An even MORE interesting theory about our OC position

#26
#26
We were #59 in 3rd down conversion %. Dobbs was the 3rd most sacked QB in the SEC. I don't know the stats on negative plays so I will say we had a lot. Defenses attacked the mesh point between RB and QB. He never seemed to exploit a defenses weakness or make in game adjustments. Playcalling and/or scheme caused 2 5* to quit halfway through the season. I don't know where I'm going with this so end rant and I'm going to take glichtenwalter's advice and have a cup of shut up with my coffee.
 
#27
#27
dreVol said:
Have we forgotten what the offense looked like for the first half of the season? (The play calling nearly cost us the game against App State) Debord laid some absolute turds and needed to be replaced.
Click to expand...

So Debord's responsible for the bad games and elite players are credited with the good. Some of y'all are arguing just to argue. I'm not upset or happy that CMD is leaving but if you're not acknowledging the good don't harp on the bad.
 
#30
#30
Roustabout said:
I can't figure this one out.
According to reports Butch has known Debord was going to retire. That was out there for months and Hyams said was confirmed. OK, Debord throws us a curve ball and takes Indiana job.

Well, Debord can't take a job he isnt offered, and you can't be offered a job without being asked permission to interview. I find it hard to fathom that Butch is "starting" his OC search. I can't understand how he would let this valuable position go unfilled during the recruiting period, but I think he did the same thing with Debord.

Bajakian left, Debord name surfaced, fans went into negative frenzy. Significant time passed and Debord was announced. Either Butch already has his candidate, or he is flat footed
Click to expand...
Just so you know... You are right. You will NEVER know the exact timeline of any hiring or firing on any coaching staff in America. However, if you do it was because feelings got hurt and it turned ugly.
 
#31
#31
Orange&White said:
In my opinion, the bowl game showed us that Butch is learning and making some right decisions. The team appeared more aggressive and the play calling was balanced and seemed to be in tune with what was occurring on the field. Not just a game plan or "chart." He still needs to relinquish some control over the program and let our coordinators do their jobs.
Click to expand...


Same thing was said past 3 years after bowl game. It never translates
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#32
#32
In College Station, Tennessee was beating the Aggies up and down the field. The Vols lost to TAMU due to turnovers. Not coaching. Not play calling. The players didn't hold onto the ball and Dobbs didn't see the field when he uncorked some errant throws.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#33
#33
BTW, Lucifer's Vessel, Nick Saban attributes Alabama's success to Neyland's maxims. Yep. Little Nicky does it Robert's way. Of late, Bama's mastery of the SEC and FBS is due to execution - better and more consistent blocking, running, catching, rushing, tackling. It's as plain as day when you watch Bama play.

The very first fundamental of coaching is to impart knowledge and technique, to enhance recognition, strength, and skill, and to instill will, discipline, and determination. Do this well, and the team will execute on the field of play. Those of you wishing to critique coaching at Tennessee should cite specific examples and logically draw connection to lapses in the above.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#34
#34
Butch already knows who his oc is gonna be. If he doesn't announce within the next week or so expect to be underwhelmed. He did the same thing with DeBord. Waited till after signing day so the backlash would have less effect on recruiting. I fully expect him to promote an assistant. If he's as egomaniacal as it's rumored, no way he'll hire anything more than a yes man to run "HIS" offense.
 
#35
#35
As I see it, the USCe loss was due to a lack of will, discipline, and determination. That's at the feet of the entire coaching staff. The Vols on the field lost that game. They did not execute.
 
#36
#36
Mick said:
We were #59 in 3rd down conversion %. Dobbs was the 3rd most sacked QB in the SEC. I don't know the stats on negative plays so I will say we had a lot. Defenses attacked the mesh point between RB and QB. He never seemed to exploit a defenses weakness or make in game adjustments. Playcalling and/or scheme caused 2 5* to quit halfway through the season. I don't know where I'm going with this so end rant and I'm going to take glichtenwalter's advice and have a cup of shut up with my coffee.
Click to expand...

How good could we have been if they had done it even close to right. They played so bad and still set records. How does that even happen?

Release the Beast!

Go Vols!
 
#37
#37
I think the issue more concerns the hot/cold nature of our offense this year. It was frustrating.
 
#38
#38
Tebus, people... Former OC, Mike Bajakian left for a position in the pros in late January 2015. There wasn't a plethora of candidates to replace him. Jones turned to DeBord, a person with whom he was very familiar. Jones knew DeBord would perform well enough to maintain the progress of the program.

Facts. Don't abandoned them.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#39
#39
BTW, DeBord is from Indiana (born in Muncie). He's 60. He's "going home" to cap his career.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#40
#40
Tin Man said:
Neyland's maxims. Robert's way.

The very first fundamental of coaching is to impart knowledge and technique, to enhance recognition, strength, and skill, and to instill will, discipline, and determination. Do this well, and the team will execute on the field of play. Those of you wishing to critique coaching at Tennessee should cite specific examples and logically draw connection to lapses in the above.
Click to expand...

Next time just leave Saban out of it. It takes away from the message. Neyland = Great Coach.

The last part was a very good discription of what a HC should be doing with the program.

Go Vols!
 
#41
#41
1990 and 1991 were our most talented under achieving teams closely followed by 2001. 1969 team can make a case too.

When we didn't have the spread, we yearned for it. Dave Clawson for a season anyone? When we have it, we don't like the same 6 plays over and over. Personally, I only didn't like it when Worley was trying to run it because he was never a threat to run. I'm for running to the strengths of our personnel whatever that is.
 
Last edited:
#42
#42
Iam4utalways said:
How good could we have been if they had done it even close to right. They played so bad and still set records. How does that even happen?

Release the Beast!

Go Vols!
Click to expand...

Desperation was the theme in every game.
 
#44
#44
I think the answer in neither one..Look at all the FBS defenses this year..they were all down except Bama of course...but all teams gave up more points than before..just think the level of defensive play was worse this year than the past...GBO
 
#45
#45
System is basically OK... need better execution and the talent needs to be coached up to avoid costly untimely mistakes... interceptions, fumbles, etc.

Go Vols!
 
#46
#46
Tin Man said:
In College Station, Tennessee was beating the Aggies up and down the field. The Vols lost to TAMU due to turnovers. Not coaching. Not play calling. The players didn't hold onto the ball and Dobbs didn't see the field when he uncorked some errant throws.
Click to expand...

If we consider drops, turnovers and penalties as a referendum on the "hands on" aspects of coaching and getting players ready, Debord stumbled badly this year. Granted, injuries requiring a new OLine every week contributed to that but it is clear it needs to be addressed. Execution was the failure this year, players and coaches IMO. It also would indicate that the underlying system may have solid merit - and why Jones wants to keep it.
 
#47
#47
Gandalf said:
I thought this deserved its own thread.

So many on this board seem to agree in principle with 2 statements:

1. Its great that we are replacing Debord with someone new/exciting who can actually coach up our O and have a more modern, responsive offense, while having our teams better prepared and make good half time adjustments.
2. CBJ's is welded to his basic offensive scheme, which is an anachronistic relic or too "mid-major" that wont work in the SEC level games of today.

Now the odd fact is that this team with this OC and Butch's system was the highest scoring O in the history of Tennessee football. Pause and reflect on that a second. Now you can say it was because they ran up the score against weak teams, we have more plays than we used to, etc but this OC with Butch's system scored more than ANY other UT team ever.

So given #1 and #2 above, how is that possible?

Here is a theory: Perhaps ol Butch's much maligned system is not so bad after all. Perhaps the problem was that Debord was not able to make proper in game and half time adjustments to that system to make it even better when it was required? Perhaps too, Debord did not have the players properly coached up and ready for the game. That is not to wash CBJ of responsibility for losing to TAM, USCjr and Vandy this year, since he is head honcho and he brought in Debord, whom he knew would implement his system. Could it be that CBJ may be correct that his basic system is fine but he needs better execution of it?

When you answer that, consider the alternative is that Debord's coaching or CBJ's system had a lot to do with shattering that record, so which is it? I would tend to lean against Debord's coaching - but I am not a football genius like it seems 60% of Vol nation's posters are.

And before you say, it was because we had the talent (that CBJ recruited) to get those numbers and but for #1 and #2 above we would have gotten even MORE scores solely due to (mismanaged) talent, can you claim that this years team was the most talented team we have ever had - the one that actually played, not the one that included the injury list? No, didnt think so. :hi:

So those of you who agree with both #1 and #2 above, please help me - and answer which is it, Debord is a strategic genius or CBJ may have a reason for liking his system, at least more than seems apparent on the surface?
Click to expand...

Perhaps putting up nearly 40 points per game means that DeBord wasn't as terrible as you arm chair QBs try to make him out to be?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top