2019-20 Non-conference Schedule released

#26

savannahfan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2014
Messages
2,779
Likes
1,898
#26
I hope so. I hate these recent cupcake schedules. 4 top 16 teams, and then a bunch of sub-100 creampuffs. I shouldn't be surprised that Holly was ducking Oregon or Oregon State and put a noncompetitive game on the schedule.

I'm interested in seeing how a nearly brand new ND team will fare against a semi-experienced Tennessee team with dead weight removed from the sidelines.
I wonder if the "creampuffs" on this schedule might not be a real advantage this year. It should give the staff the time needed to iron out communications and schemes under less then extreme pressure.
 
#27

lvocd

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
1,322
Likes
2,931
#27
I wonder if the "creampuffs" on this schedule might not be a real advantage this year. It should give the staff the time needed to iron out communications and schemes under less then extreme pressure.
Agreed.

Kellie will get plenty of insight into exactly how much more work she has to do to get back to elite status with the few top teams Tennessee WILL be playing.

Early against Notre Dame, and late against Connecticut -- with Stanford and Texas in between. That's plenty (IMO) to take on this season. There are a couple of SEC teams that are pretty good, too.

In seasons going forward, though, I hope not to see anymore exhibition-game-level opponents midway though the season anymore. And I don't think we will.
 
#29

Undercovervol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2015
Messages
490
Likes
594
#29
I agree. Besides, Oregon has a killer team. What better incentive to keep local kids home than by beating the "name" school?

Worst case scenario is that they didn't schedule Tennessee not because they were dodging the competition, but because they didn't think much of Tennessee at all...
I think that's the real reason for not scheduling us. Why schedule a bottom tier SEC team with poor offense and hack defense, both things you won't see late in the tournament? Why give UTenn more press covereage than we already get? I think Stanford and Notre Dame play us solely so they can show top recruits that we're a has been team.
 
#30

Only1COJ

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2015
Messages
449
Likes
512
#30
I think that's the real reason for not scheduling us. Why schedule a bottom tier SEC team with poor offense and hack defense, both things you won't see late in the tournament? Why give UTenn more press covereage than we already get? I think Stanford and Notre Dame play us solely so they can show top recruits that we're a has been team.
“We”, “we’re”!? You talk as if you’re a fan... I wish all of these “has been” fans would go away!
 
#31

VA_VOLFAN

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2016
Messages
2,039
Likes
2,847
#31
I think that's the real reason for not scheduling us. Why schedule a bottom tier SEC team with poor offense and hack defense, both things you won't see late in the tournament? Why give UTenn more press covereage than we already get? I think Stanford and Notre Dame play us solely so they can show top recruits that we're a has been team.
I dunno what the reason was and while they are a really good team right now their schedule Out of Conference Schedule (for Oregon)wasn’t killer either 2018-19. They played three pretty tough teams from the looks of it but wasn’t a lot or what you would call a killer schedule so scheduling not so tough teams didn’t seem to be a problem for them.
 
#33

teacherdean

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2014
Messages
2,535
Likes
3,599
#33
I hope so. I hate these recent cupcake schedules. 4 top 16 teams, and then a bunch of sub-100 creampuffs. I shouldn't be surprised that Holly was ducking Oregon or Oregon State and put a noncompetitive game on the schedule.

I'm interested in seeing how a nearly brand new ND team will fare against a semi-experienced Tennessee team with dead weight removed from the sidelines.
Isn't it past time for bashing Holly, let's allow her to ride off into the sunset, that ship has sailed.
 
#35

lvocd

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
1,322
Likes
2,931
#35
People will forget about Holly when the damage she did to the program is undone.

She had a great legacy as a player, but this is her legacy as a coach.
Holly has a terrific legacy both as a player and as a longtime ASSISTANT coach. I, for one, will never forget the wonderful job she did during most of her association with the Lady Vols. It’s just the head coach part that wasn’t her forte.

But then, many of us also suspect that she never really wanted to be a head coach in the first place. If she’d had the desire and/or ambition to be a head coach, she’d have become one before, basically, being put into the impossible position she was put in when Hart elevated her into the position to soften Pat’s transition. In hindsight, it’s obvious that everyone was trying hard to not create TOO much change while Pat was still around, and so Holly was a logical choice. She wasn’t a natural leader as it turned out, but the fact that she was kept on for too long really wasn’t her fault.

If Holly had been replaced three years ago we wouldn’t be questioning any part of her legacy.
 
#36
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
3,962
Likes
4,188
#36
Holly has a terrific legacy both as a player and as a longtime ASSISTANT coach. I, for one, will never forget the wonderful job she did during most of her association with the Lady Vols. It’s just the head coach part that wasn’t her forte.

But then, many of us also suspect that she never really wanted to be a head coach in the first place. If she’d had the desire and/or ambition to be a head coach, she’d have become one before, basically, being put into the impossible position she was put in when Hart elevated her into the position to soften Pat’s transition. In hindsight, it’s obvious that everyone was trying hard to not create TOO much change while Pat was still around, and so Holly was a logical choice. She wasn’t a natural leader as it turned out, but the fact that she was kept on for too long really wasn’t her fault.

If Holly had been replaced three years ago we wouldn’t be questioning any part of her legacy.

The only riff I have with CHW is that she didn't admit to herself that she was in over her head and take a step back.
That would have been honorable.
As it is she has walked away without even a goodbye.
Sad.

But this IS basketball
A game where nearly every aspect of it requires a short memory
As soon as Coach Harper gives us a new memory it will replace the memory of CHw's silent departure.
 
#37

NoBackBoard

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2016
Messages
920
Likes
1,093
#37
Holly has a terrific legacy both as a player and as a longtime ASSISTANT coach. I, for one, will never forget the wonderful job she did during most of her association with the Lady Vols. It’s just the head coach part that wasn’t her forte.

But then, many of us also suspect that she never really wanted to be a head coach in the first place. If she’d had the desire and/or ambition to be a head coach, she’d have become one before, basically, being put into the impossible position she was put in when Hart elevated her into the position to soften Pat’s transition. In hindsight, it’s obvious that everyone was trying hard to not create TOO much change while Pat was still around, and so Holly was a logical choice. She wasn’t a natural leader as it turned out, but the fact that she was kept on for too long really wasn’t her fault.

If Holly had been replaced three years ago we wouldn’t be questioning any part of her legacy.
Why are you floating around the story that she didn’t want the job when it’s been documented and posted here several times that she asked for it?
 
#38
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
3,962
Likes
4,188
#38
Holly has a terrific legacy both as a player and as a longtime ASSISTANT coach. I, for one, will never forget the wonderful job she did during most of her association with the Lady Vols. It’s just the head coach part that wasn’t her forte.

But then, many of us also suspect that she never really wanted to be a head coach in the first place. If she’d had the desire and/or ambition to be a head coach, she’d have become one before, basically, being put into the impossible position she was put in when Hart elevated her into the position to soften Pat’s transition. In hindsight, it’s obvious that everyone was trying hard to not create TOO much change while Pat was still around, and so Holly was a logical choice. She wasn’t a natural leader as it turned out, but the fact that she was kept on for too long really wasn’t her fault.

If Holly had been replaced three years ago we wouldn’t be questioning any part of her legacy.
I believe this could have been her choice 3 years ago,
2 years ago,
last year,,,right up to where Phil's hand was forced.
 

VN Store



Sponsors
 

Top