Give it to Clawson??????

#102
#102
justingroves said:
I'd take Clawson over a whole lot of the names being thrown around
Click to expand...

I agree with you JG. If we are not going to get a big time proven HC like Cowher, Carroll or Butch Davis, then just give Clawson a 1 year deal and see what he can do when he actually has control and isn't forced to play a QB that stinks. I don't see how it can be any worse. Heck, he might even bring Trooper Taylor back as a Co-Offensive Coordinator. Why give it to some other OC or DC that has never been a HC? That is risky and you will have to pay them a lot more to take a chance on them than someone that is already there and responsible for a lot of the good recruits we are getting for next year.

Did anyone else notice the Richmond QB looks a lot like Tajh Boyd by the way he runs and throws. Do we really know what Clawsons offense would look like with the right QB, better offensive line recruits and him not having Fulmer to force him to play certain players and change his plays? I heard Fulmer say on Vol Calls a few weeks ago he changed about 30% of the plays that came down. That was from the horses mouth.
 
#104
#104
The University of Fulmer supporters would be surprised how well the program would run if Clawson were at the helm, imo.......
 
#105
#105
UT IE 95 said:
Clawson took essentially the same team from last season that averaged over 30 ppg and turned them into squadoosh this year. Some of it's QB play, but a lot of it is play calling and him (not) adjusting during the game.
Click to expand...

Actually, we have only managed sqadoosh in the games in which the defense has helped us score.
 
#106
#106
The answer is no we have not seen Clawson's offense. I can say this because I have seen it on several occasions. Or the Richmond version at least. Yes, Eric Ward and most of the O line for Richmond could start today at UT. That said, Ward is a mensa candidate compared to Crompton. Although I do see an improvement with Stephens. So there is some hope. Furthermore I see an offense that has been dumbed down because DC does not have the players he wants in place. That as well as quite a bit of interference from CPF.

Something to keep in mind. Richmond football before Clawson arrived was a joke. A lot of you are saying good he can go back there. I don't buy that argument. DC turned around a program .

I also agree wit some of the previous posters let go of Fulmer and give Clawson the job. There is bound to be an improvement.
 
Last edited:
#107
#107
Va Vol Fan said:
After reading a thread over a Spidernation on Rivals, even those fans think that it isn't the same offense and they watched it for 3 years. They also said, we don't have a QB to run his offense and that their QB would start over ours. I don't know if I would necessarily disagree based on what I have seen from our QB play this year, even though Stephens has been serviceable.
Click to expand...

I actually heard on the radio the other day that it was obviously not the same offense that Clawson ran at Richmond. The hosts were saying not much of it looked the same at all. I don't remember the show but I want to say it was on 104.5 in Nashville.
 
#109
#109
rockytophigh said:
SpiderNation.com - Message Boards

exactly what I was suspecting to read!
Click to expand...

They know because they watched it for 3-4 years. I know because I have watched UT football for almost 15 years and haven't seen a lot of change year in and out, this season included. That's just me though.
 
#112
#112
Vols520 said:
The main problems are slow lumbering running backs, no play making receivers, and an O-Line that continually gets dominated on short yardage situations.
Click to expand...

Any offense that has fast running backs, at least one play making receiver, and an o-line that continually dominates...will be pretty good.

Sometimes when you get lemons, you make lemonade. Cut did it last year with basically the same team (except qb, which is a big part), why cant Clawon?
 
#113
#113
TravisHenryCBlockedMe said:
Any offense that has fast running backs, at least one play making receiver, and an o-line that continually dominates...will be pretty good.

Sometimes when you get lemons, you make lemonade. Cut did it last year with basically the same team (except qb, which is a big part), why cant Clawon?
Click to expand...

Two words....quick throws. Also, see Erik Ainge.
 
#114
#114
TravisHenryCBlockedMe said:
Any offense that has fast running backs, at least one play making receiver, and an o-line that continually dominates...will be pretty good.

Sometimes when you get lemons, you make lemonade. Cut did it last year with basically the same team (except qb, which is a big part), why cant Clawon?
Click to expand...

Well Cutcliff had been here since 1847 & the whole offensive system was pretty much the same as when he left it. Clawson had to come in and install an entire new offense with the personnel we have. All Cut really had to do was fix Erik's beat up emotional state. Well there were a few other things. Don't you recall Cutcliffe being upset about the O line being so out of shape and unable to run? That's a whole world's difference than trying to teach kids an entire new system.

Here's the big difference between the two though. Fulmer would let Cut have pretty much free reign over the offensive playcalling. I think it's obvious now to most that Clawson is not being allowed to run his own show.

Also, THINK ABOUT THIS.......when we bring in a new head coach....how long will you give him to determine success? This applies in all sports, not just football. I think you have to give a coach a few years to get the kind of kids he wants in his system and then coach them. Same thing with Clawson.
 
#115
#115
rockytophigh said:
Well Cutcliff had been here since 1847 & the whole offensive system was pretty much the same as when he left it. Clawson had to come in and install an entire new offense with the personnel we have. All Cut really had to do was fix Erik's beat up emotional state. Well there were a few other things. Don't you recall Cutcliffe being upset about the O line being so out of shape and unable to run? That's a whole world's difference than trying to teach kids an entire new system.

Here's the big difference between the two though. Fulmer would let Cut have pretty much free reign over the offensive playcalling. I think it's obvious now to most that Clawson is not being allowed to run his own show.

Also, THINK ABOUT THIS.......when we bring in a new head coach....how long will you give him to determine success? This applies in all sports, not just football. I think you have to give a coach a few years to get the kind of kids he wants in his system and then coach them. Same thing with Clawson.
Click to expand...
:lolabove:
Cut hired the General, right?
 
#118
#118
g8terh8ter_eric said:
They know because they watched it for 3-4 years. I know because I have watched UT football for almost 15 years and haven't seen a lot of change year in and out, this season included. That's just me though.
Click to expand...

The offense from 2004 was pretty different than the 2005 or 2003 offense. The 2006 and 2007 offenses were pretty different. This year's offense is different.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top