Butch Jones... How much longer

[Vols_tothe_Wall]

BTW...the game Saturday was the first time in school football history-118 years, that we started 7 true freshman. First time ever people! Go home

 

[papatomany]

I don't disagree with the OP on the minor observation that this staff is not a group of tactical geniuses. Very few are. But the description: "great recruiter but poor tactician" (or whatever it was) is a perfect description of Les Miles, and I'm pretty sure we'd be (relatively) happy with his results here. Anyway, the quick answer to the OPs question of how long Butch will be here: As long as he wants to be.

 

[sjt18]

If you could take an objective view in giving your opinion then I would have no problem with it.

Yes you would... because you always have. I AM objective. None of us have all the facts but even in this discussion I pointed to FACTS. You just attacked because it wasn't what you wanted to read.

As for arrogance, I would suggest you look in the mirror. Your arrogance combined with your apparent lack of understanding I think is what draws my attention to your posts.

:lolabove::lolabove::lolabove:

So basically once you get the whitewash off that non-sense... I am arrogant and ignorant for disagreeing with YOU. Don't suppose you have a mirror handy, do you?

Had UT won of course you would have had little issue with Jones decision making process which given the reality he was dealing with appears to be sound. UT lost however, and you are never at a loss for taking a cheap shot.

Umm... if it had been the right strategy resulting in a win then exactly why would someone criticize that?

How is it a "cheap shot" to simply point out that his strategy was to "play not to lose"? He told the announcers effectively that he was doing just that... "This is going to be a field position game".

So he chose a strategy that DID NOT WORK... and you somehow think he's above criticism? But really... it isn't him... You think that YOU are above being disagreed with. And of course.... that makes anyone who does both ignorant and arrogant.

 

[sjt18]

Go away. Pick a new team. You don't belong to Volnation anymore. You are the problem, not the coach. If you can't see progress in the program then you are a) blind b) too delusional to even notice c) just plain dumb

Progress? Yes.

That hardly means that the coach and staff are perfect and above any criticism. If you can't tell the difference then maybe you are blind, delusional, or just plain dumb?

 

[volfanbill]

BTW...the game Saturday was the first time in school football history-118 years, that we started 7 true freshman. First time ever people! Go home

Oh. So that's why Butch doesn't how to manage the clock, properly use timeouts or run plays to counter what a defense is showing? Brilliant.

 

[sjt18]

Oh. So that's why Butch doesn't how to manage the clock, properly use timeouts or run plays to counter what a defense is showing? Brilliant.

That's just it though... he does. I mean does anyone really believe Mizzou has a better D than Bama? The playcalling vs Bama was aggressive and exploited the few weaknesses they have.

Then... we get the ol' "It's going to be a field position game" strategy vs Mizzou and its like we've gone retro back to Fulmer's bad days.

Playing conservative IS NOT his strong suit. He's aggressive by nature. IMO, he needs to stop trying to be someone he's not. Embrace that aggressive, pedal to the floor style like Oregon has.

 

[chargervol]

That's just it though... he does. I mean does anyone really believe Mizzou has a better D than Bama? The playcalling vs Bama was aggressive and exploited the few weaknesses they have.

Then... we get the ol' "It's going to be a field position game" strategy vs Mizzou and its like we've gone retro back to Fulmer's bad days.

Playing conservative IS NOT his strong suit. He's aggressive by nature. IMO, he needs to stop trying to be someone he's not. Embrace that aggressive, pedal to the floor style like Oregon has.

I'm not convinced Mizzou has a better D than Bama but I believe that had a better practice and gameplan for Dobbs.

 

[FLVOL_79]

Oh. So that's why Butch doesn't how to manage the clock, properly use timeouts or run plays to counter what a defense is showing? Brilliant.

What the F?

You must have been asleep during the Dooley years..Butch Jones is like the Stonewall Jackson of time management compared to his predecessor.

 

[Vol Revolver]

Congrats to you for bringing so much to the table. Brilliant post. Why would we defend such a stupid argument? What's to actually defend?

Stupid people need to be called out for being stupid. Butch needs more time. It's that simple. He may be incompetent and incapable of winning in this league but until he is calling his game with his players it is impossible to tell one way or the other.

People calling for anyone to be fired at this point are just being whiny little titty babies.

 

[TGVol]

People calling for anyone to be fired at this point are just being whiny little titty babies.

Who is calling for someone to be fired? Fans criticising the game plan and time management does not translate into asking to fire somebody (or is there petition out there that I'm not aware off)? Ideally coaches should take criticism into account and look at themselves in the mirror (objectively). If they still like what they see, fine. But they are the ones who must justify their salaries and answer for subpar results/performances - so some self reflection/evaluation would only help them. By the way, fans are not the only ones criticising - ESPN analysts were also openly shocked at few calls/decisions during the Mizzou game.

 

[daj2576]

Progress? Yes.

That hardly means that the coach and staff are perfect and above any criticism. If you can't tell the difference then maybe you are blind, delusional, or just plain dumb?

Hello Newman,

I would like to point out a few things.

You and I both agree that talent matters immensely, but it doesn't tell the whole story. At a 70% prediction rate, randomness and other factors account for the 30% of the time when it fails. This is an important part of the evaluation that you tend to ignore.

Think about it this way. After UT beat SCAR, based on talent there was a 70% chance UT would beat KY, a 70% chance UT would beat Mizzou, and a 70% chance UT would beat Vandy.

What that means is that the likely outcome of a three game series where each game is a 70% chance of victory is 2.1 games. Or, the % chance that UT would win all three games was only 34%. After UT beat Kentucky the probability based on talent averages that UT would win both Mizzou and Vanderbilt rose from 34% to 49%. Now that UT lost to Mizzou, the chance of beating Vanderbilt based on talent is now back to 70%. Probability works, and actually predicted that UT would lose a game in that series even though talent heavily favored each individual match-up. Or, to look at it another way if talent predicts roughly 70% of the outcome of the total population of games, talent has predicted 9 of 11 games that Tennessee has played so far. That is a 82% success rate and that is well above the 70% expected rate. It also appears that the standard deviation in seasonal predictions is 2 games. That means that Butch's performance is well within expectations, and that he lost to two coaches that are performing outside of the standard deviation from the mean. For completeness, right now in the SEC, only Muschamp is below the standard deviation while Pinkel, Freeze and Mullen are above.

Understanding randomness and probability in this sense, and I am not even sure that I do totally, is a crucial piece of the puzzle to have before evaluating coaching. I understand the drive to form simplistic conclusions but this overwhelming drive to name a culprit, to have a villain, after a loss is often both irrational and contrary to the probabilities you are citing as the basis for your critiques.

 

[daj2576]

Who is calling for someone to be fired? Fans criticising the game plan and time management does not translate into asking to fire somebody (or is there petition out there that I'm not aware off)? Ideally coaches should take criticism into account and look at themselves in the mirror (objectively). If they still like what they see, fine. But they are the ones who must justify their salaries and answer for subpar results/performances - so some self reflection/evaluation would only help them. By the way, fans are not the only ones criticising - ESPN analysts were also openly shocked at few calls/decisions during the Mizzou game.

Did you not read the O.P. in the very thread you are commenting in?

"how much longer before we can afford to part with Butch? Serious questions so please don't merge..."

Did you think when he said 'part' he was talking about how long it will take to save up the money to comb Butch's hair?

 

[chargervol]

Who is calling for someone to be fired? Fans criticising the game plan and time management does not translate into asking to fire somebody (or is there petition out there that I'm not aware off)? Ideally coaches should take criticism into account and look at themselves in the mirror (objectively). If they still like what they see, fine. But they are the ones who must justify their salaries and answer for subpar results/performances - so some self reflection/evaluation would only help them. By the way, fans are not the only ones criticising - ESPN analysts were also openly shocked at few calls/decisions during the Mizzou game.

You did notice the the thread title right?

I agree with it being ok to criticize coaches. Though I take the criticism more seriously from people that post both the positives and the negatives. (not meaning you), I have just seen the term "some criticism" used often by those who do nothing but criticize.

Actually a shame, sometimes they have valid points but are ignored because of their endless negativity.

 

[volfanbill]

What the F?

You must have been asleep during the Dooley years..Butch Jones is like the Stonewall Jackson of time management compared to his predecessor.

Since when is Derek Dooley The standard by which coaches are measured?

 

[sjt18]

I'm not convinced Mizzou has a better D than Bama but I believe that had a better practice and gameplan for Dobbs.

They did have a good gameplan. They went VERY aggressive on D. UT didn't adjust effectively and loosen them up by throwing it over the top. I don't think they rolled Dobbs out with a run pass option the whole game, did they? Those are more "risky" plays.... but obviously conservative and playing "field position" didn't work.

 

[chargervol]

I didn't notice any roll outs, would have liked to though.
My biggest concern was still the OL. The coaches can change a gameplan if they choose
but I am not sure if another year is going to help that line.

 

[Hamptonvolfan]

the last thing you ever want to do to a great defense is run a vanilla offense. Why make it even easier for them? Also, AJ being out has little to no bearing on the offense. Especially considering the game was close throughout.

Please share with CBJ all those great plays that would have stopped the Mizzou defense. The only thing I saw was a failure to move the pocket enough with rollouts etc

 

[MedicT]

Yes you would... because you always have. I AM objective. None of us have all the facts but even in this discussion I pointed to FACTS. You just attacked because it wasn't what you wanted to read.

:lolabove::lolabove::lolabove:

So basically once you get the whitewash off that non-sense... I am arrogant and ignorant for disagreeing with YOU. Don't suppose you have a mirror handy, do you?


Umm... if it had been the right strategy resulting in a win then exactly why would someone criticize that?

How is it a "cheap shot" to simply point out that his strategy was to "play not to lose"? He told the announcers effectively that he was doing just that... "This is going to be a field position game".

So he chose a strategy that DID NOT WORK... and you somehow think he's above criticism? But really... it isn't him... You think that YOU are above being disagreed with. And of course.... that makes anyone who does both ignorant and arrogant.

As always, you do not have facts only personal conjecture that you think should be accepted as fact.

 

[sjt18]

Hello Newman,

I would like to point out a few things.

You and I both agree that talent matters immensely, but it doesn't tell the whole story. At a 70% prediction rate, randomness and other factors account for the 30% of the time when it fails. This is an important part of the evaluation that you tend to ignore.

No. I actually don't. You DO tend however to ignore the 30% that should at some point favor UT and balance out the 30% against.

Remember YOU have argued with me and others that experience or lack thereof really doesn't matter that much...

So FTR... according to your analysis how many games has Jones now won at UT against teams with more talent and how many has he lost vs teams with less? I think YOU said that there were 7 of those "70%" games on last year's schedule, right? You said 8 this year, right? So according to your usual way of arguing when you aren't trying to nitpick me... that would make Jones a -4 coach at UT, right? (Assuming a win this week)

Think about it this way. After UT beat SCAR, based on talent there was a 70% chance UT would beat KY, a 70% chance UT would beat Mizzou, and a 70% chance UT would beat Vandy.

What that means is that the likely outcome of a three game series where each game is a 70% chance of victory is 2.1 games. Or, the % chance that UT would win all three games was only 34%.

So... since Bama has a 70% chance in every game... Their chance of winning 10 games is 3%? You're a bright guy but you have to know that argument does not work.

After UT beat Kentucky the probability based on talent averages that UT would win both Mizzou and Vanderbilt rose from 34% to 49%. Now that UT lost to Mizzou, the chance of beating Vanderbilt based on talent is now back to 70%. Probability works, and actually predicted that UT would lose a game in that series even though talent heavily favored each individual match-up. Or, to look at it another way if talent predicts roughly 70% of the outcome of the total population of games, talent has predicted 9 of 11 games that Tennessee has played so far. That is a 82% success rate and that is well above the 70% expected rate.

But even in your model there should be SOME balancing from the 30% probability of beating a team with MORE talent over time, correct? If that does not happen then how is it NOT legitimate to loook at the "randomness" and "other factors"?

Understanding randomness and probability in this sense, and I am not even sure that I do totally, is a crucial piece of the puzzle to have before evaluating coaching.

I don't understand it but using your math I just demonstrated there was only a 3 % chance of Bama winning the games they've won.... Hmm.

I understand the drive to form simplistic conclusions but this overwhelming drive to name a culprit, to have a villain, after a loss is often both irrational and contrary to the probabilities you are citing as the basis for your critiques.

And that was an extremely simplistic conclusion seeking to name me as a "culprit" and to have a "villain" when you really don't want to look at some of the "randomness" and "other factors" that led to a loss. Jones employed a game strategy that did not work when he had other options that more than likely WOULD have worked. That's how "randomness" works...

Of course there really ISN'T any "randomness" in the truest sense with football. Even the smallest detail is the product of choices by multiple people- some time, somewhere. There ARE however "other factors" that account fully for that 30%. One of those is gameplanning and strategy.

 

[sjt18]

As always, you do not have facts only personal conjecture that you think should be accepted as fact.

I have facts... and have never denied that I make conjectures. That's what "opinions" are. They are conjectures... and the better ones are those that at least line up with the known facts.

I know what Jones said. We all saw the playcalling and game management. My "conjectures" or opinions... are NOT in conflict with what we know.

 

[sjt18]

Please share with CBJ all those great plays that would have stopped the Mizzou defense. The only thing I saw was a failure to move the pocket enough with rollouts etc

Even if they had to go max protect, they needed to take some shots over the top.

 

[Vol knight]

This will be a good thread to bump if we go to a bowl and win.

 

[sjt18]

This will be a good thread to bump if we go to a bowl and win.

I do not think Jones will be scared of Vandy. I do not think he will play a "field position game" (aka playing not to lose) vs Vandy. If he somehow DOES make that mistake... then this will become a thread to bump when they DON'T make a bowl game.

I think UT will smoke Vandy and then get a bowl win. They could draw a really good opponent but probably not a great one.

 

[volfanbill]

This will be a good thread to bump if we go to a bowl and win.

No it won't. Unless 7-6 seasons are all you expect year in and year out

 

[MedicT]

I have facts... and have never denied that I make conjectures. That's what "opinions" are. They are conjectures... and the better ones are those that at least line up with the known facts.

I know what Jones said. We all saw the playcalling and game management. My "conjectures" or opinions... are NOT in conflict with what we know.

Yes, and I see your opinion as wrong more often than not and I comment as such particularly when I read your attempts to attack Jones based upon your negative bias.