I want a new OC, HC and QB.

#3
#3
I can certainly understand HC, he's had more than enough time, but I personally think it's pathetic to jump ship on the entire offense 1 game into the season.

Yes, mistakes were made... and they are fixable. Will they be fixed though? I don't know, and only time will tell. Wait to see how the season pans out before rushing into judgment.
 
#4
#4
utVOLman said:
I will take a new DC as well while you're at it.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I rather like Chavis. Most of the defensive problems we've had have had to do with lack of experience and poor execution rather than bad coaching. I suppose the latter can be related back to poor coaching, but still, comparatively speaking, I've been much happier with our defense than our offense over the last 8 years. Chavis' defense has saved our bums in plenty of games.
 
#6
#6
ksushalovesthevols said:
Honestly, I rather like Chavis. Most of the defensive problems we've had have had to do with lack of experience and poor execution rather than bad coaching. I suppose the latter can be related back to poor coaching, but still, comparatively speaking, I've been much happier with our defense than our offense over the last 8 years. Chavis' defense has saved our bums in plenty of games.
Click to expand...
A defensive collapse has lost us several games, including this one.
 
#7
#7
DC Vol said:
I can certainly understand HC, he's had more than enough time, but I personally think it's pathetic to jump ship on the entire offense 1 game into the season.

Yes, mistakes were made... and they are fixable. Will they be fixed though? I don't know, and only time will tell. Wait to see how the season pans out before rushing into judgment.
Click to expand...

Yes, these are fixable mistakes, but it goes back to coaching. Norm Chow did more with less and they had as little time to learn a new offense and adjust to a new OC as we did. We were simply outcoached, because not a single sane person in the world can say that UCLA has more talent.
 
#8
#8
ksushalovesthevols said:
Honestly, I rather like Chavis. Most of the defensive problems we've had have had to do with lack of experience and poor execution rather than bad coaching. I suppose the latter can be related back to poor coaching, but still, comparatively speaking, I've been much happier with our defense than our offense over the last 8 years. Chavis' defense has saved our bums in plenty of games.
Click to expand...

You must not have watched the same game on Monday. Or did you even watch it?
 
#9
#9
Let's wait and see how they fair the rest of these games before we call for Fulmer's head.
 
#10
#10
crazyguy said:
A defensive collapse has lost us several games, including this one.
Click to expand...

I think the defense made far fewer mistakes here than the offense. Failing to capitalize on several shots at the endzone, the missed field goals (wiiiiiiiiide right), Crompton's inability to hit targets, offense failing to line up correctly or run the correct routes was far worse than the couple of defensive mistakes that were made. Lest you forget, the offense capitalized on the several defensive picks we had to score. If we scored on the two fairly reasonable field goals that we missed, we wouldn't be in this boat. Or, for that matter, if Crompton could consistently find his receivers.
 
#11
#11
ksushalovesthevols said:
I think the defense made far fewer mistakes here than the offense. Failing to capitalize on several shots at the endzone, the missed field goals (wiiiiiiiiide right), Crompton's inability to hit targets, offense failing to line up correctly or run the correct routes was far worse than the couple of defensive mistakes that were made. Lest you forget, the offense capitalized on the several defensive picks we had to score. If we scored on the two fairly reasonable field goals that we missed, we wouldn't be in this boat. Or, for that matter, if Crompton could consistently find his receivers.
Click to expand...
let's see. the overtime field goal was wide left. The defense allowed craft to look like peyton manning does now in the second half. And once again, Chavis goes to the prevent and allows a team to score a touchdown in under 40 seconds....yeah, none of the defensive mistakes in the second half mattered. I didn't say that the offense isn't to blame as well-but this was another defensive collapse.
 
#12
#12
ksushalovesthevols said:
Yes, these are fixable mistakes, but it goes back to coaching. Norm Chow did more with less and they had as little time to learn a new offense and adjust to a new OC as we did. We were simply outcoached, because not a single sane person in the world can say that UCLA has more talent.
Click to expand...


That what makes it sting the most. They not only had less talent, but replaced their HC and OC and were better prepared for the game with essentially the same amount of time. It really makes it look like they got the best OC.

Norm Chow's name was discussed a lot here, but I don't recall any serious interests or actions from UT to get him in Knoxville.

Concerning Chow, does anyone know if we tried and failed or failed to try?
 
#14
#14
I have to disagree. The offense did its job. It put the team ahead with less than 2 minutes to play. Asking much more given the situation (rookie QB and Coordinator) is asking too much.
 
#15
#15
crazyguy said:
let's see. the overtime field goal was wide left. The defense allowed craft to look like peyton manning does now in the second half. And once again, Chavis goes to the prevent and allows a team to score a touchdown in under 40 seconds....yeah, none of the defensive mistakes in the second half mattered. I didn't say that the offense isn't to blame as well-but this was another defensive collapse.
Click to expand...

if we scored on the two field goal opportunities or capitalized on even one trip to the end zone, craft's 4th quarter comeback would have been moot and there wouldn't have been an overtime situation. it was the offense's job to get it done during regulation and they failed. the defense had been doing reasonably well all day (note how we stuffed the run and craft's relative inability to get pass yardage prior to the 4th) and were worn out by the time overtime came. i'm not trying to say they were spectacular, but the offense's performance in this game was far, far worse.
 
#16
#16
Exactly...The offense did put the points on the board and all the D had to do is stop a 3rd string qb...I do not think it happened because Chavis had the secondary 10 yards off the ball allowing Craft to throw at will and move the team downfield to take the lead...I also remember the offense driving to get into field goal position in under 30 seconds allowing us to tie it...Chavis laid an egg...He can not make adjustments and get away from the gameplan when it is not working.
 
#17
#17
Lexvol said:
I have to disagree. The offense did its job. It put the team ahead with less than 2 minutes to play. Asking much more given the situation (rookie QB and Coordinator) is asking too much.
Click to expand...

The D should have stopped UCLA on its last drive, but instead layed off way too much.

The O blew a lot of opportunities to score throughout the whole game, Lex.
 
#18
#18
Im just tired of getting outcoached every single game. I mean I like Fulmer but he simply doesn't get the job done. He needs to retire and we need to get someone who can inspire our players.
 
#19
#19
ksushalovesthevols said:
if we scored on the two field goal opportunities or capitalized on even one trip to the end zone, craft's 4th quarter comeback would have been moot and there wouldn't have been an overtime situation. it was the offense's job to get it done during regulation and they failed. the defense had been doing reasonably well all day (note how we stuffed the run and craft's relative inability to get pass yardage prior to the 4th) and were worn out by the time overtime came. i'm not trying to say they were spectacular, but the offense's performance in this game was far, far worse.
Click to expand...
say what you want, but had the defense held UCLA on their side if the field with 45 seconds left...and we win the game. That's kindof the point of defense.
 
#20
#20
ksushalovesthevols said:
Yes, these are fixable mistakes, but it goes back to coaching. Norm Chow did more with less and they had as little time to learn a new offense and adjust to a new OC as we did. We were simply outcoached, because not a single sane person in the world can say that UCLA has more talent.
Click to expand...

That's assuming that Clawson devised not only the Offense and called the plays, but devised the gameplan as well. The plays fit Clawson's past... not playing to your strength as an Offense does not. I'm not willing to burn any effigies of Clawson just yet though, not after 1 game.
 
#21
#21
crazyguy said:
say what you want, but had the defense held UCLA on their side if the field with 45 seconds left...and we win the game. That's kindof the point of defense.
Click to expand...

And my point is that we had opportunities to score much earlier, which would have eliminated it coming down to the last minute. THAT's kind of the point of offense. You want to put it away, way out of reach before the other team tries their two minute drill.
 
#22
#22
utmba93 said:
The D should have stopped UCLA on its last drive, but instead layed off way too much.

The O blew a lot of opportunities to score throughout the whole game, Lex.
Click to expand...

I understand that, but this game was the essence of Fulmer ball. Yes, the offense had opportunity to perform more consistently. When the chips were down they actually delivered. The defense, on the other hand retreated into limbo.

I've seen it too many times over the past few years not to recognize it. Chavis was completely outcoached in the second half.
 
#23
#23
Lexvol said:
I have to disagree. The offense did its job. It put the team ahead with less than 2 minutes to play. Asking much more given the situation (rookie QB and Coordinator) is asking too much.
Click to expand...

The more I think about it, the more I think that it was purposeful that we called so many passing plays.

Here's why:
Crompton needs to get real experience against a decent/good defense throwing before MAJOR tests against UF and AU. UT's scout team and UAB simply aren't enough.

Here's why it could have worked:
There were open receivers all over the field. There's no denying that.

Here's why it didn't work:
Crompton made poor decisions (deep pass for potential 40-50 yards over smart pass for 5 to 10) and poor passes.

The adaptation to the blitz, or lack thereof, is inexcusable though.
 
#24
#24
Lexvol said:
I understand that, but this game was the essence of Fulmer ball. Yes, the offense had opportunity to perform more consistently. When the chips were down they actually delivered. The defense, on the other hand retreated into limbo.

I've seen it too many times over the past few years not to recognize it. Chavis was completely outcoached in the second half.
Click to expand...

Maybe the problem is the Fulmer ball part. We should have put that one away early.

I agree they dominated us with halftime adjustments versus our defense. I can't believe how much less talent they had on Offense versus our defense--and we couldn't dominate them? No debate from me on that one.
 
Last edited:
#25
#25
BTW, I asked in another thread and haven't read a post (there maby be lots here) or re-watched the game, but did anyone notice if Crompton had or used audibles to get out of some of the pass plays? What didn't he see that the rest of us saw?

What were his instructions on audibles?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top