VolQuest: DC Job Likely Down to Conklin and Rodgers

#151
#151
ABINGDON VOL FAN said:
Actually Wikipedia is more accurate than the old bound encyclopedias. If there is inaccurate info. posted it usually is corrected in a few minutes or hours.
Click to expand...

This is actually closer to true than people on here want to admit. I teach an AP class and a group of us were talking recently about how the stigma that surrounds Wikipedia today is from 15 years ago when it really was the wild west. Adults that were told not to use it as students now look at it as evil and the teachers that originally said not to use it at all are set in their ways.

I would never, ever recommend a student to cite Wikipedia as a source, but if you want a quick overview of something it does the trick. I've seen some of the very best students use worse sources than Wikipedia before.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol_0311, ABINGDON VOL FAN and T2P_Priceless
#152
#152
TnAngler said:
Outstanding! It took us a little bit but we got two DC instead of one. The way have played the pst few years, could be good to have two DC’s.
Click to expand...

I would put money on it that someone here on VN reading this very thread is changing shizz on Wikipedia just for a laugh haha
 
  • Like
Reactions: TnAngler
#153
#153
ABINGDON VOL FAN said:
It’s a good source of information. For instance if you wanted to get good info on The “Battle of the Bulge” , you would get a fairly accurate and detailed synopsis of the event. No publication or worded text can be 100% confirmed as accurate or truthful. The possible bias or intent of the person providing the information has to be taken into account. Same as the old bound encyclopedias. Wikipedia is actually better overall than those publications because it is peer reviewed almost continuously.
Click to expand...
Wow! That is a load of crap.
 
#154
#154
BigOrangeTrain said:
AP and Hubbs said Garner was hired as an analyst. Same as Steele.
Click to expand...

I think you keep those two onboard and find a spot no matter what. If the DC wants their own coaches then you hire coaches and call Garner/Steele analysts. If the DC wants them as coaches then you give them that title. Either way you dont let them leave.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cobb-Webb 1989, BigOrangeTrain and preacherwebb
#158
#158
Baba_Yaga78 said:
I think you keep those two onboard and find a spot no matter what. If the DC wants their own coaches then you hire coaches and call Garner/Steele analysts. If the DC wants them as coaches then you give them that title. Either way you dont let them leave.
Click to expand...

I don't think Analysts are allowed to recruit, right? Don't think they'd bring either of those two guys in and not have them on the road recruiting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T2P_Priceless
#159
#159
SpaceCoastVol said:
What does one have to do with the other?
Click to expand...

When you have a high paced offense that doesn’t take much time off the play clock it doesn’t give your defense much time to rest.

Therefore you coach your defenses to take more chances, more risk to get turnovers, sacks, negative plays. You’ll give up more big plays too.
 
#161
#161
PA Vol said:
This is actually closer to true than people on here want to admit. I teach an AP class and a group of us were talking recently about how the stigma that surrounds Wikipedia today is from 15 years ago when it really was the wild west. Adults that were told not to use it as students now look at it as evil and the teachers that originally said not to use it at all are set in their ways.

I would never, ever recommend a student to cite Wikipedia as a source, but if you want a quick overview of something it does the trick. I've seen some of the very best students use worse sources than Wikipedia before.
Click to expand...

so is wiki the best of the worst?
 
#163
#163
TnAngler said:
The only issue is that it can be changed easily without having to be verified. It is hard to trust.
Click to expand...
It is peer reviewed and people viewing it can point out to the moderators that something is not right. I have only questioned the accuracy of a topic one time and the article was corrected within minutes. As a matter of fact it was regarding Tn. Football and Phillip Fulmer back when he was hired as AD back in late 2017. It’s better than the bound encyclopedias which wouldn’t be able to correct an inaccuracy until the next edition.
 
#165
#165
Well....for my money....after what we have been through....we need 12 men on defense. I think that's fair and I have a plan. I'll do it on the cheap for roughly $500K per year with 5 years buyout.
 
#167
#167
Hearing Conklin .. is taking the job .. cant give sources ..dont want to get them in trouble with DW ...
 
#169
#169
Nouveaux said:
I don't think Analysts are allowed to recruit, right? Don't think they'd bring either of those two guys in and not have them on the road recruiting.
Click to expand...

There have Been cases of on field coaches staying off the road and analist/ quality control coaches taking their places........ I don't know the rules but i remember it taking place before.

That being said you keep those guys around period. They are proven position coaches on top of recruiting experience. If recruiting is the biggest reason then they can be off field recruiting coordinator and teach their methods to the others..... IF NOTHING ELSE......
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nouveaux
#170
#170
ABINGDON VOL FAN said:
I deleted the TN reference for Rodgers and the changes were accepted.
Click to expand...
Which proves the point about Wikipedia. The validity of the information provided on Wikipedia is dependent on the level of lunacy of the most recent person to edit whatever page you're viewing...and you have no way of knowing what that level of lunacy is.
 
#171
#171
Vol423 said:
Which proves the point about Wikipedia. The validity of the information provided on Wikipedia is dependent on the level of lunacy of the most recent person to edit whatever page you're viewing...and you have no way of knowing what that level of lunacy is.
Click to expand...
Actually your missing the point. It is peer reviewed continuously. If incorrect info is posted it can be immediately corrected.
 
#172
#172
Vol423 said:
Which proves the point about Wikipedia. The validity of the information provided on Wikipedia is dependent on the level of lunacy of the most recent person to edit whatever page you're viewing...and you have no way of knowing what that level of lunacy is.
Click to expand...
no, wiki is peer reviewed a ton. every edit gets put in a review action item list. crap can stay on there for a little while, but not long.
 
#174
#174
ABINGDON VOL FAN said:
It is peer reviewed and people viewing it can point out to the moderators that something is not right. I have only questioned the accuracy of a topic one time and the article was corrected within minutes. As a matter of fact it was regarding Tn. Football and Phillip Fulmer back when he was hired as AD back in late 2017. It’s better than the bound encyclopedias which wouldn’t be able to correct an inaccuracy until the next edition.
Click to expand...


I guess it all depends on whose truth it is that gets posted and taken as fact.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top