DeBord already paying 'big dividends' for Vols

#51
#51
sameolvol said:
It's good that you've dubiously removed yourself from the list of those who still resent UT's hiring an OC who's over 50. I'm puzzled as to what's being intellectually honest about all this. After all, it's just a silly sports site and intellectual honesty can only go so far as to analyzing the nuances of such a pastime. If VN is intellectually compelling to you, well, uh......OK Forrest. If you're single, my widowed sister-in-law from Poughkeepsie may be interested in a fellow "realist." As I recall, your criticism of CMD was based upon "relevantly" questioning one of football's most avid junkies based upon just a couple of years being removed from actually coaching college football (as if his brain had been switched off) and that his so-called overt longevity was a hindrance to his ability to "keep up" with the game as can certain flashy young coordinators. What was so awful looking about Coach DeBo on paper? Nice try, KB. I see you've convinced one or two others with this transparent obfuscation that you're utilizing sincere objectivity in your posts. I haven't bothered (and won't) to go through your past posts, but my 64 year old memory reminds me that you've been doubting far more of UT's promising aspects than you've been expecting these obvious upgrades and improvements to produce...by an overwhelming proportion. Hopefully I'll be able to make peace some day with an epiphany that reveals you've been removed from VN's list of negavols. BTW: Fade's not at all correct in assessing what's already made itself evident in May. Coach DeBo's the most perfect OC Butch could've hired, and the results are crystal clear. If you disagree, then ask any UT football player.
Click to expand...

Wtf is this? If you wanna play some type of message board Nostradamus and suggest I've been disingenuous or just a flat out liar then you're full of ish. I had questions about hiring a guy who'd been out of football for 2 years, who hadnt been an OC for like 8 years, who didn't run the spread at Michigan. As a fan, on a message board, I made it known that I questioned his candidacy. No deception, no dishonesty. Similarly, after hearing arguments that he allows for seamless continuity and he brings the added benefit of being a former OL coach, I became convinced that perhaps it was a good hire after all and made sense. Why the hell am I even responding to your arrogant, condescending drivel of a post anyway?.....pound sand chief.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#52
#52
KBVol said:
Wtf is this? If you wanna play some type of message board Nostradamus and suggest I've been disingenuous or just a flat out liar then you're full of ish. I had questions about hiring a guy who'd been out of football for 2 years, who hadnt been an OC for like 8 years, who didn't run the spread at Michigan. As a fan, on a message board, I made it known that I questioned his candidacy. No deception, no dishonesty. Similarly, after hearing arguments that he allows for seamless continuity and he brings the added benefit of being a former OL coach, I became convinced that perhaps it was a good hire after all and made sense. Why the hell am I even responding to your arrogant, condescending drivel of a post anyway?.....pound sand chief.
Click to expand...

Agist IMO











:p
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#54
#54
sameolvol said:
It's good that you've dubiously removed yourself from the list of those who still resent UT's hiring an OC who's over 50. I'm puzzled as to what's being intellectually honest about all this. After all, it's just a silly sports site and intellectual honesty can only go so far as to analyzing the nuances of such a pastime. If VN is intellectually compelling to you, well, uh......OK Forrest. If you're single, my widowed sister-in-law from Poughkeepsie may be interested in a fellow "realist." As I recall, your criticism of CMD was based upon "relevantly" questioning one of football's most avid junkies based upon just a couple of years being removed from actually coaching college football (as if his brain had been switched off) and that his so-called overt longevity was a hindrance to his ability to "keep up" with the game as can certain flashy young coordinators. What was so awful looking about Coach DeBo on paper? Nice try, KB. I see you've convinced one or two others with this transparent obfuscation that you're utilizing sincere objectivity in your posts. I haven't bothered (and won't) to go through your past posts, but my 64 year old memory reminds me that you've been doubting far more of UT's promising aspects than you've been expecting these obvious upgrades and improvements to produce...by an overwhelming proportion. Hopefully I'll be able to make peace some day with an epiphany that reveals you've been removed from VN's list of negavols. BTW: Fade's not at all correct in assessing what's already made itself evident in May. Coach DeBo's the most perfect OC Butch could've hired, and the results are crystal clear. If you disagree, then ask any UT football player.
Click to expand...

You Sir, have an impressive vocabulary. I appreciate a good rant too. With that said...I'm not sure what the point of your post was. You're mad, I get that. What is it about the future of Tennessee football that some of us aren't getting?

This season is going to say a lot about Butch. We're all rooting from him. But, after everything that's happened to our Vols...are you really going to begrudge some of us a little skepticism?

You seem passionate about The Vols. I like that! But not drinking the Kool-Aid isn't a crime. I have high hopes for next year. Let's hope we take a big jump!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#55
#55
I like the guy myself. He's coached the majority of his adult life and he knows how to get players to give 100% all the time while being successful.

What else do you need to know at this point? He isn't young. Big whoop.

Would you want a kid straight out of tech school working on your vehicle or a mechanic who's been around the block and knows his stuff to do it?

Perhaps a kid straight out of medical school to do your open heart surgery instead of the guy who has did hundreds of them?

Some of these fools on here crack me up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#56
#56
I didn't like the Debord hire and I still don't. And until I see the results of his hire translate to success on the field, I will still not like it. However IF he does turn out to be a great hire then I will gladly jump on board with Debord. Until then he is a low ball hire that only got the job because of a close friendship to Jones. Not his "qualifications."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#57
#57
KBVol said:
I made my peace with the actual hire a couple months ago. It looked awful on paper IMO and I asked what I thought were the relevant questions on this forum. However, as the case for the value of continuity and a second set of eyes on the OL via Debord's hiring was made, I certainly have no problem admitting I've warmed to his hiring. Hopefully, asking pertinent questions but ultimately being cautiously optimistic after accepting the logic of bringing him on board doesn't mean I'm intellectually dishonest.

Bottom line though is that Fade's post was ultimately correct....we'll have our answer as to whether or not DeBord was a good/excellent hire in December, not in May.
Click to expand...
Great post. Most people just need time to wrap their minds around a hire, then find things they like about the new coach and then support them.
 
#58
#58
BigOrangeTrain said:
I didn't like the Debord hire and I still don't. And until I see the results of his hire translate to success on the field, I will still not like it. However IF he does turn out to be a great hire then I will gladly jump on board with Debord. Until then he is a low ball hire that only got the job because of a close friendship to Jones. Not his "qualifications."
Click to expand...

Still an improvement. :)
 
#60
#60
orange parmejohn said:
Great post. Most people just need time to wrap their minds around a hire, then find things they like about the new coach and then support them.
Click to expand...

That's pretty much it. It's a nice article, but if you've paid much attention you can spot the cookie cutter, "he brings a new attitude" story we get in the spring about new assistant coaches. Sometimes it's accurate. Sometimes it's not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#62
#62
Was skeptical at the hire and will remain skeptical until seeing something on the field. Way too early to call any hire a good one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#63
#63
UNAVol89 said:
Was skeptical at the hire and will remain skeptical until seeing something on the field. Way too early to call any hire a good one.
Click to expand...


Fair enough...also too soon to call it a bad one...didn't stop people from saying so. :wink2:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#64
#64
I'm at a stalemate...nobody knows for certain how the OC will do later this year but...


One thing I have noticed is Butch is much more optimistic this year and it's obvious. The first 2 years he was a bit harsh and downplayed our strong points (which wasn't much) and would beat down our weaknesses on the team. This year it's almost like he's giggly, optimistic, and also compliments at a much more higher rate.

Some of you call it coach talk, but i don't see it like that. I don't believe Butch would compliment if he didn't mean it.
 
#66
#66
Granted, it's year 3 and Butch knows that this will be a critical year for him to show results on the field. He very well may just be playing the game of coach speak.
 
#67
#67
Seems more than half of Vol nation was down on the hire in the beginning and now he has a high percentage of support. I think he is going to be great but he hasn't called a game yet and the offensive line hasn't played a snap so I am cautiously optimistic.
 
#68
#68
KBVol said:
Wtf is this? If you wanna play some type of message board Nostradamus and suggest I've been disingenuous or just a flat out liar then you're full of ish. I had questions about hiring a guy who'd been out of football for 2 years, who hadnt been an OC for like 8 years, who didn't run the spread at Michigan. As a fan, on a message board, I made it known that I questioned his candidacy. No deception, no dishonesty. Similarly, after hearing arguments that he allows for seamless continuity and he brings the added benefit of being a former OL coach, I became convinced that perhaps it was a good hire after all and made sense. Why the hell am I even responding to your arrogant, condescending drivel of a post anyway?.....pound sand chief.
Click to expand...
Intellectual dishonesty is being disingenuous with ones self, and not being a liar. I've never accused you as being a liar and my comedic mention of my widowed sister-in-law from Poughkeepsi (who DOES exist), denotes the humor I was intending. Jeesh, KB! All I pointed out was most of your posts lean seriously toward the morose, and that your initial poor impression of CMD was based on some idiotic presumptions shared by the usual cast of characters. The spread is a formation and not necessarily a style of play (although speed and deception give it extra advantages over power plays)...it's just a pre-snap set and not a style of offense. Maybe you'd like to waltz down memory lane and examine how many spread "plays" were executed out of DeBos array of setups. His innovative alignments allowed for both speed and power plus greater opportunities for deception. Hey. Bully for finally seeing the light. Arrogant condescending? You're responding, KB, because you just can't believe that people see through the actual arrogance of re-tacking your sail boat whenever the waves have caught up with your rudder. Can't take a joke, eh? Solution? Lighten up. I'll buy you a beer next time around.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#69
#69
BigOrangeTrain said:
I didn't like the Debord hire and I still don't. And until I see the results of his hire translate to success on the field, I will still not like it. However IF he does turn out to be a great hire then I will gladly jump on board with Debord. Until then he is a low ball hire that only got the job because of a close friendship to Jones. Not his "qualifications."
Click to expand...

How is he not qualified?
 
#70
#70
My issue is that DeBord was brought in to run Butch's offense. We've seen that offense the past 2 years and I haven't been impressed by it. It seems that Butch has been waiting on the players to run his offense rather than adjusting it to the players that he had. The main examples that point me in this direction were when Worley would run the read option, but would only keep the ball against bad opponents. It wasn't fooling anyone so it was a waste. Also his continued trust of Peterman. He should have been pulled earlier at UF 2013 and never seen the field again. We also have a stable of WR's that can't seem to make a difference. I know the O-line was bad, but when a WR beats his man one on one the ball shouldn't land 5-10 yards in front of him.
 
#71
#71
The #1 thing I hope to see from Debord's offense is for the announcers to not be able to say if a play is a pass or run before the ball is snapped.
I can't remember the game or announcer last year but he pointed out that depending on where the RB lined up you knew if it was pass or run. With that advantage to the opposing defense no wonder our O line looked so bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#72
#72
08Vol said:
My issue is that DeBord was brought in to run Butch's offense. We've seen that offense the past 2 years and I haven't been impressed by it. It seems that Butch has been waiting on the players to run his offense rather than adjusting it to the players that he had. The main examples that point me in this direction were when Worley would run the read option, but would only keep the ball against bad opponents. It wasn't fooling anyone so it was a waste. Also his continued trust of Peterman. He should have been pulled earlier at UF 2013 and never seen the field again. We also have a stable of WR's that can't seem to make a difference. I know the O-line was bad, but when a WR beats his man one on one the ball shouldn't land 5-10 yards in front of him.
Click to expand...

But if Butch is finally getting the players to run his offense (that he has stuck with), it would make no sense to hire someone that runs something different? He has paid the dues to "stick by" his scheme, doubt he would go a different direction now that it might actually work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#73
#73
VOLinNC said:
The #1 thing I hope to see from Debord's offense is for the announcers to not be able to say if a play is a pass or run before the ball is snapped.
I can't remember the game or announcer last year but he pointed out that depending on where the RB lined up you knew if it was pass or run. With that advantage to the opposing defense no wonder our O line looked so bad.
Click to expand...

Hey, NC, yeah, I remember that. It was Gary Danielson, I'm pretty sure. And he didn't say the formation gave away pass v. run, he showed how Hurd's position relative to Dobbs in the shotgun (behind vs. beside) indicated whether the run was designed to go between the tackles (Hurd behind Dobbs) or to swing around the end of the line (Hurd beside Dobbs).

And that's just the physics of it...it wasn't always right, though it usually was. And it was never a good indicator of pass v. run ... Dobb could keep the ball and pass out of the play action (and Hurd could block pass rushers) from either formation.

p.s. On second thought, I believe there were two different color announcers who pointed out more or less the same thing, in two different games. If my memory holds, the other was Kirk Herbstreit.

p.p.s. If I learned this right from 8188 in an earlier thread, these formations won't necessarily even give away the RB's direction in the future ... if Hurd is to the right of Dobbs, last year's "zone read" fpcused playbook would indicate Hurd was going left or Dobbs was going right ... but 8188 pointed out that teams are running "power" plays off those same looks, with both the QB and RB running to the same side of the formation. Yet another bit of confusion and complexity for our opponents' defenses to struggle with. :)

And then when we start putting Kamara in the backfield with Dobbs and Hurd.... mua ha ha!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#74
#74
chargervol said:
But if Butch is finally getting the players to run his offense (that he has stuck with), it would make no sense to hire someone that runs something different? He has paid the dues to "stick by" his scheme, doubt he would go a different direction now that it might actually work.
Click to expand...

Nope. Butch should start over. Change the scheme. You know successful coaches do that in the 3rd year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#75
#75
VFL-82-JP said:
Hey, NC, yeah, I remember that. It was Gary Danielson, I'm pretty sure. And he didn't say the formation gave away pass v. run, he showed how Hurd's position relative to Dobbs in the shotgun (behind vs. beside) indicated whether the run was designed to go between the tackles (Hurd behind Dobbs) or to swing around the end of the line (Hurd beside Dobbs).

And that's just the physics of it...it wasn't always right, though it usually was. And it was never a good indicator of pass v. run ... Dobb could keep the ball and pass out of the play action (and Hurd could block pass rushers) from either formation.

p.s. On second thought, I believe there were two different color announcers who pointed out more or less the same thing, in two different games. If my memory holds, the other was Kirk Herbstreit.

p.p.s. If I learned this right from 8188 in an earlier thread, these formations won't necessarily even give away the RB's direction in the future ... if Hurd is to the right of Dobbs, last year's "zone read" fpcused playbook would indicate Hurd was going left or Dobbs was going right ... but 8188 pointed out that teams are running "power" plays off those same looks, with both the QB and RB running to the same side of the formation. Yet another bit of confusion and complexity for our opponents' defenses to struggle with. :)

And then when we start putting Kamara in the backfield with Dobbs and Hurd.... mua ha ha!
Click to expand...

That mua ha ha sounds purty dang devious. Kinda scares me.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top