Should Tim Banks be replaced at end of season?

DERELICK_MY_VOLS

WARNING : READER AGGRESSION IS ADVISED
Joined
Jan 16, 2010
Messages
8,102
Likes
4,066
Banks isn’t the problem. Having no bodies to keep rotating in is the problem. Guy calls a Hell of a game each week. Fresh legs to blitz, hold the line of scrimmage, etc…they were just as bad of a match up for us as we were for them. Only difference is we couldn’t get off the field on 3rd downs. It’s like we had great calls but they just executed better. Rubber legs will cause that.
 

VolinMichigan

Lifelong member of the Good Guys Club
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
4,398
Likes
2,332
Considering he inherited a defense with half the scholarship players transferred out, I’d say let the guy recruit and fill out the roster before deciding to fire him. Vol nation never disappoints.
 

wmcovol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2012
Messages
13,554
Likes
21,055
Everyone here expected a disaster this year on defense. It’s not been anything close to that. Things have got tough recently as the shortcomings of this defense has been exposed. Still, the defense made a big play to separate from Ky last night & made the final stop.

The defense rarely gives up a big play, isn’t subject to complete busts that gives the opponent 7 pts. That’s good coaching.

TN could have Donahue, Brother Oliver & Kirby Smart as DC and the same problems exist.
 

rickyyrs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
4,979
Likes
1,649
Yes, I know, my VN friends: (1) "We just won a big game, why go negative?" (I'm not being negative, this is just a question in direct response to our objectively bad defensive play) (2) "The D just had a huge TOP discrepancy, they were gassed!" (Agreed, but were they partly gassed because our coaching scheme didn't get them off the field?) (3) "We are low on scholarships and bodies who can play!" Yes, again, I know all that. My question (and it's just a question, not a call for a march on the athletic facility with torches or for a nocturnal visit to the rock with spray paint) is this: DOES TIM BANKS's DEFENSIVE SCHEME HOLD US BACK? Are we going to be able get to the next level with this lack of pressure from our 3 man rushes and infrequent blitzing or stunting, combined with a soft zone in the second and third levels? This impotent combo seems to give the opposing QB that extra second to find the receiver who turns and sits down in a hole in the secondary or breaks into a gap between our flat-footed DBs.

So do we stick with our guy and hit the portal for better players? Or do we find a coach with a better scheme (and still hit that portal)?
No he should not be let go. I think the guy has done a great job. With injuries and people that left the program. What he has to work with, he has done a great job. If you told me at start of the season this team has a chance to win 7 games i would of thought you were crazy. This coaching staff has less talent than Pruitt had. But these coaches are coaching them up like you should.
 

MaxVolnGA

Lynchburg Barrel Roller
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
354
Likes
712
VN let's just talk football here. Answer my OP if you have an answer. Move on if you don't. No need to get strangely aggressive out of nowhere.
Simple really.
Next Saturday at roughly 2:30EST, make your way down close to the field at Neyland.
Take a look at the inbred, shiteatinmutt’s LB & DL group during warm ups.
Then make your way to the other end of the field and take a look at TN’s.
Then grasshopper your knowledge will be complete.
 
Likes: tennesseeduke

tennesseeduke

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2012
Messages
6,777
Likes
6,573
Yes, I know, my VN friends: (1) "We just won a big game, why go negative?" (I'm not being negative, this is just a question in direct response to our objectively bad defensive play) (2) "The D just had a huge TOP discrepancy, they were gassed!" (Agreed, but were they partly gassed because our coaching scheme didn't get them off the field?) (3) "We are low on scholarships and bodies who can play!" Yes, again, I know all that. My question (and it's just a question, not a call for a march on the athletic facility with torches or for a nocturnal visit to the rock with spray paint) is this: DOES TIM BANKS's DEFENSIVE SCHEME HOLD US BACK? Are we going to be able get to the next level with this lack of pressure from our 3 man rushes and infrequent blitzing or stunting, combined with a soft zone in the second and third levels? This impotent combo seems to give the opposing QB that extra second to find the receiver who turns and sits down in a hole in the secondary or breaks into a gap between our flat-footed DBs.

So do we stick with our guy and hit the portal for better players? Or do we find a coach with a better scheme (and still hit that portal)?
Wow seriously? The defense played the whole game! 99 plays
 

VolByBirth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Messages
734
Likes
103
Banks is the man. If he had just an ounce of LB depth that could assist in stopping the QB run we’d be a two loss team. A two loss team in a first year with a decimated roster. Give that guy a raise.
As for last night specifically, I think he went off his game plan. He knew they were going to be on the field a long time and he didn’t dial up the pressure to save stamina. I don’t know if that was the right call but the man can coach and inspire a team. When we dialed it up at the end we got the stops we needed.
 

tennesseeduke

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2012
Messages
6,777
Likes
6,573
Yes, I know, my VN friends: (1) "We just won a big game, why go negative?" (I'm not being negative, this is just a question in direct response to our objectively bad defensive play) (2) "The D just had a huge TOP discrepancy, they were gassed!" (Agreed, but were they partly gassed because our coaching scheme didn't get them off the field?) (3) "We are low on scholarships and bodies who can play!" Yes, again, I know all that. My question (and it's just a question, not a call for a march on the athletic facility with torches or for a nocturnal visit to the rock with spray paint) is this: DOES TIM BANKS's DEFENSIVE SCHEME HOLD US BACK? Are we going to be able get to the next level with this lack of pressure from our 3 man rushes and infrequent blitzing or stunting, combined with a soft zone in the second and third levels? This impotent combo seems to give the opposing QB that extra second to find the receiver who turns and sits down in a hole in the secondary or breaks into a gap between our flat-footed DBs.

So do we stick with our guy and hit the portal for better players? Or do we find a coach with a better scheme (and still hit that portal)?
Give Banks a raise!
 
Likes: papatomany

JC61

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2014
Messages
1,432
Likes
743
I'll offer this....if you look at overall stats (easy to do), Levis, Rodriguez and Smoke were about at their statistical average (completion %, yards per carry) in conference play. Levis probably ran for more than normal but otherwise the D kept their backfield about where it normally plays. A couple of their WR did seem to have better nights on occasion.

What does it mean....likely not much, but given the fact UK had the ball for 2/3 of the game they were bound to score and have more yardage than what we thought was normal. Don't think that means Banks needs to go, but we do need more speed and depth which may help the D get off the field.
 

VN Store




Top