Preston Williams Updates?

[jpope9]

You have to realize that many posters on this board know nothing about football or how our bodies operate when injured. Unfortunately, they post as if they think are head coaches or Physicians. All they do is let everyone know the limit of their knowledge

That's because a lot of the posters here only injury history consists of a pulled back muscle reaching down for a dorito.

 

[KBVol]

"young" team has nothing to do if they are 17, 18 19. It's about EXPERIENCE. Thread on here a week or so back broke down several teams by the number of FR, SO, JR SR and we were well below on the number of upper classmen starting. We don't have a lot of depth, that's where we hurt the most.

I know that doesn't fit your agenda of hating the coaching staff but facts are facts....:crazy:

Don't hate the coaching staff, at all. I love the job Butch and the staff (except for Azzani) do Sunday through Friday and have ONLY been critical of his gameday management and his excuse-making, primarily regarding the team's relative youth and inexperience, especially in relation to the opponents we've lost to this year.

I also severely dislike when people are dishonest and play loosely with facts when trying to make excuses.....like when Jones says "17 and 18 year olds", when there are literally NO 17 year olds on the team. Or when fans say "we're struggling and not winning because we're playing only with freshmen and sophomores".....when in fact there are juniors and seniors all over the field as well.

So yes, I have an agenda to get people to honestly argue points without the hyperbole and dishonest "facts". Are we young in general? Yes. Are we younger than every team we've played and unable to win because of it? Absolutely not.

 

[Dragon18]

That's because a lot of the posters here only injury history consists of a pulled back muscle reaching down for a dorito.

Overuse thumb injuries from the playstation controller from all the coach training they get from Madden.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

Don't hate the coaching staff, at all. I love the job Butch and the staff (except for Azzani) do Sunday through Friday and have ONLY been critical of his gameday management and his excuse-making, primarily regarding the team's relative youth and inexperience, especially in relation to the opponents we've lost to this year.

I also severely dislike when people are dishonest and play loosely with facts when trying to make excuses.....like when Jones says "17 and 18 year olds", when there are literally NO 17 year olds on the team. Or when fans say "we're struggling and not winning because we're playing only with freshmen and sophomores".....when in fact there are juniors and seniors all over the field as well.

So yes, I have an agenda to get people to honestly argue points without the hyperbole and dishonest "facts". Are we young in general? Yes. Are we younger than every team we've played and unable to win because of it? Absolutely not.

Your criticisms are pathetic. Everyone with half a brain knows were losing to elite teams because our best players are freshmen and sophomores. Yes we start some juniors and seniors. But for the most part those guys are not SEC championship caliber players. It's only our freshmen and sophomore class that are championship caliber.

The whole 17 year old gripe you have is borderline juvenile. Butch has been recruiting these kids since they were 15 years old. I'm sure he doesn't keep up to date with birthday information like you. He simply assumes like the rest of us that if you're a college freshmen you're most likely 17 or 18. I doubt he's going on an intentional misrepresentation campaign. I was personally surprised by the number of 19 year old freshmen we had. I never took Butch's statement as bold face lies. I took them as reasonable assumptions.

 

[sjt18]

"young" team has nothing to do if they are 17, 18 19. It's about EXPERIENCE. Thread on here a week or so back broke down several teams by the number of FR, SO, JR SR and we were well below on the number of upper classmen starting. We don't have a lot of depth, that's where we hurt the most.

I know that doesn't fit your agenda of hating the coaching staff but facts are facts....:crazy:

UT does not have the depth of Bama. Few do. UT DOES have about the same amount of depth as the other SEC teams UT plays this year.

I know that doesn't fit your excuse making agenda... but facts are facts.

Even more, had UT not had an unusually high number of injuries to starters in practice... UT would have more upperclassmen starting and playing.

Injuries to WR's have been the rule, not the exception, for Jones at UT.

 

[08Vol]

Yes you are

No I'm not

 

[sjt18]

Your criticisms are pathetic. Everyone with half a brain knows were losing to elite teams because our best players are freshmen and sophomores.

No. Everyone doesn't know it because it isn't true of UF and OU. Those two losses are the direct result of a coach who did not coach assertively and give his players enough of a chance to win the games. Personally, I think we saw much better vs Arkansas when Jones tried to be more aggressive but didn't get enough plays from WR's. I think he coached one of his best games vs Bama. Had he coached UF and OU like he coached Bama... UT is a 6-2 football team in the East driver's seat.

Yes we start some juniors and seniors. But for the most part those guys are not SEC championship caliber players. It's only our freshmen and sophomore class that are championship caliber.

Nice. Throw players under the bus to protect the coach. Dobbs isn't championship caliber? Kerbyson isn't having a very good Sr year? The coaches have raved about the performance of O Wms, you disagree? We saw the value of McNeil while he was out. Randolph is playing well. JRM?

Be specific... which upperclassmen are so desperately bad that they single handedly cost UT losses.

For that matter, Maggitt was still playing vs UF and OU. Was he not a championship caliber player?

The whole 17 year old gripe you have is borderline juvenile.

No. Your refusal to deal with it IS juvenile.

Butch has been recruiting these kids since they were 15 years old. I'm sure he doesn't keep up to date with birthday information like you. He simply assumes like the rest of us that if you're a college freshmen you're most likely 17 or 18.

Most states require a kid to be school age before Sept 1 if not before to enter. That means almost NO college Fr are 17. So to assume that.... is blatantly stupid.

I doubt he's going on an intentional misrepresentation campaign. I was personally surprised by the number of 19 year old freshmen we had. I never took Butch's statement as bold face lies. I took them as reasonable assumptions.

No. He employed hyperbole in an effort to make an excuse of youth.

Injuries are a MUCH bigger problem for this team than youth. Jones seldom mentions it probably because he doesn't want anyone comparing his injuries to other programs...

 

[08Vol]

Your criticisms are pathetic. Everyone with half a brain knows were losing to elite teams because our best players are freshmen and sophomores. Yes we start some juniors and seniors. But for the most part those guys are not SEC championship caliber players. It's only our freshmen and sophomore class that are championship caliber.

The whole 17 year old gripe you have is borderline juvenile. Butch has been recruiting these kids since they were 15 years old. I'm sure he doesn't keep up to date with birthday information like you. He simply assumes like the rest of us that if you're a college freshmen you're most likely 17 or 18. I doubt he's going on an intentional misrepresentation campaign. I was personally surprised by the number of 19 year old freshmen we had. I never took Butch's statement as bold face lies. I took them as reasonable assumptions.

So the 4* players that Butch recruited the last 2 years are that much better than the 4* players he recruited in his 1st year? Randolph who picked off Bama and won us the UGA game isn't a good enough player to be on a championship team? The fact is that the recent recruiting classes have been so highly ranked due to the quantity of players. Then you have 7 4*s leave from the 2014 class and that ranking drops to mid SEC range

 

[jasonvol18]

No it doesn't!!!!! It has to do with us having to play 17-18 year olds against 20-21 year olds who have had a couple of years in the weight room. And to make things worse, those 17-18 year olds have to play most of the snaps with lack of depth. It's getting better but not totally there yet. If you don't like the Vols, go somewhere else and cheer.

Don't believe that is it at all. Our receivers have stayed injured off and son since Butch and CZA got here. It hasn't just been the FR it's been older players too. They use our Receivers to do a lot of blocking during the game and I'm sure they practice it often. There has been a pattern of injuries with our receivers since they got here.

 

[Volosaurus rex]

So the 4* players that Butch recruited the last 2 years are that much better than the 4* players he recruited in his 1st year? Randolph who picked off Bama and won us the UGA game isn't a good enough player to be on a championship team? The fact is that the recent recruiting classes have been so highly ranked due to the quantity of players. Then you have 7 4*s leave from the 2014 class and that ranking drops to mid SEC range

The bold-font statement simply is not true. Rivals, for example, only counts the top 20-ranked recruits per team. In that 2014 class, we had more four-star recruits (16) than anyone in the country. As for five-star recruits, we had two; only Texas A&M, Auburn, FSU and Alabama had more. Furthermore, there are typically only ca. 30-32 five-star recruits per year. If you want to talk about ranking per signee, our average (3.65) trailed only USC, Texas A&M, Ohio State, LSU and Alabama. See Yahoo Sports: Rivals.com 2014 Team Recruiting Rankings.

As for the attrition suffered from that class, it has, indeed, been quicker than normal, but a reliable rule of thumb is that 35-40% of the signees from a given recruiting class will not complete their eligibility at the university with whom they originally signed. See the data presented by LWSVOL for 2002-2015 at: http://www.volnation.com/forum/tennessee-vols-football/247610-attrition-2.html. Of the 4,856 persons who signed Letters of Intent with SEC schools during that period, 1,912 (39%) were casualties of attrition.

 

[Dragon18]

UT does not have the depth of Bama. Few do. UT DOES have about the same amount of depth as the other SEC teams UT plays this year.

I know that doesn't fit your excuse making agenda... but facts are facts.

Even more, had UT not had an unusually high number of injuries to starters in practice... UT would have more upperclassmen starting and playing.

Injuries to WR's have been the rule, not the exception, for Jones at UT.

This is simply not a fact. If you define depth as having the same number of scholarship players (85) you are correct, but when you play as many young players as we have, and I have outlined this in real numbers on a thread a few weeks ago, you can't say our depth is comparable to the better teams in the SEC. Our depth, as defined above, is simply not as developed and has not spent as much time in a college football program.

Now... to address the BS excuse moniker that you and several others like to bandy about when someone brings up youth I will add that it is not THE reason that we win or lose games. However, you really show your lack of understanding of football at this level of play if you discount that it is a factor in outcomes. Your a business man SJT and you should know that your veteran personnel are much better equipped to handle the varieties of situations that come up in the workplace. College football is like this except it's $4iploads faster.

Your post above is just another example of you claiming fact to fit your narrative when it simply is not fact. Calling it a fact just doesn't make it one. Please refer to the "is UT the best team in the state thread" to look at the true analytical facts of the above statements.

 

[wtorange]

This is a common misconception our fans like to throw out. It's a way to justify how bad we've been. Our talent did drop during the Dooley years, but it never fell below UK or Vandy. Heck during the 2013 Vandy game we started 13 or 14 4* recruits to Vandy's 1

No we didn't start that many 4 stars in the game. We certainly had higher rated players than Vandy but the 13-14 to figure is not true.

 

[KBVol]

Your criticisms are pathetic. Everyone with half a brain knows were losing to elite teams because our best players are freshmen and sophomores. Yes we start some juniors and seniors. But for the most part those guys are not SEC championship caliber players. It's only our freshmen and sophomore class that are championship caliber.

The whole 17 year old gripe you have is borderline juvenile. Butch has been recruiting these kids since they were 15 years old. I'm sure he doesn't keep up to date with birthday information like you. He simply assumes like the rest of us that if you're a college freshmen you're most likely 17 or 18. I doubt he's going on an intentional misrepresentation campaign. I was personally surprised by the number of 19 year old freshmen we had. I never took Butch's statement as bold face lies. I took them as reasonable assumptions.

No, my criticisms are legitimate. The current talent/starters/2 deep on our team is spread across our different classes....senior, junior, soph and freshmen....and when compared to the competition/opponents we've played, is very comparable. And when Jones refers to our team as the "17 and 18 year olds" and ignorant, agenda-driven fans like you constantly push the notion that "we're playing all freshmen and sophomores" .... IMHO, that's what's pathetic. How about having an honest debate about the true makeup of our roster, rather engaging in all the hyperbole? That'd be a nice change.

 

[IndianapolisVol]

No we didn't start that many 4 stars in the game. We certainly had higher rated players than Vandy but the 13-14 to figure is not true.

Yes it is. Double check, pal.

 

[KBVol]

This is simply not a fact. If you define depth as having the same number of scholarship players (85) you are correct, but when you play as many young players as we have, and I have outlined this in real numbers on a thread a few weeks ago, you can't say our depth is comparable to the better teams in the SEC. Our depth, as defined above, is simply not as developed and has not spent as much time in a college football program.

Now... to address the BS excuse moniker that you and several others like to bandy about when someone brings up youth I will add that it is not THE reason that we win or lose games. However, you really show your lack of understanding of football at this level of play if you discount that it is a factor in outcomes. Your a business man SJT and you should know that your veteran personnel are much better equipped to handle the varieties of situations that come up in the workplace. College football is like this except it's $4iploads faster.

Your post above is just another example of you claiming fact to fit your narrative when it simply is not fact. Calling it a fact just doesn't make it one. Please refer to the "is UT the best team in the state thread" to look at the true analytical facts of the above statements.

Rather than just disagreeing and making simple, inaccurate statements, how about backing it up with actual stats/data/roster comparisons. For example, while both Georgia and Bama have older, more experienced rosters....Oklahoma and Florida do not. Forgive me if I don't just take your word for it without any supporting evidence.

 

[Vols2DaWall]

Soooo...about PW?

 

[VolFootballIsLife]

Our injuries will not decrease as long as we have this Big East coaching staff that doesn't understand how to run practices at the SEC level. How many years will it take for fans to realize these injuries have a lot to do with coaching?

This is the biggest head scratching post I've seen in awhile. I would love to see the explanation of what an SEC practice looks like and how UTs is different.

 

[Dragon18]

You guys hang your hats way too much on star ratings post enrollment. It is very true that star rating gives a great indicator of how successful a player will be in college, but a 4* freshman or true soph will not be as efficient a player as jr or senior 3* that has been in a healthy program that develops players and holds them accountable for growth. Butch did inherit many 4* players. They were 4* players that were never developed or even held accountable to show up for strength and conditioning in the offseason. And boy did it ever show! I would have taken Pinkel's 3* in a heartbeat. There is a reason that many players have left this program and it's not because Butch is mean. It's because there is intensity and accountability in everything they do and some can't hack it.

That's my take and it is showing on the field in the way these guys play and it will show in the won/loss column going forward.

 

[Dragon18]

Rather than just disagreeing and making simple, inaccurate statements, how about backing it up with actual stats/data/roster comparisons. For example, while both Georgia and Bama have older, more experienced rosters....Oklahoma and Florida do not. Forgive me if I don't just take your word for it without any supporting evidence.

Already done. Reference the thread were I posted that data.

KB if you take the time to go look at that data with an open mind it really is surprising. I didn't think the comparison would show as much of a variance as it did. Even with Florida.

 

[Volview]

Soooo...about PW?

Agreed, You would think a PW update thread would talk about...PW:crazy:

 

[VolFootballIsLife]

Rather than just disagreeing and making simple, inaccurate statements, how about backing it up with actual stats/data/roster comparisons. For example, while both Georgia and Bama have older, more experienced rosters....Oklahoma and Florida do not. Forgive me if I don't just take your word for it without any supporting evidence.

Ha. Where is your supporting evidence regarding this vague at best reference to the FLA and OU inexperience. I'm not taking sides but find this post ironic.

UF starts (7) Jr's and (3) Srs on D
OU start (6) Jrs and (2) Srs on D whole also starting (3) Jrs and (4) Srs on O.

By comparison - depending on the week I suppose - UT starts (4) Jrs and (3) Srs on D and only (3) Jrs and (1) Sr on O

Those are facts...and the supporting evidence that you, yourself are lacking.

 

[wtorange]

Yes it is. Double check, pal.

Yep we started 9 or 10 depending on the service.

 

[HalfullVol]

er, um, IS P WILLY PLAYIN'?

:banghead2:

 

[VolFootballIsLife]

# of underclassmen on the 2 deep:

Tennessee:
Offense - 13
Defense - 14
Over 60%

Florida:
Offense - 15
Defense - 7
50%

Oklahoma
Offense - 12
Defense - 11
52%

 

[Dragon18]

# of underclassmen on the 2 deep:

Tennessee:
Offense - 13
Defense - 14
Over 60%

Florida:
Offense - 15
Defense - 7
50%

Oklahoma
Offense - 12
Defense - 11
52%

Thanks for digging all that up again. What was also really surprising to me within those numbers was how many true soph and freshman are playing. Those are guys that haven't even had two full years in the program. Like I said before it is not THE reason we have lost 4 games this year but it is uninformed to believe it is not a factor.