Recruiting Forum: Football Talk XV

Status
Not open for further replies.
#6,451
#6,451
DD4ME said:
They are already late out of the gate.
Click to expand...

i read somewhere that michigan was saving millions by keeping him until december. theyve been actively seeking out candidates even though hes technically still the head coach.

Edit: oops obviously hes just been fired. will try to find if they did save the millions..must have been december 1.
 
Last edited:
#6,453
#6,453
chavisut said:
Sutton had a sophomore slump?

Statistically?
Click to expand...

Not a slump in play just in that they threw away from him. I believe Barnett will still be a phenom but teams will scheme away from him and more importantly he'll be sharing sacks with guys like Khalil.
 
#6,454
#6,454
Crowder, sophomore Dylan Wiesman (the current starter) and freshman Coleman Thomas are potential candidates, but don’t forget the possibility of versatile junior Kyler Kerbyson. Former Vols O-line coach Sam Pittman (now at Arkansas) once insisted to GoVols247 that he thought center might actually be Kerbyson’s best position, and if the Vols get others to step up at offensive tackle, that could be a possibility. Kerbyson has worked at center some this season in practice, and he likes playing the position. He’ll play anywhere but knows guard and center are his best chances to get paid at the next level.
Click to expand...

This is from 247 today.
 
#6,456
#6,456
chavisut said:
Sutton had a sophomore slump?

Statistically?
Click to expand...

I had "assumed" Sutton had less stats this year. I was wrong he had more in every category except sacks and TD's. Just seemed like they never threw his way. Which is good.
 
#6,457
#6,457
DD4ME said:
I envision a Sophomore slump only because everyone will be keyed on him. And he'll have more playmakers around him. Kind of similar to Sutton. Maggit will have the NFL year he deserves though.
Click to expand...

If you consider teams pretty much ignoring your side of the field a slump, then yes, I suppose Cam was in a slump this year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,458
#6,458
tomq_123 said:
1390964103f2c371_l.jpg
Click to expand...

been trying for a minute to figure out why those trees were so short......wow
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,459
#6,459
volsohard99 said:
yeah every contract is different. they're probably both technically buyouts. it just depends on what side wants out... the coach, so he can take another job; or the school because they are looking to hire another coach. either way you're getting the coach out of his contract.

but they call it the "buyout clause" when the contract states that if you want to take a job while under contract with our school you have to pay x. and typically the school that wants to hire that coach will pay it for them as part of their new contract.

had dallas wanted dooley before we fired him, then dooley (dallas) would have to pay tennessee whatever the buyout was. the buyout wouldnt be related to the salary the school planned on paying him through the rest of the contract because the school would be relieved of paying that since the coach broke contract by taking another job. but because tennessee fired dooley, tennessee had to pay whatever was left on his contract (possibly minus what dallas is paying him if the contract said that).

my point was those two scenarios are different with different figures. so you cant compare what we are paying dooley to fire him with what florida would have to pay mcelwain to hire him.
Click to expand...

In addition, my understanding was that Dooley did not have a mitigating clause. We payed him $5 million regardless (or irregardless) of what Dallas paid him. The assisant coaches had mitigating clauses, so we only paid the difference of what Chaney or Sunseri were making at their new jobs.
 
#6,460
#6,460
TriedAndTrueVOL said:
If you consider teams pretty much ignoring your side of the field a slump, then yes, I suppose Cam was in a slump this year.
Click to expand...

I had a poor choice of words but what I meant was when you are a "sack" guy then that's what everyone looks at. More than casual fans know what contributions get made but for many it's just how many sacks. Barnett put up phenom numbers and we have a host of dline talent coming in. His numbers could explode but from where they are already that'll be hard. For your average RF poster we'll know like Cam how much he is really bringing to the table but no so average fans may look at it as a drop off.

Closest comparison is EB and INT record for what I meant. Everyone knows EB did not have a slump.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,461
#6,461
DD4ME said:
I had "assumed" Sutton had less stats this year. I was wrong he had more in every category except sacks and TD's. Just seemed like they never threw his way. Which is good.
Click to expand...

Five fewer tackles, one less sack.

One more INT, four more pass breakups.

They don't track "thrown-to" or passes completed against so it's hard to compare those.
 
#6,462
#6,462
DD4ME said:
I had a poor choice of words but what I meant was when you are a "sack" guy then that's what everyone looks at. More than casual fans know what contributions get made but for many it's just how many sacks. Barnett put up phenom numbers and we have a host of dline talent coming in. His numbers could explode but from where they are already that'll be hard. For your average RF poster we'll know like Cam how much he is really bringing to the table but no so average fans may look at it as a drop off.

Closest comparison is EB and INT record for what I meant. Everyone knows EB did not have a slump.
Click to expand...

Ok I gotcha. :hi:
 
#6,463
#6,463
VolGee4 said:
In addition, my understanding was that Dooley did not have a mitigating clause. We payed him $5 million regardless (or irregardless) of what Dallas paid him. The assisant coaches had mitigating clauses, so we only paid the difference of what Chaney or Sunseri were making at their new jobs.
Click to expand...

You know irregardless is not a real word right? :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#6,464
#6,464
DD4ME said:
I had a poor choice of words but what I meant was when you are a "sack" guy then that's what everyone looks at. More than casual fans know what contributions get made but for many it's just how many sacks. Barnett put up phenom numbers and we have a host of dline talent coming in. His numbers could explode but from where they are already that'll be hard. For your average RF poster we'll know like Cam how much he is really bringing to the table but no so average fans may look at it as a drop off.

Closest comparison is EB and INT record for what I meant. Everyone knows EB did not have a slump.
Click to expand...

I watched a little bit of Garrett in a game last week or two weeks ago. If it was any indication of his overall game, I'd take Barnett every day of the week and twice on Saturday. Barnett is a much more complete player by far. It wasn't even close. Again, it was a small sample size, but Garrett did nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#6,467
#6,467
tomq_123 said:
1390964103f2c371_l.jpg
Click to expand...




Interesting. Drove through an area that looked just like this near Lassen Volcanic National Park with my family in the early 1980's. I thought the snow was maybe 18-20 feet deep on the side of the road in some places. It was kind of scary worrying if the snow was going to fall on our car. The Park is in northern California.
 
#6,469
#6,469
WriterVol said:
I watched a little bit of Garrett in a game last week or two weeks ago. If it was any indication of his overall game, I'd take Barnett every day of the week and twice on Saturday. Barnett is a much more complete player by far. It wasn't even close. Again, it was a small sample size, but Garrett did nothing.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%. Not even close and I tried to be objective. I have watched Garrett play in 3 games. He excels only on pass rushing. Barnett is a total package - which is amazing as a true freshman. As a comparison I watched a lot of Clowney, including a couple games in HS. If Clowney was forced to play his position and not freelance every down he was just adequate. He really did not like bull rushing if he could not get under the pads of the O-lineman and could not overpower most O-linemen straight up on run or pass blocking. His quickness and pursuit are off the charts. Barnett can do all of it well and will just get better at each.

Kind of like in baseball and being a 5 tool player. Barnett is that guy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,470
#6,470
If we have even just 3 immediate contributors next year from the 2015 class, we'll be in great shape with all the sophomores stepping up.

I think the Barnett/Hurd/Pearson combo of next year's class will be Tuttle, Kamara, and Jack Jones. I also think Jones will start on the OL.
 
#6,471
#6,471
WriterVol said:
I watched a little bit of Garrett in a game last week or two weeks ago. If it was any indication of his overall game, I'd take Barnett every day of the week and twice on Saturday. Barnett is a much more complete player by far. It wasn't even close. Again, it was a small sample size, but Garrett did nothing.
Click to expand...

I've seen several commentators say similar things. Garrett's numbers are good. Barnett's numbers are against better competition.

Majority of Garrett's supposedly came against the weaker OOC teams they played and the majority of Barnett's came against our SEC competition.

I haven't actually looked it up to verify, so I'm just going to assume the commentators did.
 
#6,472
#6,472
Vols4us said:
I agree 100%. Not even close and I tried to be objective. I have watched Garrett play in 3 games. He excels only on pass rushing. Barnett is a total package - which is amazing as a true freshman. As a comparison I watched a lot of Clowney, including a couple games in HS. If Clowney was forced to play his position and not freelance every down he was just adequate. He really did not like bull rushing if he could not get under the pads of the O-lineman and could not overpower most O-linemen straight up on run or pass blocking. His quickness and pursuit are off the charts. Barnett can do all of it well and will just get better at each.

Kind of like in baseball and being a 5 tool player. Barnett is that guy.
Click to expand...

Yes, a much more complete player. They ran right at Garrett and just blew him out of the play. It was to the point that he was a liability. I don't remember seeing that happen to Barnett even once this season. He does well against the run and the pass. He has size and speed.
 
#6,473
#6,473
BaldBiker said:
I've seen several commentators say similar things. Garrett's numbers are good. Barnett's numbers are against better competition.

Majority of Garrett's supposedly came against the weaker OOC teams they played and the majority of Barnett's came against our SEC competition.

I haven't actually looked it up to verify, so I'm just going to assume the commentators did.
Click to expand...

I can see Garrett's numbers really going down next season unless he really works on his run support.
 
New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement



Back
Top