'This is not wide receiver tape'

#2
#2
The primary source for the article is a PFF analyst. In his own words, “I was basically straight into PFF as a first real job. It’s been all we’ve known, really, for the last 10-15 years”. So, while he may be knowledgeable, he is not really making personnel decisions for an NFL team.

I think the criticism is way overblown. A receiver can create separation or not, he has good hands or he doesn’t, he is fast and athletic or not. An NFL scout doesn’t need every play run from a pro style set to evaluate a receiver.

The UT offense may present fewer chances to showcase receivers in conventional routes because we run the ball a lot and because we sometimes use the wide splits to let receivers work their defenders in space or with another receiver blocking. But we run plenty of conventional posts, slants, etc. I don’t see how it is any more difficult to evaluate receivers than it would be in any other run first offense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VFFL@THE BEACH, gainesvol82, Big Al Orange and 8 others
#4
#4
Well this article is quoting two analysts and a NFL head coach so i think the criticisms are something to contend with even if you think they arent legitimate. This feels like one of those times where the narrative is more important than the substance.

I wonder if Heupel feels any pressure or sees any advantage to adjusting the offense to change the narrative.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BruisedOrange
#5
#5
Dirtyhairies said:
Well this article is quoting two analysts and a NFL head coach so i think the criticisms are something to contend with even if you think they arent legitimate. This feels like one of those times where the narrative is more important than the substance.

I wonder if Heupel feels any pressure or sees any advantage to adjusting the offense to change the narrative.
Click to expand...
Coach Heupel's job is to win college games not NFL games and, by the admission of the folks in the article, it works in college. Obviously, we've had good success with his scheme.

If he feels pressure, it's because articles like this may be negative recruiting tools used against him for getting elite WRs. That's the issue I see. It's hard to get great WRs who are looking at an NFL future if other coaches are saying "going to UT will hurt your NFL evaluation" and pointing to articles like this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Megatron88, Volanta, gainesvol82 and 11 others
#6
#6
SayUWantAreVOLution said:
Coach Heupel's job is to win college games not NFL games and, by the admission of the folks in the article, it works in college. Obviously, we've had good success with his scheme.

If he feels pressure, it's because articles like this may be negative recruiting tools used against him for getting elite WRs. That's the issue I see. It's hard to get great WRs who are looking at an NFL future if other coaches are saying "going to UT will hurt your NFL evaluation" and pointing to articles like this.
Click to expand...
I agree. I just wonder at what point he feels like recruiting starts to suffer. Any innovator is smarter than me and makes decisions made make no sense to me, but it wouldnt surprise me if Heupel factored in draft prestige at least a little bit. I mean it does affect recruiting at some level.
 
#7
#7
Can someone explain why this is about TN and not about all the air raid offenses? Mike Leach had sent receivers to the NFL since the 90’s.

All I can say is NFL coaches used to be able to coach and all they really looked at in evaluations was whether a player had enough size or enough athleticism to compensate and if that player was coachable, based on interviews and references.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nico ee-ah-MAH-LAY-ah-va, norrislakevol, marcusluvsvols and 2 others
#8
#8
adam.vol said:
Can someone explain why this is about TN and not about all the air raid offenses? Mike Leach had sent receivers to the NFL since the 90’s.
Click to expand...

Tennessee isn’t an air raid offense. Air raid offenses work well in the nfl because the air raid is a version of the west coast offense that roughly half the NFL runs.

We run a run n shoot offense. A lot of times if someone isn’t the main WR on the play, they’re running vertical with the option of a hitch based on coverage (that’s why he makes the comment about only seeing them run hitches and go routes).

The main WR on the play has a few more options. Go/vertical/post/dig if it’s the slot. If it’s the outside guy he has similar options minus the dig (unless it’s a switch release that brings him into the slot).

Occasionally we’ve ran some quick game stuff on 3rd and medium that’s closer to traditional west coast routes, but it’s rare.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lexkyvol, OptimusPrimerib, LouderVol and 6 others
#9
#9
Vol8188 said:
Tennessee isn’t an air raid offense. Air raid offenses work well in the nfl because the air raid is a version of the west coast offense that roughly half the NFL runs.

We run a run n shoot offense. A lot of times if someone isn’t the main WR on the play, they’re running vertical with the option of a hitch based on coverage (that’s why he makes the comment about only seeing them run hitches and go routes).

The main WR on the play has a few more options. Go/vertical/post/dig if it’s the slot. If it’s the outside guy he has similar options minus the dig (unless it’s a switch release that brings him into the slot).

Occasionally we’ve ran some quick game stuff on 3rd and medium that’s closer to traditional west coast routes, but it’s rare.
Click to expand...
Thank you. You’ve pointed me in a direction so that I can try to learn more.

There seems to be a distinction between the Run N’ Shoot and the Veer N’ Shoot offenses. I started on Wikipedia and somehow found myself on Reddit, where I found a nice comment, not unlike the response you gave to me.

https://www.reddit.com/r/footballst...mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
 
  • Like
Reactions: BruisedOrange and Vol8188
#10
#10
VAVol85 said:
The primary source for the article is a PFF analyst. In his own words, “I was basically straight into PFF as a first real job. It’s been all we’ve known, really, for the last 10-15 years”. So, while he may be knowledgeable, he is not really making personnel decisions for an NFL team.

I think the criticism is way overblown. A receiver can create separation or not, he has good hands or he doesn’t, he is fast and athletic or not. An NFL scout doesn’t need every play run from a pro style set to evaluate a receiver.

The UT offense may present fewer chances to showcase receivers in conventional routes because we run the ball a lot and because we sometimes use the wide splits to let receivers work their defenders in space or with another receiver blocking. But we run plenty of conventional posts, slants, etc. I don’t see how it is any more difficult to evaluate receivers than it would be in any other run first offense.
Click to expand...
Yes and no. Our very own WRs have talked about how it's hurting them. In this years draft, Donte Thornton touched on it.

Dont'e Thornton was drafted by the Las Vegas Raiders in the fourth round of the 2025 NFL Draft. Through meetings, pro day, and the draft combine, Thornton seemed to have trouble proving his skills would translate to the NFL.
Raiders head coach Pete Carroll talked about Thornton's skills and how they could translate to the NFL. Tennessee runs an air raid offense, and players need to transition into a pro-style offense in the NFL.

"That was mostly every team's main talking point was asking with the offense that we run here at Tennessee if I'm able to run those pro-style routes...I had to be very intentional, playing two seasons here at Tennessee, we don't have the same wide route tree that most pro-style offenses have," said Thornton.

Thornton's ability to run pro-style routes was a major topic of conversation ahead of the NFL draft, showing how difficult it could be for receivers in Heupel's system to get drafted.
When asked where he believes he needs to improve after being drafted by the Raiders, he said his route running because that was one area he didn't have the opportunity to fully develop while at Tennessee.


"I'd say just my intermediate and medium route running," said Thornton. "With my past two years (at Tennessee), I haven't really had the opportunity to really display that as much. So just getting back into the flow of doing that. I'd say that was the No. 1 thing everybody was saying."

Thornton also shared that his film from Oregon is a big reason why Carroll and the Raiders drafted him in the fourth round.

"One thing on draft day, when I talked to Coach Pete Carroll, he said it himself, if you look at the Oregon film, there's a lot of stuff you can see that people didn't see with these last two years with me playing at Tennessee," said Thornton during an appearance on OLV Raiders Network. "If you turn on my two years of Oregon film, you'll see me running true routes.

While Tennessee's offense is one of college football's most fun, explosive offenses, not everything translates to the next level. The wide receiver position is one area that does not seem to translate as well to the NFL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BruisedOrange and adam.vol
#12
#12
KnoxRealtorVOL said:
I just feel like Hyatt alone nullifies this entire argument.

If you can get space and catch the ball, and you have a QB who can get it to you, you’re going to the league.

How is that any different from any other team?
Click to expand...
The problem with using Hyatt is that he has 450 yards receiving over 2 seasons with ZERO TDS for the NY Giants.
And then you say “well NY sucks at QB”
THEN you see rookie Malik Nabers on the NY Giants same as Hyatt and he has 1200 yards and 7 TD in one season….


As I’ve said numerous times, this offense needs “more” breadth to its repertoire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GritNGrind1906, OptimusPrimerib, dirtyearlee5 and 5 others
#13
#13
This is kind of like the news channels work. The differences between the NFL and NCAA games with the difference in the hash marks and the NFL being a man first league and NCAA more zone coverage. Vols do run crossing routes, but they are mainly outside with the wide splits and utilizing the TE/RB for interior routes. I do think we will see more WRs catching the ball in the middle of the field this year,Huepel has to make some adjustments this year. Also Nico and Joe didn’t have near the control of the offense, nor did they have as good of WRs that Hendon had.
PS… these same gurus also used to say that running QBs or the spread college style offense wouldn’t make it in the NFL
 
  • Like
Reactions: B81
#14
#14
adam.vol said:
Thank you. You’ve pointed me in a direction so that I can try to learn more.

There seems to be a distinction between the Run N’ Shoot and the Veer N’ Shoot offenses. I started on Wikipedia and somehow found myself on Reddit, where I found a nice comment, not unlike the response you gave to me.

https://www.reddit.com/r/footballst...mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
Click to expand...

Yeah the Art Briles tree of the run n shoot is often called veer n shoot.

I also disagree with some of the comments, like the one claiming run n shoot and veer n shoot don’t share a lot of commonalities. Our base passing game is run n shoot.

One of the bigger differences is due to our increased pace of play, we don’t motion frequently like run n shoot teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#15
#15
LittleVol said:
The problem with using Hyatt is that he has 450 yards receiving over 2 seasons with ZERO TDS for the NY Giants.
And then you say “well NY sucks at QB”
THEN you see rookie Malik Nabers on the NY Giants same as Hyatt and he has 1200 yards and 7 TD in one season….


As I’ve said numerous times, this offense needs “more” breadth to its repertoire.
Click to expand...

Hyatt isn’t having less success than Nabers due to the offense he played in. He’s having less success because he’s not the same level of player
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: OrangeShades, VOLSanon, marcusluvsvols and 5 others
#16
#16
#17
#17
adam.vol said:
Can someone explain why this is about TN and not about all the air raid offenses? Mike Leach had sent receivers to the NFL since the 90’s.

All I can say is NFL coaches used to be able to coach and all they really looked at in evaluations was whether a player had enough size or enough athleticism to compensate and if that player was coachable, based on interviews and references.
Click to expand...
Heupels system is different from Leachs. It’s just a college system. No more. I mean we have a Bilitnekoff winner in the NFL that can do anything.
 
#18
#18
BigOrangeTrain said:
There really isn’t a debate. If it were not true then more of the offensive players Heupel has put in the NFL would be producing.
So far none of them have done anything. Heupels system is for college success only. And there is nothing wrong with that.
Click to expand...

If anything that’s more of positive to his system than a negative. He made a guy who may not be a starting level NFL slot into the best WR in college football.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VOLSanon, Voljayton and B81
#19
#19
It would be interesting to see a systematic analysis of the job performance of these analysts who work for NFL teams. I have a hunch, looking at all of the draft busts that these analysts select, that their job performance is probably middling at best. Analysts for some teams especially so.
 
#20
#20
JohnnyJava said:
It would be interesting to see a systematic analysis of the job performance of these analysts who work for NFL teams. I have a hunch, looking at all of the draft busts that these analysts select, that their job performance is probably middling at best. Analysts for some teams especially so.
Click to expand...

That’s true of the league as a whole. Even the best talent evaluators are only marginally better than average.
 
Last edited:
#22
#22
An interesting in-depth comparison would be with the old wishbone offense, and what player positions in it translated well to NFL play.

When wishbone linemen went to the NFL, were they found to be inexperienced in making certain types of blocks, or executing blocks from certain angles?

Were RBs who were wildly successful in college unable to produce similarly in certain NFL offenses?
-----
Or, how about Spurrier's college receivers? They certainly benefitted from developed prowess catching 50/50 balls! But how about their inexperience running a full route tree? Spurrier's emphasis was on getting isolation against a cornerback and against the sideline. I'm not sure if that left his receivers underdeveloped in other aspects.
 
  • Like
Reactions: adam.vol and SpookyAction
#24
#24
Perhaps you guys should read the article. It doesn’t say anything about preparing players for the nfl, it says it makes “evaluations” hard. In other words, the subject doesn’t like it because it makes his job hard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jackaro and BruisedOrange
#25
#25
#1fulmerite said:
As long as his system is plug and play for our success, who cares?
Click to expand...
Well, recruits care, for one!

What you would be admitting is, that this is an offense fit for mid-major schools, if it cannot attract the best talent.

As effective as our offense is (can be), at which positions does it still require top talent to win in the SEC? Well, every defensive position, for sure! And offensive linemen for sure... which might then include TEs...

How about receivers? How much disparity in speed and size between receiver and defender can the scheme overcome? Not much, I would say, from what we've seen. Because even though the pass is thrown to whomever is going to be most open given the coverage, the defenders also know that, so they understand toward which "open-ish" receiver or area they must be ready to break. That shrinks the window.

Hopefully, we've only seen this offense executed inadequately at Tennessee, and it's actually capable of recreating what it did at UCF.
-----
My biggest question is, why have we not attracted more premier running back recruits? This seems like a great showcase offense for them, requiring the full NFL skillset for the position, while limiting their carries with a view toward extending their career.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top