Why did UT lose?

[GulfCoasterVol]

Meh, really stupid take. Culture had nothing to do with getting jobbed by the refs.

If we hadnt missed on wide open TD's the refs would not have been able to job us.

 

[DaddyChad]

If we hadnt missed on wide open TD's the refs would not have been able to job us.

I mean there’s plenty we could change in retrospect. Could’ve tackled the TE on the sideline, could’ve intercepted the ball and probably scored although it was a big ask to come down with and score, could’ve executed, called plays better, managed time better. There’s just so many things that go wrong but are magnified when you don’t have a wealth of talent.

Never particularly thought Dabo or Smart were great in game coaches, they’re both good but talent gets them over coaching mistakes. I will say Heupel really needs to manage time better in some situations though. It’s come up a few times over the season. Still think given the personnel we have currently the staff has done exceptional.

 

[ButchPlz]

I mean there’s plenty we could change in retrospect. Could’ve tackled the TE on the sideline, could’ve intercepted the ball and probably scored although it was a big ask to come down with and score, could’ve executed, called plays better, managed time better. There’s just so many things that go wrong but are magnified when you don’t have a wealth of talent.

Never particularly thought Dabo or Smart were great in game coaches, they’re both good but talent gets them over coaching mistakes. I will say Heupel really needs to manage time better in some situations though. It’s come up a few times over the season. Still think given the personnel we have currently the staff has done exceptional.

In the rules applied tonight, that TE's forward progress was stopped.

 

[JonGrudensAgent]

Don't give up 534 yards passing to a depleted Purdue team and the godawful goal line call in OT doesn't happen.

 

[VAVol85]

Meh, really stupid take. Culture had nothing to do with getting jobbed by the refs.

Definitely got hosed by the refs.

But, just to advance the culture argument proposed by @Chad F ...a program that is accustomed to winning would make the lower risk decision to throw to the middle of the field, kick a 40-yd FG and go celebrate not air it out on two consecutive bombs.

A program that is accustomed to winning expects to be in the red zone and has go-to plays that have a high probability of scoring from inside the 10-yd line.

I like Heupel and appreciate what he has done this year. But, it is possible that we play like a team that is not used to winning and that has to take big risks to do so, rather than just taking care of business.

 

[MT_Vol]

A loser culture still exists here. The team doesn’t win when the big spotlight is on, even when the opponent is entirely beatable. Winners win. Losers lose.

I have no doubt you know all about losers losing...

 

[KoachKrab127]

Agree. Whataboutism is also known as "straw man" arguments. Rather than counter the argument in question, the person props up a "straw man" to knock over, trying to look like they have won the argument.

I've always thought whataboutism was closer to a red herring than a straw man. A red herring is a new topic, a distraction from the topic at hand. A straw man is when you misrepresent another person's argument. For example, if a person said, "The refs really missed that call badly in overtime," a straw man response would be, "So you think the NCAA rigs every game against Tennessee?" They make up a fake argument that is easier to refute, rather than address the argument actually made. A red herring response to the same initial statement would be, "Well, remember in the Kentucky game, UT got lots of favorable calls. It goes both ways." That is an attempt at a distraction, so they don't have to address the actual topic.

 

[presskh]

THIS. We could have won this game in spite of everything had we just gotten 15 yards in the last series and Heupel calls 2 bombs. He's an idiot.

Exactly. This was the true cause of the loss, IMO. Two long bombs in a row when you only needed a few yards and had time outs to burn? Shockingly bad play calls in this situation.

 

[PlanetVolunteer]

We no doubt have to be concerned about Heupel in close games next year.

He beat KY, but we weren't clutch in the other three.

Was the one thing I wondered about with him as I noticed every game UCF lost was close. We are well coached, but Heup has lost a lot of close games going back to UCF.

 

[TNnative]

Look up Robert Neyland's game maxim number 1. "The team that makes the fewest mistakes will win."

Now, watch the game again. Tally up the mistakes. Despite the refs and everything else, and even though our guys gave all they had, I am afraid we will find our team made the most mistakes.

 

[DaddyChad]

Definitely got hosed by the refs.

But, just to advance the culture argument proposed by @Chad F ...a program that is accustomed to winning would make the lower risk decision to throw to the middle of the field, kick a 40-yd FG and go celebrate not air it out on two consecutive bombs.

A program that is accustomed to winning expects to be in the red zone and has go-to plays that have a high probability of scoring from inside the 10-yd line.

I like Heupel and appreciate what he has done this year. But, it is possible that we play like a team that is not used to winning and that has to take big risks to do so, rather than just taking care of business.

I mean Hooker had an open guy. The play was there, the execution was lacking.

 

[kptvol1]

A,B, and C. At this point though, music city bowl ain’t the place for us. It’s kinda like like KPD out patrolling for Vols football players. It’s our territory, but the man trying to squish us like ants.

 

[Chad F]

Definitely got hosed by the refs.

But, just to advance the culture argument proposed by @Chad F ...a program that is accustomed to winning would make the lower risk decision to throw to the middle of the field, kick a 40-yd FG and go celebrate not air it out on two consecutive bombs.

A program that is accustomed to winning expects to be in the red zone and has go-to plays that have a high probability of scoring from inside the 10-yd line.

I like Heupel and appreciate what he has done this year. But, it is possible that we play like a team that is not used to winning and that has to take big risks to do so, rather than just taking care of business.

I think you’re on to something here. My point earlier was that we still have a culture problem (along with other issues). Changing the culture to a winning one is perhaps the biggest challenge we have to overcome. That takes time, unfortunately.

I appreciate your thoughts on this one. I still think Heupel is a good one - and hopefully THE one to get us going - but despite the progress, last night showed we got a heck of a lot more to fix.

 

[Chad F]

I have no doubt you know all about losers losing...

Great intellectual contribution.

Our culture has been bad for years, reaching a nadir under Pruitt. That culture was not fixed in one season and it certainly impacted things. The bad officiating and missing a couple of good players aside, we should have never blown that lead and never should haven been in a position to have the outcome swayed by bad calls.

Another poster made a good point that I’m hadn’t thought of: that the coaching staff made the calls they did at the end of regulation partially because they know the state of the team culture that they are laboring to correct. A very plausible take on things.

 

[tnutater]

Plenty of blame to pass around.
Zebras
Coaches
QB over-throws
Non existent pass defense
Piss poor field condition
Could have won? Sure
45 points beats most mediocre teams.
Should have won?
48 points beats more mediocre teams.

 

[LittleVol]

Taylor opting out weeks ago is a good place to start. Him on the field takes away the no wrap up TD, plus bring more corner blitz’s against a slow QB. Excessive Tennessee PI and selective Purdue PI calls also worth a mention.

Purdue was without their best WR.

Taylor not being there was a wash.

Our head coach needs to improve on his overall philosophy of playing winning football. Should have won that game in the 2nd Qtr. But instead the usual MIDGAME SLUMP happened.

 

[VolsSportsFan]

Either Wright scores or Fant gets flagged for pulling then Huepel definitely kicks a FG at 4th and goal from the 8.

If hooker is accurate or the refs call PI it's a TD or makeable FG and we're celebrating.

If Heupel keeps running with 3 timeouts on a gassed Purdue defense, we kick a very makeable FG and we're celebrating. Even Heupel agrees the way he handled the end of the game was bad.

 

[GetYouSomeofThat]

THIS. We could have won this game in spite of everything had we just gotten 15 yards in the last series and Heupel calls 2 bombs. He's an idiot.

Seriously? An idiot?

Stop drinking.

Had those been executed you would be telling all your buddies how amazing and smart CJH is.

I didnt and dont agree with the calls...but the only idiot is someone saying CJH is an idiot.

 

[FlVols]

All of these excuses and more. We did not play a great game but we did play good enough to win, the field was atrocious. But in the end the biggest thing I will always remember about this year’s bowl game is that the zebras ROBBED US!

 

[GBO18]

Hooker has to hit one of the two guys running wide open on the last drive for a TD. Heupel called the right play. QB has to make the throw. Hooker’s stats shows he had a good game but he missed some big throws that could have possibly put the game away. Had some guys running wide open.

 

[WoodsmanVol]

Just a thunk I have. I think Heup listened to and had faith in his team. The didn't come to Nashville to play tie scores, they came tow in, probably told him as much. And he shares the same attitude. I despise that we lost, I also like the pride Spurrier once exclaimed about the Vols. After yet another Florida victory, one of his players ran up to him and uttered a brag, "Why do those guys think they can win, coach?" Steve answered with some passion, "Tennessee ain't scared of nobody!"

I'm disappointed in the lost like the rest of you, but I like our ballsy coach and team.

 

[Majors]

Purdue was without their best WR.

Taylor not being there was a wash.

Our head coach needs to improve on his overall philosophy of playing winning football. Should have won that game in the 2nd Qtr. But instead the usual MIDGAME SLUMP happened.

Their best WR is a Top 50 NFL prospect, AT is 3-4 round potential. Their next guy up had 217 yards rec. and he was injured to capture bowl MVP. Agree we should ran away with it in the 2nd qtr.

 

[esarmstrong]

I've always thought whataboutism was closer to a red herring than a straw man. A red herring is a new topic, a distraction from the topic at hand. A straw man is when you misrepresent another person's argument. For example, if a person said, "The refs really missed that call badly in overtime," a straw man response would be, "So you think the NCAA rigs every game against Tennessee?" They make up a fake argument that is easier to refute, rather than address the argument actually made. A red herring response to the same initial statement would be, "Well, remember in the Kentucky game, UT got lots of favorable calls. It goes both ways." That is an attempt at a distraction, so they don't have to address the actual topic.

You are right. Straw Man arguments are usually a person's attempt to distort the other person's assertion, but it can also be described as being "red herring" or an outright changing of the topic in mid argument, which is easier to spot as a straw man argument. As I understand it, straw man arguments do one of the following: Ignore the real argument, create a pretend argument, defeat a pretend argument or claim victory over the real argument when you haven't actually won the argument. Anyway, Straw-man arguments are a favorite trick of many posters on VN, myself included ; )

 

[Backwards K]

Why did the Vols lose:
--Missed hold on Tillman at end of regulation/missed TD call in OT
-- Play calling at the end of the half and end of regulation
-- Vols inability to adjust to Purdue's adjustments in 2nd Quarter
-- Vols inability convert short yardage 3rd and 4th down plays (all year)
-- Vols lack of talent at running back (only get what the OL gets them)
-- Vols lack of talent at linebacker, especially in pass coverage
-- Vols complete incompetence in the defensive backfield.
-- Can't tackle
-- Don't have a clue in pass coverage. Seem lost
-- Safeties play too deep and back up on snap but they are always out of position, so they get beat deep anyway
-- No pass rush to speak of. Blitzing was even ineffective for the most part.
-- Purdue's incessant flopping. This allowed them to illegally make the needed substitutions for the down and distance + fresh legs.

If Vols cannot solve their problems at LB, DB, OT, and RB, next year will be a step back. Especially the defense. It is just inept. With that being said, the future is much brighter going forward than it was at this time last year.

 

[CubsFanTN]

Why did the Vols lose:
--Missed hold on Tillman at end of regulation/missed TD call in OT
-- Play calling at the end of the half and end of regulation
-- Vols inability to adjust to Purdue's adjustments in 2nd Quarter
-- Vols inability convert short yardage 3rd and 4th down plays (all year)
-- Vols lack of talent at running back (only get what the OL gets them)
-- Vols lack of talent at linebacker, especially in pass coverage
-- Vols complete incompetence in the defensive backfield.
-- Can't tackle
-- Don't have a clue in pass coverage. Seem lost
-- Safeties play too deep and back up on snap but they are always out of position, so they get beat deep anyway
-- No pass rush to speak of. Blitzing was even ineffective more the most part.

If Vols cannot solve their problems at LB, DB, OT, and RB, next year will be a step back. Especially the defense. It is just inept.

Pretty dang much. Yes, some terrible calls went against us, but 99% of the problem is our own deficiencies that put us in position to let the game be decided by the refs. We have a long way to go, but things are looking up.