Possible 9-4 season and still unhappy fans!

[ReaderVol]

I think it's how 3 of the 4 losses came about that has people upset. It's not the 9 and 4 record.

And I think what upsets the majority of fans is the absolute lack of respect and credit that the loud minority on this site gives this team and staff. There's a helluva lot more to be proud of with Tennessee football right now than negative.

 

[thebjd]

Do you not remember how bad UGA, SCAR, Bama, KY, and Vanderbilt were during our golden years of the late 90s? At one point we had a 20+ year streak against Ky, a 9 year streak against UGA and a 7 year streak against Bama. If you're faulting Jones for "only" beating the bad teams, than you're also basically saying a HoF coach did the exact same thing.

While people diminish Fulmer's accomplishments by looking at the opponents as being weaker and having worse records it truly is not the case and Fulmer gave most of them one loss per year. That was nearly a 10% drop in win percentage on an 11 game schedule. This myth of the conference being weaker then is just that (East Division). There were three ten win teams in the East in 1997 (Fulmer's first conference title). The difference is we were elite. Below is the winning percentage of the teams you referenced during each coach's tenure. These teams now pad their schedule with a 12th game which is an assured beatdown of a terrible school. I believe every team will also lose this Saturday with the exception of Alabama and UGA which will further lower their winning percentage during Butch's tenure.

While Fulmer was the head coach at Tennessee Georgia won 71% of their games. While Butch has been at Tennessee Georgia has won 70% of their games.

Alabama won 65% of their games while Fulmer was at Tennessee. While Butch has been at Tennessee Bama has won 87% of their games.

Kentucky won 40% of their games while Fulmer coached and has won 35% of their games while Butch has been the coach.

South Carolina won 47% of their games while Fulmer was the coach and has won 55% of their games while Butch has been the coach.

Florida won 78% of their games when Fulmer was at Tennessee and has won only 60% of their games while Butch has been at Tennessee.

 

[Wylo]

And I think what upsets the majority of fans is the absolute lack of respect and credit that the loud minority on this site gives this team and staff. There's a helluva lot more to be proud of with Tennessee football right now than negative.

This is true. But the scene isn't as rosy as you guys try to paint it.

It's not just "oh darn, we lost 4 games." All is well.

Butch hasn't figured out how to coach in the big leagues. That should terrify you as a fan.

 

[Brasszilla]

This is true. But the scene isn't as rosy as you guys try to paint it.

It's not just "oh darn, we lost 4 games." All is well.

Butch hasn't figured out how to coach in the big leagues. That should terrify you as a fan.

your "opinions" of this team and coaches terrify me.

 

[Wylo]

your "opinions" of this team and coaches terrify me.

Then you don't have enough going on in your life.

 

[daj2576]

While people diminish Fulmer's accomplishments by looking at the opponents as being weaker and having worse records it truly is not the case and Fulmer gave most of them one loss per year. That was nearly a 10% drop in win percentage on an 11 game schedule. This myth of the conference being weaker then is just that (East Division). There were three ten win teams in the East in 1997 (Fulmer's first conference title). The difference is we were elite. Below is the winning percentage of the teams you referenced during each coach's tenure. These teams now pad their schedule with a 12th game which is an assured beatdown of a terrible school. I believe every team will also lose this Saturday with the exception of Alabama and UGA which will further lower their winning percentage during Butch's tenure.

While Fulmer was the head coach at Tennessee Georgia won 71% of their games. While Butch has been at Tennessee Georgia has won 70% of their games.

Alabama won 65% of their games while Fulmer was at Tennessee. While Butch has been at Tennessee Bama has won 87% of their games.

Kentucky won 40% of their games while Fulmer coached and has won 35% of their games while Butch has been the coach.

South Carolina won 47% of their games while Fulmer was the coach and has won 55% of their games while Butch has been the coach.

Florida won 78% of their games when Fulmer was at Tennessee and has won only 60% of their games while Butch has been at Tennessee.

Interesting research. I think we actually are saying the same thing, but I really can't tell.

It is far too long a conversation to get into about how misleading, if not totally inconsequential, looking at winning percentages is when trying to compare quality across a linear progression. That would be like saying that you could take one of Neyland's undefeated and unscored on teams and expect them to win a single game against modern athletes.

What can be used to determine quality of a team is how they recruit (this is still a flawed methodology, but is far superior to looking at raw wins/losses). What is inarguable is how along a progression going back to 2005 (as far as the data takes me) the SEC as a whole has gotten much more talented meaning that the deviation from most talented to least talented has actually been cut in about half.

In 2005, for instance, here are the four year trailing recruiting averages of many of the teams you mentioned.

Alabama: 30.3
South Carolina: 20
Kentucky: 69.5
Vanderbilt: 93.3
Georgia: 7
Florida: 11.8
Tennessee: 11

in 2015, here are the numbers, and the trends.

Alabama: 1.25 (+29)
South Carolina: 17.75 (+2.25)
Kentucky: 35.25 (+34)
Vanderbilt: (+57)
Georgia: 9.5 (-2.5)
Florida: 9.5 (+2.3)
Tennessee: 11.75 (-.75)

What you see are considerable improvements in raw talent over a ten year period for teams like Kentucky, Vanderbilt and Alabama. What you also see are relatively stable recruiting for teams like Georgia, Florida and Tennessee.

What these numbers show is that in 2005, Tennessee should have gone 5-1 against that schedule due to the relative talent advantage (the only real indication of strength of schedule). And, in 2015 Tennessee should have gone 3-3 due to a relative talent disadvantage. In other words, Fulmer won a great deal of games but with a much larger relative talent advantage than Butch enjoys.

When Vanderbilt and Kentucky are recruiting in 2015 to about the level of talent that Alabama was putting on the field in 2005, it is safe to say that the east is actually more difficult now than it was then.

Further, let us look at the actual talent expectations for these teams in 2015. The chart below shows the numbers that I made on signing day in February. The SEC east has 3 teams that in league play performed exactly as talent would predict, and no teams in the east performed outside of one standard deviation from those predictions. What this means is that, as per usual, talent is a great predictor of success. Couple that with looking at trends over time, and I think it is clear that the east is actually more talented and thus more difficult than it was even a decade ago.

View attachment SEC predicted v. actual (2015).xlsx - Evaluations (2).pdf

 

[thebjd]

Interesting research. I think we actually are saying the same thing, but I really can't tell.

It is far too long a conversation to get into about how misleading, if not totally inconsequential, looking at winning percentages is when trying to compare quality across a linear progression. That would be like saying that you could take one of Neyland's undefeated and unscored on teams and expect them to win a single game against modern athletes.

What can be used to determine quality of a team is how they recruit (this is still a flawed methodology, but is far superior to looking at raw wins/losses). What is inarguable is how along a progression going back to 2005 (as far as the data takes me) the SEC as a whole has gotten much more talented meaning that the deviation from most talented to least talented has actually been cut in about half.

In 2005, for instance, here are the four year trailing recruiting averages of many of the teams you mentioned.

Alabama: 30.3
South Carolina: 20
Kentucky: 69.5
Vanderbilt: 93.3
Georgia: 7
Florida: 11.8
Tennessee: 11

in 2015, here are the numbers, and the trends.

Alabama: 1.25 (+29)
South Carolina: 17.75 (+2.25)
Kentucky: 35.25 (+34)
Vanderbilt: (+57)
Georgia: 9.5 (-2.5)
Florida: 9.5 (+2.3)
Tennessee: 11.75 (-.75)

What you see are considerable improvements in raw talent over a ten year period for teams like Kentucky, Vanderbilt and Alabama. What you also see are relatively stable recruiting for teams like Georgia, Florida and Tennessee.

What these numbers show is that in 2005, Tennessee should have gone 5-1 against that schedule due to the relative talent advantage (the only real indication of strength of schedule). And, in 2015 Tennessee should have gone 3-3 due to a relative talent disadvantage. In other words, Fulmer won a great deal of games but with a much larger relative talent advantage than Butch enjoys.

When Vanderbilt and Kentucky are recruiting in 2015 to about the level of talent that Alabama was putting on the field in 2005, it is safe to say that the east is actually more difficult now than it was then.

Further, let us look at the actual talent expectations for these teams in 2015. The chart below shows the numbers that I made on signing day in February. The SEC east has 3 teams that in league play performed exactly as talent would predict, and no teams in the east performed outside of one standard deviation from those predictions. What this means is that, as per usual, talent is a great predictor of success. Couple that with looking at trends over time, and I think it is clear that the east is actually more talented and thus more difficult than it was even a decade ago.

View attachment 103649

My point is the teams were playing the same teams and the records were about the same and the dominant team in the east is significantly down from where they were during the entire Fulmer tenure. There is no juggernaut in the east and the division is as bad as it has been since the SEC split.

 

[daj2576]

My point is the teams were playing the same teams and the records were about the same and the dominant team in the east is significantly down from where they were during the entire Fulmer tenure. There is no juggernaut in the east and the division is as bad as it has been since the SEC split.

I agree with your first point.

The second is exactly what I am attempting to show you is incorrect.

The fact that the top of the east could be so dominant is a testimony to the relative dearth in talent that the top east teams enjoyed. Now there are three SEC east teams recruiting at about the top 10 level, and all in the top 40. A decade ago, there were consistently two in that top tier, and you'd have to go down about 100 schools to get all of the teams in the east. Wins are much more stable when the gap in talent is large, like then, than when the gap is relatively small, like now.

To beat the point home: the east is more difficult than it was a decade ago, not less. It is folly to say the east is down simply because the west has gotten even better than the east in that time. The SEC overall is better, as are both divisions in comparison to themselves. The west jumped the east, but that has nothing to do with the east becoming far more talented from where it was.

 

[TennFan]

Can never satisfy some people!

 

[Elhanan]

The difference a year makes.

 

[SobeVol]

I think you may be being very generous with that 9-4.
If we play as undisciplined against Kentucky it's a loss and vandy played ga better than we did.

 

[Wylo]

Yeah, Wylo.

No, I love 9-4. Especially during national championship runs.

I love the discipline and obvious coaching up of the quarterback...


Mmmmmm mmmmmm good.

 

[orangerush]

9 wins would be great if that was all the games we played in a season.

 

[Burger]

So no improvement with a older players is a good thing?

I should start working on that teleporter. I might be done with it before Botch Jones is a great coach.

 

[EZE]

I have been a Butch supporter and still don't think he should be fired, BUT C'MON. If you aren't critical of him for this season, you haven't been watching. This team has played uninspired football from the first snap of the first game. There is something wrong and it is on Butch to fix it, even if it means cleaning house on the assistant coaching front.

This team is more likely to go 7-5 or 6-6 right now than 9-3. Just a cluster____ of a season by this coaching staff. A complete breakdown and failure.

 

[EZE]

This is true. But the scene isn't as rosy as you guys try to paint it.

It's not just "oh darn, we lost 4 games." All is well.

Butch hasn't figured out how to coach in the big leagues. That should terrify you as a fan.

Bingo, it is okay to be rationally critical. And it is warranted right now. This staff has grossly mismanaged this once-promising season, and it probably started in the offseason into fall camp and into the season.

 

[midstate]

Been watching the Vols since Bill Battle was the coach. Been through many ups and downs. This is the most undisciplined team that has ever worn the Orange. Why criticize the coaches? Because his team shows no signs of understanding fundamentals, especially ball security. Because we have left 5 wins on the field the past 2 years due to issues with fundamentals and player development. Because they have not developed an offensive line since they have been there. Because the offensive scheme is moribund until they go into panic mode. The current coaching staff has shown that they are the kings of pithy slogans and overused cliches, but nothing at player development. Butch Jones is to UT football what Kevin O'Neill was to basketball. Dooley was the Wade Houston. He has revived it and given it a pulse again, but he has hit his ceiling. Time for a coaching staff that can make us relevant in the playoff hunt and competitive against the big dogs. Let us hope the new AD is willing to recruit a heavy hitter to come here and push us over the top.

 

[VOLED]

no fire whatsoever. It was a comedy of errors after an off week. Nobody would have been happy with a loss, but did you watch the game? At least play somewhere near what you are capable of. I understand no team will play at their best every game, but this was unacceptable (Butch's words). We did not come to win.
That is scary.

 

[n_huffhines]

I don't feel entitled to 12 wins every year and I am not raging at Butch and the staff, but he's still gotta go.

Outside of talent, the onfield product is just not good. If we want to ever be title contenders, we need a staff who can prepare our team to look sharp against any opponent, and especially after 2 weeks of practice for a terrible team with a 17 YO QB...i've mostly given Butch a pass, but this was the final straw. In 8 games, there is not one you can point to and say "that's a well-coached team."

Thank you for filling the cupboard. Thank you for beating Florida. Time to part ways.

 

[EZE]

And I think what upsets the majority of fans is the absolute lack of respect and credit that the loud minority on this site gives this team and staff. There's a helluva lot more to be proud of with Tennessee football right now than negative.

I don't disagree with this, but you cannot deny that Butch completely shat the bed with this team. He should be embarrassed with the way they have played this entire season. They invent ways to make mistakes.