A thread of hope...

#26

JCHateSteve

Recovering Lurk
Joined
Sep 5, 2008
Messages
6,929
Likes
10,600
#26
You're basically using "transitive property" to evaluate where we are. That generally doesn't work very well in Football. There are to many variables. But let's ignore that. Lets go ahead and ignore that we played Bama and they curb stomped us in every facet too.

If we are better than we seem because we played Florida closer than they played OU, and UF played Bama really close, how can you say OU isn't better than Bama? If performance vs UF is a litmus test for us, it should be of OU too. That is, unless the opt outs UF had significantly effected them. But, if that's true it's not a fair comparison anyway.

I think you have a interesting point about how the margin of victory has been changing due to rule changes that favor offense, and maybe we should reevaluate what a "close" game will look like going forward. But your hypothesis about Tennessee being better than we look based on relative performance to UF/Bama isn't logically consistent, unless OU is better than Bama. You can't have it both ways.
 
#29

VFL-82-JP

Bleedin' Orange...
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
16,016
Likes
34,099
#29
You're basically using "transitive property" to evaluate where we are. That generally doesn't work very well in Football. There are to many variables. But let's ignore that. Lets go ahead and ignore that we played Bama and they curb stomped us in every facet too.

If we are better than we seem because we played Florida closer than they played OU, and UF played Bama really close, how can you say OU isn't better than Bama? If performance vs UF is a litmus test for us, it should be of OU too. That is, unless the opt outs UF had significantly effected them. But, if that's true it's not a fair comparison anyway.

I think you have a interesting point about how the margin of victory has been changing due to rule changes that favor offense, and maybe we should reevaluate what a "close" game will look like going forward. But your hypothesis about Tennessee being better than we look based on relative performance to UF/Bama isn't logically consistent, unless OU is better than Bama. You can't have it both ways.
Yep, that's the weaker part of my hypothesis.

I think there's a pretty solid grounding for saying that "close games" need redefinition. A game can end with a 10-20 point spread and still be just as "close" as the old 21-17 results were a decade or two ago.

But translating that into "Tennessee may be closer to a return to competitiveness than we thought," that does--as you noted--depend to some extent on the non-existent Transitive Property of college football. So...like I said, I'm not sure of this hypothesis myself. It's just a ray of possible light I thought I'd share, heh.

And with astoundingly positive results, by all indicators. ;)
 
#32

vol66

Grand Noobah!
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Messages
43,880
Likes
11,849
#32
1. If one of those 4 teams turn the ball over 3+ times against any of those four teams you probably won’t have enough chances to overcome them.

If UT turns the ball over 3 times....f’get about it. Why?

2. Because quite frankly, UT doesn’t pass the eye test. Not in size, not in speed. Be honest, how many players on our team would start for any of those teams? I think this is obvious for anyone. You can’t turn a hamburger into a T bone steak no matter how much steak sauce you put on it.

3. Some of those losses, the other team could have kept the pedal to the metal, so your numbers could be worse.

4. When I watch other teams, offense, defense...you can see what they are trying to do, tell their identity, when I watch our guys, heck they have trouble getting lined up, every game, I haven’t seen any other team look like that this year. In fact, the amount of busts we had in the secondary this year, that’s a real head scratcher.
 
#33

TheFlash1971

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2017
Messages
714
Likes
739
#33
...because the Lord knows we could use one.

This bowl season has gotten me thinking about a trend that has been developing in division 1 college football, and what it might mean for the Vols' future.

Bear in mind, this is a hypothesis in development. Even I'm not convinced this is right, and it's my idea. Feel free to help me explore the strengths and weaknesses of the thought. But if you're just going to trash the Vols, get the hell out; you add nothing of value. Need people who will approach this with some introspection.

Okay, start with the trend. Offense is running away from defense in the college game today. Which leads to greater point spreads by game end. Evidence: the average (_average_) score differential in a semi-final game the past six years is 21 points. Think about that. The average. Among the four best teams at the pinnacle of the sport. I think we'd all agree, there's not a lot of separation between #1 and #4 each year. All very good teams, or at least three of the four. And often enough, a #3 seed beats a #2 or a #4 beats a #1. So really close to each other. And yet 21 points apart by the end of each game. That's striking.

Now the observation that triggered my hypothesis: Florida, a team that took the #1 team in the land to the wire in Atlanta, losing by just six points ("a close game" by any measure) to Bama...this Florida team goes to the Cotton Bowl short a handful of players (granted, they were mostly receivers) and gets TROUNCED by Oklahoma, a team we'd probably all agree is not as good as Bama or Clemson, probably about the same as Ohio State or Notre Dame. Florida gets WHUPPED. Thirty-five points. Huge, gaping wound. Over the loss of six players.

And Florida can't present the excuse that their players didn't want to be there, weren't motivated. They were fired up. We saw the pre-game interviews, the warm-ups, and the first few drives of the game. Florida's players were lit up, as were their coaches. They WANTED it. At least, until Trask threw three interceptions in a row, all in the first quarter, and let them down 17-0. After that, agreed, those gator players wanted to be nowhere near the Cotton Bowl. After that.

So here's the hypothesis. The Vols may not be as far from a return to competitiveness as we all think. Here, I'll talk you through that:

Our lads lost seven times this season. All by a margin of something between 11 and 31 points. On average, we lost those games by 19.7 points.

See what I see? We were closer to winning every one of our games than Florida was to beating Oklahoma. The same Florida who took Bama to 0:00 on the clock down less than a score. A Florida who was, as far as the world can tell, six players away from beating that Oklahoma team that trounced them.

Another way of looking at it: the Vols were, objectively and mathematically, closer to winning those seven games we lost, all seven of them, than the #4 team in the country normally (on average) is to beating #1 each year, or #3 beating #2.

So maybe we're not all that far away. Makes you think, huh?

We remember the days when close games were decided by just a few poiints. A single score. That is no longer the norm. Not among the best teams, and not among lesser teams. The advantages given to the offense over the past decade or two have resulted in games having wider victory margins. Consequently, teams can be closer in capability and still not be as close in score as they used to be.

...

Okay, that's it. I know, I know, if wishes were horses, and there's no such thing as a moral victory, and WE LOST THOSE GAMES DAMMIT! I get it. We have to win. There is no substitute.

But maybe we're not quite as many light years away from winning as we thought.

What do you think?


p.s. If all you're going to say is, "we'll never win with Jeremy Pruitt as coach," why don't you just go back to one of those 10,000 threads? This one isn't about Pruitt. It's about the program.
Not as good as Clemson, I beg to differ Clemson just got boat raced by Ohio State.
 
#34

VolFanNC09

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2009
Messages
1,317
Likes
892
#34
Ok, not going to get into the coaching negatives, will get into some of the hope here.

I wouldn't get into the details of the thread....but if we get Arik Gilbert from the portal it is a game changer for us. Bailey will have a target he is super comfortable with, our passing game will be a strength again. Also getting someone like him will help recruit other transfers. We need a good OL, QB coach, but recruiting wise we will be as loaded as any other team on offense. HB needs to learn to throw the ball away, but is already much more accurate than JG was and will have experience and an actual spring and fall camp. I can see huge things here especially if Arik comes.

I also see our current staff knows they have to win big next year which means 9+ wins or they will be gone. Which means they will hit the transfer market for other help.

Assuming Pruitt is still here, what would be a good offseason for us is something like this.

Arik Transfers here.
1 more OL and WR transfer here.
Muschamp becomes our DC.
He brings in a good DL coach and LB coach.
3-4 defensive transfers with at least 2 DBs, 1-2 DE/OLB.
OL coach is hired that we don't have to google.
Weinke gone
Chaney coaches QBs and we hire an actual TE and ST coach.
Graham and Tee stay.

Pruitt knows he has to win at least 9 games and has been told that is the floor to keep his job.

I would say outside of Freeze or Malzahn coming here, that is a good offseason. Muschamp coming here is a long shot, but they are friends and will see. I can see Kiffin recruiting Muschamp as well. I just think recruiting wise, the team actually has talent, but picking up a few transfers like Arik will put us in the top 4-5 of talent in the SEC.
 
Likes: VFL-82-JP
#35

GetYouSomeofThat

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2017
Messages
2,877
Likes
2,872
#35
...because the Lord knows we could use one.

This bowl season has gotten me thinking about a trend that has been developing in division 1 college football, and what it might mean for the Vols' future.

Bear in mind, this is a hypothesis in development. Even I'm not convinced this is right, and it's my idea. Feel free to help me explore the strengths and weaknesses of the thought. But if you're just going to trash the Vols, get the hell out; you add nothing of value. Need people who will approach this with some introspection.

Okay, start with the trend. Offense is running away from defense in the college game today. Which leads to greater point spreads by game end. Evidence: the average (_average_) score differential in a semi-final game the past six years is 21 points. Think about that. The average. Among the four best teams at the pinnacle of the sport. I think we'd all agree, there's not a lot of separation between #1 and #4 each year. All very good teams, or at least three of the four. And often enough, a #3 seed beats a #2 or a #4 beats a #1. So really close to each other. And yet 21 points apart by the end of each game. That's striking.

Now the observation that triggered my hypothesis: Florida, a team that took the #1 team in the land to the wire in Atlanta, losing by just six points ("a close game" by any measure) to Bama...this Florida team goes to the Cotton Bowl short a handful of players (granted, they were mostly receivers) and gets TROUNCED by Oklahoma, a team we'd probably all agree is not as good as Bama or Clemson, probably about the same as Ohio State or Notre Dame. Florida gets WHUPPED. Thirty-five points. Huge, gaping wound. Over the loss of six players.

And Florida can't present the excuse that their players didn't want to be there, weren't motivated. They were fired up. We saw the pre-game interviews, the warm-ups, and the first few drives of the game. Florida's players were lit up, as were their coaches. They WANTED it. At least, until Trask threw three interceptions in a row, all in the first quarter, and let them down 17-0. After that, agreed, those gator players wanted to be nowhere near the Cotton Bowl. After that.

So here's the hypothesis. The Vols may not be as far from a return to competitiveness as we all think. Here, I'll talk you through that:

Our lads lost seven times this season. All by a margin of something between 11 and 31 points. On average, we lost those games by 19.7 points.

See what I see? We were closer to winning every one of our games than Florida was to beating Oklahoma. The same Florida who took Bama to 0:00 on the clock down less than a score. A Florida who was, as far as the world can tell, six players away from beating that Oklahoma team that trounced them.

Another way of looking at it: the Vols were, objectively and mathematically, closer to winning those seven games we lost, all seven of them, than the #4 team in the country normally (on average) is to beating #1 each year, or #3 beating #2.

So maybe we're not all that far away. Makes you think, huh?

We remember the days when close games were decided by just a few poiints. A single score. That is no longer the norm. Not among the best teams, and not among lesser teams. The advantages given to the offense over the past decade or two have resulted in games having wider victory margins. Consequently, teams can be closer in capability and still not be as close in score as they used to be.

...

Okay, that's it. I know, I know, if wishes were horses, and there's no such thing as a moral victory, and WE LOST THOSE GAMES DAMMIT! I get it. We have to win. There is no substitute.

But maybe we're not quite as many light years away from winning as we thought.

What do you think?


p.s. If all you're going to say is, "we'll never win with Jeremy Pruitt as coach," why don't you just go back to one of those 10,000 threads? This one isn't about Pruitt. It's about the program.
If you want yo really test your theory simply look at the Vegas line over thr last 10 years. Are the spreads larger than they were? Do they coincide with the offense over defense shift in NCAAFB?

Money is a good motivator amd Vegas cares about the lines as they relate ti money.
 
#37

VFL-82-JP

Bleedin' Orange...
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
16,016
Likes
34,099
#37
1. If one of those 4 teams turn the ball over 3+ times against any of those four teams you probably won’t have enough chances to overcome them.

If UT turns the ball over 3 times....f’get about it. Why?

2. Because quite frankly, UT doesn’t pass the eye test. Not in size, not in speed. Be honest, how many players on our team would start for any of those teams? I think this is obvious for anyone. You can’t turn a hamburger into a T bone steak no matter how much steak sauce you put on it.

3. Some of those losses, the other team could have kept the pedal to the metal, so your numbers could be worse.

4. When I watch other teams, offense, defense...you can see what they are trying to do, tell their identity, when I watch our guys, heck they have trouble getting lined up, every game, I haven’t seen any other team look like that this year. In fact, the amount of busts we had in the secondary this year, that’s a real head scratcher.
Solid points. The best counter-argument yet. And undeniable, particularly point #4.
 
#38

VFL-82-JP

Bleedin' Orange...
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
16,016
Likes
34,099
#38
Ok, not going to get into the coaching negatives, will get into some of the hope here.

I wouldn't get into the details of the thread....but if we get Arik Gilbert from the portal it is a game changer for us. Bailey will have a target he is super comfortable with, our passing game will be a strength again. Also getting someone like him will help recruit other transfers. We need a good OL, QB coach, but recruiting wise we will be as loaded as any other team on offense. HB needs to learn to throw the ball away, but is already much more accurate than JG was and will have experience and an actual spring and fall camp. I can see huge things here especially if Arik comes.

I also see our current staff knows they have to win big next year which means 9+ wins or they will be gone. Which means they will hit the transfer market for other help.

Assuming Pruitt is still here, what would be a good offseason for us is something like this.

Arik Transfers here.
1 more OL and WR transfer here.
Muschamp becomes our DC.
He brings in a good DL coach and LB coach.
3-4 defensive transfers with at least 2 DBs, 1-2 DE/OLB.
OL coach is hired that we don't have to google.
Weinke gone
Chaney coaches QBs and we hire an actual TE and ST coach.
Graham and Tee stay.

Pruitt knows he has to win at least 9 games and has been told that is the floor to keep his job.

I would say outside of Freeze or Malzahn coming here, that is a good offseason. Muschamp coming here is a long shot, but they are friends and will see. I can see Kiffin recruiting Muschamp as well. I just think recruiting wise, the team actually has talent, but picking up a few transfers like Arik will put us in the top 4-5 of talent in the SEC.
Nice analysis. Thanks for it. It's a totally different topic than the thread is about, but I enjoyed reading it.
 
#39

BeardedVol

Not-Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
10,284
Likes
20,194
#39
Ok, not going to get into the coaching negatives, will get into some of the hope here.

I wouldn't get into the details of the thread....but if we get Arik Gilbert from the portal it is a game changer for us. Bailey will have a target he is super comfortable with, our passing game will be a strength again. Also getting someone like him will help recruit other transfers. We need a good OL, QB coach, but recruiting wise we will be as loaded as any other team on offense. HB needs to learn to throw the ball away, but is already much more accurate than JG was and will have experience and an actual spring and fall camp. I can see huge things here especially if Arik comes.

I also see our current staff knows they have to win big next year which means 9+ wins or they will be gone. Which means they will hit the transfer market for other help.

Assuming Pruitt is still here, what would be a good offseason for us is something like this.

Arik Transfers here.
1 more OL and WR transfer here.
Muschamp becomes our DC.
He brings in a good DL coach and LB coach.
3-4 defensive transfers with at least 2 DBs, 1-2 DE/OLB.
OL coach is hired that we don't have to google.
Weinke gone
Chaney coaches QBs and we hire an actual TE and ST coach.
Graham and Tee stay.

Pruitt knows he has to win at least 9 games and has been told that is the floor to keep his job.

I would say outside of Freeze or Malzahn coming here, that is a good offseason. Muschamp coming here is a long shot, but they are friends and will see. I can see Kiffin recruiting Muschamp as well. I just think recruiting wise, the team actually has talent, but picking up a few transfers like Arik will put us in the top 4-5 of talent in the SEC.
Why would getting Arik Gilbert be a "game changer"? Our current offense doesn't utilize the TE except for blocking, and our TE "coach" has no clue how to coach TEs.
 
#40

VFL-82-JP

Bleedin' Orange...
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
16,016
Likes
34,099
#40
If you want yo really test your theory simply look at the Vegas line over thr last 10 years. Are the spreads larger than they were? Do they coincide with the offense over defense shift in NCAAFB?

Money is a good motivator amd Vegas cares about the lines as they relate ti money.
That's a good point.

Do you know the answer to that question? Have you seen an evolution in Vegas? In either point spread or over/under, or both?
 
#41

vol66

Grand Noobah!
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Messages
43,880
Likes
11,849
#41
I will say, to look for hope...the young guys, they didn’t have the normal acclimation that most freshmen have due to COVID. It’s hard enough to make an impact as a freshman in a normal year. In addition, I don’t know what the S&C program looked like for them as they transition from HS to College.

With that in mind it is difficult to judge what we have and how Pruitt has been recruiting.
 
#42

JCHateSteve

Recovering Lurk
Joined
Sep 5, 2008
Messages
6,929
Likes
10,600
#42
Yep, that's the weaker part of my hypothesis.

I think there's a pretty solid grounding for saying that "close games" need redefinition. A game can end with a 10-20 point spread and still be just as "close" as the old 21-17 results were a decade or two ago.

But translating that into "Tennessee may be closer to a return to competitiveness than we thought," that does--as you noted--depend to some extent on the non-existent Transitive Property of college football. So...like I said, I'm not sure of this hypothesis myself. It's just a ray of possible light I thought I'd share, heh.

And with astoundingly positive results, by all indicators. ;)
20 points might be stretch. but I do see a 14 point game as close. I think we are more talented than we look, that is what made this year so frustrating. We seem married to philosophy that runs counter to how the game is evolving on offense. That philosophy doesn't look like anything I've seen from Chaney in the past either. Pruitt needs to reevaluate what he is doing there. Honestly he needs to get his hands off that side of the ball all together. That's what Spurrier did with defense.
 
#43

sjt18

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
42,482
Likes
27,702
#43
I like the OP... but that's nothing but wishful thinking. UF's #1 in the bowl was what... #5 or #6 during the regular season. Their success wholly hinged on the passing game. Their D was middling at best. They had a very weak run game.

O's are running away from D's. But who else in the SEC got blown out 7 times? Vandy lost 9 times and was obviously a terrible football team. Their games vs TAM, MSU, and UK were decided by la TD or less. I believe UF was the only team that did not beat UT by MORE than their average margin of victory.... opponents consistently beat UT worse than they beat their average opponent.

You guys are trying to put lipstick on a pig.
 
Likes: VFL-82-JP
#44

VolFanNC09

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2009
Messages
1,317
Likes
892
#44
Why would getting Arik Gilbert be a "game changer"? Our current offense doesn't utilize the TE except for blocking, and our TE "coach" has no clue how to coach TEs.

In this thread I am trying to be hopeful....but Bailey and Shrout threw to the TEs and when you have a QB who has a connection to a WR or TE that person is always the 1st or second read.

I can guarantee that Bailey would throw to him at least 6-7 times a game. He will also be in Bailey's ear all year long.

Bailey has a comfort level with him, literally a game changer regardless of the play call. If you look at Florida without Kyle Pitts they were a different team. It wasn't' because Mullen wanted to throw him every play, it was because Trask knew if his initial read wasn't open look for Pitts.

My thought is you get someone like that and it is much bigger than just a random transfer, the only way the coaches can mess it up is not letting him go out in routes.....
 
Likes: VFL-82-JP
#45

VFL-82-JP

Bleedin' Orange...
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
16,016
Likes
34,099
#45
You're basically using "transitive property" to evaluate where we are. That generally doesn't work very well in Football. There are to many variables. But let's ignore that. Lets go ahead and ignore that we played Bama and they curb stomped us in every facet too.

If we are better than we seem because we played Florida closer than they played OU, and UF played Bama really close, how can you say OU isn't better than Bama? If performance vs UF is a litmus test for us, it should be of OU too. That is, unless the opt outs UF had significantly effected them. But, if that's true it's not a fair comparison anyway.

I think you have a interesting point about how the margin of victory has been changing due to rule changes that favor offense, and maybe we should reevaluate what a "close" game will look like going forward. But your hypothesis about Tennessee being better than we look based on relative performance to UF/Bama isn't logically consistent, unless OU is better than Bama. You can't have it both ways.
Okay, I've thought about your response a bit.

I think my hypothesis doesn't actually depend very much on the transitive property of football. Because I"m not trying to say, "team a lost to team b by X points, and we lost to team b by Y points, therefore we compare in this way to team a". That's the transitive property in application.

All I'm saying is, losing by 10-20 points may in fact still be a "close game." Where we'd never have called it that before, we now have proof that small swings in a team's fortune can cause big disparities in score. Clemson without Lawrence loses to ND by 7. Clemson with Lawrence a few weeks later beats ND by 24. Florida missing their top receivers loses by 35 to a team that most here believe would not be as good as the team Florida stayed close to in Atlanta. Big point swings from relatively small changes, in both cases.

It's almost more chaos theory kind of thinking than transitive property.

So, the thought concludes, if relatively small changes in the input can cause such wide swings for games like Florida-Oklahoma and Clemson-Notre Dame, maybe the gap between where the Vols are and where we need to be isn't so wide as many worry.

That's not transitive property, except on the very edges. It's not central to the thought.

What if we are (a) Harrison Bailey on fire and (b) Pruitt matures into head coaching and (c) we get a playmaker or two at receiver, what if we're just those three bits away from challenging for the East?
 
#46

JonGrudensAgent

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
11,167
Likes
11,378
#46
Clemson's defense hasnt had the super high end elite talent (especially on the DL) the past couple of years. They can get away with that in the ACC but going against the OSUs and LSUs of the world, they get exposed a bit...
This.

Clemson is missing Ferrell and other guys on the front 4 big time.

Also don't think Swinney was aggressive enough last night. Saw a tweet talking about him punting on 4th and short 4 times last night.

Throw in Fields having an all time great game and the game got away from them quick.

I put zero stock in margin of the FL-OK game.

There was the players missing issue, the flukey 3 int performance from Trask, and probably some let down after coming up just short against Bama.

Not sure how that relates to TN getting blasted most of the season.

Personally don't think the Vols have near the speed on the outside to hang with any of these teams being discussed.

Three years and Pruitt has brought in one guy in Gray that stands out as a playmaker on offense.
 
#47

VFL-82-JP

Bleedin' Orange...
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
16,016
Likes
34,099
#47
I like the OP... but that's nothing but wishful thinking. UF's #1 in the bowl was what... #5 or #6 during the regular season. Their success wholly hinged on the passing game. Their D was middling at best. They had a very weak run game.

O's are running away from D's. But who else in the SEC got blown out 7 times? Vandy lost 9 times and was obviously a terrible football team. Their games vs TAM, MSU, and UK were decided by la TD or less. I believe UF was the only team that did not beat UT by MORE than their average margin of victory.... opponents consistently beat UT worse than they beat their average opponent.

You guys are trying to put lipstick on a pig.
That's entirely possible, SJT. It may just be lipstick. But I'm having fun thinking it through. Heh.
 
Likes: sjt18
#49

BigOrangeMojo

The Member in Miss December
Joined
Jan 24, 2017
Messages
8,026
Likes
24,155
#49
This.

Clemson is missing Ferrell and other guys on the front 4 big time.

Also don't think Swinney was aggressive enough last night. Saw a tweet talking about him punting on 4th and short 4 times last night.

Throw in Fields having an all time great game and the game got away from them quick.

I put zero stock in margin of the FL-OK game.

There was the players missing issue, the flukey 3 int performance from Trask, and probably some let down after coming up just short against Bama.

Not sure how that relates to TN getting blasted most of the season.

Personally don't think the Vols have near the speed on the outside to hang with any of these teams being discussed.

Three years and Pruitt has brought in one guy in Gray that stands out as a playmaker on offense.
Agree. UT has no DL to speak of and the back 7 are too slow. Game is played different in 2021 than 2011. Appears that Pruitt is finally recruiting some speed at LB but currently we don't have nowhere near enough on the defensive side of the ball.
 
#50

JFBanicki

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
1,707
Likes
977
#50
...because the Lord knows we could use one.

This bowl season has gotten me thinking about a trend that has been developing in division 1 college football, and what it might mean for the Vols' future.

Bear in mind, this is a hypothesis in development. Even I'm not convinced this is right, and it's my idea. Feel free to help me explore the strengths and weaknesses of the thought. But if you're just going to trash the Vols, get the hell out; you add nothing of value. Need people who will approach this with some introspection.

Okay, start with the trend. Offense is running away from defense in the college game today. Which leads to greater point spreads by game end. Evidence: the average (_average_) score differential in a semi-final game the past six years is 21 points. Think about that. The average. Among the four best teams at the pinnacle of the sport. I think we'd all agree, there's not a lot of separation between #1 and #4 each year. All very good teams, or at least three of the four. And often enough, a #3 seed beats a #2 or a #4 beats a #1. So really close to each other. And yet 21 points apart by the end of each game. That's striking.

Now the observation that triggered my hypothesis: Florida, a team that took the #1 team in the land to the wire in Atlanta, losing by just six points ("a close game" by any measure) to Bama...this Florida team goes to the Cotton Bowl short a handful of players (granted, they were mostly receivers) and gets TROUNCED by Oklahoma, a team we'd probably all agree is not as good as Bama or Clemson, probably about the same as Ohio State or Notre Dame. Florida gets WHUPPED. Thirty-five points. Huge, gaping wound. Over the loss of six players.

And Florida can't present the excuse that their players didn't want to be there, weren't motivated. They were fired up. We saw the pre-game interviews, the warm-ups, and the first few drives of the game. Florida's players were lit up, as were their coaches. They WANTED it. At least, until Trask threw three interceptions in a row, all in the first quarter, and let them down 17-0. After that, agreed, those gator players wanted to be nowhere near the Cotton Bowl. After that.

So here's the hypothesis. The Vols may not be as far from a return to competitiveness as we all think. Here, I'll talk you through that:

Our lads lost seven times this season. All by a margin of something between 11 and 31 points. On average, we lost those games by 19.7 points.

See what I see? We were closer to winning every one of our games than Florida was to beating Oklahoma. The same Florida who took Bama to 0:00 on the clock down less than a score. A Florida who was, as far as the world can tell, six players away from beating that Oklahoma team that trounced them.

Another way of looking at it: the Vols were, objectively and mathematically, closer to winning those seven games we lost, all seven of them, than the #4 team in the country normally (on average) is to beating #1 each year, or #3 beating #2.

So maybe we're not all that far away. Makes you think, huh?

We remember the days when close games were decided by just a few poiints. A single score. That is no longer the norm. Not among the best teams, and not among lesser teams. The advantages given to the offense over the past decade or two have resulted in games having wider victory margins. Consequently, teams can be closer in capability and still not be as close in score as they used to be.

...

Okay, that's it. I know, I know, if wishes were horses, and there's no such thing as a moral victory, and WE LOST THOSE GAMES DAMMIT! I get it. We have to win. There is no substitute.

But maybe we're not quite as many light years away from winning as we thought.

What do you think?


p.s. If all you're going to say is, "we'll never win with Jeremy Pruitt as coach," why don't you just go back to one of those 10,000 threads? This one isn't about Pruitt. It's about the program.
The problem with this is the program can’t score points in a modern game that requires a team to outscore an opponent rather than simply shutting down their O.

This comes down to coaching philosophy, not the program so as much as you love you some Pruitt, his O philosophy is exactly what will keep us from being anywhere near a top program, or even mediocre for that matter. This slow, ground and pound time of possession O will make us perennial bottom feeders every year. We will be Vandy and UK, where we will mostly lose but may every 10 yrs or so pull an upset on a top team overlooking us.
 

VN Store


Sponsors
 

Top