Should Tim Banks be replaced at end of season?

#177
#177
OrangeTsar said:
I would like to see us actually make the changes we need to deal with quarterbacks running all over the field seemingly at will. Every QB we face must look forward to all the rushing yards he is about to rack up 😡
Click to expand...
“Make the changes” which mean 2 new safeties and probably 2 new linebackers.

This isn’t the NFL where you can trade or pick up guys after the season starts. We are somehow winning despite glaring talent issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbones0711
#179
#179
usagary said:
D played 99 snaps and still had what it took to stop Kentucky on their last drive. Looks like a D that had a bad matchup but was still running through walls in the end. So. I hope he stays.
Click to expand...
UK's OLine was tiring and UT was rotating along the defensive front and because of that UK had a minimal run game late. Banks is the only LBer with experience enough to know how to blitz correctly and that's not saying much. Coach Banks is just being cautious/conservative because he's aware of how limited this team is because of very little live game experience. We rushed 3 down linemen twice and got beat both times on passes to the TE. That's pitiful and needs to be fixed and goes a long way in explaining just how young and inexperienced we actually are behind the DLine. Bringing the house and getting a sack is a good thing but a simple screen pass can make you regret it. He has to be picky about his blitzing. UK has good linemen with experience and we are fortunate to get a W at their house. We'll be fine in a few years.
 
#181
#181
No the talent level on the defensive side of the ball is weak and thin in a lot of positions. I think they have exceeded expectations this season.
 
#182
#182
volinthenorth said:
Yes, I know, my VN friends: (1) "We just won a big game, why go negative?" (I'm not being negative, this is just a question in direct response to our objectively bad defensive play) (2) "The D just had a huge TOP discrepancy, they were gassed!" (Agreed, but were they partly gassed because our coaching scheme didn't get them off the field?) (3) "We are low on scholarships and bodies who can play!" Yes, again, I know all that. My question (and it's just a question, not a call for a march on the athletic facility with torches or for a nocturnal visit to the rock with spray paint) is this: DOES TIM BANKS's DEFENSIVE SCHEME HOLD US BACK? Are we going to be able get to the next level with this lack of pressure from our 3 man rushes and infrequent blitzing or stunting, combined with a soft zone in the second and third levels? This impotent combo seems to give the opposing QB that extra second to find the receiver who turns and sits down in a hole in the secondary or breaks into a gap between our flat-footed DBs.

So do we stick with our guy and hit the portal for better players? Or do we find a coach with a better scheme (and still hit that portal)?
Click to expand...
This defense was set up to be one of the worst in the history of college football. He has coached them to serviceable and respectable. The guy has actually worked a miracle. This is in contention for dumbest post in history.
 
#184
#184
volinthenorth said:
Yes, I know, my VN friends: (1) "We just won a big game, why go negative?" (I'm not being negative, this is just a question in direct response to our objectively bad defensive play) (2) "The D just had a huge TOP discrepancy, they were gassed!" (Agreed, but were they partly gassed because our coaching scheme didn't get them off the field?) (3) "We are low on scholarships and bodies who can play!" Yes, again, I know all that. My question (and it's just a question, not a call for a march on the athletic facility with torches or for a nocturnal visit to the rock with spray paint) is this: DOES TIM BANKS's DEFENSIVE SCHEME HOLD US BACK? Are we going to be able get to the next level with this lack of pressure from our 3 man rushes and infrequent blitzing or stunting, combined with a soft zone in the second and third levels? This impotent combo seems to give the opposing QB that extra second to find the receiver who turns and sits down in a hole in the secondary or breaks into a gap between our flat-footed DBs.

So do we stick with our guy and hit the portal for better players? Or do we find a coach with a better scheme (and still hit that portal)?
Click to expand...
No
 
#186
#186
OrangeTsar said:
Tonight was an outlier. For most of the season, this defense has played better than any of us had even remotely expected. I definitely want to see what Banks is able to do with a squad of his own players with decent depth
Click to expand...

I would not consider this an outlier. Unfortunately, the rush defense has left a lot to be desired this season. Countless times rushers are getting to the 2nd level before being taken down. We gave M. Corral and E. Jones career rushing days and are around 8th in the SEC in rush defense. So OP to answer your question: I don't think Banks needs replaced, but improvement needs to take place before we can get to the next level.

8th place rush defenses don't make it to ATL.

Also it is astounding how many participants of the message board are incapable of adult conversation.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: VOLS_642 and volinthenorth
#187
#187
I wouldn't replace him this early, but some conversations need to be had about how to move forward.

I've apparently been on a different page than everyone else that has been saying our D was a " bright spot" so far this season.

I know we're thin and run hurry up, but man parts of this D as been abysmal.

We were something like 72nd in the nation in total D before UK and I can't imagine where we'll be post-UGA. I think 4 teams have rushed for 200+ on us, 2 teams have run 100ish plays on us. The QB draw is baffling to us, even against slower QBs. We've given up 30+ points 5 times.

Before last night UK was 93rd in total offense and 103rd in passing offense.

Last night they ran 99 plays, had 612 yards and converted 12-17 3rd downs. That's just crazy and goes beyond depth. You're not gassed and worried about depth in the first quarter after a bye week.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volinthenorth
#188
#188
The defense is doing better than we expected at the beginning of the year. I thought we were going to look a lot like we did in Butch's first year. Banks has done better and managed to survive with second/third string talent and one man (Taylor) who is truly first rate in a partnership with an offense that plays fast and scores faster.

Give that a man raise and be glad you have him.

And while you are at it, give Kurt Schmidt a damn good raise as well.
 
#189
#189
BigOrangeTrain said:
The fact that you ask this question shows your lack of understanding. You obviously do not understand what Tom Banks inherited and how limited we are on defense. You don’t understand how incredibly bad we are at LB and safety. That falls on Pruitt and his staff. What Banks has been able to do with this unit has been nothing short of amazing.

Could he do better? Of course. We all know this. But most who have even an elementary understanding of the state of this program know that firing Tim Banks is nowhere near the right answer. He has to be given time. Yes the UK game was bad. But these games happen. Until we get some better players that specifically fit this defense, it’s going to be rough. Our offensive style needs a specific style of defense to be successful.

Also, we don’t necessarily need an elite defense. Revisit your question in 3 years.
Click to expand...
We may have the worst back 8 in the SEC (not named Vandy)
 
#190
#190
MyVolsDropped said:
Please tell us what you call Kentucky's first drive.

Did we have fresh legs then?

How many yards did they easily get on us that drive?

I'll wait.
Click to expand...

That's what an offensive line does, and they have a good one, including a kid from knoxville tennessee.

I get it... KY wants to hire banks, florida wants to hire banks, HELL, Alabama wants to hire banks. everybody wants banks.... unfortunately he's at UT. He's staying for now.
 
#191
#191
No. Part of our issue is philosophy, bit a lot comes down to players. We scheme to avoid giving up cheap scores which leaves a lot of pressure on the front six to get pressure and stop the run. Our LBs are playing hard, but they are smallish and have struggles with physicality. The front 4 can't get a rush, so we have to commit lbs to the rush which leaves a lot of opportunities for the QB run up the middle. We leave a soft box so often that we beg teams to run up the middle. With a pass rush, our defense would be dominant. That is all we are missing. Give them time. Baron has vastly improved. The rest of them will come around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volinthenorth
#192
#192
volinthenorth said:
Yes, I know, my VN friends: (1) "We just won a big game, why go negative?" (I'm not being negative, this is just a question in direct response to our objectively bad defensive play) (2) "The D just had a huge TOP discrepancy, they were gassed!" (Agreed, but were they partly gassed because our coaching scheme didn't get them off the field?) (3) "We are low on scholarships and bodies who can play!" Yes, again, I know all that. My question (and it's just a question, not a call for a march on the athletic facility with torches or for a nocturnal visit to the rock with spray paint) is this: DOES TIM BANKS's DEFENSIVE SCHEME HOLD US BACK? Are we going to be able get to the next level with this lack of pressure from our 3 man rushes and infrequent blitzing or stunting, combined with a soft zone in the second and third levels? This impotent combo seems to give the opposing QB that extra second to find the receiver who turns and sits down in a hole in the secondary or breaks into a gap between our flat-footed DBs.

So do we stick with our guy and hit the portal for better players? Or do we find a coach with a better scheme (and still hit that portal)?
Click to expand...

FD5D2DE2-8AD9-424E-845D-B090B45F0E34.gif
 
#194
#194
BigOrangeTrain said:
The fact that you ask this question shows your lack of understanding. You obviously do not understand what Tom Banks inherited and how limited we are on defense. You don’t understand how incredibly bad we are at LB and safety. That falls on Pruitt and his staff. What Banks has been able to do with this unit has been nothing short of amazing.

Could he do better? Of course. We all know this. But most who have even an elementary understanding of the state of this program know that firing Tim Banks is nowhere near the right answer. He has to be given time. Yes the UK game was bad. But these games happen. Until we get some better players that specifically fit this defense, it’s going to be rough. Our offensive style needs a specific style of defense to be successful.

Also, we don’t necessarily need an elite defense. Revisit your question in 3 years.
Click to expand...

The fact that I asked this question simply means I wanted to elicit the very response that you gave, nothing more, thank you for replying, your post makes sense
 
#195
#195
Dirtyhairies said:
Id like to start a discussion within the discussion. I see two possible scenarios here. Much like the OP, I’d like to strongly encourage the debate. Anyway, the two possibilities are as follows:

1) The OP is absolutely a troll. I am fairly confident that no mentally and socially competent person could be so condescending and pseudo-intellectual while having such little self awareness as to not grasp how dumb this thread is.

You aren’t advocating for upgrading the DC? Yet you felt the need to start a thread on exactly that. You just want to feel out volnation’s opinion on it? Lots of frustration, but most people are happy with whats been accomplished.

With a record like 5-4, why don't you start a thread about upgrading the HC just to get a discussion started? That would be a stupid thread since its only 3/4s into his first season. That would be a stupid topic, as is this one.

2) You aren’t a troll and you really are being genuine. If thats the case then good Lord, take off the fedora, stop flaunting that vocabulary that you got from thesaurus.com to make you sound oh so intellectual, and stop whining about people being aggressive toward you as you sling lame insults yourself.
Click to expand...

It's number two, and I hear you, I will tone down my responses.
 
#196
#196
TheVolsFrog said:
Same here...the non ability to stop 3/4 and forever constantly, said fire him in the heat of the moment, it gets to us all but at the same time there's some things that Banks needs to fix even being short of men, we shouldn't constantly keep getting beat on 3/4 for long yardages. This Vols team plays hard for their coaches...hoping we recruit well and pick up some bigger guys in the off season.
Click to expand...
We’re too conservative at time on D, which is funny because we’re anything but on O. It was so nice seeing us be aggressive with 16 seconds in the half and it turned out to be the difference in the game. Damn, we need to find a good kicker though. McGrath is not good at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volinthenorth
#197
#197
volinthenorth said:
Yes, I know, my VN friends: (1) "We just won a big game, why go negative?" (I'm not being negative, this is just a question in direct response to our objectively bad defensive play) (2) "The D just had a huge TOP discrepancy, they were gassed!" (Agreed, but were they partly gassed because our coaching scheme didn't get them off the field?) (3) "We are low on scholarships and bodies who can play!" Yes, again, I know all that. My question (and it's just a question, not a call for a march on the athletic facility with torches or for a nocturnal visit to the rock with spray paint) is this: DOES TIM BANKS's DEFENSIVE SCHEME HOLD US BACK? Are we going to be able get to the next level with this lack of pressure from our 3 man rushes and infrequent blitzing or stunting, combined with a soft zone in the second and third levels? This impotent combo seems to give the opposing QB that extra second to find the receiver who turns and sits down in a hole in the secondary or breaks into a gap between our flat-footed DBs.

So do we stick with our guy and hit the portal for better players? Or do we find a coach with a better scheme (and still hit that portal)?
Click to expand...
dumb post of the week.
 
#198
#198
Look, I was as irritated as the next guy. Banks never brought pressure. Never put pressure on Revis. Played with everything in front of him. Then when we needed it most...he did. And...W.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top