Our "luck" with West teams

[BanditVol]

http://www.rockytopinsider.com/2016/10/04/tennessee-west-best/

That adds up to a 122-24 cumulative total record for Tennessee’s Western opponents since 2011. But perhaps crazier is their record coming into the game against UT. Outside of an Arkansas team that stumbled out of the gates in 2015, but still found a way to beat the Vols, Tennessee has played the hottest teams. Those teams have come into the game against UT with a combined record of 63-6, with three of those six losses coming from Arkansas last year.

And while the Vols were noticeably more competitive in 2015, the West still holds a 371-144 total scoring edge against UT since 2011.

As I say below, we have not beaten a West opponent since Dooley beat a 4-8 Ole Miss team in 2010.   It's time!   

[tshadow]

Since the fall they have been steeping closer to competing. Aamof you can't say they didn't compete last year.

[Tnphil]

I made a post a couple of weeks back that it seems we play the West teams when they are up and not down...Auburn....Miss State...A&M...Ole Miss and Ark was better last year than this year. Of course the team we play every year, Bama hasn't been down in a good while.

[volsboy]

Hard to imagine Bama beats that group every year. It wasn't that long ago that the East winner won the conference every year and the West was weak. It needs to get back that way.

[BanditVol]

Hard to imagine Bama beats that group every year. It wasn't that long ago that the East winner won the conference every year and the West was weak. It needs to get back that way.

Yep. And it can start this weekend. 

[Tnphil]

Back then Bama wandered in the wilderness for a decade with Dubose, Price and Shula. LSU did the same for several years with Hallman, Archer, Dinardo until Saban and Miles came along. At the same time UT was in good shape under Fulmer and Florida had Spurrier. The past several years it's flopped.

[BanditVol]

Back then Bama wandered in the wilderness for a decade with Dubose, Price and Shula. LSU did the same for several years with Hallman, Archer, Dinardo until Saban and Miles came along. At the same time UT was in good shape under Fulmer and Florida had Spurrier. The past several years it's flopped.

Yes.  I was thinking of this in a slightly different way earlier today.  Fulmer is often derided for growing complacent.  No doubt he did.  But what is often not given enough credit is that the rest of the league stepped up their game.  We beat bammer, Florida and uga in 2004, which is the last time that heppened.  But we lost twice to Auburn, which had just made a revival under Tuberville.  We beat Baby Bowden, and dominated the early part of Tuberville's career, but they caught up.  Then as you point out, Florida and bammer hired Meyer and Satan (and LSU had hired satan first).  Those are literally two of the best coaches in the country.  No.  They are THE TWO best (much as a it gags me to say that).

I think Fulmer did not so much grow complacent as the rest of the league passed him up and he couldn't keep up.  He did try to respond..he hired a spread OC (but that was the wrong response  )

[BanditVol]

And speaking of keeping up, there has been some very interesting discussion surrounding the Miles firing.  First of all, as pointed out above, he had the 7th best win percentage over the last 10 years, and I believe the 4th or 5th best set of recruiting classes.  So you can argue he didn't live up to his talent, but it was very close, and face it, he has to face saban every year.

Having said that, the one word being repeated is stubborn.  Recall back in 2011 LSU beat bammer 9-6 in the regular season and then got blown out in the MNC.  (I still say bammer didn't deserve a rematch, but...water under the bridge  ).

What I recall is that his starting QB was godawful in the championship game and Miles would not sit him.  I thought at the time that it was stupid not to adjust the gameplan.  Well, it was much worse than I thought. Monday Finebaum pointed out (which I never noticed back in 2011) that LSU had installed an option prior to the regular season game that caught bammer off guard.  Thus they won in Tuscaloser 9-6.  Well, the failure to adjust was far worse than I thought.  LSU trotted out the EXACT SAME GAMEPLAN in the championship game.  Apparently Miles thought, "hey, it worked once, it will always work."  And as I point out, even I noticed he failed to adjust during the game.

How fizzleing STUPID is that?  Going up against saban the second time in a season, you don't change your gameplan?  

Also, it has been pointed out that apparently Miles had been ordered to open up the offense by the AD, and he basically blew them off, or just went through the motions.  McIlroy on the SECN was pointing out that it looked like the LSU QBs, many of whom came in highly touted and were very talented, just looked like they were not getting the reps in practice.  Which, thinking about how LSU has played over the years, makes sense.  The QBs often looked rushed and unprepared IMO.

McIlroy also said that if you stress the run game, it takes up a lot of practice time and doesn't leave time for QBs to get reps.  That was a very interesting point, because I have seen footage of a Muschamp practice and he spent like 95% of his time working on the D.

This could explain why places like LSU and UF/USC jr that have coaches who want a power run game and good D can't develop QBs even if they recruit and hire good offensive coaches.  If they can't PRACTICE, they won't DEVELOP, and the HC sets practice priorities.  Mystery solved.    

[Tnphil]

Fulmer hiring Clawsen wasn't a bad move given more time....He's done a pretty darn good job as a HC since he left UT and Wake Forest is having a good year. The problem was he didn't have the players to run his system. Much like when Michigan hired Rich Rod and him using Pro I players trying to run his spread....He was there 3 years and was starting to get his type players in there and he was fired and Brady Hoke was hired and tried to run a Pro-Set with Rich Rods spread players.....Talking about a cluster.

If Fulmer had stayed and left Clawsen alone I think he would have been successful here.

[volsboy]

Yes.  I was thinking of this in a slightly different way earlier today.  Fulmer is often derided for growing complacent.  No doubt he did.  But what is often not given enough credit is that the rest of the league stepped up their game.  We beat bammer, Florida and uga in 2004, which is the last time that heppened.  But we lost twice to Auburn, which had just made a revival under Tuberville.  We beat Baby Bowden, and dominated the early part of Tuberville's career, but they caught up.  Then as you point out, Florida and bammer hired Meyer and Satan (and LSU had hired satan first).  Those are literally two of the best coaches in the country.  No.  They are THE TWO best (much as a it gags me to say that).

I think Fulmer did not so much grow complacent as the rest of the league passed him up and he couldn't keep up.  He did try to respond..he hired a spread OC (but that was the wrong response  )

Historically the Vols are an 8-4 team. I grew up during the Battle and Majors years.  We are what we are.

[CrossVol]

Until Fulmer let things slide we had the highest winning percentage of all Division 1-A teams going back to 1925.  Yet our administration was convinced we weren't a big time program. 

[Creek Walker]

Historically the Vols are an 8-4 team. I grew up during the Battle and Majors years.  We are what we are.

For someone who works so hard to convince everyone he isn't a troll, you sure make some dumb statements.

[FLVOL]

For someone who works so hard to convince everyone he isn't a troll, you sure make some dumb statements.

Yep

[BanditVol]

Fulmer hiring Clawsen wasn't a bad move given more time....He's done a pretty darn good job as a HC since he left UT and Wake Forest is having a good year. The problem was he didn't have the players to run his system. Much like when Michigan hired Rich Rod and him using Pro I players trying to run his spread....He was there 3 years and was starting to get his type players in there and he was fired and Brady Hoke was hired and tried to run a Pro-Set with Rich Rods spread players.....Talking about a cluster.

If Fulmer had stayed and left Clawsen alone I think he would have been successful here.

I'll grant you that maybe switching to the spread was not a terrible idea, but yes, it was the wrong time.  We had the wrong athletes and we really needed someone to develop Crompton as a passer, not someone who would try and run the option with him.  Plus, there was so much pressure on Fulmer already.   With the exception of Cut, who he inherited, Fulmer was pretty bad at hiring assistants.  Chavis developed into a great DC, but only after 2-3 years of growing pains.  I'd say 1998 was when he "got it", and in no small part that's a big reason we won it all that year.

Johnny was known for always hiring a good staff (though from what I hear he would runt about half of em off by being a horses's arse and always pointing fingers at them).

Butch so far has shown a willingness to make major staff changes, and so far I am pretty happy with Debord and very happy with Shoop.   These days a HC doesn't need to do much coaching actually, just make sure the recruits come in and get developed and set the overall philosophy.  Let the staff coach on game day....

[volsboy]

For someone who works so hard to convince everyone he isn't a troll, you sure make some dumb statements.

What part of what I said was not true? I grew up in the Dickey, Battle and Majors era. We've won one title in my lifetime. I was born in 1960. I don't care much what we won from 1925 -1960. We are not a consistent national title contender in my lifetime. A lot of other schools have won multiple titles in my lifetime. We have a lot of states surrounding us that are way better recruiting hotbeds and those schools in those states reap the benefits accordingly. We are at a big disadvantage in that sense. It is harder for us to compete. We do real well if you take that into account.

[Creek Walker]

What part of what I said was not true? I grew up in the Dickey, Battle and Majors era. We've won one title in my lifetime. I was born in 1960. I don't care much what we won from 1925 -1960. We are not a consistent national title contender in my lifetime. A lot of other schools have won multiple titles in my lifetime. We have a lot of states surrounding us that are way better recruiting hotbeds and those schools in those states reap the benefits accordingly. We are at a big disadvantage in that sense. It is harder for us to compete. We do real well if you take that into account.

So which is it? Tennessee is historically an 8-4 team, or you "don't care much" about history? Stop talking out of both sides of your mouth.

What part of it was not true? Pretty much the entire statement. Tennessee is college football's 8th winningest program, behind Michigan, Texas, Notre Dame, Nebraska, Ohio State, Oklahoma and Alabama, in that order.

In Fulmer's 16 years, Tennessee failed to win more than 8 games just 5 times, and won 10+ games 9 times. Fulmer was not an 8-4 coach. Once Majors got the program retooled to his liking, Tennessee failed to win more than 8 games just 2 times in 8 years. In the 6 seasons he was at Tennessee, Dickey lost more than 3 games just once -- his first season. And he lost more than 2 games just twice. Since 1925, Tennessee has had 13 football coaches. If you remove the struggles created by a pair of terrible Hamilton hires, we're down to 10 coaches in 83 years. Of those, 3 — count 'em, THREE — were "8-4" or worse coaches. And even Battle won 10+ games in 3 out of the 7 seasons he was here. Aside from Battle, Bowden Wyatt and Harvey Robinson, Tennessee has traditionally been a contender on the national level. Neyland's record speaks for itself, and John Barnhill never lost more than 2 games when he was here. Go back to the start of the AP poll in 1936, and Tennessee has been ranked in the Top 10 at some point 43 times in 80 years...and ranked in the Top 25 at some point 60 times in 80 years. If you chop off the last 8 years, we were ranked in the Top 10 at some point 42 times in 72 years...which means more often than not, we were in the national title hunt. If you want to use your lame argument that history didn't begin until 1960, Tennessee has been ranked in the Top 10 at some point 31 times in 56 years, or 30 times in 48 years prior to 2008. So your dog still doesn't hunt.

Popping off a moronic statement about how Tennessee is traditionally a mediocre program and then responding that the formative years of the program don't matter when you're called on it is the stuff of trolls and I feel like I should go shower for even giving you the time of day by responding to such a nonsensical claim. Sometimes, though, ignorance is too much for anyone to ignore.

[SmokeyJoe]

Historically the Vols are an 8-4 team. I grew up during the Battle and Majors years.  We are what we are.

Wrong again vol, anti-vol. Not much research required. Now have we been overshadowed by bama? Certainly. Florida in modern times? Certainly Nobody else. Not too shabby an historical record. Check it out.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[SmokeyJoe]

Historically the Vols are an 8-4 team. I grew up during the Battle and Majors years.  We are what we are.

Battle was an historically bad, nearly catastrophic hire. No question. Majors was erratic in the rebuild but got it done. The 70s were not a lot unlike this recent decade past. The 60s the Vols were very, very good! But ol bama was better. Oh well. Things can change quickly. What if the Vols were to rip off a couple more natties? Certainly doable.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[volsboy]

I would not call the Vols a consistent national title contender in my lifetime. I don't see where you think that they are? That's all I am implying. During my lifetime, there have been a lot of schools nationally that have won multiple titles.

[SmokeyJoe]

I really do wonder wtf Bob Woodruff was thinking when here hired Battle. He had never been a head coach. If anything UT has had inept administration. I'll give you that.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[volsboy]

Battle was an historically bad, nearly catastrophic hire. No question. Majors was erratic in the rebuild but got it done. The 70s were not a lot unlike this recent decade past. The 60s the Vols were very, very good! But ol bama was better. Oh well. Things can change quickly. What if the Vols were to rip off a couple more natties? Certainly doable.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

You are correct. I remember the Battle years mostly. I had a few decent teams, but no great ones.

[SmokeyJoe]

I would not call the Vols a consistent national title contender in my lifetime. I don't see where you think that they are? That's all I am implying. During my lifetime, there have been a lot of schools nationally that have won multiple titles.

"Alot"??? A half dozen perhaps, and generally they come in spurts. Perspective. Spurrier only won one. Same for Bowden. What Saban and Meyer have done have smashed all prior coaches other than the bear. Imo. A little perspective you champion caliber human! ;)

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[SmokeyJoe]

You are correct. I remember the Battle years mostly. I had a few decent teams, but no great ones.

Nobody was beating bama back then. Not a lot unlike now, but I certainly remember 20-25 years of relative mediocrity post Bryant for bama & I know you do too :)

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[volsboy]

"Alot"??? A half dozen perhaps, and generally they come in spurts. Perspective. Spurrier only won one. Same for Bowden. What Saban and Meyer have done have smashed all prior coaches other than the bear. Imo. A little perspective you champion caliber human! ;)

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

I guess you forgot about Nebraska, Oklahoma, S. Cal, Miami, etc. There are a lot of schools that are more consistently in the national title discussion than the Vols, in my lifetime, not just the last 20 years. But it doesn't matter. let's see what this season brings us. When Eason fumbled in the end zone  I thought about the Stoerner fumble in 1998. Maybe karma is coming back around to the good side.

[SmokeyJoe]

I guess you forgot about Nebraska, Oklahoma, S. Cal, Miami, etc. There are a lot of schools that are more consistently in the national title discussion than the Vols, in my lifetime, not just the last 20 years. But it doesn't matter. let's see what this season brings us. When Eason fumbled in the end zone  I thought about the Stoerner fumble in 1998. Maybe karma is coming back around to the good side.

I said a half dozen. Throw in flarda & bama. Who else? Miami & USC are unique situations & their record reflects wild swings in success, or lack of. Kinda like Auburn. The Vols would have played for the nattie in 2001. We all know that unfortunate outcome. Oh well.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk