Butch says it takes 6 to 7 years to build a program in the SEC

#1,078
#1,078
ReaderVol said:
Seems to be. Debating with him is always at a different level. He doesn't bash and spew hate like many others. When he has a criticism it's legit and he's respectful to the players, coaches and program. He is not a negavol.
Click to expand...

That's funny coming from you. You and a few others are quick to call names. That is typical from your side of the argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#1,081
#1,081
Bump (didn't want to start a new thread.....SIAP)

Frank Beamer Stats:

First 6 years at VT (24-40-2)
Last 23 years at VT (211-80-2)

235-120-2

Pretty much backs up Butchs claim (although it isn't the SEC) "No one would survive those first six years in today's climate" - ESPN

Anyone else see this stat on the GT/VT broadcast tonight? Thought it was interesting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,082
#1,082
catchnburn said:
Bump (didn't want to start a new thread.....SIAP)

Frank Beamer Stats:

First 6 years at VT (24-40-2)
Last 23 years at VT (211-80-2)

235-120-2

Pretty much backs up Butchs claim (although it isn't the SEC) "No one would survive those first six years in today's climate" - ESPN

Anyone else see this stat on the GT/VT broadcast tonight? Thought it was interesting.
Click to expand...

Tennessee is not Virginia Tech in the late 80's/early 90's. It does not take six years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#1,083
#1,083
tvolsfan said:
Tennessee is not Virginia Tech in the late 80's/early 90's. It does not take six years.
Click to expand...

The more I look at the flow of talent through the team (on this other thread, http://www.volnation.com/forum/tenn...uiting-depth-expectations-2.html#post12073854 ), the more I understand Butch's perspective.

Now, I firmly believe the guy is trying to build in padding, and 6-7 years is a bit fat.

But I'm seeing significant improvement in depth between year 3 and 4, to the tune of possibly 20+ effective additional talented players' worth of depth.

If it's still growing that much in the year 3-4 off-season, one has to assume there will still be residual growth in year 4-5 as well.

So at this point, I could buy up to 5 of those "6-7 years."

Nonetheless, he has to continue to show improvement each year. As long as he does that, he's doing great. 5 wins ... 7 wins ... 8 or 9 wins ... maybe 10 or 11 (and an SEC run?) in 2016? Yeah, I can keep supporting Butch & Co through that.
 
#1,084
#1,084
catchnburn said:
Bump (didn't want to start a new thread.....SIAP)

Frank Beamer Stats:

First 6 years at VT (24-40-2)
Last 23 years at VT (211-80-2)

235-120-2

Pretty much backs up Butchs claim (although it isn't the SEC) "No one would survive those first six years in today's climate" - ESPN

Anyone else see this stat on the GT/VT broadcast tonight? Thought it was interesting.
Click to expand...

Facts dont count in Tennessee football. We are Tennessee. It should only take a year or two to come back into prominence regardless of the situation.
 
#1,085
#1,085
tvolsfan said:
Tennessee is not Virginia Tech in the late 80's/early 90's. It does not take six years.
Click to expand...

Not to argue a point ...because I dont know how long it will take . I do understand that some of our problems were and still are very real and that a recruiting class takes 4 years to become a senior class . The previous regime did not recruit linemen , they did not develop a QB , the number of scholly players were down until this year - the roster was filled out with walk ons , depth in terms of numbers and maturity at most position groups is still an issue . Not to mention that you play in a conference full of established teams that have not had these issues.

So how long before we recruit a highly rater kid and have the option to red-shirt him if we want ? How long until we are 3 deep at every position without much fall off between the ones and twos ? I am not talking about winning ...I am talking about having the numbers and caliber of players across the board like a team like Bama .

If I had to guess ...about 2 more years
 
Last edited:
#1,086
#1,086
Here's kind of what I'm seeing, in a nut shell: when you take over a team with a badly depleted roster, you do things that are good for the team in the short term, but will give you more depth problems in the longer term. Like playing true freshmen, who aren't yet physically developed as the RS sophomores and juniors they're going up against, increasing the risk of injuries and delaying their S&C development to an extent.

So while one can conceptually say that in five years, a coach with nothing can recruit a full team of RS seniors on down. And that no coach starts truly with nothing, so it's never quite that bad. And that in reality, it should only ever take 3 or 4 years in any program, ever.

But from what I'm seeing as I pore through the numbers of Team 119 heading into Team 120, it looks like those prices you pay early on lengthen the process by up to another year or two.

And I think that's all Butch was alluding to. Again, he's probably giving himself a year or two of padding, but I certainly have learned a lot about why it may take more than 3-4 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,088
#1,088
VFL-82-JP said:
Here's kind of what I'm seeing, in a nut shell: when you take over a team with a badly depleted roster, you do things that are good for the team in the short term, but will give you more depth problems in the longer term. Like playing true freshmen, who aren't yet physically developed as the RS sophomores and juniors they're going up against, increasing the risk of injuries and delaying their S&C development to an extent.

So while one can conceptually say that in five years, a coach with nothing can recruit a full team of RS seniors on down. And that no coach starts truly with nothing, so it's never quite that bad. And that in reality, it should only ever take 3 or 4 years in any program, ever.

But from what I'm seeing as I pore through the numbers of Team 119 heading into Team 120, it looks like those prices you pay early on lengthen the process by up to another year or two.

And I think that's all Butch was alluding to. Again, he's probably giving himself a year or two of padding, but I certainly have learned a lot about why it may take more than 3-4 years.
Click to expand...

i agree with this in merit. i go back and think about how he's tried to manage the roster, year's 1 and 2, all the while really, probably trying to get to year 4.

and that make sense.

many asked last year why would we start Worley over Dobbs? based on the results, last year, valid question.

but at the time he doesn't have the qb's line up for the next 4 years like he does today. there was no JG, or QD or SJ in the fold. it was Peterman, Worley and Dobbs.

so he took the hit, RS Dobbs in preparation just in case he needed 3 years from him--15,16,17. obviously that didn't work, out, and we got the qb committs for the future.

and QB is an easy one to analyze, but imagine having to do that for all positions, and projecting out where you need to be based on where you are.

and managing the "NOW" with what's good for the future.

the reality....the 2016 class is the first class he and the staff will be able to look at and choose who they want to RS. 2017, that number increases.

as that's happening, the competitive depth is then really starting to build, and you're reloading by year 4-5.

i too think the 6-7 is exaggerated. but only by a year or 2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,089
#1,089
so, we've got that covered.

now, can we get the coaching not to lose, and game management issues resolved.....

all in favor, say "aye".
 
#1,091
#1,091
jakez4ut said:
i agree with this in merit. i go back and think about how he's tried to manage the roster, year's 1 and 2, all the while really, probably trying to get to year 4.

and that make sense.

many asked last year why would we start Worley over Dobbs? based on the results, last year, valid question.

but at the time he doesn't have the qb's line up for the next 4 years like he does today. there was no JG, or QD or SJ in the fold. it was Peterman, Worley and Dobbs.

so he took the hit, RS Dobbs in preparation just in case he needed 3 years from him--15,16,17. obviously that didn't work, out, and we got the qb committs for the future.

and QB is an easy one to analyze, but imagine having to do that for all positions, and projecting out where you need to be based on where you are.

and managing the "NOW" with what's good for the future.

the reality....the 2016 class is the first class he and the staff will be able to look at and choose who they want to RS. 2017, that number increases.

as that's happening, the competitive depth is then really starting to build, and you're reloading by year 4-5.

i too think the 6-7 is exaggerated. but only by a year or 2.
Click to expand...

Another very high quality post Jake.
 
#1,092
#1,092
BigOrangeTrain said:
Facts dont count in Tennessee football. We are Tennessee. It should only take a year or two to come back into prominence regardless of the situation.
Click to expand...

Ironic. Facts don't matter and then you suggest that ANYONE holds the position you describe in that last sentence.

Truly facts do not matter to some of you.

Depending on the situation, it may take 6 or 7 years to win or compete for a NC. It should NOT take that long to win the SEC East in its current weakened state if you have the right coach at UT. It should NOT take that long to show real, tangible improvements in WINS. It should NOT take that long to at least end these long losing streaks and compete for the SEC championship.

It certainly should NOT take that long to field a team with SEC depth and talent. How many examples do you want of that being accomplished in 3 years?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,096
#1,096
sjt18 said:
Ironic. Facts don't matter and then you suggest that ANYONE holds the position you describe in that last sentence.

Truly facts do not matter to some of you.

Depending on the situation, it may take 6 or 7 years to win or compete for a NC. It should NOT take that long to win the SEC East in its current weakened state if you have the right coach at UT. It should NOT take that long to show real, tangible improvements in WINS. It should NOT take that long to at least end these long losing streaks and compete for the SEC championship.

It certainly should NOT take that long to field a team with SEC depth and talent. How many examples do you want of that being accomplished in 3 years?
Click to expand...

If it's an apples to apples comparison, sure, show some examples. If it's a case where a coach takes over a stacked roster and has immediate success, then no thanks.
 
#1,097
#1,097
tvolsfan said:
Tennessee is not Virginia Tech in the late 80's/early 90's. It does not take six years.
Click to expand...

Facts don't matter.... just how creative you are in making excuses for "one more year".

We were told that he shouldn't be held to account for the first year since he was installing a new system and had Dooley's players.... just wait til he has his players. Second year- "too young, no depth, no experience".... just wait til they have more experience. Third year- much the same plus "injuries"..... well "everyone" knew that success wouldn't be until year 4.

Now, many including Jones are starting to hedge on the year 4 stuff too. Now it is 6 or 7 years before we're supposed to expect results.

This article was timely:

https://www.seccountry.com/tennesse...tch-jones-side-the-path-to-winning-in-the-sec

Notably, Fulmer won 10+ games in 3 of his first 4 full seasons and didn't finish with less than 8 wins. Tuberville won 5, 9, 7, 9, and 8 before going 13-0 at Auburn. Jones is well behind Fulmer's curve and still behind Tuberville's as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,098
#1,098
Thunndarr said:
If it's an apples to apples comparison, sure, show some examples. If it's a case where a coach takes over a stacked roster and has immediate success, then no thanks.
Click to expand...

Franklin lifted Vandy to its highest level in decades in less than 3 years with worse talent than Jones inherited. Freeze inherited a very similar situation. Mullen inherited a weak roster. UF's roster this year was full of holes that McElwain figured out how to coach around.

Harbaugh at Michigan inherited an absolute mess.

Those examples are similar enough individually but certainly in composite to draw a comparison.

If you want to look at injuries... it has primarily been players Jones inherited that have been the most costly losses- Maggitt, Jackson, Croom, Pig,. Jones inherited far from an ideal situation... but many overblow just how bad it was.

The worst thing Dooley did to Jones was set him up poorly for the '13 recruiting class. Dooley wasn't doing great early in the year but he pretty much quit trying at all around the middle of the season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,099
#1,099
sjt18 said:
Facts don't matter.... just how creative you are in making excuses for "one more year".

We were told that he shouldn't be held to account for the first year since he was installing a new system and had Dooley's players.... just wait til he has his players. Second year- "too young, no depth, no experience".... just wait til they have more experience. Third year- much the same plus "injuries"..... well "everyone" knew that success wouldn't be until year 4.

Now, many including Jones are starting to hedge on the year 4 stuff too. Now it is 6 or 7 years before we're supposed to expect results.

This article was timely:

https://www.seccountry.com/tennesse...tch-jones-side-the-path-to-winning-in-the-sec

Notably, Fulmer won 10+ games in 3 of his first 4 full seasons and didn't finish with less than 8 wins. Tuberville won 5, 9, 7, 9, and 8 before going 13-0 at Auburn. Jones is well behind Fulmer's curve and still behind Tuberville's as well.
Click to expand...

Just to be clear, this "we" junk you're always spouting off about? Is this collective "we" the true Vol fan contingent that you (of course) have appointed yourself leader of? So I'd surmise that the "tell"ers are the subversives spreading disinformation and nefariously lowering expectations to the team's detriment? Nice inclusive statement that breeds open discussion there Chief! Us'ns against them'ums! :hi:
 
#1,100
#1,100
sjt18 said:
Facts don't matter.... just how creative you are in making excuses for "one more year".

We were told that he shouldn't be held to account for the first year since he was installing a new system and had Dooley's players.... just wait til he has his players. Second year- "too young, no depth, no experience".... just wait til they have more experience. Third year- much the same plus "injuries"..... well "everyone" knew that success wouldn't be until year 4.

Now, many including Jones are starting to hedge on the year 4 stuff too. Now it is 6 or 7 years before we're supposed to expect results.

This article was timely:

https://www.seccountry.com/tennesse...tch-jones-side-the-path-to-winning-in-the-sec

Notably, Fulmer won 10+ games in 3 of his first 4 full seasons and didn't finish with less than 8 wins. Tuberville won 5, 9, 7, 9, and 8 before going 13-0 at Auburn. Jones is well behind Fulmer's curve and still behind Tuberville's as well.
Click to expand...

Your act is so old and tiring. It must be a very miserable existence that you live.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top