than for the Lady Vols to get it together and have a decent season that would make you proud. I know, I know...you don't believe that will happen...but I have to believe it could. My stake in it is personal...and besides, that's just who I am.

I promise you, I can agree to disagree - it's just the nastiness from some of these folks I can't abide with. I will admit, I have let my emotions get the best of me a time or two and probably posted things I shouldn't have. I'll work on that. I much prefer civil discussions over brawling.

All that said....Go Lady Vols! 💙🍊🏀✨

 

[bobkitten]

We don't have many options this season. Non performing players need to sit and one would be Reynolds but we don't have the replacements. When a player get to four turnovers she needs to sit but we have no one to put in. Looks like a tough season and it all goes back to two former years of failed recruiting.

Looking over the box scores from this year, how many times would each player end up sitting (have made 4 TOs)?

And on the subject of TOs, how is it decided if the pass was poorly thrown or the receiver just didn't catch it?

 

[Amb3096]

T_Vol376 - Thanks. I don't purport to know more than anyone else. I've been a fan of the Lady Vols for a few decades now and over the years have started watching alot of other teams play. I would like nothing more to see the team get back to where the program has historically been, which is why I still dedicate 2 hours during gameday to watch them play. I think that's true for a lot of posters here...even the more vocal Holly detractors. At the end of the day, I think having fans that are passionate (on either side of the "Fire Holly!" fence) is better than having an echo chamber or (worse yet) an empty board because no one really cares.

 

[Amb3096]

Looking over the box scores from this year, how many times would each player end up sitting (have made 4 TOs)?

And on the subject of TOs, how is it decided if the pass was poorly thrown or the receiver just didn't catch it?

I don't think you can look at a boxscore and assess whose fault it was if there's a turnover. Even watching it, there will be those who will watch the same play and one person will say it was a bad pass and the other will say that the receiver should have been prepared for it.

In general, when it comes to drive and dishes (which pretty much is exclusively Diamond), it seems that Jaime is the only player standing around the paint that is prepared for the pass from the ball handler. Mercedes often looks likes she's surprised the ball is coming to her.

Diamond gets a lot of heat here, but I'd rather have her and her turnovers trying to make something happen vs. someone like Jordan who doesn't turn the ball over because she doesn't attack to draw in the defense and set up her teammates for easy shots. She's just there...dribbling...and when the shot clock winds down she either bricks a shot or passes it to a teammate who throws up a prayer. It's not a turnover on the box score, but IMO it's just as bad as one if not worse.

 

[T_Vol376]

T_Vol376 - Thanks. I don't purport to know more than anyone else. I've been a fan of the Lady Vols for a few decades now and over the years have started watching alot of other teams play. I would like nothing more to see the team get back to where the program has historically been, which is why I still dedicate 2 hours during gameday to watch them play. I think that's true for a lot of posters here...even the more vocal Holly detractors. At the end of the day, I think having fans that are passionate (on either side of the "Fire Holly!" fence) is better than having an echo chamber or (worse yet) an empty board because no one really cares.

Indeed...passion is a good thing. Definitely want people to stay engaged. I can assure you that you know more about BB than I do. I do need to start watching other teams and expand my knowledge!

 

[1CHATTVOL]

Amb, for what it's worth....I do not mean to come off as an attacker - well, that's a lie - I do to those I feel are just blatantly Holly haters and say things that to me are clearly personal and with an agenda in mind. (And Lord knows I am not going to name names lest they come out and make my BP spike - which they probably will anyway!) I do NOT consider you one of those posters.

While I may not always share your sentiments, as 1CHATTVOL said, your posts do obviously contain a lot of BB knowledge and I respect that. I feel that several of "the nasties" on here like to jump on your posts in particular and agree with you (because of your BB knowledge) and use it to fuel the Holly hate train. I bet you have forgotten more about BB than most of these "latch-on posters" will ever know - certainly more than I will ever know!

Anyway, I respect and thank you for your knowledge. I would love nothing more than for the Lady Vols to get it together and have a decent season that would make you proud. I know, I know...you don't believe that will happen...but I have to believe it could. My stake in it is personal...and besides, that's just who I am.

I promise you, I can agree to disagree - it's just the nastiness from some of these folks I can't abide with. I will admit, I have let my emotions get the best of me a time or two and probably posted things I shouldn't have. I'll work on that. I much prefer civil discussions over brawling.

All that said....Go Lady Vols! 💙🍊🏀✨

YASSSS! True and excellent post!

 

[T_Vol376]

YASSSS! True and excellent post!

Thank you...I meant every word of it! I've got to do a better job of not reacting to "the nasties" and agreeing to disagree. Because I am a passionate and compassionate person...sometimes my emotions get the best of me. I'm trying to do better.

It's dawned on me there are different categories of fans and the ones who don't share my sentiments are not always "the nasties," and I could probably learn a lot from some of them if I would stop letting my emotions cloud my perception. Sometimes we have to take a look in the mirror....

Here's hoping for the best for the Lady Vols, their fans and Holly.

Go Lady Vols! 💙🍊🏀

 

[1CHATTVOL]

Thank you...I meant every word of it! I've got to do a better job of not reacting to "the nasties" and agreeing to disagree. Because I am a passionate and compassionate person...sometimes my emotions get the best of me. I'm trying to do better.

It's dawned on me there are different categories of fans and the ones who don't share my sentiments are not always "the nasties," and I could probably learn a lot from some of them if I would stop letting my emotions cloud my perception. Sometimes we have to take a look in the mirror....

Here's hoping for the best for the Lady Vols, their fans and Holly.

Go Lady Vols! 💙🍊🏀

When it is family or feels like family, the comments have much more bite. I think folks don't think about that. Goodness. I'm not blind; I could find fault with our players and coaches. But to what end?

I enjoy arm-chair-quarterbacking and discussing the details. It's a great part of sports.

Just wish that more posters would be positive or constructive or at least accurate. I keep expecting folks to stand up for the team, but most every single thread becomes a Fire Holly thread. Ugh.

Well, here's to better days. Appreciate you.

 

[T_Vol376]

When it is family or feels like family, the comments have much more bite. I think folks don't think about that. Goodness. I'm not blind; I could find fault with our players and coaches. But to what end?

I enjoy arm-chair-quarterbacking and discussing the details. It's a great part of sports.

Just wish that more posters would be positive or constructive or at least accurate. I keep expecting folks to stand up for the team, but most every single thread becomes a Fire Holly thread. Ugh.

Well, here's to better days. Appreciate you.

Thank you...it sounds like we share the exact same sentiments. It sure does bite for the reasons you said. One thing I know for sure...it won't always be this way. Appreciate you too, 1CHATTVOL!

 

[Coach Jumper]

. . . . . Just wish that more posters would be positive or constructive or at least accurate. I keep expecting folks to stand up for the team, but most every single thread becomes a Fire Holly thread. Ugh....

What you may need to consider, CV, is that posters are in many variations and levels of expertise re their critique, fandom and support on VolNation.... Some are fans. Some are ex-players. Some are coaches. Some have no concept except for their history of bandwagoneering. and so forth.

For instance, I do not look at this organization as a fan. I look at this organization through the eyes of a coach of 36 years.

I do not and will not fault a player, until I experience the phenomenon personally. I do not struggle to get full effort out of my charges, and if a coach does struggle to get the effort out of their players... I don't fault the players, I fault the coach.

Holly can be thin-skinned and turn away anyone that doesn't revere her and tell her she's doing a great job. . . But in doing so, she is preventing the very change she needs.

She dismissed Meme's request to be summer-coached by me and now, when i see no significant improvement in Meme...All I can do is sit back and say, "you should have at least took a look at coach jumper"...Then I see Alexa, who I did work out with, who is performing at her highest degree and all I can do is sit back and say, "This one I did work with."

No, its not about bashing Holly for sport for me. If you follow my posts, you will see that when she warrants positive critique, I am one of the ones who will give it. . . . I look at delinquent fundamentals and I fault coaching. I look at player's lack of effort and fault coaching. I look at a bad game-plan and fault coaching...I look at a player's poor performance and fault the player, if the player is noticeably lacking in effort, etc.

I walk a very unusual like here in VN. I want to be part of the staff at UT and will stop at nothing to get that shot. I am ready to prove myself in front of Holly, her staff, and anyone else in Knoxville that wants to see if I am as good as I think I am.

I don't know who you are CV....What I do know is that you know way too much about the posters here to be a newbie....That said, I have a reasonable lack of trust for you. . . I don't know how you know my name, but I do know you knowing who I am and hiding behind avatars concerns me.

 

[1CHATTVOL]

What you may need to consider, CV, is that posters are in many variations and levels of expertise re their critique, fandom and support on VolNation.... Some are fans. Some are ex-players. Some are coaches. Some have no concept except for their history of bandwagoneering. and so forth.

For instance, I do not look at this organization as a fan. I look at this organization through rthe eyes of a coach of 36 years.

I do not and will not fault a player, until I experience the phenomenon personally. I do not struggle to get full effort out of my charges, and if a coach does struggle to get the effort out of their players... I don't fault the players, I fault the coach.

Holly can be thin-skinned and turn away anyone that doesn't revere her and tell her she's doing a great job. . . But in doing so, she is preventing the very change she needs.

She dismissed Meme's request to be summer-coached by me and now, when i see no significant improvement in Meme...All I can do is sit back and say, "you should have at least took a look at coach jumper"...Then I see Alexa, who I did work out with, who is performing at her highest degree and all I can do is sit back and say, "This one I did work with."

No, its not about bashing Holly for sport for me. If you follow my posts, you will see that when she warrants positive critique, I am one of the ones who will give it. . . . I look at delinquent fundamentals and I fault coaching. I look at player's lack of effort and fault coaching. I look at a bad game-plan and fault coaching...I look at a player's poor performance and fault the player, if the player is noticeably lacking in effort, etc.

I walk a very unusual like here in VN. I want to be part of the staff at UT and will stop at nothing to get that shot. I am ready to prove myself in front of Holly, her staff, and anyone else in Knoxville that wants to see if I am as good as I think I am.

I don't know who you are CV....What I do know is that you know way too much about the posters here to be a newbie....That said, I have a reasonable lack of trust for you. . . I don't know how you know my name, but I do know you knowing who I am and hiding behind avatars concerns me.

Wow. You said you weren't hiding. And I'm not either. We're just posters on a fan message board. You've been giving me a tough time for days, now suddenly you're concerned. Be ye not concerned.

I get that people come from different POV. I just think much of the negativity is online snide. No matter who we are, we know common manners. I would just think that those of us that love the program wouldn't tolerate all these jabs. Someone should be an Alpha and start a turnaround. But, hey, that's jmo.

I always appreciate your posts.

 

[NoBackBoard]

And yes, to a degree, I still think glory-day comparisons from over 10 years ago are not reasonable. I mean, I'd like to get to a place where we were one of 4 teams that were a F4 lock every year. But like we saw last year, I think those days have passed because of parity.

I hear a lot about parity in Wcbb... how are we judging that? An increase in first-time Final Four appearances? Different teams winning the title? More teams winning conference titles for the first time? I'm just curious as to how this is measured, if at all.

 

[1CHATTVOL]

I hear a lot about parity in Wcbb... how are we judging that? An increase in first-time Final Four appearances? Different teams winning the title? More teams winning conference titles for the first time? I'm just curious as to how this is measured, if at all.

All of those things. You can see it, too, from general competitiveness increases. Kids are staying home more often to play for the state school. You see different teams in the weekly rankings and there are more upsets and movement than in years past.

I'm sure there's been official research. Just never looked.

 

[Coach Jumper]

I hear a lot about parity in Wcbb... how are we judging that? An increase in first-time Final Four appearances? Different teams winning the title? More teams winning conference titles for the first time? I'm just curious as to how this is measured, if at all.

there is a rise of talent out there that coaches who preach older style offenses, they may not know how to get the best out of these very different brand of ballers because they're not like they used to be.

When I started out coaching the younger kids, 10-12, In 1981, they were "little girls" in the truest sense. Only the rarest ones were athletes. Most just played to be seen.
:
The last ten your old, I coached was about 10 years ago.
Her name is Te"Erica Eason. Coached her in a 18U competitive rec league in Marietta. She was Jarvis Haye's niece....She was playing in the 18U division...Opting not to play in the 12U league on my advice. . . She had a great experience.


Girls now can : Finger-roll, fade-aways, jump-hooks,,,, got em all. . . But fundamentals within the skills?

Often not.