At what point...?

#1
H

hndog609

Junior Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2006
Messages
13,688
Likes
10,119
#1
OK, there's a lot of frayed nerves out there (and here) so please, I'm trying to posit this as a general question that could, perhaps, be applied to UT's game last night. My goal, though, is to see what people think of the question in general, at any level, any sport.

At what point does the coach's (any coach) responsibility start to ebb (or disappear) and the players are expected to do what they are supposed to do?

I have played many sports and still play several recreationally. If I'm at the free throw line I don't get to whine about what the coach's did or didn't tell me...I'm gonna make the shot or miss. If I'm 80 yds off the green with a good lie I (me, nobody else) am going to stick it on the flat stuff or not. I guess I've read and heard many people that, swear to God, you'd think they actually believed that the game was being played by the coaches in some video game and not by players on the field/court/whatever. Pick a game, any game, where a receiver was open and the QB flat missed him. Simple as that, sailed it 10yds over the guy. If it suits some people to do so they will find a way to blame a coach. It's just beyond me.

The little cadre of watchers we assembled to watch the game were unanimous in one single concern above all others after last nights game; do we or do we not have an SEC caliber player at QB. If the answer really is no (and this applies to ANY SEC team) then winning in this league is going to be very, very tough and who is under center might be every bit as important than who is on the sideline.
 
#2
#2
I think the difference is with college football is the fact that if the players don't perform, who does that ultimately come back on? The head coach since he chose to recruit those players. So really anyway I look at it there is blame for the head coach.
 
#3
#3
If the Coach has done his job and adequately prepared the kid in the offseason and calls the right play to put the kid in the position to succeed, and he doesn't because he can't make the play... then it is absolutely on the kid.
 
#4
#4
it's one thing when you don't have players that are capable of executing. there's only so much coaching you can do, if you have players that simply can't perform.

the argument that will always exist against CPF and co., is that talent has never been a problem.

the other thing to consider is the amount of errors. it's one thing to get out played by another team physically. it's another to shoot yourself in the foot.

last night, this team looked ill prepared and they played like it. far too many mistakes in too many areas too many times for it not to fall on the coaches.

throw in the lack of 2nd half adjustments compared to what UCLA's staff did with their offense and, there's no getting around the coaches being accountable for last night's game.
 
#5
#5
DC Vol said:
If the Coach has done his job and adequately prepared the kid in the offseason and calls the right play to put the kid in the position to succeed, and he doesn't because he can't make the play... then it is absolutely on the kid.
Click to expand...

I'm trying to avoid tying my question too much to last night's game (for obvious bias reasons) but I seem to recall several examples that meet the criteria you set forth in your reply taking place.
 
#6
#6
hndog609 said:
I'm trying to avoid tying my question too much to last night's game (for obvious bias reasons) but I seem to recall several examples that meet the criteria you set forth in your reply taking place.
Click to expand...

I only came to that conclusion when I carefully read newsposts on GVX.

The only thing I don't understand is if Clawson knew it was a weakness of Crompton (that he probably wanted a 4 TD 300 yard game)... than it shouldn't have been a pass to begin with. Crompton shouldn't have passed more than 25 times.
 
#7
#7
We can pose all these hypotheticals, but who really thinks that if Houston Nutt is our coach last night we don't win by at least 10 points?
 
#8
#8
jakez4ut said:
the argument that will always exist against CPF and co., is that talent has never been a problem.
Click to expand...

Not saying there isn't merit in that observation but, as I stated in the OP, I've watched a certain QB play in three different losses. Are you sure that the talent (or lack thereof) might not be reasonably called into question?
 
#9
#9
UCLA had a precieved lack of talent and see what they were able to do?
 
#10
#10
hndog609 said:
Not saying there isn't merit in that observation but, as I stated in the OP, I've watched a certain QB play in three different losses. Are you sure that the talent (or lack thereof) might not be reasonably called into question?
Click to expand...
the qb referred to is but one of many current and former players that have come in highly regarded that have never won a c'ship while at UT.

that's not an endorsement of recruiting services, but these kids are all evaluated. the coaches want them here for a reason. some don't pan out for a myriad of reasons.

in general though, you can't recruit like CPF has over his career and put NFL talent on the field like he has over his career and have so little to show for it.

anyway, the talent levels are defintely not on the same level as 10 years ago.

but when you consider the competition we continue to struggle against the last few years........Air Force, UAB, UCLA, Vandy, KY, South Carolina, Bama and CAl from last year.........

talent simply isn't the problem in those games.
 
#11
#11
hndog609 said:
Not saying there isn't merit in that observation but, as I stated in the OP, I've watched a certain QB play in three different losses. Are you sure that the talent (or lack thereof) might not be reasonably called into question?
Click to expand...

He certainly reminds me of Rex Grossman, the Chicago Bears years.
 
#13
#13
hndog609 said:
OK, there's a lot of frayed nerves out there (and here) so please, I'm trying to posit this as a general question that could, perhaps, be applied to UT's game last night. My goal, though, is to see what people think of the question in general, at any level, any sport.

At what point does the coach's (any coach) responsibility start to ebb (or disappear) and the players are expected to do what they are supposed to do?

I have played many sports and still play several recreationally. If I'm at the free throw line I don't get to whine about what the coach's did or didn't tell me...I'm gonna make the shot or miss. If I'm 80 yds off the green with a good lie I (me, nobody else) am going to stick it on the flat stuff or not. I guess I've read and heard many people that, swear to God, you'd think they actually believed that the game was being played by the coaches in some video game and not by players on the field/court/whatever. Pick a game, any game, where a receiver was open and the QB flat missed him. Simple as that, sailed it 10yds over the guy. If it suits some people to do so they will find a way to blame a coach. It's just beyond me.

The little cadre of watchers we assembled to watch the game were unanimous in one single concern above all others after last nights game; do we or do we not have an SEC caliber player at QB. If the answer really is no (and this applies to ANY SEC team) then winning in this league is going to be very, very tough and who is under center might be every bit as important than who is on the sideline.
Click to expand...

The difference in football is the coaches are responsible for putting their players in position to win. That means game planning to get your best players involved. If the strongest part of a team is the secondary and you play extremely soft coverage and let a 3rd string qb dink and dunk his way down the field the onus is not on the players but the coaches who instructed them to play a type of coverage that did not take advantage of their strengths.
 
#14
#14
jakez4ut said:
the qb referred to is but one of many current and former players that have come in highly regarded that have never won a c'ship while at UT.

that's not an endorsement of recruiting services, but these kids are all evaluated. the coaches want them here for a reason. some don't pan out for a myriad of reasons.

in general though, you can't recruit like CPF has over his career and put NFL talent on the field like he has over his career and have so little to show for it.

anyway, the talent levels are defintely not on the same level as 10 years ago.

but when you consider the competition we continue to struggle against the last few years........Air Force, UAB, UCLA, Vandy, KY, South Carolina, Bama and CAl from last year.........

talent simply isn't the problem in those games.
Click to expand...

I think this is a good post but, and obviously you can only give your opinion here, do you think the offense would have looked a lot better if Ainge were still here? I mean, (crap, getting dragged straight into last night's game like I hoped I wouldn't) I saw a lot of exactly what I had hoped this new O staff would do and said they would do. Slants? Yep. Deep routes? Check. Seam routes to TE? You betcha. Basically, it looked to me like Clawson wanted very much to keep his promise to the fans of getting the ball to our playmakers. I know it's only one game but there is an absolutely vital element to that formula that MUST get it done...and I'm starting to be very worried that the element in question might not be up to the task.
 
#15
#15
When you have such an obvious talent advantage over teams that you consistently fail to put away, or even worse (as in the case of last night), LOSE to, coaching and program leadership are the problems.
 
#16
#16
hndog609 said:
I think this is a good post but, and obviously you can only give your opinion here, do you think the offense would have looked a lot better if Ainge were still here? I mean, (crap, getting dragged straight into last night's game like I hoped I wouldn't) I saw a lot of exactly what I had hoped this new O staff would do and said they would do. Slants? Yep. Deep routes? Check. Seam routes to TE? You betcha. Basically, it looked to me like Clawson wanted very much to keep his promise to the fans of getting the ball to our playmakers. I know it's only one game but there is an absolutely vital element to that formula that MUST get it done...and I'm starting to be very worried that the element in question might not be up to the task.
Click to expand...
i think in generaly, you're correct. the play calling in spots did live up to what we should expect.. the execution was lacking obviously. as for Ainge, i don't know that he would have done better, the pass protection wasn't great, but i do think he'd of been more accurate with the throws.

that's the biggest thing about Jon i had a problem with.......he threw several high balls, several ground balls, was long, short.......he was all over the place.

another point about the play calling, it's the situations that some of the play calls were made that had me scratching my head. too many good 1st down gains got wasted on 2nd down. our best plays at times was Hardesty and Foster running right at them, and we'd throw it seemingly every 2nd down, regardless of down and distance.

the only good news is that all of this can be corrected. the bad news is that it happened to begin with. i hate leaving games with more questions than answers. and that's the case today.
 
#17
#17
jakez4ut said:
i think in generaly, you're correct. the play calling in spots did live up to what we should expect.. the execution was lacking obviously. as for Ainge, i don't know that he would have done better, the pass protection wasn't great, but i do think he'd of been more accurate with the throws.

that's the biggest thing about Jon i had a problem with.......he threw several high balls, several ground balls, was long, short.......he was all over the place.

another point about the play calling, it's the situations that some of the play calls were made that had me scratching my head. too many good 1st down gains got wasted on 2nd down. our best plays at times was Hardesty and Foster running right at them, and we'd throw it seemingly every 2nd down, regardless of down and distance.

the only good news is that all of this can be corrected. the bad news is that it happened to begin with. i hate leaving games with more questions than answers. and that's the case today.
Click to expand...

On this post we are pretty much eye-to-eye.
 
#18
#18
jakez4ut said:
the qb referred to is but one of many current and former players that have come in highly regarded that have never won a c'ship while at UT.

that's not an endorsement of recruiting services, but these kids are all evaluated. the coaches want them here for a reason. some don't pan out for a myriad of reasons.

in general though, you can't recruit like CPF has over his career and put NFL talent on the field like he has over his career and have so little to show for it.

anyway, the talent levels are defintely not on the same level as 10 years ago.

but when you consider the competition we continue to struggle against the last few years........Air Force, UAB, UCLA, Vandy, KY, South Carolina, Bama and CAl from last year.........

talent simply isn't the problem in those games.
Click to expand...


Very true. Certain games used to be a foregone conclusion. Now, we have no certain games. We manage to make the cupcake games look difficult. Occasionally, we come prepared and play well against a better team and this has saved Fulmer to this point. However, we can no longer afford to lose the gimme games and get blown out in rivalry games. It's just so frustrating to watch our coaching staff make the same mistakes game after game and year after year. They have their job for a reason but I think that a decent HS coach could have won that game with our talent and UCLA's holes. We should have killed their confidence from the beginning but our coaches did everything possible to boost UCLA's confidence even with the 4 picks.
 
#19
#19
Coaches are there to teach, recruit, scheme, and call plays. Players are there to get an education and make the plays that are called. When a bad play is called, the players need to be able to react to it and adjust to what they have. The QB absolutely, positively HAS to be able to read the defense and either check out of a bad play called or find the best possible way to execute the play. Crompton did neither last night. He made bad decisions and bad throws. The loss falls on the entire team and coaches. It was a group (lack of) effort. This game was mailed in after halftime. No heart, no intensity, no chance.CPF and co simply have to adjust what they are doing to get the most out of what they have. If you have a guy on the field that isn't giving 100% bench him and put a guy in there that may be less gifted athletically, but has a greater desire to play. Same with the coaching staff, if they aren't doing the job they were hired to do, then you find somebody that will. If your players can't adjust to your system, adjust your system to fit your players. Or perish.
 
#20
#20
I agree to some extent that it's not all on the coaching staff... I mean, it wasn't them who fumbled on the goal line, it wasn't them who missed the FG to tie the game in OT, it wasn't them who consistently overthrew recievers by 5 to 10 yards. but the team was horribly unprepared, and the didn't make any decent adjustments, and that does fall on the coaching staff
 
#21
#21
If you want to see good coaching and let the staff soak it in, let them look at what happened last night with a 3rd string QB and a beat up team. Coach N. took Phil to the woodshed and let him have it.
 
#22
#22
I guess my gripe is that, being someone who has played (and still does) various sports it's always irked me that there is some nigh-omniscient quality given to coaching. I don't care if it was friggin pee-wee league, when I blew up a play I like some credit and if I got beat I had to man up and say "guys, that was all me". When I see a great play made by whoever in whatever sport my first inclination is not to go "Wow, check out the coaching on that guy!" I'm not about to say coaching isn't relevent but there has never been a single pass completed...ever...where a player didn't have to make a throw and the other guy actually catch it. I don't care what the play call was or even if it was a busted play the completion happened wholly and entirely between two guys on the field. Maybe I'm just an old player that wants to see what's on the field more than what's on the sideline but watching a game, any game of any sport, I like to believe that the guys out there hold most of their own fate in their own hands and wouldn't want it any other way. Give them the praise they deserve when appropriate and expect them to be man enough to say "I just got beat." when they were.

Anyway, I'd like to think our team can, and will, do better.
 
#24
#24
hndog609 said:
I guess my gripe is that, being someone who has played (and still does) various sports it's always irked me that there is some nigh-omniscient quality given to coaching. I don't care if it was friggin pee-wee league, when I blew up a play I like some credit and if I got beat I had to man up and say "guys, that was all me". When I see a great play made by whoever in whatever sport my first inclination is not to go "Wow, check out the coaching on that guy!" I'm not about to say coaching isn't relevent but there has never been a single pass completed...ever...where a player didn't have to make a throw and the other guy actually catch it. I don't care what the play call was or even if it was a busted play the completion happened wholly and entirely between two guys on the field. Maybe I'm just an old player that wants to see what's on the field more than what's on the sideline but watching a game, any game of any sport, I like to believe that the guys out there hold most of their own fate in their own hands and wouldn't want it any other way. Give them the praise they deserve when appropriate and expect them to be man enough to say "I just got beat." when they were.

Anyway, I'd like to think our team can, and will, do better.
Click to expand...
:yes::rock:
 
#25
#25
hndog609 said:
I guess my gripe is that, being someone who has played (and still does) various sports it's always irked me that there is some nigh-omniscient quality given to coaching. I don't care if it was friggin pee-wee league, when I blew up a play I like some credit and if I got beat I had to man up and say "guys, that was all me". When I see a great play made by whoever in whatever sport my first inclination is not to go "Wow, check out the coaching on that guy!" I'm not about to say coaching isn't relevent but there has never been a single pass completed...ever...where a player didn't have to make a throw and the other guy actually catch it. I don't care what the play call was or even if it was a busted play the completion happened wholly and entirely between two guys on the field. Maybe I'm just an old player that wants to see what's on the field more than what's on the sideline but watching a game, any game of any sport, I like to believe that the guys out there hold most of their own fate in their own hands and wouldn't want it any other way. Give them the praise they deserve when appropriate and expect them to be man enough to say "I just got beat." when they were.

Anyway, I'd like to think our team can, and will, do better.
Click to expand...
history says they will.

as to your overall point, there has to be accountablity for the players as well. i think we'd all agree that they didn't teach Crompton to throw it int he dirt or teach Arian to fumble in the 10.

i think what's very frustrating is to continually see these issues creep up game after game or year after year.

and we all understand they won't be perfect. but when you have a game like last night with THAT MANY mistakes.......that's on the coaches. 1 or 2 here or there, and yeah, the player screwed up.

that just wasn't the case last night.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top