Merged "My Take on the game" threads

#26
#26
volchick1 said:
The complete and utter lack of pressure on Longshore astounded me. I've become a bit accustomed to Chavis's D giving up the 3rd and longs, but I was shocked at how ineffective the defense was...and the missed tackles?...or should I say the flag football arm slaps some of our guys were trying instead of tackling......
Click to expand...

I was surprised to learn that in the four games before Cal, UT had only one sack. So now it's one in five. In light of that, the lack of pressure on Longshore isn't really surprising. Let's hope Ben Martin is ready to go soon.
 
#27
#27
k-sny-vol said:
This is all ive got to say..
ONCE OUR DEFENSIVE LINE IMPROVES, I GUARANTEE, AND I MEAN GUARANTEE THAT OUR WHOLE DEFENSE WILL IMPROVE VASTLY!! AND I MEAN THAT OUR D-LINE WILL HAVE TO SACK THE QB AT LEAST ONCE A GAME, AND GET AT LEAST 3 TACKLES FOR LOSSES. THATS NOT ASKING FOR TOO MUCH COMPARED TO UT'S PAST DEFENSES!! SO BASICALLY, IT ALL STARTS WITH OUR D-LINE! OUR LB'S WILL IMPROVE GREATLY ONCE THE D-LINE PUTS PRESSURE ON THE QB AND MAKES THE RB JUKE OUT OF THE BACKFIELD.. THAT WAY OUR LB'S CAN USE THEIR AWESOME ATHLETICISM AND BRING DOWN THE RB'S WITHIN JUST FIVE YARD.. OR USUALLY WITHIN JUST 3 YARDS! AND ONCE WE GET PRESSURE ON THE QB OUR SPEED-AHOLIC DB'S WILL GET SOME INTERCEPTIONS!!
SO YEA, IT WILL ALL, AND I MEAN ALL OUR DEFENSE WILL IMPROVE ONCE OUR D-LINE STEPS UP!!!
Click to expand...

Our D-line has been headed downward slowly since 2001 with the brief exception of 2004, and more specifically, 2005.
 
#28
#28
Unfortunately for us our Defensive line is the worst in the Fulmer era, and will continue to be so all year with low depth (and how they badly they did last year, it's probably only worse now).

The rest of our defense looked okay, but they can't do anything if Longshore gets 5 seconds to pick one of his huge athletic targets. Notice that those three beautiful defensive stands in the third were the only times the whole game any pressure was applied to Longshore, and he looked absolutely awful. He's overinflated, and if we'd ever gotten to him, we would've beat Cal handily. Our Secondary could only cover those guys for so long, so of course they looked bad.

Fortunately for us, the offense kind of looked like they knew what they were doing. The running game was fine, but we stopped running of course because we were down by 14 and had to pass. That passing didn't work because Ainge didn't have time to throw because there was no running game. Our gameplan at that point was completely exposed, useless, and done with. We should've ended up with 38 points and no more. We couldn't do much better with the players we have.

Our recievers looked exactly the same as they did in the preseason, and we couldn't go downfield because Ainge never had that much time to throw. The questionable decision here was to put Vinson in. That was basically the only thing I saw all night that I thought was absolutely stupid (besides kicking to Jackson at any point, but that's Colquitt's fault, not the coaches).

Our Special teams was kind of awful, letting Cal get to the 35 all day, but with the new rules I didn't see a team in all of college football that started a drive after a kickoff below their 20 yardline.

This loss is entirely the D-Line's fault. It sucks that our receivers can't be any better, but at least we have our best positions coach guiding them. The rest of the defense never had a chance because the D-line could never stop the run or the pass, an essential factor of Chavis's defense. You have to stop one or the other. Hopefully they'll get better. If they don't, yeah, this season will probably be pretty poor in the SEC.

What it means for the future is that I can't wait for Creer, Coleman, and Berry down the road (and maybe one of these wideouts). And I hope this recruiting class gets some goooooooooooood linemen.

Seacrest, Out
 
#30
#30
It keeps coming back to the D-line, and with good reason. Without pressure on the QB, even Penn State's rifleman could become a sniper. Oh, wait. . . . Hard to fault the LBs and secondary, with the exception of their poor tackling.

So, what does last night "tell" us? That not much has changed.
 
#31
#31
The talk about the lb athleticism is pathetic as well if they were so athletic then on one play late their center took out 3 people why because they were not where they should've been. I just don't understand I don't think the lack of d completely falls on fulmer we have to look at chavis too. don't get me wrong i love chavis. so that's what i don't understand we know he can coach and develop players so why haven't any developed over the last few years
 
#32
#32
1. Columnists on this side of the country have been spouting off for years now about how the offensive speed in the Pac-10 has caught up with the defensive speed of the SEC. Me, being the big Pac-10 apologist that I am, was somewhat inclined to agree with them. I had a hard time believing people in the south are just somehow magically stronger and faster than people on the west coast. After Saturday's game, and given that Cal's talent level is closer to most of the Pac-10 rather than USC, what are your honest opinions on Pac-10 football in comparison to the SEC?

2. The no-huddle went pretty well against Cal, but here's something that I noticed... I was listening to the VN LIVE pre-game show, and Larkin and Freak made a comparison of what we might be running to how we ran the no-huddle under Sanders. As most of you know, when we had Ainge and Schaeffer running the offense as true freshmen, they ran up to the line, got the call from Sanders and went from there. What we expected was Ainge to run up to the line, call the play himself, make the proper adjustments and go. Well, as we all saw, it felt Sanders-esque. I got vivid memories of '04 watching the offense run. Do you think it will continue to work in the SEC, and if so, what adjustments, if any, does the team need to make?

3. Many people on here are complaining about how we got pushed around in the trenches by Cal. In case you guys need reminded, Jeff Tedford's Cal teams have never been short in talent on the offensive line. This year is no different, with two seniors and three juniors, one of which may very well be the best offensive linemen in the country this year. I honestly feel they will be as good as any SEC offensive line we face this year. The jury is still out on the offensive line, because as we know, Cal's defensive front seven is nothing special. It looked about the same as last year; decent pass blocking, not much on the run support. Our RB's are having to make their own plays most of the time. I know it sounds crazy, but we may have to institute a FB and do a lot of outside running to win in the SEC.

4. More of a personal note to Cal's football team... I've probably hated on them more often than most of you here. I've called them an embarrassment to the Pac-10. I openly defended them in '04, saying that they got screwed out of the Rose Bowl, then they lost to Texas Tech. They did not help their case any by having a piss-poor showing in Knoxville last year. But they have redeemed themselves. A Jeff Tedford team actually came into a big game fired up and well-prepared, something I didn't think was actually possible. If they make this type of thing a consistent habit, I may yet gain some respect for them.

I'll let the rest of this thread go as a forum for you guys to post your thoughts in relation to my talking points. I'm only going to reply in this thread if you guys specifically ask me to do so.
 
#33
#33
I think everything is really dependent on how Tennessee does with the rest of the season. If we have a good SEC showing, then Cal (and the Pac-10) really accomplished something. If UT finishes fourth in the East... not so much.
 
#34
#34
1. I don't think that I've ever thought the SEC was any faster than the Pac 10 just the Big Ten. My problem is they don't play much defense out there.

I still feel the SEC is better than the Pac 10. I mean Cal finished second in the Pac 10 last year and we laid it to them and we were the fifth best team in the league. This year they beat us and in all likelyhood will finish second in the Pac 10 again and we will probably finish fifth again.

2. I thought the no-huddle worked out well and I think we will continue to use it with success in the SEC. Maybe Ainge will make more of the calls himself as the season wears on or maybe more at home.

3. I think our OL is slightly better than last year. Our DL according to Fulmer played decent except for no pressure on the QB. Not sure what this means.

4. Honestly I think this was a one time thing for them. They had all summer to get up for us and get revenge, which they did. Maybe they will do this again, but I think the timing of it had more to do with it than anything. We were their first opponent so they had 8 months to get fired up for it. If it had been any other game (like in the middle of the season) then they would have never been able to steam all summer like they did b/c their concentration would have to be on the first game.
 
#35
#35
kptvol said:
I think everything is really dependent on how Tennessee does with the rest of the season. If we have a good SEC showing, then Cal (and the Pac-10) really accomplished something. If UT finishes fourth in the East... not so much.
Click to expand...


That would make sense, but this logic certainly wasn't applied last year. When Cal won most of their games after the blowout at Tennessee, the media construed the Cal loss as a fluke. The anti-SEC trolling, especially at ESPN, is insufferable. I assure you that even if we win 100% of our games from now on, they'll keep talking about the Cal loss as evidence that the PAC-10 is better than the SEC. They'll give Cal even more credit for beating what was obviously a green defense. Either way, we lose. Trust me, they will NOT allow us redemption, even if we actually accomplish it.
 
#36
#36
Cal's Oline only allowed 12 sacks all year. tedford keeps the back and TE in a lot, so it's hard to say how good youre back is. Even SC and UCLA (two guys with over 10 sacks) didnt get much pressure on us. We'll see how good you guys are next week and against florida.
 
#37
#37
My question is what does the team learn from this game and how can we make some defensive adjustments thats gonna keep us alive and viable in the SEC. After seeing what Appy did to Michigan doesn't make me feel to good about scheduling "cupcake" games as a warm up for Florida as we normally do. Not that I believe we would loose but with the many questions the Cal game raised about our defense you cant help but question. On the offense, I think if we can hang 38 on teams the rest of the year with an improved defense then we might just make a run for the SEC title.....:ermm:
 
#38
#38
SEC is still the best, the Pac 10 has caught up... I also think the SEC will be much stronger next year than this year.
 
#39
#39
Next week it will be hard to gauge anything. I'm not looking forward to Gainesville, but I expect to see a better team with more speed.
 
#40
#40
1. I've never seen the PAC-10 as weak. They always have good speed. California in general produces a lot of the top high school talent to stay in state. But, they don't spread around the Pac10. They hit a couple of the top teams then head out of state/conf.

2. I didn't see Cal. as being that much better than us. In spite of our lack luster defense, we also put up 31 on them. 2 touchdowns in a game like that at home for them was not that much of a national statement.

3. We put up our points on Cal on mostly running and passing underneath under 20 yards. They have along way to go as well, but are good. I'm not going to attempt to qualify their win. They played football Saturday, and came out on top.

4. We never really tried to see if we could go deep. Maybe twice. That's not enough. That's not how you develop a deep threat.

5. We got back in the game and immediately changed our play calling away from what got us back in the game. That did not surprise me. Typical. We went from aggressive to protective and were still behind.
 
#41
#41
milohimself said:
1. Columnists on this side of the country have been spouting off for years now about how the offensive speed in the Pac-10 has caught up with the defensive speed of the SEC. Me, being the big Pac-10 apologist that I am, was somewhat inclined to agree with them. I had a hard time believing people in the south are just somehow magically stronger and faster than people on the west coast. After Saturday's game, and given that Cal's talent level is closer to most of the Pac-10 rather than USC, what are your honest opinions on Pac-10 football in comparison to the SEC?

2. The no-huddle went pretty well against Cal, but here's something that I noticed... I was listening to the VN LIVE pre-game show, and Larkin and Freak made a comparison of what we might be running to how we ran the no-huddle under Sanders. As most of you know, when we had Ainge and Schaeffer running the offense as true freshmen, they ran up to the line, got the call from Sanders and went from there. What we expected was Ainge to run up to the line, call the play himself, make the proper adjustments and go. Well, as we all saw, it felt Sanders-esque. I got vivid memories of '04 watching the offense run. Do you think it will continue to work in the SEC, and if so, what adjustments, if any, does the team need to make?

3. Many people on here are complaining about how we got pushed around in the trenches by Cal. In case you guys need reminded, Jeff Tedford's Cal teams have never been short in talent on the offensive line. This year is no different, with two seniors and three juniors, one of which may very well be the best offensive linemen in the country this year. I honestly feel they will be as good as any SEC offensive line we face this year. The jury is still out on the offensive line, because as we know, Cal's defensive front seven is nothing special. It looked about the same as last year; decent pass blocking, not much on the run support. Our RB's are having to make their own plays most of the time. I know it sounds crazy, but we may have to institute a FB and do a lot of outside running to win in the SEC.

4. More of a personal note to Cal's football team... I've probably hated on them more often than most of you here. I've called them an embarrassment to the Pac-10. I openly defended them in '04, saying that they got screwed out of the Rose Bowl, then they lost to Texas Tech. They did not help their case any by having a piss-poor showing in Knoxville last year. But they have redeemed themselves. A Jeff Tedford team actually came into a big game fired up and well-prepared, something I didn't think was actually possible. If they make this type of thing a consistent habit, I may yet gain some respect for them.

I'll let the rest of this thread go as a forum for you guys to post your thoughts in relation to my talking points. I'm only going to reply in this thread if you guys specifically ask me to do so.
Click to expand...
It is nice to get a post with a little more"reasonable substance' Milo.I think Cal is probably as quick as any SEC team on offense.The difference I see would be LSU or Florida's quickness on defense and their toughness.My Big 10 brother in law stated days prior to the UT/CAL game that Cal had actually only lost, that to USC since we beat them last year.I knew they weren't a pushover team.I don't hate Cal as some on here do.My nephew goes to Cal/Riverside,neice graduated from UCLA.I'm not getting all worked up about this one game.Also, just wanted to state, what scares me sometimes about all the hate on this board is UT recruits looking in and getting a bad taste in their mouth.
 
#42
#42
I learned that Cal is really fast.

It was a loss on the road against a top 20 team. I don't think all is lost in Knoxville. The Vols did show some good things Saturday. Heck, I thought it was over when Cal went up by 17. The goaline stand definately hurt early in the second half, but the Vols came back and had chances to tie the game. Ainge looked very good. There were some positives.
 
#43
#43
1. In general, I do think that the SEC has more speed top to bottom, meaning Mississippi State or Vandy likely have more speed than Arizona or Stanford. I definitely underestimated Cal's speed.

2. I didn't think the offense was "Sanders-esque" because it was highly effective and included your typical one Cutcliff brain fart (the unsuccessful goal line series), as apposed to Sanders' FB draws on 3rd and long. They will struggle in the SEC, at one or many points, because Cal isn't the best defense we will face, not even close.

3. Not sure if your asking anything here, but I thought our OL played pretty darn good, but again, who knows about that Cal defense. As for the Cal OL, I just don't see how you go from pure domination ('05) to dominated ('06), after 12 games and an offseason. What every happened to the 1990's when UT would just reload their lost talent, at every position?

4. Cal was the best team Saturday night. They physically man handled to Vols, but more importantly, they made big plays (even on D) and the Vols did not (especially on D).

Good thread Milo.
 
#45
#45
Can anyone update us on the Phil's take on the game and the path forward will be, key palyers, those that may move up to play more? I have not read anything regarding his analysis of the game......or is he still studying the heck out of the game film? Thanks.
 
#46
#46
milohimself said:
1. Columnists on this side of the country have been spouting off for years now about how the offensive speed in the Pac-10 has caught up with the defensive speed of the SEC. Me, being the big Pac-10 apologist that I am, was somewhat inclined to agree with them. I had a hard time believing people in the south are just somehow magically stronger and faster than people on the west coast. After Saturday's game, and given that Cal's talent level is closer to most of the Pac-10 rather than USC, what are your honest opinions on Pac-10 football in comparison to the SEC?

2. The no-huddle went pretty well against Cal, but here's something that I noticed... I was listening to the VN LIVE pre-game show, and Larkin and Freak made a comparison of what we might be running to how we ran the no-huddle under Sanders. As most of you know, when we had Ainge and Schaeffer running the offense as true freshmen, they ran up to the line, got the call from Sanders and went from there. What we expected was Ainge to run up to the line, call the play himself, make the proper adjustments and go. Well, as we all saw, it felt Sanders-esque. I got vivid memories of '04 watching the offense run. Do you think it will continue to work in the SEC, and if so, what adjustments, if any, does the team need to make?

3. Many people on here are complaining about how we got pushed around in the trenches by Cal. In case you guys need reminded, Jeff Tedford's Cal teams have never been short in talent on the offensive line. This year is no different, with two seniors and three juniors, one of which may very well be the best offensive linemen in the country this year. I honestly feel they will be as good as any SEC offensive line we face this year. The jury is still out on the offensive line, because as we know, Cal's defensive front seven is nothing special. It looked about the same as last year; decent pass blocking, not much on the run support. Our RB's are having to make their own plays most of the time. I know it sounds crazy, but we may have to institute a FB and do a lot of outside running to win in the SEC.

4. More of a personal note to Cal's football team... I've probably hated on them more often than most of you here. I've called them an embarrassment to the Pac-10. I openly defended them in '04, saying that they got screwed out of the Rose Bowl, then they lost to Texas Tech. They did not help their case any by having a piss-poor showing in Knoxville last year. But they have redeemed themselves. A Jeff Tedford team actually came into a big game fired up and well-prepared, something I didn't think was actually possible. If they make this type of thing a consistent habit, I may yet gain some respect for them.

I'll let the rest of this thread go as a forum for you guys to post your thoughts in relation to my talking points. I'm only going to reply in this thread if you guys specifically ask me to do so.
Click to expand...
1. I don't think there is any doubut that Cal's offensive speed, espeically outside, is significantly faster than ours. would it be a good comparison to say the Pac 10 is now faster than the SEC as a whole? probably not. but you could probably take Cal and USC and put them up against FL, LSU, GA etc...and it'd be at least comparable. but at the end of the day, i'd point more to TN simply not having speed right now than anything else.

2. i felt the same way. he's a sr, why are checking the sidelines? it felt like 04 all over again.......

3. Again, i think it has more to do with the fact that we have historically had D lines that get push, regardless. if our D line was good at all, you'd at least expect the match up to have more of a 50/50 relationship. we got no sacks. 1 hurry and allowed 230 yards rushing. our d line is bad. period.

4. it'll be interesting from a Cal perspective to see how this game plays out at the end of the season. IF TN tanks it' the rest of the way, it probably won't help them as much. but for now, it's the first big game they've won in several years and they'll ride this for a while....no doubt. lots of chest thumping to be done in the bay area right now.
 
#47
#47
SEC vs Pac-10. The Pac-10 just has the teams at the top and thats it. The SEC hurts themselves because they beat each other up and keep each other out of the National Title Game excuse me BCS Championship Game. The Pac-10 has about 3-4 teams that sit at the top while the others are in the dredges of society.
 
#48
#48
They can give cal all the props they want.But when they play a team that can actually pressure longshore,then you will see what cal is made of.Cal has great speed and talent offensively.But we made them look far better than what they are i believe.We gave them 14 points off the fumble and the punt return.Now as bad as our defense played you take those two plays out of it and we might have walked out of there with a win.
 
#49
#49
Defensive line is where ut is hurting not the linebackers,secondary
we have not been stocking up there for a few years now and it
has cought up with us. cals o-line was able to get out on our
linebackers all night. no pass rush and just totalty blown off the ball
and cals supposedly had a revamped line.we are going to have to just suck it up this year and go out get 8 or 9 of thease guys
for the future. if you look at other sec schools they bring in 4 or
5 D-Lineman every year. and thats just tackles.
 
#50
#50
I don't know what game you were watching, but I saw our Lbs and secondary miss tackles left and right. There is a problem somewhere.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top