So...I'm Confused...

#226
#226
tvolsfan said:
And several horribly coached games.

And stop trying to make it seem like Butch's performance is comparable to Harbaugh's. Nobody with a shred of intellectual honesty is buying it.
Click to expand...
I'm not buying the several horribly coached games comment. The team took leads into the fourth quarter of the Oklahoma, Florida and the end of the Alabama games. Were the endings all coaching issues or was the lack of depth and experience contributing factors? Butch Jones wasn't on the field performing in any of those games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#227
#227
tvolsfan said:
Oh I see what you're saying. I definitely agree it was a weak hire, although we were at a low point. We really should have hired an interim coach when Kiffin left, bit the bullet on one recruiting class, and hired a real coach after 2010.
Click to expand...

This will get me in trouble but here goes...

Charlie Strong...don't leave Louisville without him, we did...But that's not any of the guys on your list...

Would you feel better about Kevin Sumlin?

Gus Malzahn, right now, where he stands today?

The guy at OSU?

The past is a lesson and I agree on Kippy.

Two or three weeks ago it was Fuente...basically a hire somewhere between Dooley and Jones.

We have to stop.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#228
#228
hmanvolfan said:
I'm not buying the several horribly coached games comment. The team took leads into the fourth quarter of the Oklahoma, Florida and the end of the Alabama games. Were the endings all coaching issues or was the lack of depth and experience contributing factors? Butch Jones wasn't on the field performing in any of those games.
Click to expand...

agreed . The interior of the defensive front is young and inconsistent with no depth . It was the downfall in all of the games you mentioned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#229
#229
OrangeBlitz said:
Ok. I'm a bit confused here and need some direction on how to be a compliant little VN poster (although I rarely post).

Through most of Butch's tenure on the Hill, I've logged on to read statements about how people are looking for wins. "Butch isn't winning enough," or "He can sure recruit, but he's just not winning," or "Don't give me that 'moral victory' crap, we lost the game."

That last one was especially prevalent during the first three losses of this season. The general feel on the board seemed to be that we were playing good ball for a half and then shutting down. That seems to be a true statement. Now the more negatively minded amongst the faithful here quickly derided anyone that took our boys play as being a bright point. They fell back on the "we're still losing" bandwagon.

So the season progresses and we notch wins against Georgia (then ranked in the Top 20 and holding a 5 year winning streak against us) and South Carolina (for the third year in a row) and, most recently, against lowly North Texas.

Suddenly the story has changed. Now I read that "yes we're getting wins, but their garbage wins," and "we're playing too conservatively," and, to put a current spin on an old favorite, "Fahr Butch!"

It seems that now it doesn't matter if we win, only if we demolish our competition. We beat Georgia but they suck now. We beat SC but they're in transition and also...they suck. We held North Texas scoreless and won by more than 3 scores, but that's irrelevant. We should have won that game by the score of 119-0. Now wins don't matter...only the way we play.

So it can't be both ways...either wins solely matter or efficiency of play solely matters. Can't be both. Is there an explanation here I'm missing?

I was born and raised in Knoxville (I've now relocated to Chatt town) and have been a Vols fan like my father before me, and his father before him, since I could grasp the concept of what a game even was. Do I wish we were enjoying the success that Bama has had for the past 8 years or so? Of course I do. Do I wish we were constantly in the mix for the National Championship? Desperately. Do I wish we consistently dominated all opponents on our schedule? With all my heart.

But...

I also recognize that we're playing better ball than we were before and our record is slowly improving. We're beating SEC teams again and put up a damned good showing against a quality Oklahoma team.

So which is it? Should I hate Butch because he doesn't win enough or should I hate him because he doesn't win convincingly enough?

I know this isn't a new thread, but I'd read all I could take and wanted to vent. I've done that now. Carry on. :hi:
Click to expand...

You should realize that no matter how good or bad the state of the program is, some posters are going to complain. It is just in their DNA, a lack of functional brain cells, or from a perpetual sense of entitlement.

Realize that, and your chances of future good health and sanity will increase tenfold.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#230
#230
tvolsfan said:
Since you're clearly willing to deny logic and common sense, lets put it this way. Harbaugh's early years at Stanford made it clear he was a great coach and a hot commodity. Let's see how long it is before NFL teams come after Botch.
Click to expand...

i'm all about logic and common sense. show me the evidence that, specifically in his early years, it was clear that harbaugh was a great coach. cause thats a pretty big statement after you took a jab, that "it was clear he was a great coach and a hot commodity." i do think he was/is a good coach. but he did no better in his first 3 years at stanford than butch at winning games, which seems to be the absolute benchmark for success (when convenient). do you think harbaugh flawlessly coached every year at stanford? no one has. harbaugh also had the the juice early because he's a former star college qb as well as a very long, successful nfl career. butch doesn't have that any of that.

do i believe that butch has been a perfect gameday coach? no, but a lot of this criticism is unrealistic. we are 2 3/4 years into the butch jones era at tennessee, that's such a small sample size to already know without a doubt, like many of you have stated, is and will never be a good enough coach for you.

it's like when a coach calls a timeout to ice the kicker. 1st try kicker makes it. timeout. 2nd try he misses. we win the game, the coach is genius. he's got such guts to call that time out. does it the next game except the kicker misses it 1st time and makes it the second time. we loose. oh what a doofus. terrible coaching error. he lost us the game. that's just the "f'n way she goes" sometimes. doesnt mean the coach is a genius or buffoon. there's a much larger picture to be seen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#231
#231
Through three years, Harbaugh had beaten more ranked teams in less opportunities. What he started with at Stanford is way, way less than what Butch started with, even as bad as Dooley was. Also, it's much, much easier to convince recruits you're about to turn Tennessee around than Stanford.

But by all means, feel free to continue pretending the situation was comparable. We can feel free to visit this again in a year or two when Butch is out having never matched Harbaugh's year four record.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#232
#232
tvolsfan said:
Through three years, Harbaugh had beaten more ranked teams in less opportunities. What he started with at Stanford is way, way less than what Butch started with, even as bad as Dooley was. Also, it's much, much easier to convince recruits you're about to turn Tennessee around than Stanford.

But by all means, feel free to continue pretending the situation was comparable. We can feel free to visit this again in a year or two when Butch is out having never matched Harbaugh's year four record.
Click to expand...

Even in your infinite wisdom, you must admit playing in the PAC is different than playing in the SEC. Playing Bama, UGA, AU, and OU is a lot tougher than playing Cal, Oregon and USC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#234
#234
tvolsfan said:
Through three years, Harbaugh had beaten more ranked teams in less opportunities. What he started with at Stanford is way, way less than what Butch started with, even as bad as Dooley was. Also, it's much, much easier to convince recruits you're about to turn Tennessee around than Stanford.

But by all means, feel free to continue pretending the situation was comparable. We can feel free to visit this again in a year or two when Butch is out having never matched Harbaugh's year four record.
Click to expand...

It's obvious you hate Butch because he hasn't turned it around "quick enough" for you. I for one, have not thrown in the towel yet. Butch definitely has the program headed in the right direction. If we had a better O-line and D-line this year with some good depth, we probably win 3 of the 4 losses.

The next 2 years will be pivotal in determining Butch's success. If we stay mediocre, then your assessment is probably correct. If we get to 9 wins this season and the next 2 get a season up to 10, then you are wrong.

I also don't buy into the horribly coached games. You don't build leads through 3 quarters without good coaching. It's not like suddenly coaches forget how to coach in the 4th quarter and lose games. Nearly every game this year we lose steam in the 4th quarter. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand the team is gassed in the 4th quarter. With no depth on the d-line, they cannot get pressure in the 4th because they are exhausted. With no depth on the O-line it's hard to get a good push to run the ball or protect Dobbs on passes. Furthermore, we've continued to lose quality players to injuries which is it making our depth issue even worse.

I will admit however that we get too conservative sometimes in the 4th quarter with the play calling. I would prefer to see a more balanced approach later in the game. But, that is not the sole reason we lost the games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#235
#235
I wish I had 4-5 years to perform up to expectations at my job.

If I had only gotten my job headed in the right direction, I wouldn't have been here long.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#236
#236
The Tall Gguy said:
I wish I had 4-5 years to perform up to expectations at my job.

If I had only gotten my job headed in the right direction, I wouldn't have been here long.
Click to expand...

Yeah, well it's a whole lot easier to ask "do you want fries with that?" than it is to build a major football program. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8 people
#240
#240
OrangeBlitz said:
Ok. I'm a bit confused here and need some direction on how to be a compliant little VN poster (although I rarely post).

Through most of Butch's tenure on the Hill, I've logged on to read statements about how people are looking for wins. "Butch isn't winning enough," or "He can sure recruit, but he's just not winning," or "Don't give me that 'moral victory' crap, we lost the game."

That last one was especially prevalent during the first three losses of this season. The general feel on the board seemed to be that we were playing good ball for a half and then shutting down. That seems to be a true statement. Now the more negatively minded amongst the faithful here quickly derided anyone that took our boys play as being a bright point. They fell back on the "we're still losing" bandwagon.

So the season progresses and we notch wins against Georgia (then ranked in the Top 20 and holding a 5 year winning streak against us) and South Carolina (for the third year in a row) and, most recently, against lowly North Texas.

Suddenly the story has changed. Now I read that "yes we're getting wins, but their garbage wins," and "we're playing too conservatively," and, to put a current spin on an old favorite, "Fahr Butch!"

It seems that now it doesn't matter if we win, only if we demolish our competition. We beat Georgia but they suck now. We beat SC but they're in transition and also...they suck. We held North Texas scoreless and won by more than 3 scores, but that's irrelevant. We should have won that game by the score of 119-0. Now wins don't matter...only the way we play.

So it can't be both ways...either wins solely matter or efficiency of play solely matters. Can't be both. Is there an explanation here I'm missing?

I was born and raised in Knoxville (I've now relocated to Chatt town) and have been a Vols fan like my father before me, and his father before him, since I could grasp the concept of what a game even was. Do I wish we were enjoying the success that Bama has had for the past 8 years or so? Of course I do. Do I wish we were constantly in the mix for the National Championship? Desperately. Do I wish we consistently dominated all opponents on our schedule? With all my heart.

But...

I also recognize that we're playing better ball than we were before and our record is slowly improving. We're beating SEC teams again and put up a damned good showing against a quality Oklahoma team.

So which is it? Should I hate Butch because he doesn't win enough or should I hate him because he doesn't win convincingly enough?

I know this isn't a new thread, but I'd read all I could take and wanted to vent. I've done that now. Carry on. :hi:
Click to expand...


You should hate him because we were equal to or better than all but one team on our schedule and we're 6-4.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#241
#241
What's to be confused about.
Optimists see promise in moral victories.
Pessimists see doom in moral losses.
 
#242
#242
majic73 said:
agreed . The interior of the defensive front is young and inconsistent with no depth . It was the downfall in all of the games you mentioned.
Click to expand...

Agree. For those who don't know what depth really is Bama rotates 10 players up front. 10!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#243
#243
tvolsfan said:
Through three years, Harbaugh had beaten more ranked teams in less opportunities. What he started with at Stanford is way, way less than what Butch started with, even as bad as Dooley was. Also, it's much, much easier to convince recruits you're about to turn Tennessee around than Stanford.

But by all means, feel free to continue pretending the situation was comparable. We can feel free to visit this again in a year or two when Butch is out having never matched Harbaugh's year four record.
Click to expand...

Please prove Butch had more talent that Harbaugh.
 
#244
#244
JohnD13 said:
Please prove Butch had more talent that Harbaugh.
Click to expand...
Rivals:
2004 Stanford class:149
2005 Stanford class:41
2006:54
2007:51

Avg recruiting rank: 61.25

Rivals:

UT 2010:9
2011:13
2012:17
2013:21

Avg rank: 15


Clearly Harbaugh had the better starting point. Clearly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#246
#246
fade route said:
I appreciate the fact that you are asking an honest question. That said, I totally disagree with your last statement. I feel like this offense is easy to game plan from a defensive standpoint - make Dobbs beat you with his arm - some defenses have done that very well.

From a scheme standpoint, it doesn't seem we run a single slant - and this is with guys that are big, fast, and athletic. We also don't run any post patterns, at least from what I recall. And Dormady is the only one allowed to throw the deep ball apparently.
Click to expand...

Also, the delayed handoff with no read option makes no sense. Either read option or put in a fullback and drop the delay. I'm ok with either scheme, but we run the worst of both worlds.
 
#247
#247
ptclaus98 said:
Rivals:
2004 Stanford class:149
2005 Stanford class:41
2006:54
2007:51

Avg recruiting rank: 61.25

Rivals:

UT 2010:9
2011:13
2012:17
2013:21

Avg rank: 15


Clearly Harbaugh had the better starting point. Clearly.
Click to expand...

How many OL were recruited @ Stanford in 2006?

I'm guessing more than zero.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#248
#248
ptclaus98 said:
Rivals:
2004 Stanford class:149
2005 Stanford class:41
2006:54
2007:51

Avg recruiting rank: 61.25

Rivals:

UT 2010:9
2011:13
2012:17
2013:21

Avg rank: 15


Clearly Harbaugh had the better starting point. Clearly.
Click to expand...


And you clearly left out attrition, strength of schedule, Kiffin and Dooley, as another poster pointed out sec vs pac10.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top