Comments by oldster

Written on Top women's basketball recruit A'ja Wilson picks South Carolina:

The Lady Vols have lost their status in the nation, and now, it appears they may be losing it in the conference as well. Hopefully, this number one recruit is no better than last year's.

Written on John Adams: UT's next move needs to be as good as Cuonzo Martin's was :

in response to 81volguy:

Right but it's just a matter of investing in the future. Which I'm sure is a foreign concept to you, since by your moniker I assume you don't have much of a future.

Neither does anyone or any thing who or which keeps throwing good money after bad. E.g. the United States of America.

Written on New York Liberty rescues Meighan Simmons with 26th pick of WNBA draft:

in response to bfaj34#1436246:

Uneducated comments should be a crime. Know the Simmons story before posting. She was not an All American at all. Candace Parker found her by chance and told Pat about her who offered her a scholarship immediately. And we wonder why Cuonzo left. Disappointing how fickle we are as fans. These are kids and people and you're all sideline idiots waiting for the chance to pounce. Get a life and if you do go to church, pray for forgiveness for hypocrisy. Lord have mercy.

I was replying to a comment which implied a condemnation of the Lady Vols' coaching staff being unable to win big enough with 12 McDonald's All Americans in the last 8 years. I was not referring to Simmons at all. I have no idea if the person to whom I was replying was or not.

Therefore, your insult showed an inability to comprehend. I.e. a lack of intelligence. This is much worse than ignorance as the latter can be overcome by education while the former is going to be with you forever.

Written on UT players, media weigh in on social media about Cuonzo Martin:

The players should take the blame for how their coach was treated. Had they played better, he would have gotten more respect. Winning is the name of the game. Do it and get respect. Don't and you won't.

Maybe it should not be that way, but it should not be this darned cold in April either.

Written on John Adams: UT's next move needs to be as good as Cuonzo Martin's was :

in response to 81volguy:

Agreed. Open up the checkbook and go get Marshall.

Easy for you to say. It is not your checkbook.

Written on Reactions of Tennessee students to Cuonzo Martin leaving vary:

in response to norma-bob#1420407:

Just way until he starts paying CA taxes

And has to pay the higher cost of living. He better get a whole lot more money in CA if he wants or thinks to have the same standard of living he has had in East TN.

I would not move to CA for 10 times my salary here. I cannot speak Spanish, and do not wish to learn.

Written on New York Liberty rescues Meighan Simmons with 26th pick of WNBA draft:

in response to RLL59:

Or more likely those basketball experts are asking how a coaching staff could sign 12 McDonald's All Americans since 2008, and still not develop even for one year a team or players that can compete with the best.

I think most of them are thinking that many of the girls that make McDonald's All Americans do so because they were much better than most of their high school competition, but, when they get into college find that, like Simmons, do not stand out quite so much against other talented women.

Written on [Updated] Cuonzo Martin leaving UT for California; search for his replacement begins:

in response to TNlogfire:

2 words, 1 name.....Rick Byrd.

Tommy Amaker.

Written on [Updated] Cuonzo Martin leaving UT for California; search for his replacement begins:

in response to johnlg00:

I'm sorry, but that argument is just stupid on its face. Martin was never more than the 10th-highest-paid coach in the SEC, yet his teams never finished lower than fifth and the attendance was never below second in the whole league and in the top five in the country! I'm not saying that is "enough", since I would like to see the Vols in the championship hunt every year, but it surely does make a mockery of the idea that Martin wasn't worth at least a little more than he was already being paid, a little more respect from those who call themselves Vols fans, and a bit more vocal support from his boss.

I would not put any of the coaches in the SEC, other than Donovan and Calipari in a category of better than average major college coaches. I.e. you are judging by a flawed standard. I would also argue that all the coaches in the SEC, with those same two exceptions - and maybe Martin and Rick Stansberry - are overpaid. To support my argument: where did any of the rest who were coaches when Martin started at UT, go when they were fired? For that matter, is Cal a step up in terms of basketball competition?

I do NOT think Martin deserved more than he was paid. I think the other coaches in the SEC deserve less.

Written on [Updated] Cuonzo Martin leaving UT for California; search for his replacement begins:

in response to Theo:

Why would the man be loyal to TN at all? Some of the redneck fan base hated him the moment he stepped on campus. Then someone thought an online petition would be a great idea. Do you think his family saw that at all?
BTW - Bruce LIED, LIED, LIED to the NCAA!!!! He should never coach in college again and it would have been an absolute travesty for UT to have anything to do with him again. So we got in a good guy, great man, kids loved him, respected him etc. and we treated him like dirt from the first minute he arrived on campus. We will get what we deserve in a new coach and it will not be pretty.

If Martin left because of criticism, he should not be coaching. Any coach, at any level, from youth sports to the pros, gets criticized - a lot.

Written on New York Liberty rescues Meighan Simmons with 26th pick of WNBA draft:

The pros probably looked at Simmons' stats against the best teams as they are not good. She simply has not shown that she can compete well against the best players and the WNBA is pretty much made up of just that type player.

This result shows what basketball experts think of the talent that the Lady Vols are playing with - especially since she was the team's "star." It should also show what a great job Holly has done winning with talent that is held in such low esteem by said basketball experts.

Written on [Updated] Cuonzo Martin leaving UT for California; search for his replacement begins:

Martin seems to be developing into a decent basketball coach. He is not, at the moment, more than that. Whether or not he will continue to improve is subject to conjecture. The Golden Bears are betting that he will. I do not know how much they are placing on that bet, but I have not seen enough to want to bet any more than UT seems to be willing to do. I.e. I do not know that Martin is worth a bigger salary than UT was willing to pay. Were I in Hart's shoes, I would not if for no other reason than UT has gambled and lost so much on football coaches in the last decade. Not even the UT athletic department has an endless supply of money.

Written on Jarnelll Stokes says college athletes need more money:

in response to 81volguy:

What are you talking about? In college sports, the people who are the leaders, the moneymakers, ARE the players; it's not the university -- is that what you think? Think about it.... this is true in professional sports as well. The NBA, MLB, NFL, are all governed by labor contracts that guarantee big salaries to the actual people who drive revenue. Your example is infantile. We all know the CEO of Wal Mart makes millions while the people at the cashier stations make $7.50 an hour. Somehow you think that justifies the collegiate athletic system? I suppose you think it's cool that that top 5 percent controls 90 percent of the wealth. "Oh, that's just how the world works." Perhaps. But that's not what made America great -- it was the middle class. And that's being squeezed. Same with college athletes. Most of these kids are from poor backgrounds. You say, "Oh, if they don't like it, they should do something else." What? Don't you think they should benefit from their talents according to the marketplace instead of being indentured by a socialistic system? You say, I say, "Pay them what they are worth, and if YOU don't like it, watch another sport." Peace.

The reason that the CEOs, managers, etc. make more money than the workers, is because their skills are exceptional and in demand. They sacrificed to get the education that most of the workers did not. The value of a good CEO can be seen by the many business turn arounds that have accompanied changes in leadership.

In college football, look at the difference that occurred at Alabama when they ditched Shula in favor of Saban. Think that business has gotten its money's worth? Think any one player, or even a group of them is worth as much as Saban?

College athletes are getting benefits from their skills and efforts on behalf of the college - whether they are from poor backgrounds or not. They are being given the skills necessary to lead a productive and profitable life - whether in sports or not. The total value of what they are being given is totally up to them.

BTW: The middle class helped make America great. However, without the Vanderbilts, the Gettys, the J.P.Morgans, the Edisons, the robber barons, the railroad tycoons, etc. etc., the middle class would not have mattered because they would have had no jobs. I should say, WE, as I am a member of that class. The difference is, I appreciate those geniuses, those ambitious, those rich that provided me with the opportunity to make a living.

Written on Jarnelll Stokes says college athletes need more money:

in response to 81volguy:

What about the other 90% who make it possible for the stars to shine? What are they worth?

Individually, they aren't worth anything. Collectively, they are worth something. If they organized and boycotted maybe they could make a statement. But Stokes is worth something individually. Otherwise you wouldn't care. Your arguments are hollow -- "they are getting paid for their education, etc., etc." So? They are also making millions for the NCAA and the the universities. Why shouldn't they be paid for that?

Because they signed a contract saying that they would? If they did not or do not like the contract, I can think of lots of guys who would. Granted the level of skill of the athletic contests might not be as good, but, heck, I enjoy watching good high school, or even 7 years olds play as much as I enjoy the pros (and their egos are not nearly so disgusting).

Written on Jarnelll Stokes says college athletes need more money:

in response to tntuba#225866:

The value of an athletic scholarship at the University of Tennessee for an our of state student
Tuition and Fees $29,684
Dorm room $5,600
Meal Plan $3,902
Books $3,072
Tutoring $2,880
Free Clothing $1,500
That's $46,638

Average HOUSEHOLD income in Tennessee $44,140!!!

They are getting paid enough. If they don't like the deal they are getting then they don't have to play. They can do like the rest of us did...get a job and or join the Military to pay our way.

Hear, hear!

Written on Jarnelll Stokes says college athletes need more money:

in response to 81volguy:

Dude, try to live in the current century.

If tats are in and cell phones have reached the point of being a necessity, I would rather not. The Communists may now be right - we are a decadent society.

Written on Butch Jones says defense at Orange and White game was 'unacceptable':

in response to BrassMonkey:

Same old, same old. Wait for the excuses to start after we drop the prime time home opener to Utah State and continue till we get embarrassed by a Vandy team with a fresh coach.

I believe I will wait to be pessimistic. In Spring, hope springs eternal. I hope for 6-6 and a bowl game. I expect 5-7.

Written on Jarnelll Stokes says college athletes need more money:

in response to 81volguy:

Phones are mandatory. I grew up without computers but they are mandatory now. Times change. As for the tattoos, they aren't that expensive. He's right, it's a crime for these athletes to not have a living wage. The university and other companies make millions off them and they can't even buy dinner. It's ridiculous.

Cell phones are NOT a necessity. You just think they are because you have always had one and could not imagine living without one. It is NOT necessary to stay in touch with everyone you know 24/7. Leave a message.

Computers are now an integral part of an education now. Agreed, but they are needed to do research and type up and save homework and assignments.

Tats are expensive enough that the money used to buy them could be used to pay for several of the meals that are, for some reason - evidently - necessary for some athletes over and above their food allowance.

These athletes can afford to eat. To say otherwise is pure baloney.

Written on Jarnelll Stokes says college athletes need more money:

in response to vut5686#1405392:

There is nothing wrong with this logic; it is factual, historic and depicts one side of the equation: the player's. It sides with the status quo, and suggest athletes be happy with their lot. They signed on.

What is does not address is the other side. For starters, why should coaches be paid more than professors? It was said Woody Hayes refused to be paid more than that. (Rumor; I have not verified it.) But that was clearly in another time. Why should a college coach earn more than a high school coach, who, exists on a teachers salary plus a (usually) small stipend. One could argue a high school coach, who might labor in the same place for a lifetime, contributes more to society than any college coach. As in most industries, we (fans, society) just place more value on the college coach than the high school coach...and that value has increased out of proportion to the players'.

I happened to have washed the first dish in the newly opened student center at UT; I worked up to full time to get by. I was paid minimum wage. My managers and supervisors were paid more....but not much; it was porportionate.

The situation now, between the workers (players) and the rest (coaches, media, marketers, university giving efforts, tied to athletics, simply out of proportion.

There is a strong argument that athletics do little, if anything, to further the basic purpose of a college. Some argue it promotes interest....and contributions....that help all facets of university life. If that be true, it cancels the argument that players should just be thankful for their room, board and tuition. If fans, alumni and the public will not support their school "without" athletics, they obviously do not value that schools purpose on its own merits. So, why should players?

Again, there is no balance. Can't argue that players should be content and look the other way while all the rest help themselves to the take.

I never said that they had to be content. I just said that if they cannot be, then do not take the deal. No one is forcing them to do it.

I played football for fun. I worked out - for fun. I had no hope or dreams of playing professionally and, therefore, did not seek out expert coaching.

If players do not like the current system, then they can turn pro. If they lack the physical and/or emotional maturity to turn pro, then they can either accept the current situation, or not and work out on their own. Of course, if they work on their own, they will have to find an expert coach who will work for free (good luck with that) or pay one a good wage (where will the money come from).

Coaches get paid more than professors because of something called the marketplace. Now, I know that in today's society, capitalism is not appreciated, but it is what has given our country the economy it has and is losing because of the desire, of a large percentage, if not a majority to level society (i.e. give everyone, regardless of the demand for what they do, or the exceptional skill with which they do it, the same wage).

There is also the practical aspect of paying college athletes. How does one figure out, who gets what? Should every athlete get the same amount? Should the ones who generate the most jersey sales get a percentage? Should the starters get more? Should the most highly recruited athletes get more in order to induce them? What would be the effects of any pay system? If everyone got the same, would the guy who started every game, scored a record amount of points, sold more jerseys, etc, not demand more money than the guy who never played a down? Would he not pout and sit out once he had proven his NFL value? If you pay the stars more, would the guys who support him and make him a star, not undermine him in order to show how important they are?

Lastly, where is the money going to come from? Paying 85 football players and 13 basketball players something might be doable for schools like UT, but would it be for Tusculum, Carson-Newman, or even the less successful Division One schools. For that matter, could even the most successful ones afford to pay ALL their scholarship athletes the same amount (remember Title IX?)?

Written on Jarnelll Stokes says college athletes need more money:

in response to Alpha-Snail:

Holy cow! You just destroyed Oldster's argument. Your points are well made, and I express my views precisely.

As for the argument that many budgets barely break even, there's two solutions...either cut the over bloated pay of coaches or allow colleges the choice to pay players. If it's a choice, the schools that value football the most would pay for the best athletes, and the other schools could recruit the rest.

Wait destroyed nothing, Snail. His "argument" is trite and moot.

Scholarship athletes know before they sign what they will be getting and what they won't - just as I, and others like me, did. If any of us do not like what we are VOLUNTEERLY getting into, then we should not have done it. No one put a gun to Stokes' or any other scholarship athlete's head to make them get a free education, free coaching, etc, etc in return for the things he does and generated. He had options. I sure he could have made the money he has missed by going to Eur

Written on Jarnelll Stokes says college athletes need more money:

in response to WaitUntilNextYear:

You really are a curmudgeon and another member of the flat earth society. Stokes articulates a major problem today in college athletics. He told the truth and also acknowledged his respect for UT having ethics. His words are insightful. Unlike the chip on your shoulder.
The difference is no one paid to see you do anything. And no one would buy a paisley shirt just because you had it on. You didn't generate revenue in bars, restaurants, gas stations, airports, airlines, ticket offices, shoe stores and clothing stores.
There was no radio or tv stations talking about you constantly.
It's not about you, you didn't play for UT, it's about college athletes getting a meager stipend when companies and UT fill their 100 million dollar athletic budget because of the players.
If this was corporate America there would be thousands of lawsuits yearly, oh wait it is with no injustices according to the NCAA.

I am a member of an older generation. It was a generation which was different in many ways when we were young from today's. However, it is NOT different in that we wanted, needed, had to have more money. The major difference is that few of us looked for someone to give it to us. Moreover, most of us had enough sense to realize that one does not sign a contract unless one was willing to accept the responsibilities it imposed for the benefits that were outlined.

You are wrong in believing that I have a chip on my shoulder. I am proud that I earned what I have. I think that everyone would be proud of earning what they get. I also am proud of the fact that I have taken time to realize what a contract demanded and offered before I signed it, and have always lived up to it. I believe that others should as well.

Actually, people did pay me for what I did. People on scholarship, athletic or academic, are paid for what they do - and quite handsomely, too. They are so pampered that when released into the real world (when not professional athletes), then they realize how well they had it in college. However, I did not generate any revenue in bars, etc, but then I did not get free housing, a food allowance, free books, free tutors, or, oh yeah, a free college education (which pays anyone who puts anything into earning it, quite a bit, you know).

If athletes want to get paid cash, they should join a minor league, play in Europe, or enter the draft. There are no secrets as to what they are going to get in college. Now, if they are too immature, physically or otherwise when coming out of high school, then there is another thing that college is providing them for free: a chance to mature and free coaching.

Yes, I am a curmudgeon, but you, Wait, are a member, whether you realize it or not, the Occupy movement.

Written on Mike Strange: Without Stokes, Vols have no sun to orbit around :

It makes me think of an old Skeeter Davis song, "I got along before I met you, I will get along without you now."

Written on Jarnelll Stokes says college athletes need more money:

How much food could he buy for the cost of the tats? How much could he get for the amount he pays for a cell phone?

I had no tats, no phone - at all, shared a room in a boarding house with another guy, and a toilet and shower with 12 others, and worked as many hours to earn the money for my tuition, books, rent, food, clothes and recreation as athletes do working to earn their scholarships. They get free tuition, free books, tutors, food allowances, a free dorm room, or housing allowance. Sorry, I do not pity them. There are more people like me than like them.

Also, how does one determine who gets what money? Do the Stokes of the world get the same amount as the Lopezes or Cheivoses? If not, and the stars get more, will that not lead to say point guards like Darius Thompson keeping the ball away from the stars and shooting in order to pump up his worth and paycheck?

Nope, if you do not like what the college is offering, go to Europe and learn your craft there. I will not miss you.

Written on Lady Vols hit three home runs in first, 13-5 :

It is a good thing this bunch can hit, as the pitching is Ellen Renfro and not much else. While Ellen is very good, she is not likely going to be good enough to sustain the LVs at the top of the softball world by herself.

Obviously, the Weekly's see something in Cheyenne Tarango that I have never seen. They are the experts, but even experts can be wrong and this young lady seems intent on proving that point.

Written on John Adams: No matter who starts, UT will be better at quarterback:

in response to OrangePride:

JA has this right. We will be better at QB this year. The offense, which bordered on woeful last year, has more talent at receiver, the bigger RB they need, and two years under the Jones system. The big question is how the OL will perform. Frankly, I expect less, but not the big drop off some predict. We will get better as the year goes on. Looking forward to watching them all Saturday. PLUS..and let's not lose sight of this, we have some very fine talent arriving this summer. Its not all blue skies yet, but I do see some breaks in the clouds.

I expect that we fans will feel better about this year's offensive line than we have the past 3 because of the lower expectations. The group that just left came in with such hoopla that we all expected them to be the greatest line UT ever had and to be able to dominate the line of scrimmage every game. What we got was significantly less than that. They were good, maybe even very good - at times, but they were often perceived as being a disappointment due to the hype. This group, on the other hand, has little expected of them so if they are even adequate, they will be hailed as being better than they really are.

Written on Informal talks between Lady Vols and UConn about resuming series:

One should never apologize for telling the truth, although I must admit I did have to give a few for answering some of my wife's questions about her outfit for the night truthfully.

Written on Missouri indefinitely suspends WR Green-Beckham:

atnvol has it. Green-Beckham will start the first game.

Written on Women's finalists reflect scope of Lady Vols' quest for improvement:

This team should not have Massengale next season. If she is as susceptible to head injuries as that tap in the face made it seem, then it would be almost criminal to allow her to play again (seems like the men refused to play a guy who wanted to and transferred because of it).

The team's issues are: 1) turnovers, 2) stopping dribble penetration, 3) turnovers, 4) getting dribble penetration, 5) turnovers, 6) outside shooting, 7) turnovers, 8) getting Harrison some help on the boards (e.g. getting Graves and Russell up to snuff), 9) turnovers, and 10) turnovers.

Written on Which quarterback do you think will start the most games for Tennessee this season? :

Justin Worley will start because he understands the offense the best and the most important asset a q.b. must have is a sharp mind (e.g. compare Tyler Bray and Peyton Manning).

Written on Coming Sunday: Remembering Stokely with stories, documentatry:

My greatest memory of Stokely was the shot that Rudy Kinard made from the corner baseline (that would have been a three had there been one in those days) at the buzzer to beat LSU and Pete Maravich. I cannot remember the year, but as I started at UT in the winter quarter of 1970,it was 1970, 71, or 72.

I thought the building was going to come down.

Written on Paul Finebaum hosting live show from Neyland Stadium on Thursday:

in response to atnvol#283282:

Indeed that is the same Paul Finebaum....who was so fond of calling Tennessee's fanbase, "trailer trash"on his Alabama afternoon show.

He has got to be one of the top ten all-time homliest individuals that I have ever seen. Hard to figure why he is so fond of "pointing" fingers at individuals.

I remember this guy from when he was the sports editor for the Daily Beacon. He did not know a football from a Frisbee then and still does not.

Written on John Adams: Lady Vols one great player short of Final Four:

in response to underthehill:

If you are right about next year's starters ..then I think you are right about it being a sweet sixteen team at best..I hope to see Russell and Izzy on the floor starting and a double low post offense with Izzy going out for the mid range jumper..along with Reynolds and Carter..this would be the nuc for a team that could go further than the sweet sixteen ..what I simply cannot believe ..even after her play in the SEC that Holly and her staff do not know what Jordan Reynolds brings to the floor..she has all around skills and does not get intimidated or back off.. when she makes a bad play she comes back and is ready to play harder..she has more leadership skills than any player on this team..she is the only player who got it right as to why the Lady Vols had so many turnovers...they were trying to force passes inside when they had no chance..when Carter and Reynolds should have been driving the ball and dishing it off to Izzy or Russell...I think we will see a lot of that next year..and I think Russell is going to be one of the best inside players in the SEC next year...she made tremendous progress this year and is far more talented than John has observed..she has great hands and reflexes and her speed has seemed to improve every game..I think the team next year will be far better than the one this year...and I think Reynolds and Russell will be the best players..if the coaching staff lets it happen..

There are two reasons why Reynolds did not play more: 1) she was needed to back up the point guard who was playing waaay too much and 2) the two guard was Simmons - who the coaches obviously felt had to be on the floor no matter what. Other than that, surely the coaches realize that she needed to be on the floor.

Written on No quick fixes for Lady Vols next year:

in response to johnlg00:

This is just an off-the-cuff impression, but if you compare Meighan's statistics in games against average teams to her stats against the better teams, I think there would be a noticeable gap. I have often said that I thought Meighan's volume shooting was just part of the LVs' game and they can often deal with a less-efficient game from her. However, at least part of the definition of a "super-star", on the level of those just above her in the career scoring stats, is the ability to come up big when the team needs it the most. It's hard for me to argue that she did that dependably, but that's just my opinion.

I agree with you 100%. The analogy that I use is of the two minor league players where the one who was hitting .420 with 12 homers, stayed in A ball, while his team mate who was only hitting .250 with 8 homers with a similar number of at bats was promoted. The reason? The former got no hits against the best pitchers, while the latter actually hit better against those than the bad ones. It happens in baseball all the time.

BTW: "Volume Shooter" is the new p.c. term for ball hog.

Written on John Adams: Lady Vols one great player short of Final Four:

in response to vut5686#1405392:

Your points are well taken, and I agree Adams should be neither a "homer" for the Vols nor avoid the truth, if the truth hurts. Perhaps I draw too fine a line in often taking him to task.

Today, for instance: Everyone understands that, from a results standpoint, the LVs need a player who can take over, be a game changer and dominate. That understood, what is the point of the article? It is neither news, original nor instructive as to how we attract such players.

And, as I pointed out, his outlined needs for the LVs are no different than the needs of most teams not still standing. Probably far fewer of such individuals are available than the need for them. We have a great history. Tennessee really has not slipped that much; many other teams have just caught up. Sure, we expect...and hope we can out compete the Notre Dames, Conn., etc...for such players, but in the last several years, those programs offer as much "history" to eighteen year old high school girls as does Tennessee. We just hope we get our share. It is not news that we need them. Hence, nothing informative in this article today.

I believe that the point of an editorial, any editorial, is to elicit responses. Adams seems to have done a pretty good job of that in this instance, wouldn't you say?

Written on John Adams: Lady Vols one great player short of Final Four:

I have been saying what Adams said here, all year. Simmons was way too streaky to be the dominant player. Harrison needs better passers to get her the ball to come close to being dominant or reaching her potential.

I doubt that Tucker will ever play a game. Her injury seems to have had a set back and that is bad, bad news. Massengail should, for her own safety, never play another basketball game. If anyone is so injured by as slight a hit as she took to cause them to miss 16 games, that person is too prone to brain injuries for me to want to take a chance on their future. Therefore, next year's starters are likely to be Carter, Harrison, Burdick, Reynolds, and Graves. This leaves, Jones, Russell, and Moore coming back with the freshmen adding depth. Unless Asia comes, there does not appear to be a dominant player in either the freshmen or the returning players. I.e. A good team (Sweet Sixteen), but not a Final Four team.

Written on John Adams: Lady Vols fold under tournament pressure:

The LVs lack talent. They have good and very good players, but only one elite player, Izzy Harrison. One can be enough, but only if that player can get her hands on the ball and the LVs could not get her the ball enough and threw the ball away trying to do it (i.e. they are not good enough passing the ball to the post - an underappreciated skill).

They want to win so badly that they play tight. It is a difficult thing for a coach to do - get the team to loosen up. It goes against the grain which is to make the team play harder, be more focused, and serious.

Written on Lady Vols can't recover from slow start, fall to Maryland, 73-62:

in response to JSmith525:

Some of you so called fans are the biggest damn cry babies that I've ever seen. When things go good you sit back with you pie holes shut. As soon as any UT team has a bad game or something else bad happens your miserable selves come out for all to see. Nice season Lady Vols. Times are getting better. Pay no attention to the negative posting losers here.

There are different ways to be fans, Polly Anna. Saying, "Yah, it is alright to be mediocre. I will support you," is fine. However, it is not any better than pointing out faults in the hope of improvement. You see, I pay to be entertained. I do not pay to entertain these girls and very well paid coaches.

Written on Lady Vols can't recover from slow start, fall to Maryland, 73-62:

The LV program is no longer elite. They have few, if any, elite players. When Simmons is hot, like she was today, she is. However, this is the first tournament game in her career that I can remember when she was. Harrison is elite. None of the rest are. Graves was very good last year. This year she was somewhere between mediocre and bad. Oh, she puts out lots of effort and is still a tremendous rebounder, but she could not hit a bull in the butt with a bass fiddle when shooting. Still, the number one recruit in the country could not beat her out. CB has lots of effort, but zero consistency in anything but effort. Carter is a wonderful player whose quickness is taken away by pacing herself and the necessity of having to play too many minutes. Reynolds was the better of the freshman, but was, in the final analysis, about what was predicted when recruited - a "nice" player. Jasmine Jones, can play defense and shoot free throws. However, she gets a lot of shots simply because the other team lets her and gets ready to rebound.

We can blame the coaches all we want - and since they recruit these players as well as coach them and allot playing time, they deserve the "blame," but these players are not elite players - good and very good, but not elite. I.e. even Pat at her very best could not make this group competitive with UConn.

Written on With big-time matchup like Maryland, Sunday's Lady Vols' game has Sweet 16 feeling:

The humiliation of a once great program.

Written on Lady Vols make the most of second half in Meighan Simmons' final game at home:

Anyone who watched St.John's first round game would have known that a zone would have been preferred over the man for two reasons. First, they hit very few jumpers or threes in the entire game vs. USC. Secondly, they love to drive (particularly Handford who also, BTW is particularly good while driving to her left).

While the help by the baseline players certainly was important in the second half, the guards, particularly Simmons and Carter in finally preventing baseline drives (away from the shot blockers) and in preventing so many straight line drives into the paint from the point area had much more to do with it. Why could/did they not do it in the first half? I can only speculate, but I would advance the theory that Carter, in particular, was pacing herself knowing that she must play almost the entire game (39 minutes in this one). I would also suggest that the leg weariness that she had every right to have may have contributed to one or both of the easy layups that she blew in the second half.

Written on John Adams: Meighan Simmons' shooting raises UT tournament fear factor:

Simmons is more "The Question," than "The Answer." No shooter is always on, and many are streaky, but Simmons has been predictable. When the games are big, her shots do not fall, but she keeps hoisting them up with a "one of these suckas has got to fall eventually" attitude.

Written on John Adams: Supposed mismatch doesn't measure up to expectations:

in response to murrayvol:

It's "voila" old sport but other than that you're pretty much on target.

Je nais parle pas Francaise. Besides, isn't viola a big fiddle?

Written on John Adams: Supposed mismatch doesn't measure up to expectations:

Yes, the Lady Vols are capable of losing to anyone on any given day. The other team just needs to double and triple team Izzy and let the idea of being in a tournament guard Simmons and, wallah, the LVs cannot score.

Written on Lady Vols 'lost,' but found their way against Northwestern State:

They will not win another game if they play like they did in this game. Simmons continues her historical trend of lousy shooting in tournament games.

Unless Simmons starts hitting like the SEC player of the year should, the LVs will not make it past the Sweet Sixteen.

BTW: If the LVs do not play a zone against the Red Hawks they were not watching the second game today. They hit maybe one three and very few jumpers from more than 5 feet.

Written on Ariel Massengale uncertain whether she will return this season from 'head injury':

in response to MichaelL:

So you have access to her medical record? You must, if you can make a sweeping statement like that. You must also be a neurosurgeon, or neurologist. Where did you go to medical school? Where did you do your residency> Your fellowship?

I do not. However, anyone with a brain and compassion can see that the young lady is exceptionally susceptible to concussions. The hit that has kept her out for this long was a love tap compared to many hits that any basketball player can anticipate getting in the normal flow of a game (driving to the basket, getting a rebound, going for loose balls, etc). Given those two things, one would have to be more concerned with winning basketball games than the health and future of the player to even consider allowing her, or making her play again.

Where did you learn anything about basketball? Where did you learn your compassion - or lack of same? Where did you check your common sense? Clearly, all you care about is winning a game. You do not care about the players in it.

Written on Ariel Massengale uncertain whether she will return this season from 'head injury':

I do not think Massengale should ever play another game. If she got hurt this badly from such a minor blow, she would surely incur a permanent, if not fatal, injury if she continues to play. She must be unusually susceptible and you are going to get hit in the head sometime in any team sport.

Do not take a chance with this young lady's health and life.

Written on Don't think First Four game counts as NCAA tournament? The Vols say you're wrong.:

This idea of the NCAA is further proof that it is crazy - money crazy. If there are "play in" games or whatever euphemistic title you want to give these aberrations, they should be for teams ranked 61-68, not 41-48. The way this is set up, it would be better to be ranked in the 50s than the 40s because you only have to win 6 games, not 7.

This is yet another sign of the disrespect the NCAA has for UT which probably arises from the Bruce Pearl matter. Heck, it would not surprise me if they assign that Adams guy (the bad call and T on Maymon in the SEC tournament) to ref any and all games UT has in the tournament.

BTW: The Vols are NOT in the dance. They are wallflowers that have to eliminate another wallflower in order to get a dance partner.

Written on Video of Pat Adams' 'T' on Jeronne Maymon goes viral:

An official who is sure of his call, rarely calls a T. But, when they know they blew it, they will T up even the most innocent and polite comment. It happens all the time - at every level from rec league to the NBA.

Written on Tennessee makes NCAA tournament, will meet Iowa in play-in game in Dayton:

in response to fannotsheep:

I don't see a problem. Tennessee has a chance to win some NCAA games if they play well. If they don't, then it wouldn't have mattered if they were a 10 seed playing a 7 seed. And that was about as high as you could logically expect, based on how we underachieved for most of the season.

The opportunity is there. Once again, Vols … any takers?

The Vols and tournaments do not mix. I cannot see the team winning more than one game and probably not that. Oh, they have the talent, they just cannot get over the stress of being in a tournament.