Shots Across The Bow

Vols final report card

OK...the anger has been replaced with a sick feeling of frustration. Could the Peach Bowl have been ANY worse?

According to the local sports writers, it could have. I think these guys have been kissing the University's butts for so long, their heads are wedged firmly up Doug's Dickey, and they can no longer see straight.

A few examples:

from Mike Griffith's Peach Bowl report card:

QUARTERBACK (C-): Casey Clausen had his moments, making some good throws and some productive scrambles, but he also made a costly mistake. Clausen overshot his receiver on a screen pass and it was intercepted and returned for a touchdown. Clausen completed 23 of 37 passes for 242 yards.

RUNNING BACKS (F): The longest run of the night was a 10-yarder. Troy Fleming's blocking was embarrassing. Cedric Houston's runs were average, and Jabari Davis (10 carries, 10 yards) was ineffective. Derrick Tinsley had a huge fumble at the Maryland 7. There were also protection breakdowns.

23 of 37 for 242 yards, no touchdowns (except for the INT for Maryland) and that gets a C-, when the running backs get an F for a similar performance? Give me a break Mike. Clausen stunk up the joint.
Again. Why didn't he throw to Fayton after the first half?

Here's more:

SECONDARY (D+) Maryland was an efficient 11 of 19 passing for 120 yards. Gibril Wilson had a team-high 12 tackles, and Rashad Baker had six tackles. Cornerback Julian Battle got beat deep once and had a personal foul. Corey Larkins missed two sack opportunities.

SPECIAL TEAMS (D) Punter Dustin Colquitt was the highlight, averaging 47.7 yards on six punts. The punt coverage broke down late when Steve Suter broke a 79-yard return. but was otherwise good. Alex Walls missed a 41-yard field goal. Larkins ran tentative on kick returns.

Lead the team in tackles, but grade out worse than Clausen? One breakdown on punt coverage (when the game was already out of hand), gets an otherwise good performance a D?

Please!

It gets worse. In Sunday's paper, Mike gives his season report card. Clausen grades out to a B. I'', sorry, but an 8-5 performance, and running dead last in the SEC for scoring offence isn't a B. Not for a team ranked in the top 5 at the beginning of the season.

Receivers graded out to a D. Well, if you aren't going to hold Clausen accountable, I guess you have to blame the receivers. Maybe if Clausen had thrown to the open man, instead of waiting for his favorites, another receiver could have emerged.

The defense, which statistically ranked as the 7th best in the nation, griffith gives a C-, a B and a B-. Let me get this straight; the unit which suffered the lion's share of injuries manages to maintain a top ten ranking, and only gets a C?

The funniest thing was pointed out by the Maryville paper's sports writer, who noticed that the overall grade, D+ was significantly lower than the individual positions average. I think that what Mike was accounting for was an important grade that he couldn't put on the report card.

COACHING.

I'll say what he couldn't.

F--.

Here are my grades:

Quarterbacks: D
Clausen gets a D-. His off the field comments coupled with his on the field actions contributed to tearing this team apart. He made poor throwing decisions, lost his composure during the Florida game, bad mouthed his team mates after the Georgia game, all while achieving the lowest scoring percentage of any quarterback at Tennessee that I can remember. James Banks may not know the schemes yet, but he showed a willingness to do whatever he could to win. He gets a C. We never got to see enough of Leak, so he gets an Incomplete.

Running BacksC
Jabari Davis, Derrick Tinsley, and Cedric Housaton all gave it their best, but were hampered by injuries, both to them and to the offensive line. Troy Fleming was called on this year to fulfill the traditional fullbacks roll, and failed to answer the call. I can't count the number of times I saw him fall flat on his face after failing to pick up the blitzing end.

ReceiversC
Kelley Washington gets a D-. He started off the season running his mouth, tearing up the team. Unfortunately all he could run was his mouth, unless he was dodging for the sidelines, where he was plenty quick. There's no denying his physical skills; the man has a spin move that virtually guarantees 10 yards after the catch. But he never fully realized those skills when it counted; when the game was on the line. He couldn't be counted on to block downfield, or to misdirect defenses when the play wasn't coming his way. He simply is not a team player. Countering his score was Jason Witten, who gets an A. Jason did all that was asked of him, and all I can say is that if he decides to stay another year, it would be a mistake. UT has nothing to offer him.

Offensive LineD
True, they were riddled with injuries, but started to pull together during the last couple of games. Then in the Peach Bowl, they couldn't handle two guys who weren't good enough to get scholarships, and walked on at Maryland. In a word, pathetic.

Defense A-
Defense alone kept us in the Georgia game. And the Bama game. And the Peach Bowl...at least until they were exhausted. Our number of interceptions skyrocketed from last year. Had we any kind of offense, we would have gone 10-2 in the regular season, and potentially 11-1. John Chavis deserves the raise that Fulmer is going to get.

Special TeamsC+
I don't disagree too much with Griffith's assessment here.

CoachingF-
You all know how I feel about Randy Sanders, so I won't rake him over the coals again. Besides, with the meltdown of the Peach Bowl, I now have to consider the possibility that he did the best he could with the cards he was dealt. It does say something when the Offensive co-ordinator, the guy in charge of devising the game plan, doesn't know until a few hours before a major game that his star receiver isn't going to play. Who was responsible for letting him know that this was a possibility? We'll get back to that. First, John Chavis grades oput to an A-. To accomplish what he did with the injuries he had to deal with is nothing short of amazing. The fact that he has decided to stay with UT is a blessing and the only mitigating factor I can find in Fulmer's performance. If Chavis wants to stay, Fulmer must be doing something right.

Coach Fulmer, on the other hand, gets an F. Befoer the season ever started, it was clear that he didn't have a handle on this team. There were no clear leaders; nobody to step up and take the place of the Al Wilsons, Leonard Littles, Peyton Mannings who led the team on and off the field. Instead we had Kelley Washington telling us he was playing for himself, not the team. We had Casey Clausen, badmouthing the performance of the team when he couldn't play. Instead of stepping on it early, telling Kelley Washington to pipe down, Fulmer allowed it to continue, and the worst fears of the fans were realized. We didn't have a team this year, we had a bunch of guys wearing a uniform, and it showed in their performance.

A lot of people want to know what the Head Coach's job is. There's an offensive coordinator who designs the offense and calls the plays; there's a defensive coordinator who designs the defensive schemes, and there are coaches for every position, ensuring their players know the right techniques for their position. So what is left for the head coach?

It's his job to build all of these positions, players and coaches into a team. He harnesses the egos, converting them into a cohesive unit that is greater than the sum of it's parts. A lot of years, it's an easy job; you have kids on the team who can do most of it for you. This year was a true test of Fulmer's coaching ability, because there were no real leaders on the team; nobody stepped up to bring the team together. The fact that we were still having trouble getting the right number of players on the field in our 13th game of the season demonstrates just how much control Fulmer lost.

OverallD
Something Pat Summitt said comes to mind. She says that you can't coach intensity; your team either wants to win, or it doesn't. The 2002 Vols didn't want to win. Coach Fulmer takes the heat for that, because that is his job; at the same time, the players themselves have to take some of the heat. There were bad attitudes on the team starting in the spring. Rather than stamp them out, the players let them spread.

Should we fire some coaches? I don't believe in firing somebody just to make a change. We should ask the question, "Can we find somebody better to replace them?" I like Fulmer. He's an excellent recruiter and a good coach. There aren't many coaches with a National Championship under their belts. It'll take more than one season for me to say it's time for him to go. But he has a hard job ahead of him; he has to get his team back. The great coaches are able to rebound from a bad year; we should see marked improvement next year. Not necessarily in the record, since our schedule is much tougher next year. Buit we should see a team on the field, not just a bunch of guys.

We need to keep Chavis. Period.

Sanders, on the other hand, well, let's just say I wouldn't cry to see him pursue other opportunities. He hasn't demonstrated the flexibility to adapt to changing conditions, or the guts necessary to run a wide open offense, something that is at the heart of SEC football.

Posted by Rich at January 6, 2003 12:43 AM