Killer Instinct

#1
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
2,493
Likes
5,335
#1
Am I wrong that one of the most important parts of our game throughout the 80's and 90's was the fact we could get a lead then pile it on? We had our fair share of competitive games and great rivalries but, back in the day, we could step it up and not let up until the outcome was certain. It seems this last decade we make great runs and look unbeatable only to flitter the lead away with disjointed play then lose or barely hang on. It's almost like we think the game is over long before the final horn. We need to get that edge back and I'm afraid it's going to take more time than some are willing to allow.
 
#2

Amb3096

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2014
Messages
7,513
Likes
10,699
#2
Am I wrong that one of the most important parts of our game throughout the 80's and 90's was the fact we could get a lead then pile it on? We had our fair share of competitive games and great rivalries but, back in the day, we could step it up and not let up until the outcome was certain. It seems this last decade we make great runs and look unbeatable only to flitter the lead away with disjointed play then lose or barely hang on. It's almost like we think the game is over long before the final horn. We need to get that edge back and I'm afraid it's going to take more time than some are willing to allow.
It helped that they always had one of the most talented rosters in the country. Most teams were in an uphill battle when they faced off against the LVs. She doesn't have that now. If anything, I think she's done a great job with a good, but not the best talent on her team.
 
#3

Volfan2012

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2012
Messages
18,841
Likes
15,572
#3
I think the difference between now and then is that there were only three or four SEC teams with any talent and usually none of them compared to the talent of Tennessee. This is not your Grandmas SEC all these teams have talent and usually an edge on the road. Also in the year of covid the SEC schedule turned out to be a little unfair some teams got out of playing some better teams and some teams didn't get to play some of the lesser teams namely Vandy. The point I'm making is we'll never have a domination like Pat Summit in the SEC again or any of the top five leagues. Back in those days there were always at least six or seven teams that you could beat without much effort. Today you have to work with all you got and then the games come down to three or four possessions with almost every team you play. It will be like that for now on as parity is definitely here to stay and the day when one or two teams dominate is over. Were a top five SEC team now had a schedule because of covid no one could manage. Were on the right track Coach Kellie doing a great job in year two. Let the entire four years of recruiting play out and even then expect tough competition every game you will win some and lose some that is something that is not going to change.
 
#4

Voltopia

Aight, aight, aight.
Joined
Sep 20, 2009
Messages
2,408
Likes
4,701
#4
A lot of reasons. Let's call a few of them out -

There were fewer teams with experience in "big games." So a team like Tennessee with more big game experience had a lot of composure to withstand challenges.

As the wins piled up, the "Lady Vols" on the front of the jersey meant more and more. Plenty of teams marched out there against Pat in the 80s, 90s, and 00s, and lost as soon as they saw the "Lady Vols" on the front of the jersey. Either they were too hyped, or they were too intimidated. When a team fell behind by a few, it was easier for them to then fall behind by a lot more.

And finally, there was less talent in the game in the 80s. Not very many teams with superior talent, so having big time recruits gave you big time advantages. Seriously. The level of play outside the best 5-10 teams was not that hot.

Finally, Pat was one of the best coaches in existence when it came to motivating players. She could take an average player and motivate them to play at or above their "limitations," and she had the persona to demand the best of her players (and she almost always got it).

With AAU having expanded the women's game, and with more kids coming into college with experience and better skillsets, some of those old advantages aren't what they used to be. There's still a divide between the haves and have-nots, but it's not as wide as it once was.
 
#6

savannahfan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2014
Messages
4,874
Likes
3,847
#6
I think the difference between now and then is that there were only three or four SEC teams with any talent and usually none of them compared to the talent of Tennessee. This is not your Grandmas SEC all these teams have talent and usually an edge on the road. Also in the year of covid the SEC schedule turned out to be a little unfair some teams got out of playing some better teams and some teams didn't get to play some of the lesser teams namely Vandy. The point I'm making is we'll never have a domination like Pat Summit in the SEC again or any of the top five leagues. Back in those days there were always at least six or seven teams that you could beat without much effort. Today you have to work with all you got and then the games come down to three or four possessions with almost every team you play. It will be like that for now on as parity is definitely here to stay and the day when one or two teams dominate is over. Were a top five SEC team now had a schedule because of covid no one could manage. Were on the right track Coach Kellie doing a great job in year two. Let the entire four years of recruiting play out and even then expect tough competition every game you will win some and lose some that is something that is not going to change.
What you say is pretty factual, however to say dynasties in the SEC are a thing of the past: Just remember the current SC women's program. What are they in the SEC something like 31 - 1?
 
Likes: LadyVols_WBK
#7

Volfan2012

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2012
Messages
18,841
Likes
15,572
#7
What you say is pretty factual, however to say dynasties in the SEC are a thing of the past: Just remember the current SC women's program. What are they in the SEC something like 31 - 1?
The post was more about overall strength of the league top to bottom compared to in the past. Yes they are 31 and 1 in the last two seasons and likely to get another streak going with the talent coming in. There is also an excellent possibility that will not win the SEC regular championship this year.
 
#8

Nute Gunray

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2015
Messages
993
Likes
1,375
#8
A lot of reasons. Let's call a few of them out -

There were fewer teams with experience in "big games." So a team like Tennessee with more big game experience had a lot of composure to withstand challenges.

As the wins piled up, the "Lady Vols" on the front of the jersey meant more and more. Plenty of teams marched out there against Pat in the 80s, 90s, and 00s, and lost as soon as they saw the "Lady Vols" on the front of the jersey. Either they were too hyped, or they were too intimidated. When a team fell behind by a few, it was easier for them to then fall behind by a lot more.

And finally, there was less talent in the game in the 80s. Not very many teams with superior talent, so having big time recruits gave you big time advantages. Seriously. The level of play outside the best 5-10 teams was not that hot.

Finally, Pat was one of the best coaches in existence when it came to motivating players. She could take an average player and motivate them to play at or above their "limitations," and she had the persona to demand the best of her players (and she almost always got it).

With AAU having expanded the women's game, and with more kids coming into college with experience and better skillsets, some of those old advantages aren't what they used to be. There's still a divide between the haves and have-nots, but it's not as wide as it once was.
Perceptive and accurate statement, Voltopia: "Finally, Pat was one of the best coaches in existence when it came to motivating players. She could take an average player and motivate them to play at or above their "limitations," and she had the persona to demand the best of her players (and she almost always got it).". Kellie is a good coach but this is the difference between her and Pat.
 
Likes: NoBackBoard
#9

Volfan2012

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2012
Messages
18,841
Likes
15,572
#9
Am I wrong that one of the most important parts of our game throughout the 80's and 90's was the fact we could get a lead then pile it on? We had our fair share of competitive games and great rivalries but, back in the day, we could step it up and not let up until the outcome was certain. It seems this last decade we make great runs and look unbeatable only to flitter the lead away with disjointed play then lose or barely hang on. It's almost like we think the game is over long before the final horn. We need to get that edge back and I'm afraid it's going to take more time than some are willing to allow.
Almost every year Coach Summitt had walk ons on the team and they got quite a bit of playing time because of the leads that were secured by the starters.
 
Likes: LadyVols_WBK
#10
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
8,768
Likes
10,691
#10
Holly used to beg for her players to give effort, when she demanded it, they barely noticed it (Beta)
Pat demanded effort and through respect for her, got it without question (Alpha)

I think Coach Kellie is an Alpha/Beta at this point
When she demands it, she gets it,
but when she asks for it, she doesn't (except from the Beta players)
I think this is why the effort comes in spurts from the dominant players...

In my experience,,An Alpha athlete can turn it on ("it", being, full intensity and effort) and off by themselves,, and when you give them this control and let them do it by themselves, it comes when they want it to come
 
#11

glv98

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2018
Messages
1,817
Likes
4,219
#11
When she demands it, she gets it,
but when she asks for it, she doesn't (except from the Beta players)
I think this is why the effort comes in spurts from the dominant players...

In my experience,,An Alpha athlete can turn it on ("it", being, full intensity and effort) and off by themselves,, and when you give them this control and let them do it by themselves, it comes when they want it to come
So since your theory is that players randomly, intentionally withhold effort, how do you gain control of this willful misbehavior? I'd think you'd have to understand why they'd make such a bizarre choice to look bad on national TV, lose games, lose respect, and lose possible future earnings. I know I personally can't understand it every time I hear this oversimplified 'effort" bull crap. But then I'm not a coach.

Of course they don't intentionally withhold effort in some kind of silly mind game power struggle with coaches. Is that how you coach? Effort often gets confused with focus, which can come in spurts(so to speak). Sometimes, too many times in our case, players are not properly focused and mentally zoned in to play. That is the hardest thing, IMO, for players to achieve and coaches to coach. Learning to consistently be mentally "present", stick to game plan, stay locked in is what makes great teams great. It's a process like every other aspect of developing as a player. Lack of it is not caused by players randomly deciding to suck out loud. Never going to get fixed by a coach who doesn't understand that.

All that said, it is true that sometimes frustration caused by sucking in public leds some players to dog it toward the end of bad games. That is definitely willful misbehavior and should be addressed, like any ingame improper displays.
 
#12
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
8,768
Likes
10,691
#12
So since your theory is that players randomly, intentionally withhold effort, how do you gain control of this willful misbehavior? I'd think you'd have to understand why they'd make such a bizarre choice to look bad on national TV, lose games, lose respect, and lose possible future earnings. I know I personally can't understand it every time I hear this oversimplified 'effort" bull crap. But then I'm not a coach.

Of course they don't intentionally withhold effort in some kind of silly mind game power struggle with coaches. Is that how you coach? Effort often gets confused with focus, which can come in spurts(so to speak). Sometimes, too many times in our case, players are not properly focused and mentally zoned in to play. That is the hardest thing, IMO, for players to achieve and coaches to coach. Learning to consistently be mentally "present", stick to game plan, stay locked in is what makes great teams great. It's a process like every other aspect of developing as a player. Lack of it is not caused by players randomly deciding to suck out loud. Never going to get fixed by a coach who doesn't understand that.

All that said, it is true that sometimes frustration caused by sucking in public leds some players to dog it toward the end of bad games. That is definitely willful misbehavior and should be addressed, like any ingame improper displays.

Once again, my bothersome little friend, you have misstated my thoughts.
"players randomly, intentionally withhold effort",,,That is a laughable interpretation of my ideology

All players WANT to perform, but some have to be guided more than others and they have to be guided by the right type of persona. You can not ASK for an alpha athlete's focus and effort, you have to demand it and know how to get it out of them when they don't know how to get it out of them-self. . . They give their respect and acceptance,, to who they respect, not to who asks for it!

Beta players want to please. Alpha players want to perform. And each of the types have to be influenced differently. A coach has to understand their players, just as a boss has to understand their employees...Some you pat on the back and brag on and they get hyped-up and want to give you even more,,,,,and some you put your foot into their backside and demand they give you more and out of respect they give you more....and then there are the one's in the middle, the Alpha-Beta's who can swing either way and sometimes they are the trickiest to read.

I almost NEVER struggle to get full effort out of my players bc I understand this phenomenon. I KNOW that I can get the best out of my Alpha's and I can also get the best out of my Beta's....BUT, when I can't read a Beta player, I also know that sometimes I have to give that player to one of my assistant coaches and let them be what I am not. . . I struggle immensely with players that have to be "coddled" yet, these players can often be as dominant as the aggressive Alpha's, and thus are equally able and equal in the sport,,,So, I KNOW I have to have the right person in my org to handle those players for me.
++++++
glv, there is nothing I can say to you that will ever let you understand me, or my way, bc, you have it in your mind to try to confront me in every way you can...If I coached you, quite simply, I'd trade you or force you into quitting...A great man once said, "A man's got to know his limitations" (Clint Eastwood) , . . And you are mine!
 
#13

glv98

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2018
Messages
1,817
Likes
4,219
#13
Once again, my bothersome little friend, you have misstated my thoughts.
"players randomly, intentionally withhold effort",,,That is a laughable interpretation of my ideology
All players WANT to perform, but some have to be guided more than others and they have to be guided by t
Misstated? Laughable interpretation? Really. More like directly contradictory statements.
An Alpha athlete can turn it on ("it", being, full intensity and effort) and off by themselves,, and when you give them this control and let them do it by themselves, it comes when they want it to come
turning it off and on by themselves and having it come when they want it to come sounds for all the world like willful withholding to me. That's why I was confused.
 
#14
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
8,768
Likes
10,691
#14
Misstated? Laughable interpretation? Really. More like directly contradictory statements.

turning it off and on by themselves and having it come when they want it to come sounds for all the world like willful withholding to me. That's why I was confused.

If the switch isn't flipped by someone who knows how to do it, ultimately they can find it,,,Just as Rennia plays her best when the team needs her most. But if the coach can say the right thing initially, they can come out of the gate faster
 
#15

Nute Gunray

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2015
Messages
993
Likes
1,375
#15
Holly used to beg for her players to give effort, when she demanded it, they barely noticed it (Beta)
Pat demanded effort and through respect for her, got it without question (Alpha)

I think Coach Kellie is an Alpha/Beta at this point
When she demands it, she gets it,
but when she asks for it, she doesn't (except from the Beta players)
I think this is why the effort comes in spurts from the dominant players...

In my experience,,An Alpha athlete can turn it on ("it", being, full intensity and effort) and off by themselves,, and when you give them this control and let them do it by themselves, it comes when they want it to come
I agree with you, Coach Jumper. Kellie needs to be an Alpha (and no Beta) like her mentor, Pat Summitt. I believe the LVs would have no more than 2 losses if she were. She struggles with the Alpha identity because it is not natural to her.
 
#16
Joined
Nov 30, 2014
Messages
872
Likes
958
#16
Am I wrong that one of the most important parts of our game throughout the 80's and 90's was the fact we could get a lead then pile it on? We had our fair share of competitive games and great rivalries but, back in the day, we could step it up and not let up until the outcome was certain. It seems this last decade we make great runs and look unbeatable only to flitter the lead away with disjointed play then lose or barely hang on. It's almost like we think the game is over long before the final horn. We need to get that edge back and I'm afraid it's going to take more time than some are willing to allow.
Yes, I see a total lack of intensity compared to those games off a generation ago.... Those who played for Pat were motivated.... they would dive for loose balls.... they got arms up in defensive position..... they would not jog back on defense, etc etc.... i look back at those videos a lot.... it is plain in view.... and i wish i would see the team give it their all.... it is tennessee and we are the Lady Vols
 
#17
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
8,768
Likes
10,691
#17
I agree with you, Coach Jumper. Kellie needs to be an Alpha (and no Beta) like her mentor, Pat Summitt. I believe the LVs would have no more than 2 losses if she were. She struggles with the Alpha identity because it is not natural to her.
.
Pat was as different from what we saw in Holly as could be, but Pat needed a Holly to be what she couldn't be,,,a friend-coach, a rah-rah coach....some girls thrive with this type of coach and some have to be pushed.

Kellie doesn't necessarily have to change her coaching persona,,,what she does works!
But for certain types of players she will have in the future, she will need to either hire, or, have one of her present coaches, fill this role.

Players like Rennia, Jordan, (and I'm sure, others) are unique. They are just as determined and motivated as the next player, but, they often get into their own heads and need to be brought out...Only one of their own type can do this...It doesn't have to be the coach,,an assistant, or even another player can push that button...But it HAS to be pushed,, otherwise you have to wait for them to self-adjust their own selves.

I have coached for forty years now, exclusively females and I can guarantee you this is fact. For males, don't know, don't care, don't coach them.
 
#18
Joined
Nov 15, 2014
Messages
1,483
Likes
2,021
#18
I agree with you, Coach Jumper. Kellie needs to be an Alpha (and no Beta) like her mentor, Pat Summitt. I believe the LVs would have no more than 2 losses if she were. She struggles with the Alpha identity because it is not natural to her.
Anyone who thinks Kellie isn't an Alpha never saw her in an orange uniform. The thing you are all discounting is the extra coddling players expect today. The transfer portal is full of players who didn't like getting a kick in the butt by their previous coaches.
 
#19

madtownvol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2014
Messages
2,610
Likes
8,036
#19
So since your theory is that players randomly, intentionally withhold effort, how do you gain control of this willful misbehavior? I'd think you'd have to understand why they'd make such a bizarre choice to look bad on national TV, lose games, lose respect, and lose possible future earnings. I know I personally can't understand it every time I hear this oversimplified 'effort" bull crap. But then I'm not a coach.

Of course they don't intentionally withhold effort in some kind of silly mind game power struggle with coaches. Is that how you coach? Effort often gets confused with focus, which can come in spurts(so to speak). Sometimes, too many times in our case, players are not properly focused and mentally zoned in to play. That is the hardest thing, IMO, for players to achieve and coaches to coach. Learning to consistently be mentally "present", stick to game plan, stay locked in is what makes great teams great. It's a process like every other aspect of developing as a player. Lack of it is not caused by players randomly deciding to suck out loud. Never going to get fixed by a coach who doesn't understand that.

All that said, it is true that sometimes frustration caused by sucking in public leds some players to dog it toward the end of bad games. That is definitely willful misbehavior and should be addressed, like any ingame improper displays.
Hi Glv98,

I am not wanting to engage in the underlying debate just respond to a few of YOUR observations. I think many people like the psychological explantion because it fits with a comforting morality tale of everyone getting what they deserve. If you lose, of course you just did not want it as bad as the other team and did not put out the needed effort and desire. So for example, last year Pat Mahomes simply wanted "it more" than everyone else. This year, he and the Chiefs got fat and lazy and did not want it as much as Tom Brady and the Buccaneers, though we must also note that the Chiefs were not as fat and lazy everyone else in the AFC (why are those other teams even playing?). And don't get me started me on Brady. The dude has been in the league 20+ seasons and he really only "wanted it" 7 times. That means 67% of his career he obviously did not want it and was not motivated. What a beta loser....

Or closer to home, Geno was great at motivating players and his players really "wanted it" except for the last few season, Now, GA clearly can't motivate and has players who don't "want it," though perhaps Page B. does want "it" more than anyone else We will have to wait and see.

The less comforting view is that sometimes teams and players are just better than you and no matter how hard you try or how badly you "want it," you just can't win except for the rare anomalous game where luck (i.e. low probability outcomes) go your way.

Of course, coaching and recruiting does make a difference in terms of establishing baseline performance levels for a team but I think it seldom comes down to having the right speech in your back pocket when the going gets tough.

Give me Candace Parker, Lex Hornbucke and Nicky Anosike against teams who have less talent (which was just about everybody back then) and my motivating speeches will work damn well-- similarly give me the Meeks and Jolly at PG in the context of 1990's WCBB.

This current LV team just does not have the separation in skill and talent that those legend LV teams had. And even with CP3, it is interesting that she apparently did want it "badly enough" (and presumably CPS could not motivate to the right alpha level) until the team brought in a great back court tandem of Bobbitt and Augustus who resolved some glaring guard deficiencies, where Summit had been trying to convert Alex Hornbuckle to play point (sound familar?)

Parity has a way of making "killer instincts" harder to come by.

The LVs should have won the Georgia game but the bulldogs match up well with us and play the kind of defense (at a high level of execution) that has given the LVs trouble all season. We do have some weaknesses at PG and Georgia exposes them. That is not a will issue but a skill issue.

Having said that, GA was just as bad we were for much of the game and really the outcome turned on some 3 pointers that took crazy bounces and went in (i.e. the lucky/low probability event).
 
Last edited:
#20

glv98

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2018
Messages
1,817
Likes
4,219
#20
Thanks madtown, I think you're explanation is spot on. They don't actually think Rennia decides sometime between the team meal and warmups she's just not feeling it tonight and doesn't give a rat's patoot if they win or lose nor how lousy she plays. It's just silly fanspeak.Totally agree with the "deserves it" psychology.

I've often said, oh but that it were that easy to fix problems of focus, intensity and decision making. If you could stare, run or punish it out of them, it wouldn't be near the problem it actually is. Takes a truly great coach to consistently master the intangibles.

It still gets under my skin every time I hear "didn't want it" "decided not to play" because its such a terrible insult to the player. Same folks who weep and wail that we're meanies who run recruits off by analysing their game don't think twice about accusing a player of betraying her teammates, coaches, and herself by quitting on them. To me, that's about the biggest personal insult you could make towards a player.
 
#21
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
8,768
Likes
10,691
#21
you both miss my point,,,I in no way think Rennia is holding back or not trying....I think that the right coach saying the right words and pushing the right buttons can help her realize her potential and level, earlier in the games.

It has nothing to do with desire, it has everything to do with coaching in the mental aspect of the athlete. If you let a non-aggressive Alpha athlete decide their own entry into 5th gear, they will hit that gear when they have to and not until then...And Rennia is not the hyper aggressive type, she doesn't walk out on the floor with fists clenched and teeth gritted,,,she strolls out on the court with confidence that she can reach for that level, whenever she calls for it to herself.
 
Likes: Bret178
#22

VOLPAT

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2018
Messages
92
Likes
138
#22
It helped that they always had one of the most talented rosters in the country. Most teams were in an uphill battle when they faced off against the LVs. She doesn't have that now. If anything, I think she's done a great job with a good, but not the best talent on her team.
Good point Amb. Kellie hates to lose with a passion and if her work effort as a player translates to her coaching, things will be getting significantly better. It’s pretty clear she played on one of the greatest women’s basketball teams....EVER. 39-0 3 National Championships. She knows what it takes.
 
#23

glv98

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2018
Messages
1,817
Likes
4,219
#23
you both miss my point,,,I in no way think Rennia is holding back or not trying..
If we miss your point, it's because its so muddled and contradictory. You can't have it both ways. You can't agree with us that "effort" is not a conscious choice and then turn around and say this:
An Alpha athlete can turn it on ("it", being, full intensity and effort) and off by themselves,, and when you give them this control and let them do it by themselves, it comes when they want it to come
f you let a non-aggressive Alpha athlete decide their own entry into 5th gear, they will hit that gear when they have to and not until then..
When their good and goshdarn ready, not before if they "control . . . and do it by themselves" "comes when they want it to come". Maybe I'm dense but I cannot see that as anything but a choice. It's not just you, as madtown said every loss brings an avalanche of disgusted, insulted poster convinced our players "just didn't want it" "decided not to play." He said it perfectly, its playing out the morality tale where everyone gets what they deserve. I understand it as meaningless fanspeak but I find it comically oversimplified and completely insulting to the players.
she doesn't walk out on the floor with fists clenched and teeth gritted,,,she strolls out on the court with confidence that she can reach for that level, whenever she calls for it to herself.
This strikes me the same way as saying KJH doesn't adequately coach the team during games bc she doesn't make a show of it. We don't know that; in fact, her best coaching has obviously come in the locker room at halftime completely out of public view. Look at our 3rd quarter play this season. Similarly, we don't know Rennia' mindset going into the game just because she's not an overtly rah rah, clinched fists sort. Also, again, when we say she'll reach a level when she calls for it herself is completely calling the giving of effort intentional. And completely unfairly insulting.
 
#25
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
8,768
Likes
10,691
#25
You can argue all you want to, but tonight you just witnessed exactly what I have been saying

Coach Jumper said:
An Alpha athlete can turn it on ("it", being, full intensity and effort) and off by themselves,, and when you give them this control and let them do it by themselves, it comes when they want it to come

Coach Jumper said:
f you let a non-aggressive Alpha athlete decide their own entry into 5th gear, they will hit that gear when they have to and not until then..

When Rae went down, I called it:

Game Thread: (20/21) Lady Vols at Missouri

Davis flipped her own switch when it had to be flipped.
Argue all you want, but 40 years of coaching,,,,I know ballers.
Especially Alpha's
 

VN Store


Sponsors
 

Top