Recruiting Forum Football Talk XXIV

Status
Not open for further replies.
#10,601
#10,601
Vols4us said:
From 'sources', like the ones some writers use. :) In my case an actual VFL that occasionally attends practices.

It only took a few plays for anybody to see Jumper was out of his element. Yet, in practice many saw that all Kirkland lacked was experience to be able to help. Butch and staff's MO has nearly always been to defer to the older guy until they are completely satisfied the younger guy can do better except in cases of injury.

They started the drumbeat in the media reports to justify Jumper in August. Minds were already made up despite Jumper being a walk on and also having zero starts. That's all we are saying. Obviously they were looking for an Alex Ellis type deal. Swing and a miss. It happens.
Click to expand...

Many coaches tend to go with a player that will not wow but also won't give up the huge play. My guess is they saw in Jumper a guy who might give up a first down but wouldn't give up the home run.

In Kirkland's case, they might have seen the flashes of wow as well as the big mistake potential early on. As some of you said, that can make coaches hesitant.

I am thankful you guys have a bit more evidence than just, "he was clearly the better player." At least you talked to someone who actually gets to see a few practices.

I'm not saying the coaches were right to start Jumper early. Clearly, he made mistakes and missed on some plays. I just wasn't convinced Kirkland would automatically have been better that early in the season.

Either way, thanks for the replies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#10,602
#10,602
WriterVol said:
Many coaches tend to go with a player that will not wow but also won't give up the huge play. My guess is they saw in Jumper a guy who might give up a first down but wouldn't give up the home run.

In Kirkland's case, they might have seen the flashes of wow as well as the big mistake potential early on. As some of you said, that can make coaches hesitant.

I am thankful you guys have a bit more evidence than just, "he was clearly the better player." At least you talked to someone who actually gets to see a few practices.

I'm not saying the coaches were right to start Jumper early. Clearly, he made mistakes and missed on some plays. I just wasn't convinced Kirkland would automatically have been better that early in the season.

Either way, thanks for the replies.
Click to expand...

Except Jumper gave up numerous home runs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#10,603
#10,603
jjay2518 said:
Except Jumper gave up numerous home runs.
Click to expand...

Which is why he only started a couple games. They gave him the go ahead because they thought he'd be steady, if unspectacular. After he he failed to be steady they decided there was no downside to going with the more naturally talented guy.
 
#10,606
#10,606
I think Butch Jones has an ideal progression he would like to see for each player. He tries not to stick players out there before they are ready. I think that's why DK was playing behind jumper at the beginning of the year.

I don't buy for a second that Jumper outplayed DK. Jones let him sit the bench until he thought he was ready even though that meant not putting your best 11 on the field.
 
#10,609
#10,609
WriterVol said:
Many coaches tend to go with a player that will not wow but also won't give up the huge play. My guess is they saw in Jumper a guy who might give up a first down but wouldn't give up the home run.

In Kirkland's case, they might have seen the flashes of wow as well as the big mistake potential early on. As some of you said, that can make coaches hesitant.

I am thankful you guys have a bit more evidence than just, "he was clearly the better player." At least you talked to someone who actually gets to see a few practices.

I'm not saying the coaches were right to start Jumper early. Clearly, he made mistakes and missed on some plays. I just wasn't convinced Kirkland would automatically have been better that early in the season.

Either way, thanks for the replies.
Click to expand...

:hi: Good post.

I truly believe last season was a huge (yuge!) eye opener for Butch. I believe we saw him open up his thinking in the second half of the season instead of "the system is infallible" type mindset continuing. I get why somebody in leadership sells stability with great upside. The downside is he/she tend to oversell to get the buy-in. Have done it myself in a couple of start-up business situations. He wanted to show the same loyalty to the roster that bought in as he demanded of them. They hoped Jumper could be the transition guy until they felt Kirkland was ready. They oversold themselves on Jumper and undersold Kirkland in the process. There were really good reasons Kirkland was a highly coveted player by many programs as we know.

When the world Butch created got beat up early in the season, he responded with guts and positive changes. He may never be the game day coach he could be (hopefully he will), however, the rest of what he does may overcome it big time.

My main point really was that sometimes you cannot go the loyalty route over talent in the SEC and against SEC level competition, especially at critically important positions. All that is water under the bridge because I think Butch gets it now. It was really surprising to some of us at the time because the Derek Barnett story had already unfolded before the coaches' eyes the previous season.
 
Last edited:
#10,610
#10,610
Aesius said:
Is anyone actually worried about the impact this lawsuit is going to have on the AD/football/Jones?
Click to expand...

Not unless they have something that's not reported.

All players suspended immediately.

Drae gave a statement under oath to the Grand Jury that he was NOT assaulted.

To this point, not enough evidence for any case to make it to trial.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#10,611
#10,611
Maleik Gray and Eric Crosby tweeted the same thing within the same day...

"Rocky Top...?🤔🍊 #VFL #GBO"

May be thinking about visiting, or may be thinking about all the potential of this class. Either way thought I'd share. I'm sure it's in the tweets thread but I rarely visit it...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#10,612
#10,612
volatil said:
Not unless they have something that's not reported.

All players suspended immediately.

Drae gave a statement under oath to the Grand Jury that he was NOT assaulted.

To this point, not enough evidence for any case to make it to trial.
Click to expand...
According to Jimmy Hyams, the lawsuit stems around Title IX and the specific part that requires thorough investigations by the university in sexual assault cases. In Jimmy's opinion, and I completely agree, is that the university should not be doing investigations like this but local, independent law enforcement should. If you look at all the cases that we know about, all players were immediately suspended until a resolution was made in regards to the charges. In one case, the player was not allowed back even though he was never charged (Paulk).
 
#10,613
#10,613
InVOLuntary said:
According to Jimmy Hyams, the lawsuit stems around Title IX and the specific part that requires thorough investigations by the university in sexual assault cases. In Jimmy's opinion, and I completely agree, is that the university should not be doing investigations like this but local, independent law enforcement should. If you look at all the cases that we know about, all players were immediately suspended until a resolution was made in regards to the charges. In one case, the player was not allowed back even though he was never charged (Paulk).
Click to expand...

I agree that's the only part of the suit the university needs change.
 
#10,617
#10,617
engineerVOL said:
I totally agree, it's ridiculous the University is responsible for investigating something potentially criminal.
Click to expand...

Agree with everybody. If the university does not have the legal authority to prosecute criminally and apply a penalty beyond what they already exhibit they have - there is nothing else left for them to do as long as they apply the authority they do have in accordance with policies, laws and AA/SEC regs on a consistent basis. They obviously do everything under the advice of counsel as well.

Money grab.
 
#10,619
#10,619
InVOLuntary said:
According to Jimmy Hyams, the lawsuit stems around Title IX and the specific part that requires thorough investigations by the university in sexual assault cases. In Jimmy's opinion, and I completely agree, is that the university should not be doing investigations like this but local, independent law enforcement should. If you look at all the cases that we know about, all players were immediately suspended until a resolution was made in regards to the charges. In one case, the player was not allowed back even though he was never charged (Paulk).
Click to expand...

IMO, both the school and law enforcement should do an investigation and then the school wait until the law enforcement investigation is completed. The school has to do some work on their own because the student may be required to go through an administrative hearing to determine whether he can remain enrolled. While the student has some due process rights, that hearing is not the same as a criminal investigation and the standard or burden is not as high as in a criminal case. There is a fine line with all of this, but everyone has to cover themselves. It also reminds me of the Dez Wells situation at Xavier. He was accused, law enforcement investigated and found no evidence, but Xavier dismissed him from school. The local DA publicly came out and said that Xavier was flat out wrong for doing it. It can go the other way, too, because Xavier caught a lot of heat for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#10,620
#10,620
The Breakerboy said:
Some decisions aren't that complicated. People wanted to argue for Jumper early on but after he couldn't stop the running game of Bowling Green I knew he was a problem.
Click to expand...

When bowling green faked the punt on 4th down deep in their end and Jumper was asleep at the wheel I was perplexed.

When Oklahoma abused him I thought he played his last football.

When he started against Florida I was worried because all they had was a run game. When Taylor ran past him and they went up by 7 I was in disbelief with the coaches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#10,621
#10,621
Outofmyvolcanmind said:
When bowling green faked the punt on 4th down deep in their end and Jumper was asleep at the wheel I was perplexed.

When Oklahoma abused him I thought he played his last football.

When he started against Florida I was worried because all they had was a run game. When Taylor ran past him and they went up by 7 I was in disbelief with the coaches.
Click to expand...

That's the only thing that bothers me. The coaches are so loyal/stubborn to a point that it hurts the team at times.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#10,622
#10,622
VolGee4 said:
IMO, both the school and law enforcement should do an investigation and then the school wait until the law enforcement investigation is completed. The school has to do some work on their own because the student may be required to go through an administrative hearing to determine whether he can remain enrolled. While the student has some due process rights, that hearing is not the same as a criminal investigation and the standard or burden is not as high as in a criminal case. There is a fine line with all of this, but everyone has to cover themselves. It also reminds me of the Dez Wells situation at Xavier. He was accused, law enforcement investigated and found no evidence, but Xavier dismissed him from school. The local DA publicly came out and said that Xavier was flat out wrong for doing it. It can go the other way, too, because Xavier caught a lot of heat for it.
Click to expand...

I can see that and I think Butch and the AD has done that. Take the Paulk situation. No charges were filed but he had eye witness accounts from players stating what happened and Butch dismissed him from the team. The only further action would have been to kick him out of school. Maybe that's what these morons want. Maybe they felt like being removed from the team wasn't adequate punishment. I continue to believe these folks only have a motive of trying to make bank off this. This sanctimonious statements of wanting UT to change is a farce IMO. They don't want to go to court. They were banking on UT settling. It's the reason they've named Lil' John and Peyton. They realize the awkward position of having them deposed. Well it just may have come back to bite them.

Now let me make myself perfectly clear, I in no way believe that things should be swept under the rug for athletes or anyone for that matter. I do however have a problem with legal extortion and that appears to be the case here. I think a lot of the cases would never present themselves if the Loser pays the winner's legal expenses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement





Back
Top