Couple Things Being Reported...

#76
#76
sjt18 said:
Didn't say that. There were problems both with the OL and the RB's. However the WR's didn't block well all year. There were times when the OL blocked reasonably well or the RB's ran reasonably well.

Someone started a thread saying the DD's job depends on getting the run game fixed for real. I tend to agree with that. Whoever the keep on staff had BETTER be fully sold out to whatever plan they come up with. You can't have any single coach deciding they don't want to go along. There is more than one method to getting it done... but generally speaking you can't haphazardly mix and match components of one method with another. You have to be consistent from the HC to the equipment manager.
Click to expand...
Everything you've posted is pure speculation based solely in your imagination. Give it a rest.
 
#79
#79
IF this is the direction Dooley is planning to go and he does not make anymore changes than this... Well I guess we will soon know if his "System" works or not. If they do not go at least 8-4 next year he is gone IMHO
 
#81
#81
sjt18 said:
Toward the end you began to see some changes and a few creases open up.
Click to expand...
:blink:

Is Kentucky included in "the end?" What about Arkansas or MTSU? Our best game rushing was Buffalo, the 4th game of the season. After Hunter's injury, btw.
 
#82
#82
LawVol13 said:
1.) No more staff changes after Baggett. This means Hiestand stays; this is mind-boggling.

2.) Chaney to quarterbacks coach. Hinshaw to receivers coach.

3.) Jay Graham has already been contacted informally by Tennessee.

4.) Larry Porter won't be a candidate for the RB coach job.

All of this per 247 Sports.
Click to expand...

Why mess with a good thing?
 
#83
#83
He will look like a champ or a chump. I'm confident there will be scheme and technique changes. If not, and we see the same stuff, DD will need to go after next year.
It's a make or break decision. It won't buy him more time, as staff changes would. Imo, not changing any scheme and/or coaches would show poor decision making and he'd need to go. I'm going to still assume he is smarter than that.
 
#84
#84
Look at how hyped up we were about Monte and his defense (I was at the Auburn game and the Mississippi game with Dexter McCluster; hell fire!). To be honest, he didn't show me s**t. Now about Harry. Something tells me "give him one more chance." Why, I don't know. I've already had one hot toddy this afternoon (cold/congestion) and I'm getting ready to pour a good one. Go Vols!
 
#85
#85
sjt18 said:
Didn't say that. There were problems both with the OL and the RB's. However the WR's didn't block well all year. There were times when the OL blocked reasonably well or the RB's ran reasonably well.

Someone started a thread saying the DD's job depends on getting the run game fixed for real. I tend to agree with that. Whoever the keep on staff had BETTER be fully sold out to whatever plan they come up with. You can't have any single coach deciding they don't want to go along. There is more than one method to getting it done... but generally speaking you can't haphazardly mix and match components of one method with another. You have to be consistent from the HC to the equipment manager.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree about being on the same page. But, what you're implying is that Baggett wasn't on the same page with the running game, and that explains at least some of the failure. I don't see that at all. It was the offensive line and the backs.

Judging by the plan we saw this year, who can blame Baggett for not being on the same page? I don't. I think we just got rid of Dooley's best staff hire in order to keep guys that should have been fired.
 
#86
#86
Since Dooley's head is supposed to be on the chopping block, don't you believe he would can CHH if he thought he was the problem? After all, he is closer to the situation than all of us keyboard cowboys who have opinions and nothing else. It could be a timing issue in that a CHH replacement could be on a bowl team staff and won't leave now. I don't know, but if he stays, the positives must outweigh the negatives. We are going to be adding Tiny, Marcus and maybe others to the mix and the starters will have another year to get better. I have always believed CHH should go, but I don't have all the facts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#87
#87
LawVol13 said:
I don't see how they won't have to do a major overhaul schematically anyway with the running game. That pretty much tosses out the only real justification for keeping Chaney or Hiestand, imo.
Click to expand...

My personal opinion is that scheme importance is often overstated when run blocking and effectiveness is concerned. Imo, most of the effectiveness of a team's run blocking is concerned with whether or not the OLine knows who to block, the technique with which to do that, and whether or not they're strong/mean/tough enough to do it.

Sure, blocking angles matter, but that's not rocket science and there are only so many ways to do it. None of them work if your guys up front can't knock guys off the ball and, imo, just about any scheme will work if the guys up front knock the defense on their cans consistently.

I played Oline in HS and the right side of our line was tough as hell. Shoot, we ran off-tackle on a 4th and 7 and it went 63 for a score - not many teams think their best play on 4th/7 is a 'Wham' right. We wouldn't have tried a 2nd and 1 with the same play to the left and expected much success. Of course, we all had the same coach and all had the same scheme. Difference was in how the players executed.

While I was very disappointed in the run game this year, I think that another year of strength training for the Oline and TE's and some more Tiny Richardson is likely to make a world of difference.

A stud back would make a world of difference, too. I saw Trent Richardson make a lot of long runs after being hit in the backfield and didn't see any long runs from our backs when they didn't get hit until 5 yds downfield. First contact and they were down, typically.
 
#88
#88
Some have claimed that our running game woes are a result of a pass first OC and poor play calling. But if Chaney is a pass first OC, why would he call running plays when the D is showing run D formations or loading the box? Wouldn't Chaney be inclined to throw on plays like that? My point is that it is pure execution of run blocking assignments and having the type of nasty streak to finish plays that I believe are the culprits, and that's on Heistand. I am be-wildered as to why Dools is keeping him
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#89
#89
pl3 said:
He will look like a champ or a chump. I'm confident there will be scheme and technique changes. If not, and we see the same stuff, DD will need to go after next year.It's a make or break decision. It won't buy him more time, as staff changes would. Imo, not changing any scheme and/or coaches would show poor decision making and he'd need to go. I'm going to still assume he is smarter than that.
Click to expand...

this is for sure... I just can't grasp it
 
#90
#90
The offense was clearly designed around the premise of using the pass to setup the run. Think Spurrier lead-draw teams of the '90s. Chaney has always been this way. Unlike the TFS, Mazzone, or AR teams, there was no outside edge running game (Partially because we didn't have the personnel) or screen game that was packaged with it. I think of the 09 Pats as soon as teams started reading Moss and giving up the underneath routes to Welker. There was no serious play-action threat from Maroney, and unless you live and die by horizontal stretches and screen game like the Leaches, you have an obvious schematic flaw.
 
#91
#91
DrunkJohnny said:
:blink:

Is Kentucky included in "the end?" What about Arkansas or MTSU? Our best game rushing was Buffalo, the 4th game of the season. After Hunter's injury, btw.
Click to expand...

Did we not have two of the best rushing games LSU AND Bama have had against their D all year?
 
#93
#93
LawVol13 said:
Are you honestly trying to argue we were a good rushing team? I mean, really?
Click to expand...

I have defended Dooley's right to coach his way and to have a chance to prove or disprove himself. But even I know our running game sucked
 
#94
#94
LawVol13 said:
1.) No more staff changes after Baggett. This means Hiestand stays; this is mind-boggling.

2.) Chaney to quarterbacks coach. Hinshaw to receivers coach.

3.) Jay Graham has already been contacted informally by Tennessee.

4.) Larry Porter won't be a candidate for the RB coach job.

All of this per 247 Sports.
Click to expand...

I'll be shocked if we dont see a change with atleast 1 coach. Not saying we fire someone, but saying one of our coaches could very well be coaching somewhere else soon. They're right about Porter, he pretty much said no thanks.
 
#95
#95
LawVol13 said:
If Wilcox leaves, Dooley is straight screwed.
Click to expand...

If prior to NSD, you are correct. I think it would spell disaster. After -- and if he were to get a quality replacement -- it would be ok.

Frankly, I've come to the realization that college football is about 98% Jimmys and Joes and 2% Xs and Os. Fulmer and staff were not, in any way (maybe except Cutcliffe), the best X and O guys. They just had better players. This came home to roost once everyone else started recruiting over them.

For Dooley, if we have the horses it will take care of a lot of issues. I do not want to lose Wilcox and Sirmon but it can be managed if after NSD.
 
#96
#96
skeeter33418 said:
I'll be shocked if we dont see a change with atleast 1 coach. Not saying we fire someone, but saying one of our coaches could very well be coaching somewhere else soon. They're right about Porter, he pretty much said no thanks.
Click to expand...

wilcox....thompson....sirmon......
 
#98
#98
skeeter33418 said:
I'll be shocked if we dont see a change with atleast 1 coach. Not saying we fire someone, but saying one of our coaches could very well be coaching somewhere else soon. They're right about Porter, he pretty much said no thanks.
Click to expand...

Who would you be talking about Skeeter?
 
#99
#99
I think 247sports got some bad info as we have a few posters on here who are in the know and say more coaching change(s) to come. Coaching changes (either add or subtract from current staff) don't normally come during the NFL season and before NCAA bowl games.
 
#100
#100
LawVol13 said:
1.) No more staff changes after Baggett. This means Hiestand stays; this is mind-boggling.

2.) Chaney to quarterbacks coach. Hinshaw to receivers coach.

3.) Jay Graham has already been contacted informally by Tennessee.

4.) Larry Porter won't be a candidate for the RB coach job.

All of this per 247 Sports.
Click to expand...

1) OK, Hiestand can stay...but he's on a short leash and the O-Line better be stepping up.

2) Chaney was OC/QB coach at Purdue for Brees, so no problem with this. Besides Hinshaw could probably really do some good if the attitude rumors are true with teh WRs and Chaney could probably teach Bray and Worley some things about film study.

3) This would be OUTSTANDING!!!

4) Wasn't really sold anyways (other than from recruiting us a stud RB)
 
Last edited:
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top