The Official Tennessee vs Vanderbilt Game Thread, 7:00pm ET, ESPN2

#801
#801
Lefteye said:
Wow irony got you with that timeout complaint. lol
Click to expand...

Vandy game from last year flashback?...or A&M?...or Florida?...or?...etc etc?

Don't feel like listing the whole schedule from last year. :)
 
#804
#804
It just comes down to a lack of closeout speed on the 3 point close out. Give em open shots, they hit em. If you can't rotate in the zone you'll get pounded by the three. Tough game to watch, gotta make the changes.
 
#805
#805
etsuvol13 said:
It just comes down to a lack of closeout speed on the 3 point close out. Give em open shots, they hit em. If you can't rotate in the zone you'll get pounded by the three. Tough game to watch, gotta make the changes.
Click to expand...

It also comes down to having taller, longer players at the 3, 4, and 5. Our PG should be playing the 3. So, he plays at the top of the zone instead of the wing. That leaves a 7 footer shooting threes from the baseline and deep wings. I did notice a slow close out by Richardson, but we just don't have the players right now.
 
#807
#807
VolGee4 said:
It also comes down to having taller, longer players at the 3, 4, and 5. Our PG should be playing the 3. So, he plays at the top of the zone instead of the wing. That leaves a 7 footer shooting threes from the baseline and deep wings. I did notice a slow close out by Richardson, but we just don't have the players right now.
Click to expand...

If we have smaller players, shouldn't we be able to close out better against larger competition? If you look at our offensive rebounding from the game, or rebounding in general, size wasn't the issue in this game. It was vandy shooting like every other team against our zone. If they beat us senseless in the post, then size is an explanation for the loss, but not wing closeout and teams getting wide open shots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#810
#810
etsuvol13 said:
If we have smaller players, shouldn't we be able to close out better against larger competition? If you look at our offensive rebounding from the game, or rebounding in general, size wasn't the issue in this game. It was vandy shooting like every other team against our zone. If they beat us senseless in the post, then size is an explanation for the loss, but not wing closeout and teams getting wide open shots.
Click to expand...

We should absolutely be recognizing and closing out faster. It has to get better next yr
 
#811
#811
etsuvol13 said:
If we have smaller players, shouldn't we be able to close out better against larger competition? If you look at our offensive rebounding from the game, or rebounding in general, size wasn't the issue in this game. It was vandy shooting like every other team against our zone. If they beat us senseless in the post, then size is an explanation for the loss, but not wing closeout and teams getting wide open shots.
Click to expand...

They were able to get better looks because we played better inside. Do you not remember the first game when Vandy played high low all night and Jones easily sealed our guys for layups and dunks? They didn't do that this game. We don't have enough size to hold our own and to close out a 7 footer on the baseline. Foot speed is a problem, too. Again, our roster is our biggest problem. Not the coaching at this point.
 
#813
#813
VolGee4 said:
They were able to get better looks because we played better inside. Do you not remember the first game when Vandy played high low all night and Jones easily sealed our guys for layups and dunks? They didn't do that this game. We don't have enough size to hold our own and to close out a 7 footer on the baseline. Foot speed is a problem, too. Again, our roster is our biggest problem. Not the coaching at this point.
Click to expand...

We'll have to agree to disagree. If the coach is insisting on staying with a zone without changes, then the staff needs to do a better job of making sure the players get to their areas. It's on the players, but it's on the coaches for not getting the team ready, at home, on defense, again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#814
#814
Lefteye said:
We should absolutely be recognizing and closing out faster. It has to get better next yr
Click to expand...

Having McGee back will help, but we lose Richardson, our best defender. Considering where our issues are, I don't see how it can get better next year, unless the freshmen coming in are solid. Hubbs is slow on the rotation, Baulkman and Reese are continuously lost on the wings, and Mostella will have to make a maymonesque improvement.
 
#815
#815
etsuvol13 said:
We'll have to agree to disagree. If the coach is insisting on staying with a zone without changes, then the staff needs to do a better job of making sure the players get to their areas. It's on the players, but it's on the coaches for not getting the team ready, at home, on defense, again.
Click to expand...

About par for the course. You can't change your roster. I don't know what else people want. Shooting 9-11 from 3 doesn't make Stallings a better coach. It simply doesn't.
 
#816
#816
VolGee4 said:
About par for the course. You can't change your roster. I don't know what else people want. Shooting 9-11 from 3 doesn't make Stallings a better coach. It simply doesn't.
Click to expand...

stallings is a very good coach. However, volnation has been saying "well insert team name here shot insert percentage amount here from three. That doesn't make them a better team or Tyndall a bad coach. At some point, it stops being the other team, and becomes a problem with UT. If you have shots as open as just about every team has had, and as frequently, corrections have to be made. This "well it has to get better next year" stuff just shows that the fan base has given up on this team and this coach for the season. That is a reason TBA is half empty, quiet, and we will be irrelevant for a while. At least until this "NCAA Cloud" passes, if it does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#817
#817
etsuvol13 said:
Having McGee back will help, but we lose Richardson, our best defender. Considering where our issues are, I don't see how it can get better next year, unless the freshmen coming in are solid. Hubbs is slow on the rotation, Baulkman and Reese are continuously lost on the wings, and Mostella will have to make a maymonesque improvement.
Click to expand...

McGhee will definitely help. Along with the aa cloud. May sound silly to use as an excuse, but I believe its valid.
 
Last edited:
#818
#818
etsuvol13 said:
Having McGee back will help, but we lose Richardson, our best defender. Considering where our issues are, I don't see how it can get better next year, unless the freshmen coming in are solid. Hubbs is slow on the rotation, Baulkman and Reese are continuously lost on the wings, and Mostella will have to make a maymonesque improvement.
Click to expand...

I don't think it will be better next year. In fact, I think they will take a step back
 
#819
#819
etsuvol13 said:
stallings is a very good coach. However, volnation has been saying "well insert team name here shot insert percentage amount here from three. That doesn't make them a better team or Tyndall a bad coach. At some point, it stops being the other team, and becomes a problem with UT. If you have shots as open as just about every team has had, and as frequently, corrections have to be made. This "well it has to get better next year" stuff just shows that the fan base has given up on this team and this coach for the season. That is a reason TBA is half empty, quiet, and we will be irrelevant for a while. At least until this "NCAA Cloud" passes, if it does.
Click to expand...

I believe Stallings has a losing record against UT, and that includes coaching against Buzz, Martin, and Tyndall. He is not bad, but he isn't the best either.

From a technical standpoint, Tyndall is a better coach that at least 3 of our last 4 coaches. We will see if he can get the players.
 
#820
#820
VolGee4 said:
They were able to get better looks because we played better inside. Do you not remember the first game when Vandy played high low all night and Jones easily sealed our guys for layups and dunks? They didn't do that this game. We don't have enough size to hold our own and to close out a 7 footer on the baseline. Foot speed is a problem, too. Again, our roster is our biggest problem. Not the coaching at this point.
Click to expand...

You mean....the game we won...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#821
#821
Look we can talk about how we have to play zone and protect inside and that's fine but we give up too many three's and it needs to be fixed whether by recruiting or coaching. Simple as that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#822
#822
1985Vols said:
Exactly. Go man and their bigs dominate against Reese and Moore. Pick your poison.....
Click to expand...

Should've stopped the bleeding from 3. Much easier to erase a 13 pt lead and go on a 25-5 run 3 points at a time than 2 points at a time. It's Donnie's defense's Achilles heel, has been all year long. His zone gives up an incredible amount of open looks from 3, other teams know it and they've collectively shot the lights out with incredible confidence against us all year long. Iirc, vandy had already hit 5-6 threes to start the second half before even making a 2pt shot. Donnie has to make some sort of adjustment before he did. It cost him the game. I would've been giddy in the second half last night to see us only give up 10-12 lay ups/dunks rather than 10-12 3s. If we had, we wouldn't have lost. Pretty easy poison to pick imo.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top