Scrimmage one: Eh.

#1
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
30,513
Likes
3
#1
Based on what has been written since saturday's scrimmage concluded, it seems to me that the Volunteers are probably not where we were led to believe they were. They are in fact about where most teams trying to insert young pieces into the team chemistry puzzle are at this time....uncertain.

Cal game planning will start next week, so this week's reps will be the deciding factor in how much play the young guys will get in the opener.

Everyone has an opinion right now, including me. Some broad strokes...

-Depth, not quality, is the problem at DT. Stay healthy and the Vols will be a quality defensive line.

-Quality, not depth, looks to be what is holding back the right side of the O-line. Among four or five guys, not one has stood up and shown that the coaches really have no choice but to make them the starter.

-With the obvious truth that Eric Berry is the real thing and ready to be a starter right now, the secondary begins to look more and more like it may just be a force to be reckoned with.

-RB will be fine without LaMarcus, but that doesn't mean they don't need him back. Badly. Coker in the backfield means a pass catcher with good hands and great speed is available to roll out into the slot. This is a good thing because....

-The Wide receivers are just not where they need to be. Yet. I thought that the offseason work with Ainge would have the new guys further along than they are. I should have known better. There is no substitute for the experience of being in full pads, in a scrimmage situation, and having to hear the play, line up properly, and then execute at full speed. Vinson, Jones, Moore, et al will be a joy to watch. Right now though, the veterans are our best hope to consistently move the offense.
 
#2
#2
I don't completely agree.

The defense played well in the scrimmage from what I read, but it sounded like because of the play of the LB's. I think the DT's have a lot to prove still. The UT OL has less experience then the DL, but the DT's didn't dominate them. I think losing Coker is a big loss. I agree about the WR's.
 
#4
#4
We could really struggle this year. We need guys to step up, and right now we are not getting enough of it.
 
#5
#5
I don't completely agree.

The defense played well in the scrimmage from what I read, but it sounded like because of the play of the LB's. I think the DT's have a lot to prove still. They UT OL has less experience then the DL, but the DT's didn't dominate. I think losing Coker is a big loss. I agree about the WR's.
Everyone who comented on the DTs after the practice said they played really well. Just because they didnt make a bunch of tackles dont mean they didnt play well. If they plugged the hole, got double teamed and kept the OL off the LBs they played really well and they did manage to do that.
 
#6
#6
Based on what has been written since saturday's scrimmage concluded, it seems to me that the Volunteers are probably not where we were led to believe they were. They are in fact about where most teams trying to insert young pieces into the team chemistry puzzle are at this time....uncertain.

Cal game planning will start next week, so this week's reps will be the deciding factor in how much play the young guys will get in the opener.

Everyone has an opinion right now, including me. Some broad strokes...

-Depth, not quality, is the problem at DT. Stay healthy and the Vols will be a quality defensive line.

-Quality, not depth, looks to be what is holding back the right side of the O-line. Among four or five guys, not one has stood up and shown that the coaches really have no choice but to make them the starter.

-With the obvious truth that Eric Berry is the real thing and ready to be a starter right now, the secondary begins to look more and more like it may just be a force to be reckoned with.

-RB will be fine without LaMarcus, but that doesn't mean they don't need him back. Badly. Coker in the backfield means a pass catcher with good hands and great speed is available to roll out into the slot. This is a good thing because....

-The Wide receivers are just not where they need to be. Yet. I thought that the offseason work with Ainge would have the new guys further along than they are. I should have known better. There is no substitute for the experience of being in full pads, in a scrimmage situation, and having to hear the play, line up properly, and then execute at full speed. Vinson, Jones, Moore, et al will be a joy to watch. Right now though, the veterans are our best hope to consistently move the offense.


Agreed, talent will eventually catch and overtake experience, will it be before the opener ? doubtful but possible.
 
#7
#7
I think we need to wait for the next scrimmage to see how things shape up. If we've hardly made any improvements then we can start to worry.
 
#8
#8
pretty much agree on all points owh......good stuff as usual. and good points about both the D line and O line......couldn't have said it better myself, though i don't know that i'm as confident in the D Line overall quality as you are, depth certainly seems to be the bigger issue.
 
#9
#9
Everyone who comented on the DTs after the practice said they played really well. Just because they didnt make a bunch of tackles dont mean they didnt play well. If they plugged the hole, got double teamed and kept the OL off the LBs they played really well and they did manage to do that.

UT offensive line is pretty inexperienced, I expected them to have an early advantage. Were you at the scrimmage?
 
#10
#10
I will say again this year.......how can a "top" D1 school have a depth problem? Strong recruiting classes yet we still lack depth! Does this go back to the development issue or........

but thanks OW...nice job as usual!
 
#11
#11
I will say again this year.......how can a "top" D1 school have a depth problem? Strong recruiting classes yet we still lack depth! Does this go back to the development issue or........

but thanks OW...nice job as usual!
It's the development issue. Their just not ready to play Sec football.
 
#12
#12
I will say again this year.......how can a "top" D1 school have a depth problem? Strong recruiting classes yet we still lack depth! Does this go back to the development issue or........

but thanks OW...nice job as usual!
i think development is part of it, but alos when you go back and look at some of those recruiting classes you speak of, how many of those kids are still here? we've had a few instances of folks leaving, getting kicked out or transferring that affected depth and made us move some guys around that we may not have done, except out of need.....

so i'll call it a combination of the two.......
 
#15
#15
No, but i have no reason to believe that people would report false info about how the DTs performed in the scrimmage.

I don't read teammates criticizing other teammates very often.

I've read the same article you have, it's going to take more then 1 scrimmage where the reported best DT records zero tackles to convince me they are now playing great.

Maybe you can live with someone having a different opinion then you.
 
#16
#16
I don't read teammates criticizing other teammates very often.

I've read the same article you have, it's going to take more then 1 scrimmage where the reported best DT records zero tackles to convince me they are now playing great.

Maybe you can live with someone having a different opinion then you.
:blink:wow.......a little trigger happy today Okla?
 
#17
#17
I don't read teammates criticizing other teammates very often.

I've read the same article you have, it's going to take more then 1 scrimmage where the reported best DT records zero tackles to convince me they are now playing great.

Maybe you can live with someone having a different opinion then you.
But im not basing it off of just the scrimmage. During the practices their have been reports that Bolden, Fisher, Mapu, and Williams have all stepped it up big time. Not every DT is going to be Glenn Dorsey and make a bunch of tackles.
 
Advertisement



Back
Top