Chavis Staying?

#26
#26
NO NO NO!!!!

He doesn't teach enough physical coverage and he along with Phil have sucked it up against our biggest rivals.
 
#28
#28
triton1 said:
They're ranked 8th in the nation against the schedule they were delt. We did stop USCe, our offense gave up 2 td's. If you've ever played football, you know how important it is to get rest on D. Our offense is the reason the D is down to #8. The D also held Auburn to 1 score, enough to win, but again the O was terrible. You're the one kidding himself, Chavis knows how to coach D.
Click to expand...

Exactly! Our defense has been outstanding. Is their areas that need improvement? Yeah! Our line hasn't had the sacks that they were known for in the past. But our secondary has been great. I'm not for the bend don't break philosophy, but it has worked. Only problem is offense. The entire season our d has given us a chance with stops and turnovers and unless the Defense scored on the turnover it went nowhere. We started the game against Wyoming with great field position due to a great return by Rogan and what happened. The offense gave the ball to Wyoming on the 4. If it wasn't for our Def we would be 0-10. Our Defense has almost scored more points than our offense.
 
Last edited:
#31
#31
If the so-called "money people" are successful in dictating required hold-over coaches to a new HC, that is probably going to be a clear sign that the new HC isn't an "A" list hire. The new coach may choose to keep hold-over assistants for any number of reasons, but if it is dictated to him by boosters my guess is we'll be seeing a second-tier hire---someone who wants the job so badly they will compromise their staff to get it. It is inconceivable that the strongest candidates mentioned won't be on their own to hire their staff if they agree to come to Knoxville.
 
#32
#32
rexvol said:
believe it or not, but Im beginning to really like the idea of Kiffin and Coach O as d-coord
Click to expand...

What has Kiffin done? Had his daddy put him in some positions? Work with all of the talent out there in SC, hell Clawson could make those boys look good. Be a head coach of the Raiders? He stinks. Coach O now he really stinks. If Kiffin is hired it would be a major mistake.
 
#33
#33
Hey dunderheads if this blog has any truth to it then the chief's future is the least of our problems. Read between the lines "the big money people" don't wnt to completely turn the program over to outsiders. Translation the new coach will have limitations on who he can hire and fire. BIG PROBLEM!!

No top coach is going to come in with the admin and boosters telling him who he has to keep on his staff. If this is true we are screwed again.
 
#34
#34
Brave Volunteer said:
There is no denying that Chavis has had some pretty good defenses over ther years. I just do not like Chavis' defensive philosophy. I don't like the "bend but don't break" style he plays. I don't like the fact the he seems to like under-sized, speedy linebackers as opposed to not as fast, but bigger, more physical line backers. Plus he does not blitz as much as I would like.
Click to expand...


Of all his faults, coaching the LB position is not one of them. Chavis has made a living turning 3 star linebackers in to SEC and NFL successes. He still needs to go because of the fact his defenses have consistently been bad on 3rd down.
 
#35
#35
kick chavis non recruiting a$$ to the curb....the O or kevin steele would make everyone on the board forget chavis with the talent they could bring in....now on offense, i'd probably keep scott possibly drayton........kiffin, O, scott, drayton = a dream team in recruiting and that is what it takes to keep up
 
#38
#38
Fact is I myself didn't say I wanted him to stay. I would love to have new fresh blood here. I just said that it wouldn't bother me if he were retained. I would hate to have new fresh blood come in and suck. I believe we would be handing whomever is the next DC a heck of a Defense, specifically the secondary.
 
#39
#39
hog88 said:
Hey dunderheads if this blog has any truth to it then the chief's future is the least of our problems. Read between the lines "the big money people" don't wnt to completely turn the program over to outsiders. Translation the new coach will have limitations on who he can hire and fire. BIG PROBLEM!!

No top coach is going to come in with the admin and boosters telling him who he has to keep on his staff. If this is true we are screwed again.
Click to expand...

Okay, 'dunderhead,' not all of the options are top coaches. For example, some want to hire Leach who has one good season--the current one.

If we get a top coach like Gruden, Davis, or Kiffin, they'll have free reigns. Hire an unproven guy who may need to be replaced in short order (w/in a couple of years could be the case with Leach if he flops), and you try not to fall any futher than we have. Therefore, keep Chavis if you want to risk the program on Leach.
 
Last edited:
#42
#42
utmba93 said:
Okay, 'dunderhead,' not all of the options are top coaches. For example, some want to hire Leach who has one good season--the current one.

If we get a top coach like Gruden, Davis, or Kiffen, they'll have free reigns. Hire an unproven guy who may need to be replaced in short order (w/in a couple of years could be the case with Leach if he flops), and you try not to fall any futher than we have. Therefore, keep Chavis if you want to risk the program on Leach.
Click to expand...

"If we get a top notch coach" that is the point we will not have a chance at one if the admin and boosters lead off by dictating his staff. No proven winner will walk into a situation like that with limited control. We will be relagated to an unproven guy.

I meant dunderheads in a kind way. Everyone is missing the big picture. The debate should not be if we keep Chavis, it is should we be forced to.
 
#43
#43
hog88 said:
"If we get a top notch coach" that is the point we will not have a chance at one if the admin and boosters lead off by dictating his staff. No proven winner will walk into a situation like that with limited control. We will be relagated to an unproven guy.

I meant dunderheads in a kind way. Everyone is missing the big picture. The debate should not be if we keep Chavis, it is should we be forced to.
Click to expand...

That's a good point.

I don't think anyone is trying to force any 'top coach' to keep anyone.

There's a case to be made that whoever takes over might benefit from keeping someone on the current staff who can, at the very least, reassure commits that we want them at UT. And that case applies to a coach who could be playing for the SuperBowl. These recruits need someone to continue to encourage them to stay with UT in spite of what Saban, Spurrier, Meyer, Miles, and others tell them.

I've simply suggested considering Scott and/or Drayton because, by most counts, those guys can recruit and they help explain our success in recruiting during what is the worst year UT football has experienced in some time. They are also less expensive as an investment for an incoming head coach who could reassign them to other responsibilities if he deems their ability to develop players less than ideal--as some have suggested. Essentially, it's a potential investment in a faster recovery.
 
Last edited:
#44
#44
utmba93 said:
That's a good point.

I don't think anyone is trying to force any 'top coach' to keep anyone.

There's a case to be made that whoever takes over might benefit from keeping someone on the current staff who can, at the very least, reassure commits that we want them at UT. And that case applies to a coach who could be playing for the SuperBowl. These recruits need someone to continue to encourage them to stay with UT in spite of what Saban, Spurrier, Meyer, Miles, and others tell them.

I've simply suggested considering Scott and/or Drayton because by most counts, those guys can recruit and they help explain our success in recruiting during what is the worst year UT football has experienced in some time.
Click to expand...

Yes and all of the assitants should be working their tails off right now to preserve this class instead of ruin it. That would impress any incomming coach and might lead to them keeping their jobs.
 
#45
#45
If you look at most of the games this year.. If we score 25 to 30 we probably win the game. Fact is our D was on the field for large portions of most of the games bec our O was the King of 3 and outs. Imagine an O that could have put 25 or so points on the board, keeping our D fresh, and keeping the opposition's O off the field.

I have no problems with Chavis other than I see this as a problem with a new coach wanting to bring his own staff in. May be a sticking point.
 
#46
#46
hog88 said:
Yes and all of the assitants should be working their tails off right now to preserve this class instead of ruin it. That would impress any incomming coach and might lead to them keeping their jobs.
Click to expand...

Spot on. It's not only what's best for UT football, it's what best for their won self interests.
 
#47
#47
tim said:
If you look at most of the games this year.. If we score 25 to 30 we probably win the game. Fact is our D was on the field for large portions of most of the games bec our O was the King of 3 and outs. Imagine an O that could have put 25 or so points on the board, keeping our D fresh, and keeping the opposition's O off the field.

I have no problems with Chavis other than I see this as a problem with a new coach wanting to bring his own staff in. May be a sticking point.
Click to expand...

For somone like Leach, it's not like he has a DC who's anywhere close to Chavis.
 
#48
#48
VOLnMiami said:
Why?...Sometimes you don't make any sense
Click to expand...

Makes complete sense if you dont want to retain Chavis.

I am torn on this because after Gruden and Kiffin, Leach would be my choice. I might even be pursuaded to have Leach #2
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top