The problem is NOT EFFORT

#51
#51
Volfan2012 said:
The only player I saw playing with effort in the last game was C. Green. None of the rest of the players know how hard you have to work in a game to win or to at least be a factor.
Click to expand...
That is one of the things I have wondered about or questioned. We have so many players who were the star of the show but never had to scrap much. They are not fire-tested.
 
#52
#52
Bighairlol said:
What most people fail to realize is that Holly was always in a “lose/lose “ situation. It would have been difficult for anyone following Pat at Tennessee, but for Holly, it was worse. In the beginning, fans were hopeful that Holly had learned enough from Pat over the years that the transition wouldn’t be that drastic. Never mind that the LV program was slipping under Pat. Those top ranked programs ALWAYS digress.
Click to expand...
Don't mean to pile on, but I have problems with this also. Who doesn't realize? In the top 3 or 4 of most oft repeated tropes on this board is that Holly never had a chance due to impossible legend following and unrealistic fan expectations. That urban legend provides the softest long term Holly landing possible, even as it begs the question of why in hell we gave the coach with no chance to succeed almost a decade to destroy the program.

Why never mind the program was already slipping? It's true and it's important in the true story of what's happened. Anyone who followed closely saw it and even if we didn't Pat Summitt told us. She knew and said the game was changing, there were more good players and her offense needed an update. Both she and we were keenly aware it had been four or five years since we'd been to the final four. Sadly, she never got to implement her fixes.

So the truth is for Holly the expectations were already somewhat tempered. All she had to do was keep the program moving forward consistently and stay relevant among the better teams. Continue to recruit top players and develop them into solid college players. Keep being fun and entertaining to watch. Sure the occasional final four would be great but I expected doing the first three things would take care of records, rankings and championships.

Outrageous post-Pat "fan expectations" get inflated to give Holly an easy out but its more truism than true.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: madtownvol and lvocd
#53
#53
madtownvol said:
That mantra about effort is Holly's biggest blindspot. The problem is that the players are uncertain about what to do.

You see this same dynamic all the time in other programs across all sports. Poorly performing teams tend to invoke debates about whether it is the coach or some moral failing in the players, who for some inexplicable reason, lack drive, determination, or a willingness to give effort.

Once a better coach comes in, voila! suddenly these players seem to find their missing moral virtue. But it was never about some psychological block or character shortcoming. Rather, the problem was a structural flaw in how the team was being organized and prepared to play--Bad game plans and lack of coaching makes players tentative, uncertain and he/she who hesitates always looks lost.

Currently, how do LVs give effort on the offense?- you saw it last night, take the ball to the rim! But, when defenses adjust, they have was no Plan B, leading to charges and turnovers.
Currently, how do the LVs give effort on defense?- they chase ghosts because they are always out of position and leave gaping wide open lanes to the rim. There is no clear understanding of how to play defense as a team, possession after possession.

In this game and others, the LVs played hard but not smart. As these losing games wear on, the team's effort does tend to decline mainly out of frustration and futility-- the players are human and they get discouraged too.

In sum, the players are fine; the system is bad. Change the coach; change the system.

I had hoped that Holly would find a way to do things differently and alter the negative trajectory of the program. Sadly, it is now undeniably clear that such a positive transformation will not happen under her stewardship.
Click to expand...
Well said! I think I am gonna buy season tickets now cause we gonna get a good coach!
 
#54
#54
bobkitten said:
That is one of the things I have wondered about or questioned. We have so many players who were the star of the show but never had to scrap much. They are not fire-tested.
Click to expand...

So, are you suggesting these specific McDonald AAs who come to the LVs are more used to be the star of the show than other McDonald All-Americans who go to Baylor, Uconn, Standford, Notre Dame, Louisville, South Carolina, Oregon and on and on. So, were those other all-american players somehow not used to being the star of the show? [And if they weren't stars of the show, how did they become High school all-americans?-- a bit of a paradox no?]

And are you saying that these other high school A-A somehow got more "fire testing" than ours or, in other words, that Holly has peculiar knack for finding the small set of High school AAs who just don't know how to scap or have never been fire tested while these other programs are finding the AAs who have deep battle scars; wrestle alligators, and sleep on beds of nails, and eat fire while dribbling and being chased by packs of rabid wolves.

Seriously, think about it. Other High school A-A step into elite programs and have great success; under CPS, the LVs never had players who mysteriously lacked "fire testing. "So, does it really make logical sense to conclude that it is just something about the inherent snow flakiness of LV recruits, year after year after year (though these same recruits, like Horston now or Massengill last year, have high school reputations for being battlers and fans post endlessly about they can't wait to see such a firey, competitive player in a LV uniform). So, are these players frauds, is it something in the water or could there be another reason? Is there any common factor we can identify? Hmm, I think there might be one.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Nute Gunray, Remy, Amb3096 and 2 others
#55
#55
madtownvol said:
So, are you suggesting these specific McDonald AAs who come to the LVs are more used to be the star of the show than other McDonald All-Americans who go to Baylor, Uconn, Standford, Notre Dame, Louisville, South Carolina, Oregon and on and on. So, were those other all-american players somehow not used to being the star of the show? [And if they weren't stars of the show, how did they become High school all-americans?-- a bit of a paradox no?]

And are you saying that these other high school A-A somehow got more "fire testing" than ours or, in other words, that Holly has peculiar knack for finding the small set of High school AAs who just don't know how to scap or have never been fire tested while these other programs are finding the AAs who have deep battle scars; wrestle alligators, and sleep on beds of nails, and eat fire while dribbling and being chased by packs of rabid wolves.

Seriously, think about it. Other High school A-A step into elite programs and have great success; under CPS, the LVs never had players who mysteriously lacked "fire testing. "So, does it really make logical sense to conclude that it is just something about the inherent snow flakiness of LV recruits, year after year after year (though these same recruits, like Horston now or Massengill last year, have high school reputations for being battlers and fans post endlessly about they can't wait to see such a firey, competitive player in a LV uniform). So, are these players frauds, is it something in the water or could there be another reason? Is there any common factor we can identify? Hmm, I think there might be one.
Click to expand...
As Talking Heads once said, stop making sense! Or as the late great Gregg Allman was reported to have said on the occasion of his seventh divorce, "I'm beginning to think it's me."

When you lay it out in numerical odds, its pretty easy to pick out the lowest common denominator. Been an awfully lot of unfiretested kids come and go round here the last 7 years, as opposed to the oven-tested ones who mysteriously steer clear and win championships and go to the W and stuff.

On the other hand, painful recent experience leads me to never rule out the possibility that poor Holly does actually have a knack for choosing the teeny mathmatical subset of elite secret slackers.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: madtownvol and lvocd
#57
#57
Thanks you're sweet.

Occurred to me after the game today that Holly now actually is in an absolute lose/lose situation. On the rare occasions they do play well, even against weak competition, the obvious reaction is well where the hell has this been hiding? So the kids clearly can play decently, then why do they so often play so poorly, even against weak competition? At this point Holly literally cannot win for all the losing.

Which is why I'd be shocked, shocked I tell ya, at any other outcome than her resigning a few days after the last game. It feels different this year from the previous two seasons when she should have been fired. The losses are worse and the grumbling more widespread in local media. The Holly ship has totally sailed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: madtownvol
#58
#58
glv98 said:
Thanks you're sweet.

Occurred to me after the game today that Holly now actually is in an absolute lose/lose situation. On the rare occasions they do play well, even against weak competition, the obvious reaction is well where the hell has this been hiding? So the kids clearly can play decently, then why do they so often play so poorly, even against weak competition? At this point Holly literally cannot win for all the losing.

Which is why I'd be shocked, shocked I tell ya, at any other outcome than her resigning a few days after the last game. It feels different this year from the previous two seasons when she should have been fired. The losses are worse and the grumbling more widespread in local media. The Holly ship has totally sailed.
Click to expand...

You make some very good points.
My gut tells me she’ll wait to step down until sometime after the dust settles on the NCAA Tournament. It’s going to be bad enough that a major topic of tournament coverage is likely to be how Tennessee is not there, so I don’t think Holly will want to throw gas on that funeral pyre with her sudden “retirement.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: orangealways and madtownvol
#59
#59
Two quick but hopefully not entirely irrelevant observations:

1. The many posters saying Holly throws the players under the bus are right, and it looks like an inferiority complex crutch to which she resorts when things go badly. The pattern has been established--during the nonconference early schedule while racking up wins (even when deficiencies are glaringly obvious), she says some variation of this:

"I love this team. I love their fight and their energy and their grit." And then she throws in some remarks about team chemistry and how the current team has the right stuff that has been missing recently (throwing past teams under tbe bus), yada yada bada bing.

Funny how quickly she changes her tune once the bad losses come along with the rankings slide. Now that "hustling" team with all that "desire" has inexplicably become a team who lacks effort. And when someone ventures to ask the obvious...namely, what has happened and how do you fix it, we get the same infuriating and insulting answer:

"I don't know."

How can any conscientious athletic director, good friends notwithstanding, tolerate that response from someone he's paying over $700,000 to represent the university?

2. For the poster(s) still asking why we care about womens' basketball, the answer is simple: we like good basketball, period. It's the reason we love the current men's team. They're well-coached and fundamentally sound, execute well on offense, show great heart and hustle on defense, respond maturely to hard coaching because they want to become the best they can be, and keep improving. The same things can be seen in the best women's programs. Dunks and fast breaks are exciting, but many of us prefer a balanced game in which great ball movement, crisp passes, well-set picks, charges taken, clean blocks and steals, physical posting up and, conversely, denying position in the paint, etc. to a run-and-gun individual scorefest. The men's and women's games should be complementary, not exclusionary.

If you're a fan of good, competitive basketball, we encourage you to watch the good teams and players regardless of gender and see how entertaining the sport can be when played at a high level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nute Gunray, TN1111, orangealways and 3 others
#60
#60
creekdipper said:
For the poster(s) still asking why we care about womens' basketball, the answer is simple: we like good basketball, period. It's the reason we love the current men's team. They're well-coached and fundamentally sound, execute well on offense, show great heart and hustle on defense, respond maturely to hard coaching because they want to become the best they can be, and keep improving. The same things can be seen in the best women's programs. Dunks and fast breaks are exciting, but many of us prefer a balanced game in which great ball movement, crisp passes, well-set picks, charges taken, clean blocks and steals, physical posting up and, conversely, denying position in the paint, etc. to a run-and-gun individual scorefest. The men's and women's games should be complementary, not exclusionary.

If you're a fan of good, competitive basketball, we encourage you to watch the good teams and players regardless of gender and see how entertaining the sport can be when played at a high level.
Click to expand...


Good point! To that poster, his or her argument was that someone can see "better" b-balled being played elsewhere on the men's side, which of course raises the question of what constitutes "better" as your post highlights. If one defines "better" as alley oop dunk plays, then don't watch the women's game.

I see another side to this debate as well. No one ever asks "why watch college football when the NFL plays the game at a higher level of quality" or "why watch college men's hoops when the NBA clearly offers higher caliber players." When it comes to women's b-ball, however, suddenly critics assume that the correct fan position is to think "gee, I want to watch a basketball, which specific game will allow me to see the highest level of the sport being played." On that view, one would pretty much only watch the Golden state warriors or a football fan would only watch Patriot games and so on.'

Why did people stick with the men b-ball vols during the down years or the vol football over the past several seasons? You could see much better football by watching Alabama.


However, people form connections with teams, players, legacies that transcend the maximization of one's experience of "quality." And they root for turnarounds when things are not going so well.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: cabbie191, lvocd and creekdipper
#61
#61
Madtown it’s so weird to see you’ve thrown the towel in on Holly. I’ve agreed with a ton of your points over the years and it’s just crazy seeing you change up. What was your breaking point if you don’t mind me asking?
 
#62
#62
LadyVol1908 said:
Madtown it’s so weird to see you’ve thrown the towel in on Holly. I’ve agreed with a ton of your points over the years and it’s just crazy seeing you change up. What was your breaking point if you don’t mind me asking?
Click to expand...
Have you been watching this season......?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nute Gunray
#66
#66
LadyVol1908 said:
Madtown it’s so weird to see you’ve thrown the towel in on Holly. I’ve agreed with a ton of your points over the years and it’s just crazy seeing you change up. What was your breaking point if you don’t mind me asking?
Click to expand...

Thanks for asking. My brief history on Holly; not excited when she was named HC but, took a wait and see attitude. After her first 3 years, I thought, "hey, I was wrong, she has risen above expectations."

However, the team has been on a steady decline for the last four seasons. And it is the same problem, year after year, though only getting worse. Any major program, men's or women's, that had this trajectory would be making a coaching change. The system needs a drastic overhaul.

I really wanted to see Holly succeed. And I also believed that she had this year and the next (based on her recruiting classes) to turn things around. However, the program bottomed out this season by setting all kinds of unwanted firsts. The fact that a LV team is fighting now against long odds, at the very end of the season just to make the NCAA tournament is the rubicon that has been crossed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: LadyVol1908, Nute Gunray, th2421 and 3 others
#67
#67
I still say Holly is in breach of her contract for impersonating a head coach. I looked up pressers from 2014 and you could substitute them for today's pressers. Just saying....
 
#68
#68
glv98 said:
Why never mind the program was already slipping? It's true and it's important in the true story of what's happened. Anyone who followed closely saw it and even if we didn't Pat Summitt told us. She knew and said the game was changing, there were more good players and her offense needed an update. Both she and we were keenly aware it had been four or five years since we'd been to the final four. Sadly, she never got to implement her fixes.
Click to expand...

That's a great point. Remember how Pat visited Harry Perretta in 2003 at Villanova to get some new perspectives on running UT's offense? Similar to Vic Schaefer visiting Geno after the Huskies lambasted MSST in the 2016 semis.

To anyone's knowledge, has CHW ever reached out to her peers for help?
 
#69
#69
cabbie191 said:
That's a great point. Remember how Pat visited Harry Perretta in 2003 at Villanova to get some new perspectives on running UT's offense? Similar to Vic Schaefer visiting Geno after the Huskies lambasted MSST in the 2016 semis.

To anyone's knowledge, has CHW ever reached out to her peers for help?
Click to expand...

The first step in recovery is realizing...and admitting...that there is a problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nute Gunray and olddog
#70
#70
cabbie191 said:
That's a great point. Remember how Pat visited Harry Perretta in 2003 at Villanova to get some new perspectives on running UT's offense? Similar to Vic Schaefer visiting Geno after the Huskies lambasted MSST in the 2016 semis.

To anyone's knowledge, has CHW ever reached out to her peers for help?
Click to expand...

Fchw took into account other people's opinions and suggestions and ideas ... We may not even be in this mess
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top