A thread of hope...

#77
#77
JP, I get your theories and agree to the basis of your post but I can’t look at a team that has a profile of mediocrity and no obvious sense of purpose and think that we are closer to pulling up than VN-think says we are. You are usually in line with my thoughts, but I can’t see significant signs of improvement or excellence on this team.
 
#78
#78
mercuryvol said:
JP, I get your theories and agree to the basis of your post but I can’t look at a team that has a profile of mediocrity and no obvious sense of purpose and think that we are closer to pulling up than VN-think says we are. You are usually in line with my thoughts, but I can’t see significant signs of improvement or excellence on this team.
Click to expand...
Okay, Mercury. I understand. My hypothesis could absolutely be wrong.

Then again, if we go 10-2 and win the East next season, surprising all of us, I'm going to resurrect this thread. Haha :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: mercuryvol
#79
#79
VFL-82-JP said:
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.
Click to expand...

How is it the same Florida team when they were down a bunch of their starters?

You're overthinking it.

Nothing anyone says will make us feel any better about any of these last few years under Pruitt.

The only words that will bring hope around here are "You're fired!!!"

Pruitt and Fulmer both need to go or we will have a restrictor plate on this program for the foreseeable future.
 
#80
#80
MyVolsDropped said:
How is it the same Florida team when they were down a bunch of their starters?

You're overthinking it.

Nothing anyone says will make us feel any better about any of these last few years under Pruitt.

The only words that will bring hope around here are "You're fired!!!"

Pruitt and Fulmer both need to go or we will have a restrictor plate on this program for the foreseeable future.
Click to expand...
The p.s. in the OP was for you.
 
#83
#83
Salute, OP, for putting this out there to have your ideas tested--fairly or unfairly.

I think you're onto something. I don't believe there are 21 points difference between these teams physically, mentally-emotionally, nor in team-wide talent level.

I think it's the nature of these offenses. Today's offenses isolate defenders. A missed defensive assignment by one player on any play results in big yardage. Back in the day, that only happened if a safety or corner missed on a tackle or angle. I think it takes less today to yield a big gain or TD.

But since the offenses rely on misdirection or reads rather than power, when one offensive player misses an assignment, there's often no gain at all. Compare that to an old off-tackle power play with the fullback lead blocking: good blocking got you 7 yards, poor blocking only 2-3, and a missed assignment by a safety or LB yielded 15-20 yards.

My high school runs one of those read/react offenses that isolates key defenders and takes advantage of a single defender's choice. A correct read--or poor positioning by the key defender--quickly yields 10-15 yards. We started using that offense because we were perennially undersized. To be competitive, we needed an offense that didn't require our smaller linemen to hold their blocks for several seconds.

We got good at running that offense, and gradually, with more on-field success, we began to attract bigger linemen who could handle the academics. Now that we run that offense with linemen the same size as our competition, those inside handoffs frequently go for TDs even with RBs of average speed, and we're competing for championships yearly.

Maybe that's what accounts for Bama, Clemson, Ohio State, et.al. today: consistent execution combined with superior athleticism. At that level, only a slight difference in quality of play is manifested in 21-point wins.

And maybe Tennessee's seeming ineptness really is as the coaches tell us--each play only one player blows his assignment, but that's enough to negate what the other 10 did correctly.

If success today depends more on CORRECT performance, then it makes sense that in a COVID limited season (Spring and Fall) we would not show the improvement that everyone expected. Not for lack of skill or athleticism (D-line being a possible exception), but for lack of perfected execution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VFL-82-JP
#84
#84
VFL-82-JP said:
...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.
Click to expand...

F430E215-BE83-4FC9-9A3F-36C50761B05B.gif
 
#86
#86
BruisedOrange said:
Salute, OP, for putting this out there to have your ideas tested--fairly or unfairly.

I think you're onto something. I don't believe there are 21 points difference between these teams physically, mentally-emotionally, nor in team-wide talent level.

I think it's the nature of these offenses. Today's offenses isolate defenders. A missed defensive assignment by one player on any play results in big yardage. Back in the day, that only happened if a safety or corner missed on a tackle or angle. I think it takes less today to yield a big gain or TD.

But since the offenses rely on misdirection or reads rather than power, when one offensive player misses an assignment, there's often no gain at all. Compare that to an old off-tackle power play with the fullback lead blocking: good blocking got you 7 yards, poor blocking only 2-3, and a missed assignment by a safety or LB yielded 15-20 yards.

My high school runs one of those read/react offenses that isolates key defenders and takes advantage of a single defender's choice. A correct read--or poor positioning by the key defender--quickly yields 10-15 yards. We started using that offense because we were perennially undersized. To be competitive, we needed an offense that didn't require our smaller linemen to hold their blocks for several seconds.

We got good at running that offense, and gradually, with more on-field success, we began to attract bigger linemen who could handle the academics. Now that we run that offense with linemen the same size as our competition, those inside handoffs frequently go for TDs even with RBs of average speed, and we're competing for championships yearly.

Maybe that's what accounts for Bama, Clemson, Ohio State, et.al. today: consistent execution combined with superior athleticism. At that level, only a slight difference in quality of play is manifested in 21-point wins.

And maybe Tennessee's seeming ineptness really is as the coaches tell us--each play only one player blows his assignment, but that's enough to negate what the other 10 did correctly.

If success today depends more on CORRECT performance, then it makes sense that in a COVID limited season (Spring and Fall) we would not show the improvement that everyone expected. Not for lack of skill or athleticism (D-line being a possible exception), but for lack of perfected execution.
Click to expand...
Great insights, Bruised, thanks for them.

You articulated really well something I've been pondering for months now, but could never organize into coherence. The idea that one missed assignment on each of several plays in a game could make such a marked difference in the outcome. Where such a fine-tuned difference in discipline and assignment football could cause big swings in scores. And all of that being somehow different from the way things worked a couple of decades ago.

Thanks very much. This helps greatly with several things I've been trying to sort out.
 
#90
#90
BruisedOrange said:
Salute, OP, for putting this out there to have your ideas tested--fairly or unfairly.

I think you're onto something. I don't believe there are 21 points difference between these teams physically, mentally-emotionally, nor in team-wide talent level.

I think it's the nature of these offenses. Today's offenses isolate defenders. A missed defensive assignment by one player on any play results in big yardage. Back in the day, that only happened if a safety or corner missed on a tackle or angle. I think it takes less today to yield a big gain or TD.

But since the offenses rely on misdirection or reads rather than power, when one offensive player misses an assignment, there's often no gain at all. Compare that to an old off-tackle power play with the fullback lead blocking: good blocking got you 7 yards, poor blocking only 2-3, and a missed assignment by a safety or LB yielded 15-20 yards.

My high school runs one of those read/react offenses that isolates key defenders and takes advantage of a single defender's choice. A correct read--or poor positioning by the key defender--quickly yields 10-15 yards. We started using that offense because we were perennially undersized. To be competitive, we needed an offense that didn't require our smaller linemen to hold their blocks for several seconds.

We got good at running that offense, and gradually, with more on-field success, we began to attract bigger linemen who could handle the academics. Now that we run that offense with linemen the same size as our competition, those inside handoffs frequently go for TDs even with RBs of average speed, and we're competing for championships yearly.

Maybe that's what accounts for Bama, Clemson, Ohio State, et.al. today: consistent execution combined with superior athleticism. At that level, only a slight difference in quality of play is manifested in 21-point wins.

And maybe Tennessee's seeming ineptness really is as the coaches tell us--each play only one player blows his assignment, but that's enough to negate what the other 10 did correctly.

If success today depends more on CORRECT performance, then it makes sense that in a COVID limited season (Spring and Fall) we would not show the improvement that everyone expected. Not for lack of skill or athleticism (D-line being a possible exception), but for lack of perfected execution.
Click to expand...
The only problem with your theory is COVID is not unique to Tennessee, but Pruitt and his staff are.
 
#92
#92
onevol74 said:
The only problem with your theory is COVID is not unique to Tennessee, but Pruitt and his staff are.
Click to expand...

Actually, that point further supports the success of "established" programs this season. In those programs you have seniors and juniors who know their assignments and can "tutor" incoming players without congregating in unallowable numbers.

I think this season's limitations and interruptions also revealed another aspect of what seperates the top tier coaches:

Guys like Pruitt--less experienced as a HC but having studied under the best--came to their new jobs with a plan that was detailed and cumulative. I think Pruitt and his staff (like lots of well-led programs that are trying to re-build) new exactly what they wanted to accomplish, down to each 15-minute segment of every practice session, Spring, Summer, and Fall. Their plans would put each piece in place so that in 3-4 years, their team would be capable of executing at a confernece championship level.

Well, COVID blew away those kinds of detailed plans for every program. But that only allowed the top, most experienced coaching staffs to display their true advantage. Coaches like Saban don't just have a plan, they understand the principles that are the basis for the plan. So if they lose 30% of their practice time, they can adjust on the fly because they KNOW intuitively which things have to be taught today, and what can be delayed 'til later in the season.

I don't doubt Pruitt's plan. I think Fulmer recognized its thoroughness, too. But when COVID threw the plan out the window, it forced every coach on the staff to come up with their own Plan B, or to try to teach too fast, or to demand that players teach themselves and each other all that there was no longer practice time to achieve. That puts everyone under higher stress, and maybe even panic. It's like putting on a roof when you expected 3 sunshiny days, but suddenly there's a huge thunderstorm headed your way. Does each person on your crew know what to do without being told? If not... hammers are gonna fly!

I think the top tier of HCs--because of their experience and their special giftedness--were able to guide their position coaches through each next day, so that as a staff they remained on the same page, even when the pages were being re-written on-the-fly.

I think some second-tier coaches found success this year because they were able to simplify (understand intuitively what could be removed from their D & O playbooks) and develop consistency in their team's execution. Maybe they will prove to be the next generation of top tier coaches.
 
#93
#93
VFL-82-JP said:
Umm, I just spent about 720 words telling you the point. If you were only able to absorb about 150 of them, how does me repeating the other 570 help you out?
Click to expand...

Well, your observation that Florida only had receivers not playing. If they were key receivers, that is exactly why they lost by however many points they lost by. Add to that, from what little I watched that game, Oklahoma seemed more motivated, while Florida seemed to be intimidated. That is football. But how that translates to hope for the Vols? I don't get it. The only way they can have hope is to learn to be more motivated than the teams wearing the other colored uniforms, and been the intimidated team less often. Instead of using 720 words to be impressed with yourself, maybe you need to find simpler solutions that will actually lead to better long term results.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 'Boro-vol
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top