Recruiting Forum Football Talk IX

#53,001
#53,001
RiseToTheTop said:
please handle UK so we dont have to hear that Nick Roush Douche guy from KSR all over every platform


the last few days have sucked bad enough.
Click to expand...
Huepel is getting benefit of winning, quick turnaround, running a clean program, and being a great guy.

Lose to Kentucky, and that gets exponentially harder. Or impossible. QB or not, we have more talent than they do. And, I expect to beat them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RiseToTheTop
#53,005
#53,005
vol9799 said:
This is gonna come across like I'm bashing a former player and I don't mean it that way. Ramon is likely just parroting what other talking heads and coaches are saying, assuming that because they're "in the business" they are speaking intelligently.

I'm so tired of all the panty-waisted, soft, placating, apologist, excuse-making "defensive experts" whining about offensive style. You know what, sack up and teach a damn defense some fundamentals. How to tackle. How to read cues. How to exploit tendencies. How to line up correctly irrespective of motion. How to get into position in zone defense without losing track of the ball. How to take proper pursuit and coverage angles. How to maintain situational awareness regardless of the environment.

How long the defense is on the field is COMPLETELY up to them. Not the offense! You want a break, get a few third down and fourth down stops and you'll have more time to rest. You want off the field, watch more film and understand where you're supposed to be on each play. You want more rest, learn how to break down and tackle in the open field.

If the only way you can play good defense is to only have to defend 3 drives per half, then in today's environment, you are not a good defensive coach. I get the whole "more drives = greater opportunity for failure" but more 3 and out's = more rest too, regardless of the number of drives you have to defend. This crap about highly productive offense being a liability is total excuse making 🐴💩

So you have to work a little harder or a little longer, so what? The main concern shouldn't be just finding the easiest path to success, but doing whatever it takes to ensure success.

Rant over, until Saturday when we give up our next 3 and 17 conversion.
Click to expand...
You make some valid points here but your 3rd paragraph is misleading and completely ignores others valid points about complimentary football.

Early in the game there are typically no issues nor excuses. But with a fast strike offense you're defense by nature is going to face more pressure, having to face and defend more offensive possessions/pressure. The benefits it adds for your offense work equally against your defense. That wears on your defense, particularly later in the game.
 
#53,011
#53,011
ready to stomp a hole through Kentucky and pack the house for Oklahoma

win those, then disappear for a bit with a bye week and NMSU

reemerge in the swamp to do what we haven't done in a generation - win at Florida

whole program and fanbase is bought back in just in time to turn Neyland into a carnage house for Vandy

A lot can happen in the meantime, in terms of health and experience/growth

Like other wiser posters have said, one foot in front of the other
 
  • Like
Reactions: LaagerVol, BigOrangeGoose, Orange. and 23 others
#53,013
#53,013
Saying that Vitello absolutely won't be successful as a MLB coach because he didn't take the typical path has to be an all-time stupid take. It's absolutely possible he won't be successful. It's not guaranteed that he will fail though. So dumb. There are certain qualities that are needed to be successful. Vitello is a people person that is unbelievable at relationships. He has shown a tremendous ability to get a team full of talented players to play together. Players that are good enough to play but can't get in the lineup still stay engaged and are ready when they are called on. MLB managers are a CEO that manages people. That is a skillet that Vitello has proven. His success will depend much more on the roster he is given than his "inability" to do the job due to lack of minor league/MLB experience.
 
#53,018
#53,018
KB5252 said:
You make some valid points here but your 3rd paragraph is misleading and completely ignores others valid points about complimentary football.

Early in the game there are typically no issues nor excuses. But with a fast strike offense you're defense by nature is going to face more pressure, having to face and defend more offensive possessions/pressure. The benefits it adds for your offense work equally against your defense. That wears on your defense, particularly later in the game.
Click to expand...
I'm not trying to be misleading and I realize that I'm speaking in a vacuum when I say it's completely up to the defense. But technically, in the way that I describe, it is within the defense's control how long they stay on the field in pressure situations. TOP in games that are firmly in control is a non-issue.

I refuse to use a term Botch introduced into our program's lexicon, but I get your point and understand the concept of the different phases of the game working to help each other. But all anyone wants to talk about it is the negative impact of defending more possessions, they don't talk about the luxury of having a larger cushion because the offense is scoring more points and can get you back into games more quickly. It works both ways.

In Ramon's argument, why wouldn't defensive coordinators avoid teams with plodding conservative offense schemes? Sure they limit other teams scoring opportunities by chewing clock, but they also provide the defense so much less margin for error in terms of points. But nobody is suggesting that, because that's been a norm for eons and everyone just accepts that it's not a disadvantage.

It would be different if the offense were fast AND unproductive. I wouldn't fault any defensive coach for not wanting to be saddled with that burden. But exclusive of last year, that hasn't been our issue, that's why I have such a problem with the bellyaching.
 
#53,020
#53,020
SmyrnaATLVolisback said:
No offense to Ramon but it’s just not true. Heupel has adjusted his offense almost every year, we went really slow the last two years. And we are back to some tempo but we still have longer drives and slow it down a good bit. We could get a proven DC. This is a way of saying we will hire from within and say that we couldn’t hire form outside the program.
Click to expand...
I think Inge will be the likely replacement if it's internal.
 
#53,022
#53,022
Vols4us said:
They have been spot on. The teams and coaches shrink on the road under Heup.

It is on Heup to fix it. DW needs to make sure he does. We all see the issues just as they described. The biggest besides individual player performances is situational awareness by the staff. The next is not progressing as a team, not getting better knowing that you will be facing better competition.
Click to expand...

There’s certainly room for improvement. Need to have a good showing at UK then beat Oklahoma in Neyland. This wasn’t supposed to be a playoff year for us but expectations lifted after a few games so finishing strong will prevent additional negativity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Volunteer821 and Jimmy Football
#53,025
#53,025
MemphisVol3 said:
I think Inge will be the likely replacement if it's internal.
Click to expand...

I always thought Inge came here because CJH like familiarity and it was to build in the next DC with some continuity If a change needed to be made.

Of course VN will bitch that CJH promoted from within even without giving Inge a chance but hey it’s what we do.

Now if Venables is available, go get him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Volunteer821
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top