Recruiting Forum: Football Talk IX

Status
Not open for further replies.
#7,802
#7,802
All this Trooper talk...y'all remember he was pulled off the recruiting trail at Auburn...AUBURN...for highly suspected shady stuff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#7,803
#7,803
Apparently Pat Haden offered Coach O the Associate HC position and offered to make him one of the highest paid asst's in the nation and he still turned it down.

Maybe I'm misremembering, but wasn't there some tension or bad blood between Kiffin and Sark at one point? If so, wonder if O turned it down bc of it and how close he is with Kiffin.

Either way, I could also see him turning it down regardless of who they hired bc he wanted it so bad. For some reason I'm thinking Kif and Sark had some sort of feud though. Have they always been on good terms or what? Geez...my memory smh. Sucks getting older lol
 
#7,805
#7,805
Mike4Vols said:
Serious question: How do you tell the difference between bad coaching and poor talent? I would argue a bad coach can make mediocre talent look bad -- in the same way a great coach can elevate the same mediocre talent.

The talent may be the real issue as you say but I saw plenty of reasons to be worried about the coaching as well.
Click to expand...

At WR????? What did you see? Kids dropping the ball? Non aggressive 6'5 WR? Only two guys that would make a play on the outside? That's on coaching or what?
 
#7,806
#7,806
Aesius said:
Name some.
Click to expand...

1. Not making an attempt to run more and control the clock against Oregon. Stanford gave everyone a blueprint for beating Oregon the year before (and repeated it this year). I didn't expect that we would beat Oregon but I didn't expect to get undressed and ****ed on national TV either.

2. Sticking with Peterman too long in the FL game. He was confused and scared and everybody knew it. He should've been pulled long before he was injured (like after the first series). Seriously, he was historically bad right from the start. That game should have been a win for us.

3. Continuing to pass against Vandy when Dobbs was clearly struggling. Vandy had trouble against the run in previous games and we were actually running pretty well. The coaches should have made that adjustment. This was another win we should have had.

4. Personnel decisions on the defensive side. Why was Sutton not covering the other team's best receiver all the time? Sure, he's a freshman and that's a big adjustment but is it possible he would have been worse at making the adjustment than Coleman was against ... well ... everybody? Also, when it was clear we had speed issues on D, why didn't they play JRM or more?

If you need more, I've got 'em. Almost every game had one or two headscratchers.

The coaches struggled early in the season IMO. I hoped for improvements as the year progressed. Sorry, but I didn't see it.

I'm really hopeful we see it next year because we're gonna have a LOT of freshmen on this team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#7,807
#7,807
The Breakerboy said:
At WR????? What did you see? Kids dropping the ball? Non aggressive 6'5 WR? Only two guys that would make a play on the outside? That's on coaching or what?
Click to expand...

Adjusting scheme and playcalling to fit your talent? That's what I'm talking about.

I don't expect these players to be something their not. I DO expect the coaches to make the best of the talent their given.
 
#7,809
#7,809
You lost me, Mike4Vols. I just don't agree with laying into the coaching staff at the end of year one when they inherited little talent and a huge mess. Flipped you to ignore. I will unignore you in two years if we are still struggling to make bowl games. I don't expect that to be the case, though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#7,810
#7,810
Mike4Vols said:
1. Not making an attempt to run more and control the clock against Oregon. Stanford gave everyone a blueprint for beating Oregon the year before (and repeated it this year). I didn't expect that we would beat Oregon but I didn't expect to get undressed and ****ed on national TV either.

2. Sticking with Peterman too long in the FL game. He was confused and scared and everybody knew it. He should've been pulled long before he was injured (like after the first series). Seriously, he was historically bad right from the start. That game should have been a win for us.

3. Continuing to pass against Vandy when Dobbs was clearly struggling. Vandy had trouble against the run in previous games and we were actually running pretty well. The coaches should have made that adjustment. This was another win we should have had.

4. Personnel decisions on the defensive side. Why was Sutton not covering the other team's best receiver all the time? Sure, he's a freshman and that's a big adjustment but is it possible he would have been worse at making the adjustment than Coleman was against ... well ... everybody? Also, when it was clear we had speed issues on D, why didn't they play JRM or more?

If you need more, I've got 'em. Almost every game had one or two headscratchers.

The coaches struggled early in the season IMO. I hoped for improvements as the year progressed. Sorry, but I didn't see it.

I'm really hopeful we see it next year because we're gonna have a LOT of freshmen on this team.
Click to expand...

I agree with most of those. But the thing is, for every "bad" decision we as fans see, there are 1,000 things that factored into it that we don't see.

Sometimes it does boil down to simply making a bad call, which all coaches do in every game. Sometimes it's more far more complicated than that. Overall, I didn't see anything this season that sticks out to me as a glaringly badly called game.

I did see three games that were called well--UGA, USCe, and WKU. Yes, WKU. Even after the INT bonanza to open up the game, WKU started taking advantage of our D and was in position to get right back in the game in the 2nd half. But we came out with a gameplan that totally shut them down. I never once saw Dooley do that. If teams figured out a weakness in the first half, it was magnified 10x in the second half.

At least we know our coaches can make adjustments. And they obviously adjusted the gameplan from Vandy to UK as well. I think they are learning as they go, being in the SEC, but I don't distrust any of them.
 
#7,813
#7,813
Mike4Vols said:
1. Not making an attempt to run more and control the clock against Oregon. Stanford gave everyone a blueprint for beating Oregon the year before (and repeated it this year). I didn't expect that we would beat Oregon but I didn't expect to get undressed and ****ed on national TV either.

2. Sticking with Peterman too long in the FL game. He was confused and scared and everybody knew it. He should've been pulled long before he was injured (like after the first series). Seriously, he was historically bad right from the start. That game should have been a win for us.

3. Continuing to pass against Vandy when Dobbs was clearly struggling. Vandy had trouble against the run in previous games and we were actually running pretty well. The coaches should have made that adjustment. This was another win we should have had.

4. Personnel decisions on the defensive side. Why was Sutton not covering the other team's best receiver all the time? Sure, he's a freshman and that's a big adjustment but is it possible he would have been worse at making the adjustment than Coleman was against ... well ... everybody? Also, when it was clear we had speed issues on D, why didn't they play JRM or more?

If you need more, I've got 'em. Almost every game had one or two headscratchers.

The coaches struggled early in the season IMO. I hoped for improvements as the year progressed. Sorry, but I didn't see it.

I'm really hopeful we see it next year because we're gonna have a LOT of freshmen on this team.
Click to expand...

1.The defense was outmatched at Oregon, nothing he could do, literally.

2. To realize Peterman was going to underperform against UF, he had to get a sample size. He did that. Also, the defense again didn't do any favors for us against a backup QB.

3. Did you watch the same Vandy game I did? We ran as much as possible after the 2nd Dobbs pick.

4. I always see people questioning why Sutton isn't covering the best WR always. This baffles me. Good offenses move thier weapons all over the formation to create matchup problems, you can't have your best players shadow one player all game, that's rediculous. Plus, we run a zone coverage often, so the players are going to play where they are lined up, period.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#7,814
#7,814
Mike4Vols said:
1. Not making an attempt to run more and control the clock against Oregon. Stanford gave everyone a blueprint for beating Oregon the year before (and repeated it this year). I didn't expect that we would beat Oregon but I didn't expect to get undressed and ****ed on national TV either.

2. Sticking with Peterman too long in the FL game. He was confused and scared and everybody knew it. He should've been pulled long before he was injured (like after the first series). Seriously, he was historically bad right from the start. That game should have been a win for us.

3. Continuing to pass against Vandy when Dobbs was clearly struggling. Vandy had trouble against the run in previous games and we were actually running pretty well. The coaches should have made that adjustment. This was another win we should have had.

4. Personnel decisions on the defensive side. Why was Sutton not covering the other team's best receiver all the time? Sure, he's a freshman and that's a big adjustment but is it possible he would have been worse at making the adjustment than Coleman was against ... well ... everybody? Also, when it was clear we had speed issues on D, why didn't they play JRM or more?

If you need more, I've got 'em. Almost every game had one or two headscratchers.

The coaches struggled early in the season IMO. I hoped for improvements as the year progressed. Sorry, but I didn't see it.

I'm really hopeful we see it next year because we're gonna have a LOT of freshmen on this team.
Click to expand...

Dobbs only threw 2 passes more than 15 yards and both were picks. They were so vanilla with thier pass game to cater to his needs.
 
#7,815
#7,815
Mike4Vols said:
1. Not making an attempt to run more and control the clock against Oregon. Stanford gave everyone a blueprint for beating Oregon the year before (and repeated it this year). I didn't expect that we would beat Oregon but I didn't expect to get undressed and ****ed on national TV either.

2. Sticking with Peterman too long in the FL game. He was confused and scared and everybody knew it. He should've been pulled long before he was injured (like after the first series). Seriously, he was historically bad right from the start. That game should have been a win for us.

3. Continuing to pass against Vandy when Dobbs was clearly struggling. Vandy had trouble against the run in previous games and we were actually running pretty well. The coaches should have made that adjustment. This was another win we should have had.

4. Personnel decisions on the defensive side. Why was Sutton not covering the other team's best receiver all the time? Sure, he's a freshman and that's a big adjustment but is it possible he would have been worse at making the adjustment than Coleman was against ... well ... everybody? Also, when it was clear we had speed issues on D, why didn't they play JRM or more?

If you need more, I've got 'em. Almost every game had one or two headscratchers.

The coaches struggled early in the season IMO. I hoped for improvements as the year progressed. Sorry, but I didn't see it.

I'm really hopeful we see it next year because we're gonna have a LOT of freshmen on this team.
Click to expand...
I'd like to see you do better
 
#7,817
#7,817
Aesius said:
I agree with most of those. But the thing is, for every "bad" decision we as fans see, there are 1,000 things that factored into it that we don't see.

Sometimes it does boil down to simply making a bad call, which all coaches do in every game. Sometimes it's more far more complicated than that. Overall, I didn't see anything this season that sticks out to me as a glaringly badly called game.

I did see three games that were called well--UGA, USCe, and WKU. Yes, WKU. Even after the INT bonanza to open up the game, WKU started taking advantage of our D and was in position to get right back in the game in the 2nd half. But we came out with a gameplan that totally shut them down. I never once saw Dooley do that. If teams figured out a weakness in the first half, it was magnified 10x in the second half.

At least we know our coaches can make adjustments. And they obviously adjusted the gameplan from Vandy to UK as well. I think they are learning as they go, being in the SEC, but I don't distrust any of them.
Click to expand...

Great, well thought-out answer. :good!:

They did have a few shining moments. I was asked to provide examples of the coaching issues so that's all I did. I didn't mean to focus totally on the negative.

I do think the staff is a work in progress, though. Talent will help a lot but we need the coaches on their 'A' game. I wouldn't give them anything higher than a 'C' overall this year (factoring the occasional 'B' game). Just my 2 cents.
 
#7,819
#7,819
If you go to Dominos Facebook page, you can get 50% off regular priced pizzas. You have to follow the link on their facebook to receive the deal

thought i would share


off topic, i know, but its good Monday Night Football food
 
#7,820
#7,820
Aesius said:
I agree with most of those. But the thing is, for every "bad" decision we as fans see, there are 1,000 things that factored into it that we don't see.

Sometimes it does boil down to simply making a bad call, which all coaches do in every game. Sometimes it's more far more complicated than that. Overall, I didn't see anything this season that sticks out to me as a glaringly badly called game.

I did see three games that were called well--UGA, USCe, and WKU. Yes, WKU. Even after the INT bonanza to open up the game, WKU started taking advantage of our D and was in position to get right back in the game in the 2nd half. But we came out with a gameplan that totally shut them down. I never once saw Dooley do that. If teams figured out a weakness in the first half, it was magnified 10x in the second half.

At least we know our coaches can make adjustments. And they obviously adjusted the gameplan from Vandy to UK as well. I think they are learning as they go, being in the SEC, but I don't distrust any of them.
Click to expand...

Nothing the coaches do will satisfy some who have agendas. All coaches make mistakes. Saban got outcoached last Saturday. Many question Hoke's decision to go for 2. You can go on and on, but on balance you have to look at the total body of work for the program. Some on VN don't have the ability to do that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#7,821
#7,821
OddFuture said:
Kind of kidding. You do sound pretty negative for no reason though. I hope you find happiness in posting such negative, unnecessary posts.
Click to expand...

I'm really not trying to be negative. There are real issues and this is the place to discuss them. The reason I do it here instead of the FF is (most) people in the recruiting forum can have an intelligent conversation without burning mattresses.

And I'm a lot more civil than a few other people at the moment. OrangeBlood79 has made some stinging comment in here lately. He's right about most of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement





Back
Top