Should Tim Banks be replaced at end of season?

[bpalmer28]

Doug Mathews today called last night the worst zone defense he's ever seen. When we finally blitzed late in 4th qtr we got three sacks. Wonder how it woulda worked if we'd blitzed a lot sooner

Maybe that would have given them time to adjust and we lose? Who knows. Rough game defensively but our DL was completely outmatched yet we found a way to get stops when it mattered and won the game

 

[cobbwebb0710]

No defensive coordinator alive will be able to actually THRIVE in this system. Too much time spent on the field due to the quick strike offense. So I think the judgement standards will need to be a little lower.

LMAO! That’s a very good point! We better just be glad that we have a guy who wants to be here and is just crazy enough and ballsy enough to want to be Heupel’s D coordinator!
I bet Banks has aged 10 years in the past 9 games.
GBO!!

 

[Woke]

Hell. No.

 

[cobbwebb0710]

You better start(hopefully they already have been) building the culture/mindset in the defensive room. Start putting that chip on the shoulders of these guys and making it a sense of pride, because I don’t know if there’s many recruits that want to hear,”come to Tennessee where you’re gonna be on the field for 90+ plays and you will continually be thrown to the wolves and have a continuous pressure put on you!” And by the way, “we’ll give you 37 seconds of rest in between each defensive series.”
GBO!!

 

[ALStateLineVol]

Well after 13 pages I think we have a resounding NO!!! I'm in agreement too!!
Go Vols!!

 

[Volnuck]

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!!!!! We will get better defensive players as long as we keep winning. YES, even 45-42 wins.

 

[Volfan1000]

Banks needs depth and the defensive staff has done a hell of a job this season.

 

[MurphyVol]

Our run defense has been solid all season except for tonight. No reason to fire Banks based off of one game. Besides he's working with very thin depth. Firing him after the season would just be even more detrimental.

I'm not wanting Banks fired. But when has the run D been solid? We're 126th in 3rd down conversions.

 

[JPL]

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, not at all. Keep the staff together for continuity and recruiting. They’ll tap the portal as needed. If the players had executed the plays called we’re 7-2, easy-with wins over Pitt & Ole Miss. Granted, there is room for improvement but this staff has exceeded expectations.

We should be in the Music City Bowl now, at minimum.

Go VOLS!!!

 

[kell7517]

With the limited scholarship players we have. I don’t believe any coaches should be dismissed this first year.

 

[pastorvol]

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! Ridiculous post at this point!

 

[Hbg]

Idk about banks coaching but I do know poor tackling when I see it.

 

[1world1love]

Better DL will solve a lot of ills. Good line play makes the entire defense better. The linebackers aren’t great but are serviceable. It is what it is. We need to increase quality just few notches and increase depth a lot. In an ideal scenario, all of our starting DL and LB would be second string. Most just aren’t starter quality in the SEC.

The coaching seems miles better to me though. Yes, missed tackles are still an issue but even so, this is the best tackling defense we have seen in years. Overall though, the players are out in the right positions. That’s all that we can ask of the coaches. After that it comes down to players.

I love the way the defense fights and never gives up. Most of them have reached their ceiling though.

 

[VOL_Lyfe]

Yes.

 

[RAVOL]

No doubt the worst D performance of year. Zone was horrible because we are weak up the middle in LB and Safety making plays. But they play with belief of next play and in the end the next plays were made and we WON. I am willing to be patient to see Tim Banks with Players he and his staff develop and then see his play calling . In CHRIST Alone

 

[MurphyVol]

Idk about banks coaching but I do know poor tackling when I see it.

Tim Irwin never minces words and I totally agreed with his assessment

Yes we're thin, but we need to:

wrap up

(In a legal way) punish QBs that choose to run up the gut. Make them tentative

Blitz more because you know you can't cover them anyway.

 

[Delmar]

Coaching has been fine. Just need some more players and some better talent. Only complaint I have is that 3 man rush against an experienced and talented offensive line. It wasn’t ever going to work and it basically allowed 12 out of 17 3rd down conversions. Really poor and I couldn’t understand why we stayed with it so long. When we finally sent some more defenders, they got to Levis and forced some poor throws.

 

[Orange_Crush]

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)?

You serious, Clark?

 

[WhenUrVolUrVFL]

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)?

This shouldn’t even be put out there to even be considered.

 

[TJSVOLS]

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)?

were you trying to start a dumb thread, or are you really that football Illiterate?

 

[Orange_Crush]

Again, go back and read the game thread tonight. There was a tidal wave of criticism of our poor play, especially after a bye week to get ready. We were getting gashed every play. We couldn't figure out how to stop 3rd down conversions. Once again the opposing QB was running free or looking like a Heisman candidate. When we blitzed, it worked, but we hardly ever did that. Our cover guys were always a yard or two away from the reciever when he caught the ball. Even our DL was getting pushed back tonight, unlike earlier this season. So it's not crazy to ask if there's any culpability for the coach. I think winning a close one tonight is making people forget how frustrated we were when the defense was looking like hot garbage. Kensucky just put up an insane amount of yards on us. The question about the DC is worth asking. That said, I do think we should keep the guy. But if I am Heupel, I require him to make some schematic changes.

You go into the game thread expecting rationality? I think I see your problem.

The game thread has too many emotional chicken littles, giving up on the team at the slightest hint of adversity. Don't go there expecting a plan for the program's best future. And don't defend your thread logic with that hot mess.

 

[FranklinVFL]

This. This right here is the type of threads we need to just stop with and let the coaches get a full roster of players to coach first. Geez…all the coaches are playing with a huge handicap right now.

 

[Buddr]

 

[Vol in Central FL]

I hope this thread gave you the attention that your parents never showed you growing up.

 

[PC Jr.]

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. If you understood football, you wouldn’t ask silly questions like this. He’s working miracles with a VERY limited roster and limited talent.