Vandy Loss = Pruitt Sucks

#1

Neyland Law Vol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
8,189
Likes
3,421
#1
I keep hearing this over and over. "Pruitt isn't the answer. He lost to Vandy. No coach worth the job gets beat by Vandy!"

In general I agree - Losses to Vandy aren't acceptable. But you cannot judge coaches based on year one results.
  1. Year One Kirby Smart at UGA (with loaded roster) - lost to Vandy also.
  2. The classic example (year one Saban at Bama lost to La. Monroe).
You can't judge CJP good or bad based on his year one results.

Year 2 is a different story. Let's see what happens. If he has a chance to be good we should see some improvement this season. But when judging year two you have to take the starting point (4-8 in 2017). I think 7-5 in 2019 will be a good step - with 8-4 being a very positive sign.

But please no more references to "he lost to vandy so he sucks".
 
#4

XknoxvolsX

The only people who dislike winners are losers!
Joined
Mar 11, 2019
Messages
1,072
Likes
975
#4
No excuses for losses this year to teams with less talent, our 2nds and 3rds should be coached up enough to hold their own vs the bottom feeders.
What about the annual excuse of injuries that have been used for over the past decade and a half?

Fulmer milked that one and so did Butch.
 
#10

Woodlawn VOL

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2018
Messages
1,019
Likes
1,504
#10
I keep hearing this over and over. "Pruitt isn't the answer. He lost to Vandy. No coach worth the job gets beat by Vandy!"

In general I agree - Losses to Vandy aren't acceptable. But you cannot judge coaches based on year one results.
  1. Year One Kirby Smart at UGA (with loaded roster) - lost to Vandy also.
  2. The classic example (year one Saban at Bama lost to La. Monroe).
You can't judge CJP good or bad based on his year one results.

Year 2 is a different story. Let's see what happens. If he has a chance to be good we should see some improvement this season. But when judging year two you have to take the starting point (4-8 in 2017). I think 7-5 in 2019 will be a good step - with 8-4 being a very positive sign.

But please no more references to "he lost to vandy so he sucks".
Why did you go make a thread about it then. Saban lost to Louisana Monroe his first year. That type of talk is what grade school kids do. He lost to vandy he is no good automatically??? This type of stuff is so stupid just like the start of this thread quite frankly, you start a thread with that title and then proceed to preach about something that 95% percent of us all ready new. GBO!!!! Go Pruitt and staff!
 
#11

EZE

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
8,926
Likes
6,650
#11
I keep hearing this over and over. "Pruitt isn't the answer. He lost to Vandy. No coach worth the job gets beat by Vandy!"

In general I agree - Losses to Vandy aren't acceptable. But you cannot judge coaches based on year one results.
  1. Year One Kirby Smart at UGA (with loaded roster) - lost to Vandy also.
  2. The classic example (year one Saban at Bama lost to La. Monroe).
You can't judge CJP good or bad based on his year one results.

Year 2 is a different story. Let's see what happens. If he has a chance to be good we should see some improvement this season. But when judging year two you have to take the starting point (4-8 in 2017). I think 7-5 in 2019 will be a good step - with 8-4 being a very positive sign.

But please no more references to "he lost to vandy so he sucks".
This same argument first appeared for Dooley...then Butch...and now Pruitt.

I hope the third time’s a charm.
 
#12

Trent4Pruitt4life

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2019
Messages
327
Likes
239
#12
I keep hearing this over and over. "Pruitt isn't the answer. He lost to Vandy. No coach worth the job gets beat by Vandy!"

In general I agree - Losses to Vandy aren't acceptable. But you cannot judge coaches based on year one results.
  1. Year One Kirby Smart at UGA (with loaded roster) - lost to Vandy also.
  2. The classic example (year one Saban at Bama lost to La. Monroe).
You can't judge CJP good or bad based on his year one results.

Year 2 is a different story. Let's see what happens. If he has a chance to be good we should see some improvement this season. But when judging year two you have to take the starting point (4-8 in 2017). I think 7-5 in 2019 will be a good step - with 8-4 being a very positive sign.

But please no more references to "he lost to vandy so he sucks".
It's not that he just lost to Vandy, he got destroyed by Vandy And when that's the game that determines Bowl eligibility that's concerning. South Carolina loss didn't help either.
 
#15

Tin Man

Dirt's Childhood Playmate
Joined
Mar 9, 2015
Messages
16,717
Likes
8,021
#15
year one Saban at Bama lost to La. Monroe
Let us pause to appreciate the P40s taking it to Bama at Tuscaloosa. Once, the Warhawks had to play a home game at a stadium other than their own to avoid dropping below requisite annual FBS attendance numbers. Yeah, some will spin it as the listless Tide's embarrassing loss ("They lost that game more than ULM won it."), but let a smile be on your face. Be happy for ULM. After all, they are not North Texas (10/25/75).
 
#16

Pride85

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2010
Messages
2,623
Likes
2,707
#16
No excuses for losses this year to teams with less talent, our 2nds and 3rds should be coached up enough to hold their own vs the bottom feeders.
Then I guess your beef for last year was the coaching staff that did not get the team in the proper position to succeed. The team was horrid the year before last. That is not on Pruitt. Let's see if there is significant improvement this year. Although, members of the miserable minority will find something to complain about I am sure.
 
Likes: tobybeast
#19

VolBricks

Thank You Sir, May I Have Another
Joined
Dec 5, 2013
Messages
1,634
Likes
2,408
#19
No excuses for losses this year to teams with less talent, our 2nds and 3rds should be coached up enough to hold their own vs the bottom feeders.
The problem is that we are the bottom feeders, I hate this but it is true. We have been the worst or next to worst team in the east for several years. We are not more talented that than most teams in the east even this year, but we are catching up and this coaching staff is the best we have had since Fulmer. I don't say these words lightly. I have been a Vols fan most of my life and I am getting old.
 
#21

VOLINVONORE

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
8,728
Likes
4,326
#21
No excuses for losses this year to teams with less talent, our 2nds and 3rds should be coached up enough to hold their own vs the bottom feeders.
And who decides who has the better talent? At which positions are the teams better? What is the experience of the team, Oline .Dline. QB, punter, kicker: where are the holes? Many questions lead to who has the most talent. Most championship teams have superior talent on the Oline Dline. QB, defensive backs who can play man , at least two good running backs, fast /quick LB, WRs who can get open and block a punter who averages over 41 yds/pt, and a kicker who hits 75% of field goals and puts kickoffs in th end zone. I think I covered most of the positions on a football team. Bama and Clemson seem to fit those requirements. thank goodness who only have to play Bama during the regular season. I would like to play Bama twice a year ,win half of those games, and play Clemson 2-3 times in any five year period. I don't think think we can do that this year, but we are likely to be there by 2021 or 2020. I look forward to the next 10-15 years of Tennessee football.
 
#23

sjt18

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
37,794
Likes
17,452
#23
What about the annual excuse of injuries that have been used for over the past decade and a half?

Fulmer milked that one and so did Butch.
I got attacked for saying that injury rates above the norm were products of the HC's program and decisions. Later when Jones was fired... that became a popular theme.

Injuries can hurt a team. All teams have abnormal years when higher than avg injuries occur... but they also have years with low injuries. When a HC (like Jones) goes 4 or 5 years with higher injury rates, it is him.
 
#24

Neyland Law Vol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
8,189
Likes
3,421
#24
I got attacked for saying that injury rates above the norm were products of the HC's program and decisions. Later when Jones was fired... that became a popular theme.

Injuries can hurt a team. All teams have abnormal years when higher than avg injuries occur... but they also have years with low injuries. When a HC (like Jones) goes 4 or 5 years with higher injury rates, it is him.
You were right on this.
 

VN Store



Sponsors
 

Top