If we would have used this O game plan all year......

[Pooods]

Ok we all can figure out Phil was in charge of the offense the last two games. He knew the passing game was so bad that he might as well not use it at all. The line suprised me by being able to stay on the field and run run run. Yeah it was Vandy and the Bluecats but a few weeks ago I thought we were worse than them.

Would we have won a few more games by using this game plan all season? I think we would have had a couple more wins.

Don't get me wrong. The offense sucks! Against Florida, Bama and others we probably would have not scored 10 points with this plan. But, it worked better than I thought it would against Vandy and Kentucky. I really didn't think this very offensive line could whip ANYONE off the ball. Especially every play when the D knew what was coming at them.

 

[jsc1973]

Yes, we would have finished 8-4 with this game plan. We would have beaten UCLA, Auburn and Wyoming and lost to UF, UGA, Bama and USC-Columbia.

I alluded to this earlier. We'd be headed to a Weedeater Bowl, where we would beat some joke of a Big 10 team, and Fulmer would be getting a raise and an extension. But we'd be no better off than we are in the long run.

 

[RCKYT0P]

Had CPF took control all year, we would not be excited about Kif right now.

Good thing or bad thing? We will find out over the next couple of seasons

 

[tonyvolsfan05]

I think we would have had a couple more wins.

:banghead2::banghead2::banghead2::banghead2::banghead2::banghead2::banghead2::banghead2::banghead2::banghead2: A couple more wins would have meant what? 7 and 5 and a lame duck bowl.

 

[Volmania]

The no-passing offense did limit turnovers and kept us from beating ourselves, but it wouldn't work against teams with real defenses; we just weren't that good at running the ball.

I believe we gained 1 yard rushing the entire game against Georgia. If we had run every play instead of mixing in some passes maybe we would have gotten that up to two yards.

I do agree we would probably have beaten UCLA and Wyoming with a running only game plan and maybe even Auburn, but it wouldn't have worked against Florida, Alabama, Georgia or South Carolina.

 

[GAVol]

A defense as good as South Carolina's would have eaten us alive. I could see it maybe saving us against Wyoming.

 

[corona1898]

Was it the offense or total breakdown by UK's defense that allowed some big plays? Anyway, I am glad we won.

 

[GAVol]

Was it the offense or total breakdown by UK's defense that allowed some big plays? Anyway, I am glad we won.

They were completely baffled when we basically started running the Single Wing from the 1950's. :crazy: The play where Gerald Jones had the long run was one of the most telegraphed plays I've ever seen. You could look at the formation and tell it was a sweep left . . . but it worked.

 

[gavol2572]

They were completely baffled when we basically started running the Single Wing from the 1950's. :crazy: The play where Gerald Jones had the long run was one of the most telegraphed plays I've ever seen. You could look at the formation and tell it was a sweep left . . . but it worked.

yep:yes:

 

[TravisHenryCBlockedMe]

Call me crazy, but I would have taken a 7-5 year over a 5-7 year.

 

[GAVol]

If you ever wondered if there were too many bowl games, consider this . . . The worst Tennessee team in the past 30 years was effectively one play away against either UCLA, Auburn or Wyoming from bowl eligibility.

I would have liked to have gone 6-6 just so the new guy could come on in and have 20 extra practices.

 

[VolinDawgland]

Call me crazy, but I would have taken a 7-5 year over a 5-7 year.

Who knows how it would have turned out:

7-5: Fulmer retains job, keeps staff in tact and either the offense makes huge strides next year or continues to flounder. The major issue that would hold back the offense is Adkins' line coaching - or lack there of. There'd be no new coach and system.

5-7: As painful as it's been to watch at least makes the decision to make a change much more acceptable and even necessary. I feel bad for Clawson, but in hind sight the deck was stacked against him from the start. He should never have taken the job without the ability to bring more of his staff with him. He was fighting against two hold overs in Fulmer and Adkins and two new coaches who didn't know his system and a disaster situation at QB. He was trying to teach a team that was well versed in the old system his system and it appears that the players did not invest themselves in learning the new system as required. I'll bet he had his 'what the F*** moment' sometime in fall practice and those shots of him at the UCLA game was him coming to realize what he'd gotten himself into.

Time to turn the page or better open an entirely new book.