If you're into metrics....

#26
#26
The entire purpose of play calling and play designing is putting your team in the best position to succeed. Having a run first team, where you run it on 95% of your first down plays(analytics tell you that's a stupid decision even if you're a great running team. you need more variety on first down than that, much less when you're one of the worst running teams in the FBS) and a lot of the times even on 2nd down behind this bad of an offensive line is foolish. Then when they do pass it's largely long developing routes that cause the offensive line to have to hold up against a pass rush. A pass rush that can just pin it's ears back because more than likely we're running these long developing routes on a 3rd and 9 because we ran it twice in a row. The offensive line is not good enough to do that on a consistent basis(even if they were, this kind of play calling is stupid).

The strength of this offense is it's skill position players. JG has proven to be a solid enough QB this year and has a good arm. So what do you do when you have a solid QB and the strength of your offense is at the skill positions? Well, you run things like quick slants, outs, crossers, screens and the like. What does this accomplish? Not only are these effective plays that can pick you up 4-6 yards( a nice first down play, especially compared to running it up the gut for no gain like Helton loves to do), but this has the added benefit of slowing down blitzes because teams are then more likely to drop their LBs in coverage to pick up the shorter routes. So what does that do for you? It opens up the longer developing routes because of two things. Number one, instead of our garbage o-line trying to block 6 guys, it only has to block 3 or 4 now. Number two, the corners are likely to be trying to jump the shorter routes, so stop and go routes and the like would certainly have some effect. And what do the long developing routes allow for? Easier defenses to run against because the safeties aren't creeping up towards the line of scrimmage because of the threat of those long routes.

This **** isn't rocket science.

On top of these terrible play calling tendencies that Helton possesses, the thing where JG wiggles his fingers behind his back and we run it 100% of the time after that happens needs to go. Far away. Never to be seen again.

It's dumbfounding how stubborn and idiotic Helton and play callers like him are. It's either fit his system or nothing. Completely ignore the fact that this team can't run his system effectively, he's gonna make them do it anyway.

The day CFB and the NFL are rid of these stubborn coaches and instead full of coaches like Sean McVay and Kyle Shanahan that know how adapt to their offensive skill set and adapt their offense on a weekly basis based on what defense they're playing will be a wonderful day.

And no, I was not happy with the play calling vs Auburn. We scored vs Auburn because we won a lot of 50/50 balls/JG making some great back shoulder throws, on top of thankfully Auburn being awful and giving us multiple turnovers. You go try and do that week in and week out and see how often that wins games for you. It's not a sustainable way to play offense.
Then please, go explain to the OC how he should be able to introduce new players to his new system, or suddenly know how to run a system tailored to their skill set within 6 months. Then show him how to play call with this hybrid system to your standards. You cannot install the new offensive scheme and modify it to the existing personnel at the same time. You are right, it is not rocket science, but it isn't magical mystery mountain either.

Your comments about the 50/50 balls is off as well. You do remember from the practice reports that the receivers worked extensively on back shoulder throws during the off week. Almost all of the 50/50 balls were back shoulder throws. This was even pointed out by the broadcast crew.

How do you teach a team a new offensive scheme if you don't actually run the scheme?

Sean McVay can spend unlimited amounts of time with his personnel to install changes. This is NOT the case in college.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolsLady-in-FL
#28
#28
Dooley's big problem, from my view point and limited information channels, (occasional word of mouth from friends across state) was his seeming arrogant attitude and lack of repore with high school staffs in Tennessee and our historical recruiting area.
Dooley is a pretty smart guy with a pedigree and some privilege to go with it. Lots of guys like that struggle to relate to other people. OTOH, some guys like that if set up well become really successful. Jones was a used car salesman. Used car salesmen don't make good coaches... ever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DC_Vol
#31
#31
I haven't pressed this point because people attack for the suggestion that Dooley got anything right... but the guys he brought in were better than the guys Jones brought in. None of Jones' DC's were as good as Wilcox. None of his OC's were as good as Chaney. Dooley couldn't pull it together nor did he put the energy into recruiting required to build a program.... but he had some quality assistants that often got good performance out of what they did have.

Dooley nor Butch were never qualified to be the HC at TN.
 
#32
#32
Dooley nor Butch were never qualified to be the HC at TN.
Look at your own quote just above this one. Wilcox produced some decent D's with not a lot to work with. Chaney produced a really good offense at UT. Dooley had enough smarts to choose some good assistants and then in large measure stay out of the way.

It is possible that Dooley would have been better if he had started from a better spot. Arrogant asses are tolerated as long as they are winning arrogant asses. Everyone loves a winner. Jones was never going to be anything but a used car salesman. He isn't straight with players. He doesn't manage players well by an measure. The only thing he really did well was take advantage of his new status, early playing time, and promises of a return to greatness to pull a couple of really good recruiting classes.

Dooley didn't recruit well. I'm not sure you can call it "lazy"... but I remember a report coming out that he'd limited coach travel to assure they had time with their families. That's noble if true... but it doesn't get the job done.
 
#33
#33
Look at your own quote just above this one. Wilcox produced some decent D's with not a lot to work with. Chaney produced a really good offense at UT. Dooley had enough smarts to choose some good assistants and then in large measure stay out of the way.

It is possible that Dooley would have been better if he had started from a better spot. Arrogant asses are tolerated as long as they are winning arrogant asses. Everyone loves a winner. Jones was never going to be anything but a used car salesman. He isn't straight with players. He doesn't manage players well by an measure. The only thing he really did well was take advantage of his new status, early playing time, and promises of a return to greatness to pull a couple of really good recruiting classes.

Dooley didn't recruit well. I'm not sure you can call it "lazy"... but I remember a report coming out that he'd limited coach travel to assure they had time with their families. That's noble if true... but it doesn't get the job done.
He thought it would recruit itself if he did all the other stuff. I am sure it kind of worked that way for dad and Saban.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Weezer and sjt18
#34
#34
The entire purpose of play calling and play designing is putting your team in the best position to succeed. Having a run first team, where you run it on 95% of your first down plays(analytics tell you that's a stupid decision even if you're a great running team. you need more variety on first down than that, much less when you're one of the worst running teams in the FBS) and a lot of the times even on 2nd down behind this bad of an offensive line is foolish. Then when they do pass it's largely long developing routes that cause the offensive line to have to hold up against a pass rush. A pass rush that can just pin it's ears back because more than likely we're running these long developing routes on a 3rd and 9 because we ran it twice in a row. The offensive line is not good enough to do that on a consistent basis(even if they were, this kind of play calling is stupid).

The strength of this offense is it's skill position players. JG has proven to be a solid enough QB this year and has a good arm. So what do you do when you have a solid QB and the strength of your offense is at the skill positions? Well, you run things like quick slants, outs, crossers, screens and the like. What does this accomplish? Not only are these effective plays that can pick you up 4-6 yards( a nice first down play, especially compared to running it up the gut for no gain like Helton loves to do), but this has the added benefit of slowing down blitzes because teams are then more likely to drop their LBs in coverage to pick up the shorter routes. So what does that do for you? It opens up the longer developing routes because of two things. Number one, instead of our garbage o-line trying to block 6 guys, it only has to block 3 or 4 now. Number two, the corners are likely to be trying to jump the shorter routes, so stop and go routes and the like would certainly have some effect. And what do the long developing routes allow for? Easier defenses to run against because the safeties aren't creeping up towards the line of scrimmage because of the threat of those long routes.

This **** isn't rocket science.

On top of these terrible play calling tendencies that Helton possesses, the thing where JG wiggles his fingers behind his back and we run it 100% of the time after that happens needs to go. Far away. Never to be seen again.

It's dumbfounding how stubborn and idiotic Helton and play callers like him are. It's either fit his system or nothing. Completely ignore the fact that this team can't run his system effectively, he's gonna make them do it anyway.

The day CFB and the NFL are rid of these stubborn coaches and instead full of coaches like Sean McVay and Kyle Shanahan that know how adapt to their offensive skill set and adapt their offense on a weekly basis based on what defense they're playing will be a wonderful day.

And no, I was not happy with the play calling vs Auburn. We scored vs Auburn because we won a lot of 50/50 balls/JG making some great back shoulder throws, on top of thankfully Auburn being awful and giving us multiple turnovers. You go try and do that week in and week out and see how often that wins games for you. It's not a sustainable way to play offense.

While many of the fans, wish to see explosive plays, 8 yard gains running, blah blah this and blah blah that, win the game SEC East this year. Pruitt isn't concerned with this year in the same way. He's doing the process as we've all heard many times. Part of this process is changing weaknesses to strengths. A major weakness this team has had for many years. Lining up and running the ball. Why? Attitude. It's hard to line up and punch the other guy in the mouth, even harder when he knows it's coming, is bigger, more trained and has better buddies lined up beside him to help. How are they fixing this? Making them run it over and over and over until they toughen up and get it right. Or quit. It's about changing mentality for the future. We can't complain that Tennessee can't get two yards for a first down or push one into the end zone if they never develop the confidence and persona of being a smash mouth team. Criticizing a coach because of playcalling when he isn't the one entirely in control of that is crazy. Pruitt, and company, have decided that this is how to get the team where they want it to go. Coupled with changing over from Lyle's offense and less than one year in the new system which means there are no veterans who know all the details and can help the younger. As the season has progressed, more and more of the playbook is being absorbed, utilized, reviewed, corrected. Each new week brings more and more options to the play calling, and by the end of the season, they will have a large portion of their plays running efficiently. Those players who return next year will bring that base with them and then we will see a more true representation of the Pruitt/Helton Experience. I, for one, think it will be a helluva show and will improve each game.

My 2 cents, not worth much I know.
 
#35
#35
People seem to forget that Dooley had some pretty good offenses, but the D couldn’t keep the other team from scoring. During his final years we had quiet a few high scoring games where the O played awesome but the D just couldn’t stop the other team. Dooleys downfall was that the O got tired of scoring 30+ and still losing cause the D couldn’t stop a peewee team.
 
#36
#36
Then please, go explain to the OC how he should be able to introduce new players to his new system, or suddenly know how to run a system tailored to their skill set within 6 months. Then show him how to play call with this hybrid system to your standards. You cannot install the new offensive scheme and modify it to the existing personnel at the same time. You are right, it is not rocket science, but it isn't magical mystery mountain either.

Your comments about the 50/50 balls is off as well. You do remember from the practice reports that the receivers worked extensively on back shoulder throws during the off week. Almost all of the 50/50 balls were back shoulder throws. This was even pointed out by the broadcast crew.

How do you teach a team a new offensive scheme if you don't actually run the scheme?

Sean McVay can spend unlimited amounts of time with his personnel to install changes. This is NOT the case in college.

It's late and after a long work day but you get a like for "magical mystery mountain".

Seriously I re-read it like 3 times to make sure I read it correctly.

Go Vols!!!!
 
#37
#37
It is possible that Dooley would have been better if he had started from a better spot. Arrogant asses are tolerated as long as they are winning arrogant asses. Everyone loves a winner. Jones was never going to be anything but a used car salesman. He isn't straight with players. He doesn't manage players well by an measure. The only thing he really did well was take advantage of his new status, early playing time, and promises of a return to greatness to pull a couple of really good recruiting classes.

If Dooley started from 'a better spot', he might've simply looked like Charlie Weis: produced early results and then performance drops off quickly after a few years. He didn't do a whole lot right other than hire Wilcox and bring in good WRs. He didn't even hire Cheney --- Cheney was forced on him as a condition of employment (that was a big part of the reason Cutcliffe didn't want the job; he wanted to hire his own assistants). Dooley's Sunseri hire suggests that the Wilcox hire might've simply been dumb luck. Sunseri is easily the worst assistant hire at UT in the 40 years, if not all-time.

Dooley was also a terrible motivator and terrible at adjustments. Our performance always seemed to drop off in the 2nd half under Dooley; the team would come out as if they didn't even care. As bad as the last season under Butch Jones was, I've never seen teams ever play as unmotivated as they did during the Dooley years. That Kentucky loss under Dooley is still IMO the worst loss in UT history.

Dooley's recruiting cratered very quickly. He only recruited well the first 12 months. He alienated most of the high school coaches.

Dooley will always be, in my view, the worst coach in UT history.

There's no scenario where he was going to succeed long-term. Even if he inherited an abundance of riches, his results would've dropped off by Year 3 or Year 4.
 
#38
#38
Dooley will always be, in my view, the worst coach in UT history.
.
We'll just have to disagree on that. Butch Jones IMO is by far the worst coach UT has had in my lifetime. Dooley wasn't an "expert" but he was willing to let others be the experts. He failed in other things- particularly recruiting.

Jones wasn't an expert either. But he thought he was. He made everyone who worked for him worse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DC_Vol
#39
#39
Then please, go explain to the OC how he should be able to introduce new players to his new system, or suddenly know how to run a system tailored to their skill set within 6 months. Then show him how to play call with this hybrid system to your standards. You cannot install the new offensive scheme and modify it to the existing personnel at the same time. You are right, it is not rocket science, but it isn't magical mystery mountain either.

He had all off-season to introduce them to a system. And these concepts I introduced don't require some change in system. Helton has plays in his playbook that use quick slants, outs, screens and everything else I mentioned. It's just, you know, calling them. You can most certainly modify your play calling to fit your personnel.

Your comments about the 50/50 balls is off as well. You do remember from the practice reports that the receivers worked extensively on back shoulder throws during the off week. Almost all of the 50/50 balls were back shoulder throws. This was even pointed out by the broadcast crew.

It wouldn't be possible for me to care less about what players and coaches say about practice, nor is that even relevant to the point I made. They can work on getting good at back shoulder throws down the field all they want. Doesn't mean your offense can survive off of that.

How do you teach a team a new offensive scheme if you don't actually run the scheme?

Acting as if it's difficult for football players to execute plays that you already know are in the playbook is not difficult. Helton just has to call the plays.

Sean McVay can spend unlimited amounts of time with his personnel to install changes. This is NOT the case in college.

You want to freshen yourself up on NFL rules regarding practice as that is not even remotely the case.
 
#40
#40
Acting as if it's difficult for football players to execute plays that you already know are in the playbook is not difficult. Helton just has to call the plays.
.
Knowing a play and executing it aren't the same thing and yeah... the execution part and especially in sync with everyone else on the field is difficult. It is worse when you've been coached by Jones previously... it is like everyone is learning the right way for the first time and especially on the OL.

Then you have to look at the OL Jones left. Undersized... not good depth... underdeveloped... and poorly coached.

I still think there's talent on this team. I had no idea their development was as far behind as it appears to be.
 
#41
#41
Knowing a play and executing it aren't the same thing and yeah... the execution part and especially in sync with everyone else on the field is difficult. It is worse when you've been coached by Jones previously... it is like everyone is learning the right way for the first time and especially on the OL.

Then you have to look at the OL Jones left. Undersized... not good depth... underdeveloped... and poorly coached.

I still think there's talent on this team. I had no idea their development was as far behind as it appears to be.

Well maybe if Helton had spent a little time in the off-season teaching them those plays instead of how to just run it up the gut for no gain over and over again maybe we'd do a bit better.
 
#42
#42
I never thought we should have gotten rid of Chief, but what do I know.

His prevent defense prevents nothing. Good DC for 58 minutes, but a liability for the last two. If you aren't up by 14+, you're in trouble.
 
#43
#43
The entire purpose of play calling and play designing is putting your team in the best position to succeed. Having a run first team, where you run it on 95% of your first down plays(analytics tell you that's a stupid decision even if you're a great running team. you need more variety on first down than that, much less when you're one of the worst running teams in the FBS) and a lot of the times even on 2nd down behind this bad of an offensive line is foolish. Then when they do pass it's largely long developing routes that cause the offensive line to have to hold up against a pass rush. A pass rush that can just pin it's ears back because more than likely we're running these long developing routes on a 3rd and 9 because we ran it twice in a row. The offensive line is not good enough to do that on a consistent basis(even if they were, this kind of play calling is stupid).

The strength of this offense is it's skill position players. JG has proven to be a solid enough QB this year and has a good arm. So what do you do when you have a solid QB and the strength of your offense is at the skill positions? Well, you run things like quick slants, outs, crossers, screens and the like. What does this accomplish? Not only are these effective plays that can pick you up 4-6 yards( a nice first down play, especially compared to running it up the gut for no gain like Helton loves to do), but this has the added benefit of slowing down blitzes because teams are then more likely to drop their LBs in coverage to pick up the shorter routes. So what does that do for you? It opens up the longer developing routes because of two things. Number one, instead of our garbage o-line trying to block 6 guys, it only has to block 3 or 4 now. Number two, the corners are likely to be trying to jump the shorter routes, so stop and go routes and the like would certainly have some effect. And what do the long developing routes allow for? Easier defenses to run against because the safeties aren't creeping up towards the line of scrimmage because of the threat of those long routes.

This **** isn't rocket science.

On top of these terrible play calling tendencies that Helton possesses, the thing where JG wiggles his fingers behind his back and we run it 100% of the time after that happens needs to go. Far away. Never to be seen again.

It's dumbfounding how stubborn and idiotic Helton and play callers like him are. It's either fit his system or nothing. Completely ignore the fact that this team can't run his system effectively, he's gonna make them do it anyway.

The day CFB and the NFL are rid of these stubborn coaches and instead full of coaches like Sean McVay and Kyle Shanahan that know how adapt to their offensive skill set and adapt their offense on a weekly basis based on what defense they're playing will be a wonderful day.

And no, I was not happy with the play calling vs Auburn. We scored vs Auburn because we won a lot of 50/50 balls/JG making some great back shoulder throws, on top of thankfully Auburn being awful and giving us multiple turnovers. You go try and do that week in and week out and see how often that wins games for you. It's not a sustainable way to play offense.

Isn't it incredible how I could point this stuff out but it took Helton to the 8th game of the season to start doing it?

And with us doing it we're moving the ball pretty much at will and JG is taking less hits.

As I said, this isn't rocket science. But for Helton it was pretty damn difficult it seems.
 
#44
#44
Isn't it incredible how I could point this stuff out but it took Helton to the 8th game of the season to start doing it?

And with us doing it we're moving the ball pretty much at will and JG is taking less hits.

As I said, this isn't rocket science. But for Helton it was pretty damn difficult it seems.

I think it had some to do with what the offense was capable of as well. Might be some of both but I think they were trying to figure out what the players could do.
 

VN Store



Back
Top