Should Tim Banks be replaced at end of season?

#326
#326
dumbest-thing-ive-ever-heard-dumb.gif


What Banks is doing without any talent is pretty impressive
 
  • Like
Reactions: njvols, Cobb-Webb 1989, Vol Farmer and 1 other person
#329
#329
volinthenorth said:
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)?
Click to expand...

Dude is holding it together with duct tape, has guys playing hard and you come in here throwing this shade?
 
  • Like
Reactions: knox73, DuckInAPen and Vol Farmer
#331
#331
volinthenorth said:
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)?
Click to expand...
Nooooooooooo ! You just answered everything where they stand as a team. Limited !!!!!!
 
#332
#332
We are playing with 3 linebackers and limited depth on d-line. Beasley is a redshirt freshman, did he even play linebacker in high school? We need another pass rusher opposite Byron Young and a strong safety that can play run support.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IndianaVol and tbones0711
#334
#334
Zues1 said:
When it mattered they got the stop, and the win.
Click to expand...
Defense also got the stops late in games vs. Ole Piss and Shittsburg. Offense didn't put the ball in the end zone on their final possession in either of those games.
 
#336
#336
OrangeTsar said:
I would like to see us actually make the changes we need to deal with quarterbacks running all over the field seemingly at will. Every QB we face must look forward to all the rushing yards he is about to rack up 😡
Click to expand...
This speaks to the lack of real athleticism we have at safety and LB. Often we have had these QBs lined up in the open field to make a stop and they just consistently made out LB’s and safeties miss. Granted we have played some very athletic QBs – at least 4 Heisman candidates, but yes, the inability to run down and tackle opposing QBs in the open field is disturbing.
 
#337
#337
volinthenorth said:
I know a lot about the sport, actually. I think Banks has done a good job. Tonight, though, was quite bad. Do you think he stubbornly stuck with a system tonight that just wasn't working? Any criticism of him, or is it all on the players?
Click to expand...
Then why ask if he needs to be fired? He's done a heck of a job with depth he has. And, to be on the latter half of the season with no more depth added is what makes the question nonsensical at this point in his tenure.
 
#338
#338
No I don't think so. Undermanned and opponents hold the ball 45 minutes out of 60. Considering all that I think he's pretty good
 
#340
#340
volinthenorth said:
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)?
Click to expand...

I understand the frustration and last night was not our best effort. But if you're a Kentucky fan you got to be thinking your defense sucks as well and they have NONE of the reasons you mention for our D to give up 38 points in less than 14 minutes TOP. Bottom line our D got the pick six that was the difference in the game and got the stop when it mattered most to preserve the win. Sometimes you don't have to be good...you just have to better than the team you are playing and our D outplayed theirs at the end of the night!
 
#342
#342
volinthenorth said:
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)?
Click to expand...

we of course praise banks and stop talking stupidly about firing a first year defensive co coach with 71 scholarship players totally putting these same players out on the field for three games defending 95 plays - then 100 with ol miss and then again 92 yesterday - including most of our best LB being gone. Just stop !!! Please !!!!
 
#343
#343
volinthenorth said:
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)?
Click to expand...
Stay in the North with that garbage.
 
#346
#346
farmdogvol said:
We are playing with 3 linebackers and limited depth on d-line. Beasley is a redshirt freshman, did he even play linebacker in high school? We need another pass rusher opposite Byron Young and a strong safety that can play run support.
Click to expand...
1000 percent agreed...and I think our coaches know it but never use the excuse of "we need more guys" or "another recruiting cycle" publicly because at the end if the day this staff is all about coaching the guys you have and doing your best which is what this team has done for the most part so far.

As you pointed out, on every play we have to either commit to defending the pass or defending the run. We don't have enough dudes to do both and keep a safety to crash the run in play action. That's why I'm 3rd and medium to long we get gashed by the RB or QB for a first down because those are typical passing situations and that's where our guys line up, this giving up the shorter but effective runs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top