Doug Matthews completely shredded the coaches and a RB debate ensued

#1
tarvol23

tarvol23

GO VOLS/HEELS
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
472
Likes
0
#1
this afternoon on his show with tony barnhart. he has always been as diplomatic as can be but today he was more livid than I have ever heard.thats going back before the '05 season of course. he said the punt block goes right to the head coach. in regards to the 2nd half game plan, he said with his voice rising with each word," they would not,not could not, would not, would not, would not run the ball!" I wish everyone on here could have heard it. again, I have never heard him so disgusted, emotional,pissed off.

oh, he also said that no blame should be placed on any player, even a.foster ,since the coaches should have figured out that hardesty was the more effective back.

just brutal
 
#2
#2
tarvol23 said:
this afternoon on his show with tony barnhart. he has always been as diplomatic as can be but today he was more livid than I have ever heard.thats going back before the '05 season of course. he said the punt block goes right to the head coach. in regards to the 2nd half game plan, he said with his voice rising with each word," they would not,not could not, would not, would not, would not run the ball!" I wish everyone on here could have heard it. again, I have never heard him so disgusted, emotional,pissed off.

oh, he also said that no blame should be placed on any player, even a.foster ,since the coaches should have figured out that hardesty was the more effective back.

just brutal
Click to expand...

I missed it.Usually Doug takes up for Phil,or at least he has every time I listen to him.
 
#3
#3
totally agree. I remember how critical he got during 05 but that was nothing compared to yesterday. cant wait to hear what he says fri afternoon.
 
#5
#5
someone needs to call it like they see it. Foster still can take the blame for the fumble. Although he did the same thing at the bowl game against Penn St.
 
#6
#6
Good, its time. Those with a voice need to use it. Maybe hambone will finally get off the opium and hear the masses.

I'm not out to get fulmer personally, but the heat needs to be searing on him at this point. 7 years removed from truly playing championship caliber football, with 2 top 5 (if not better) recruiting classes taking the field, there was absolutely no excuse for the coaching ineptitude we saw Monday night.
 
#7
#7
tarvol23 said:
oh, he also said that no blame should be placed on any player, even a.foster ,since the coaches should have figured out that hardesty was the more effective back.

just brutal
Click to expand...


Arian Foster: 13 carries, 96 yards, good enough for 7.4 ypc
Montario Hardesty: 12 carries, 66 yards, good enough for 5.5 ypc

Also Foster had 4 catches for 12 more yards. Please explain how it was obvious Hardesty was the more effective back. The two compliment each other perfectly.
 
#8
#8
Good job Doug Matthews. All of us complaining and pointing out the mistakes doesn't phase Hamilton or Fulmer in the least, but hopefully some one like this can send a wake up call their way.
 
#9
#9
I would say that Foster's critical fumble made Hardesty the more effective back.
 
#10
#10
rexvol said:
I would say that Foster's critical fumble made Hardesty the more effective back.
Click to expand...

and after the fumble, Hardesty rushed 5 times to Foster's 2.

Which brings me to this point. This is for all those that have tried to defend the playcalling and saying we shouldn't have ran it anymore than we did:

After Foster's fumble, including the OT drive, we ran the ball only 7 times. Foster's fumble occurred with around 10:30 minutes left in the 3rd quarter.
 
#12
#12
volfanbill said:
and after the fumble, Hardesty rushed 5 times to Foster's 2.

Which brings me to this point. This is for all those that have tried to defend the playcalling and saying we shouldn't have ran it anymore than we did:

After Foster's fumble, including the OT drive, we ran the ball only 7 times. Foster's fumble occurred with around 10:30 minutes left in the 3rd quarter.
Click to expand...

Quote:
"and after the fumble, Hardesty rushed 5 times to Foster's 2." Foster should not have run it again, 2 times was too many. He was very effective up to that point, but that was killer. He has done that too many times and has to much experience to keep doing that crap at critical times. He needs to be taught a hard lesson.

Quote:
"Which brings me to this point. This is for all those that have tried to defend the playcalling and saying we shouldn't have ran it anymore than we did:" I haven't heard anyone say we shouldn't have ran it anymore than we did. All I have heard is we should have run the ball more.
 
#13
#13
utVOLman said:
and the 2 TDs...

Foster just doesn't get in the end zone enough...period.
Click to expand...

one TD was after the fumble, in which I already pointed out the 5-2 difference in carries.

Let's not forget that Foster's closest trips to the goal line was at the UCLA 34 yard line in the first quarter, then he had a 7 yard run, a 9 yard run and a 41 yard run that got UT to the UCLA 22. After a Lucas Taylor 19 yd reception, he did fumble. I give no excuses for that.

He then had a 5 yard run in the fourth to set up Hardesty's second TD.

By my count, there was one legit time he should have scored. He screwed up badly, but it's not his fault he didn't get in the endzone. You can't expect RBs to constantly pile up 30+ yard gains and take it to the house.
 
#14
#14
volfanbill said:
By my count, there was one legit time he should have scored. He screwed up badly, but it's not his fault he didn't get in the endzone. You can't expect RBs to constantly pile up 30+ yard gains and take it to the house.
Click to expand...

I know it's hypothetical, but give Foster the ball on either one of Hardesty's TDs....you think he scores?

i don't.
 
#15
#15
Foster could have scored on the 11 yard run without question in my mind. Could he have broken the 20 yarder? Maybe not, but Foster broke the 41 yarder so who knows.

I'm not necessarily defending Foster and putting Hardesty down. Hardesty is my favorite back in the stable. I just want to make sure people understand the real reasons we lost. The fumble is a major reason, but to actually think Hardesty looked better than Foster all game long is ridiculous. Hardesty also isn't the receiver out of the backfield Foster is. Again, the two compliment each other almost perfectly.
 
#16
#16
utVOLman said:
I know it's hypothetical, but give Foster the ball on either one of Hardesty's TDs....you think he scores?

i don't.
Click to expand...

I don't either. I definitely don't think Foster would have scored on the 2nd touchdown that Hardesty scored on. Hardesty was running around the end toward the sidelines and saw a gap, hit it and turned up field. Foster would have continued to run toward the sidelines and might have gotten 5 yards. I like Foster, and I am not knocking him, but that fumble hurt no doubt, and Hardesty ran the ball much harder. Even the announcers said that even though Foster was the featured back and had all the career rushing yards, Hardesty ran with a much more burst of speed.
 
#17
#17
We should have been able to recover from the fumble. We are a much, much better team than UCLA.

Lack of running the ball and the prevent D in the fourth are the most significant contributors to this loss, IMO.
 
#18
#18
Hardesty is the faster runner. Foster is a little more of a power guy. It's two different running styles, but both are very effective, especially when used together.
 
#19
#19
volfanbill said:
By my count, there was one legit time he should have scored. He screwed up badly, but it's not his fault he didn't get in the endzone. You can't expect RBs to constantly pile up 30+ yard gains and take it to the house.
Click to expand...

No. But you do expect them to hang on to the ball in which he consitantly can not do in critical plays/drives...
Thats what Running backs do.
 
#20
#20
JBinTN said:
No. But you do expect them to hang on to the ball in which he consitantly can not do in critical plays/drives...
Thats what Running backs do.
Click to expand...

he didn't have a problem holding onto the ball getting them there. I know he struggles holding onto the ball, but my point is up until that point in the game, he didn't have a problem holding on to the ball, so there is still no evidence that Hardesty was the better back.
 
#21
#21
I am glad someone is turning up the heat on the coaches. Maybe this can be sort of a wake up call the coaches need.
 
#22
#22
volfanbill said:
Foster could have scored on the 11 yard run without question in my mind. Could he have broken the 20 yarder? Maybe not, but Foster broke the 41 yarder so who knows.

I'm not necessarily defending Foster and putting Hardesty down. Hardesty is my favorite back in the stable. I just want to make sure people understand the real reasons we lost. The fumble is a major reason, but to actually think Hardesty looked better than Foster all game long is ridiculous. Hardesty also isn't the receiver out of the backfield Foster is. Again, the two compliment each other almost perfectly.
Click to expand...

Agreed, they do compliment one another very well. It's nice to keep them rotated and fresh. Foster has got to hang on to the ball however. If he can stop doing that crap and we will actually run the ball more, we will hurt some defenses with these two backs. I agree, Foster was very effective and ran very well up until the fumble which really hurt.
 
#24
#24
How many times has Hardesty been absent due to some nagging injury he can't get over? As much as I like Hardesty, he's never shown anything to make me think he's very dependable either
 
#25
#25
Here is an interesting question to ponder:

All spring and preseason long I read about Foster not getting many touches because they didn't want to get him hurt and they "knew what he could do". Why not let someone who struggles to hold onto the ball get more reps in practice so he can practice holding onto the ball? I blame that on the coaches
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top