Defensive Stop Rate

#27
#27
And you really accept that as an excuse for giving up that kind of game to a bad USCe offense? I can't ignore things like that.


It matters when it is a reflection of the D's inability to do exactly what Banks said they were good at- getting off the field and preventing scoring/scoring opportunities. If Clemson hits rather than misses those opportunities UT could have easily lost.

Obviously the number of scholarship CBs available in a game where we gave up record numbers is important. It’s also relevant to point at that at full strength we had less 4* composite dbs than anyone but Vandy. You can’t look at the numbers without accepting those two facts.

You mean if we didn’t get off the field? Which we did? That seems true in any game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: -GiveHim6-
#29
#29
Has the defense improved every year under banks?
Two years isn't enough of a sample size. I'm not dodging. I argued the same thing when some were claiming that Heupel declined each year at UCF.

Reducing PPG by 6 was excellent and more important than some might think. OTOH, the USCe game was the worst of his two years at UT. Take that game out and I might not have doubts as strong as I do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol4lifejbone
#30
#30
Two years isn't enough of a sample size. I'm not dodging. I argued the same thing when some were claiming that Heupel declined each year at UCF.

Reducing PPG by 6 was excellent and more important than some might think. OTOH, the USCe game was the worst of his two years at UT. Take that game out and I might not have doubts as strong as I do.

So we agree I’m back to back seasons he’s made the defense better than it was before him. That goes along way. We’d agree the jury is still out, but I like trajectory
 
#31
#31
Obviously the number of scholarship CBs available in a game where we gave up record numbers is important.
I can't see it explaining that kind of collapse and especially against a team as inept as USCe was on O otherwise.
It’s also relevant to point at that at full strength we had less 4* composite dbs than anyone but Vandy. You can’t look at the numbers without accepting those two facts.
I've seen that baloney. And that's what it is... baloney. I actually took a look. And what the person who started that did was choose the site that rated UT's DBs the lowest. Several were rated 4* on at least one site that were counted as 3*.

You mean if we didn’t get off the field? Which we did? That seems true in any game.
If they just hit their FGs... it would have been a 31-26 game when Walker intercepted that ball. That's a different kind of game. Those weren't errors UT forced. Clemson drove the field then missed kicks.
 
#32
#32
I can't see it explaining that kind of collapse and especially against a team as inept as USCe was on O otherwise.
I've seen that baloney. And that's what it is... baloney. I actually took a look. And what the person who started that did was choose the site that rated UT's DBs the lowest. Several were rated 4* on at least one site that were counted as 3*.


If they just hit their FGs... it would have been a 31-26 game when Walker intercepted that ball. That's a different kind of game. Those weren't errors UT forced. Clemson drove the field then missed kicks.

I’m the person who did that. Please check my work. Show me any team we had more 4* composite (not cherry picked, but 247 composite) dbs than in the sec?

The only team is Vandy. To proclaim I’m cherry picking is absurd and ignorant
 
#33
#33
I’m the person who did that. Please check my work. Show me any team we had more 4* composite (not cherry picked, but 247 composite) dbs than in the sec?

The only team is Vandy. To proclaim I’m cherry picking is absurd and ignorant
No it isn't. You ignored that some sites had them as 4*.

I am not one who claims that the sites do all that great discerning between a 4* and "high" 3*. But most of the time folks here say a player has talent if at least one site says they're a 4*.

I'm old enough to remember a lot of 4/5* busts and some 3* who were among the best UT has ever produced.

So on the one hand, I don't buy the argument that guys lack talent because they're 3* to start with... and on the other... yeah, you cherry picked your justification.

And again... I have NO desire to see Banks fail. Very much the opposite. But I'm not going to make excuses or buy in before he proves himself. I said the same thing about Jones and people didn't like it then either. I did not "like" Jones but that's purely secondary to winning in this kind of thing. I actually like Banks' personality as much as we've seen of it. The players seem to like him and play hard. I still have not seen enough to say he has the talent to create a championship D at UT.
 
#34
#34
No it isn't. You ignored that some sites had them as 4*.

I am not one who claims that the sites do all that great discerning between a 4* and "high" 3*. But most of the time folks here say a player has talent if at least one site says they're a 4*.

I'm old enough to remember a lot of 4/5* busts and some 3* who were among the best UT has ever produced.

So on the one hand, I don't buy the argument that guys lack talent because they're 3* to start with... and on the other... yeah, you cherry picked your justification.

And again... I have NO desire to see Banks fail. Very much the opposite. But I'm not going to make excuses or buy in before he proves himself. I said the same thing about Jones and people didn't like it then either. I did not "like" Jones but that's purely secondary to winning in this kind of thing. I actually like Banks' personality as much as we've seen of it. The players seem to like him and play hard. I still have not seen enough to say he has the talent to create a championship D at UT.

Ignored? I clearly stated my standard was 247 composite dbs.

You should admit you’re wrong here. It’s pathetic
 
#35
#35
So we agree I’m back to back seasons he’s made the defense better than it was before him. That goes along way. We’d agree the jury is still out, but I like trajectory
I think the statistics over Heupel's career made the claim that a two year "trend" at UCF showed decline. I don't think you can count the Covid year unless there were problems before like with Pruitt.

I think two years is pretty much all we have with Banks. We can go deeper but I don't think it is particularly helpful to him or the discussion. Interestingly, he coached under Jones at CMU and Cincy. At Illinois, his D's were mostly pretty awful. He allowed more than 30 ppg in 3 of his 4 seasons there.

Honestly, I think I'm being pretty fair by saying we don't have enough to judge him.
 
#36
#36
Ignored? I clearly stated my standard was 247 composite dbs.

You should admit you’re wrong here. It’s pathetic
Wrong about what? You chose a "proof" that is not absolute. You claimed it is absolute to support your argument that UT didn't have enough talent to prevent USCe from scoring at will... almost as if they were playing against air.
 
#37
#37
Wrong about what? You chose a "proof" that is not absolute. You claimed it is absolute to support your claim that UT didn't have enough talent to prevent USCe from scoring at will... almost as if they were playing against air.

The issue isn’t if my “proof” is absolute but rather that you outright lied and proclaimed I picked the site that had each player listed the lowest. That’s blatantly false. I used the same metric for each player (247 composite ranking). You can disagree with the metric and I really don’t care. The issue is you’re being disingenuous and pretending I cherry picked the data.

So prove me wrong. Find the team with less 4* dbs not named Vandy in the sec using 247 composite
 
  • Like
Reactions: AllThingsTN
#39
#39
The issue isn’t if my “proof” is absolute but rather that you outright lied and proclaimed I picked the site that had each player listed the lowest. That’s blatantly false. I used the same metric for each player (247 composite ranking). You can disagree with the metric and I really don’t care. The issue is you’re being disingenuous and pretending I cherry picked the data.
So why didn't you use another metric? Why try to use that to gauge talent at all? Are you consistent with that? Do you think the 3* players UT signed this year suck because they're 3*?

You specifically chose that metric and that measure because it supported the point you were trying to make. I'm not sure why you are trying to evade that... I think most people do it. But that leaves you open to challenges.

So prove me wrong. Find the team with less 4* dbs not named Vandy in the sec using 247 composite
You first. Prove that MSU, OM, Arkansas, UK, et al have "more talent" than UT had in their secondary by some non-subjective metric.
 
#40
#40
So why didn't you use another metric? Why try to use that to gauge talent at all? Are you consistent with that? Do you think the 3* players UT signed this year suck because they're 3*?

You specifically chose that metric and that measure because it supported the point you were trying to make. I'm not sure why you are trying to evade that... I think most people do it. But that leaves you open to challenges.


You first. Prove that MSU, OM, Arkansas, UK, et al have "more talent" than UT had in their secondary by some non-subjective metric.

I picked that metric because it’s one of only two composite rankings that even exist (that I know of) and it’s been around longer.

Why use it to gauge talent at all? Because there’s a high correlation between recruiting rankings and wins. So I used recruiting rankings.

I’m evading nothing. You’re pretending I cherry picked the data and refuse to admit you’re wrong.
 
#41
#41
I think the statistics over Heupel's career made the claim that a two year "trend" at UCF showed decline. I don't think you can count the Covid year unless there were problems before like with Pruitt.

I think two years is pretty much all we have with Banks. We can go deeper but I don't think it is particularly helpful to him or the discussion. Interestingly, he coached under Jones at CMU and Cincy. At Illinois, his D's were mostly pretty awful. He allowed more than 30 ppg in 3 of his 4 seasons there.

Honestly, I think I'm being pretty fair by saying we don't have enough to judge him.

Banks was play caller for 3 years at Central Michigan and the play caller at Cincinnati for 2 years. At Central, his defenses improved each year and Central was conference Champions 2 of his 3 years. Then he went to Cincinnati and improved the defense there and was nominated for Broyles Award because he had one of the youngest, yet most improved defenses that helped the team get another Conference Championship. 3 conference championships in his first 5 years as a play calling DC.........you failed to mention that. You go straight to Illinois where there were a few bad program years, but the defense improved his last year there.......you forgot to mention that as well.

Here at Tennessee, there were only 5 or 6 schools who's defense improved more than we did in one year in a stat that actually matters.
AND any TRUE vols fan should be happy about that. It's a good thing that our defense is ranked Top 25 in stopping teams from scoring and getting off the field......is that not the objective?
 
#42
#42
@sjt18 Did I apply the same fair standard to every SEC team and when doing so did the results show that only Vandy had less DB talent per that standard? Yes or no?

I don't give two ****s if you like the standard or not. That's a different thing we can address. But the issue is you're pretending I cherry picked.
 
#43
#43
Oh, and while we're at it. Vandy held USCe to 284 passing yds and 38 points. Mizzou held them to 171. Charlotte held them to 250. Ga State held them to 227. UK held them to 177.

All of those D's had more talent in their secondary that UT, right?
 
#45
#45
Banks was play caller for 3 years at Central Michigan and the play caller at Cincinnati for 2 years. At Central, his defenses improved each year and Central was conference Champions 2 of his 3 years. Then he went to Cincinnati and improved the defense there and was nominated for Broyles Award because he had one of the youngest, yet most improved defenses that helped the team get another Conference Championship. 3 conference championships in his first 5 years as a play calling DC.........you failed to mention that. You go straight to Illinois where there were a few bad program years, but the defense improved his last year there.......you forgot to mention that as well.
Do you think it is relevant to his later career? What matters more what he's done vs P-5 competition or the MAC and Big East?

If you want to use that as an excuse for these collapses then go ahead. Maybe it makes you feel better in some way. It doesn't work for me. Heupel took an offensive roster equally as bad and produced the nation's best offense in two years. That is great coaching. That is championship level coaching. Banks has not shown he has that kind of talent. Sorry if you think all of the excuses and rationalizing somehow nullify that.

Here at Tennessee, there were only 5 or 6 schools who's defense improved more than we did in one year in a stat that actually matters.
Can you link me to that stat or are you just giving uncritical credence to something that may be coach speak from a guy who may be under a little pressure?

Heupel promised aggression on both sides of the ball. At one point, it was pretty obvious that Banks' game plans were "bend don't break". There were some "whispers" through some of the media that they had a "meeting". Afterwards for better and sometimes worse, Banks was more aggressive. I don't think he's guaranteed a contract renewal unless the D improves significantly this year.

AND any TRUE vols fan should be happy about that.
LOL... seriously? The old "fan card"? Look mo', I've been a Vol fan for decades through good... but honestly mostly bad. I've been on this board for more than 16 years. I am a "TRUE vols fan". And I no longer give cheap loyalty to coaches. If you do... then maybe check your OWN fan card.

It's a good thing that our defense is ranked Top 25 in stopping teams from scoring and getting off the field......is that not the objective?
That's why I would like to see the actual stat. Averaging UK and Vandy in with some of the other games... causes the average to not fully reflect reality. They didn't get off the field vs USCe. They didn't vs Clemson either if you count Swinney's mismanagement against him.

If your wife was the "perfect wife" except for those 2 or 3 days per year that she went on a bender and let herself be used by other men... would the "average" of the two impress you?
 
#46
#46
247 broke this down on a podcast like a month or two ago. Detailed all the percentages per down. Really good listen on improved defensive numbers by year. I’ll see if I can find it
Would be appreciated. But if they only use the averages then it doesn't tell the whole story.
 
#47
#47
@sjt18 Did I apply the same fair standard to every SEC team and when doing so did the results show that only Vandy had less DB talent per that standard? Yes or no?
If "stars" are the absolute standard of talent and if you only counted the "stars" of the players who played significant roles... then that would be "true". And it STILL would not excuse the USCe game.

I don't give two ****s if you like the standard or not. That's a different thing we can address. But the issue is you're pretending I cherry picked.
LOL. You did. You had a point to make. You found a subjective analysis of "talent" and used it to support your point. Do you really claim that you did an in depth analysis, player by player, of every DB and secondary in the SEC reflective of their talent, development, and skill as of 2022? No. You found something you consider a good short cut and took it. If it had not proven your point... you wouldn't have cited it. You might have gone on to cite one or the other of the recruiting sites.

I'm not "pretending" anything. That is what you did. You can believe that's a legitimate portrayal of "talent". You can say that it is good enough to generalize. But you DID in fact pick a source that told the story you wanted to tell.
 
#48
#48
If "stars" are the absolute standard of talent and if you only counted the "stars" of the players who played significant roles... then that would be "true". And it STILL would not excuse the USCe game.


LOL. You did. You had a point to make. You found a subjective analysis of "talent" and used it to support your point. Do you really claim that you did an in depth analysis, player by player, of every DB and secondary in the SEC reflective of their talent, development, and skill as of 2022? No. You found something you consider a good short cut and took it. If it had not proven your point... you wouldn't have cited it. You might have gone on to site one or the other of the recruiting sites.

I'm not "pretending" anything. That is what you did. You can believe that's a legitimate portrayal of "talent". You can say that it is good enough to generalize. But you DID in fact pick a source that told the story you wanted to tell.

Nor did I claim such. I claimed that per 247 composite only Vandy had less talent. That's true. I picked the most respected source available. Is there a source that tells a different story? Let's see it.

And yes, you're still pretending I cherry picked because you're a dishonest loser.
 
#49
#49
Do you think it is relevant to his later career? What matters more what he's done vs P-5 competition or the MAC and Big East?

If you want to use that as an excuse for these collapses then go ahead. Maybe it makes you feel better in some way. It doesn't work for me. Heupel took an offensive roster equally as bad and produced the nation's best offense in two years. That is great coaching. That is championship level coaching. Banks has not shown he has that kind of talent. Sorry if you think all of the excuses and rationalizing somehow nullify that.

Can you link me to that stat or are you just giving uncritical credence to something that may be coach speak from a guy who may be under a little pressure?

Heupel promised aggression on both sides of the ball. At one point, it was pretty obvious that Banks' game plans were "bend don't break". There were some "whispers" through some of the media that they had a "meeting". Afterwards for better and sometimes worse, Banks was more aggressive. I don't think he's guaranteed a contract renewal unless the D improves significantly this year.

LOL... seriously? The old "fan card"? Look mo', I've been a Vol fan for decades through good... but honestly mostly bad. I've been on this board for more than 16 years. I am a "TRUE vols fan". And I no longer give cheap loyalty to coaches. If you do... then maybe check your OWN fan card.


That's why I would like to see the actual stat. Averaging UK and Vandy in with some of the other games... causes the average to not fully reflect reality. They didn't get off the field vs USCe. They didn't vs Clemson either if you count Swinney's mismanagement against him.

If your wife was the "perfect wife" except for those 2 or 3 days per year that she went on a bender and let herself be used by other men... would the "average" of the two impress you?

😆😆😆
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol8188

VN Store



Back
Top