|
|
Post by Stopspopsdrops83 on Jul 26, 2022 21:23:56 GMT -5
Had no idea WHBQ was now talk radio, back in the 60’s and 70’s before FM stations WHBQ was the “in” station for top Billboard music. Then at night you went to WLS Chicago. I believe WHBQ gave us Disco Duck?
|
|
|
|
Post by siberiavol on Jul 26, 2022 22:08:46 GMT -5
There was an Eagle Scout banquet in Nashville in the sixties. You told them what you wanted to be when you grew up and they found a sponsor . I wanted to be a sports announcer . Larry Munson was my sponsor. I am living my dream as a analyst on this site. |
|
|
|
Post by pdlglm on Jul 26, 2022 22:15:19 GMT -5
Ok, changed the name of the thread and added the records attachment as a pdf to the first post. If you have trouble with it I can try and format it to just post... but that is probably gonna be alot of trouble.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stopspopsdrops83 on Jul 26, 2022 22:20:35 GMT -5
Ok, changed the name of the thread and added the records attachment as a pdf to the first post. If you have trouble with it I can try and format it to just post... but that is probably gonna be alot of trouble. Sorry but several of us got the whole thread a little sideways before you had a chance to finish. Basketball junkies |
|
|
|
Post by tns56 on Jul 27, 2022 6:57:53 GMT -5
Yes you are correct about WHBQ (and other AM stations) having to power down at sundown. I still listen to them now because they are a Sports Talk station now. WLAC was not a part of the Vol Network but I listened to them because they had a 3 hour show Monday through Friday nights talking sports with a good majority of it being about the Vols. This was before the Interwebs had become so populated. One time I had to do some work at one of our other facilities. I couldn't pick up WLAC at the hotel, so for two evenings I drove leisurely down the almost deserted Arkansas backroads listening to Bob and Bill in the car and smoking a cigar. It don't get no better than that. Here's some info on clear channel stations and why you can pick them up from great distances. It's 988 miles from Islamorada, Fl to Nashville. A clear-channel station is an AM radio station in North America that has the highest protection from interference from other stations, particularly concerning night-time skywave propagation. The system exists to ensure the viability of cross-country or cross-continent radio service enforced through a series of treaties and statutory laws. Known as Class A stations since 1982, they are occasionally still referred to by their former classifications of Class I-A (the highest classification), Class I-B (the next highest class), or Class I-N (for stations in Alaska too far away to cause interference to the primary clear-channel stations in the lower 48 states). The term "clear-channel" is used most often in the context of North America and the Caribbean, where the concept originated. Since 1941, these stations have been required to maintain an effective radiated power of at least 10,000 watts to retain their status. Nearly all such stations in the United States, Canada and The Bahamas broadcast at 50,000 watts, with several clear-channel stations in Mexico going as high as 150,000 watts and XEW in Mexico City having operated at 250,000 watts for over 80 years. Cuba was originally included in the plan and had several stations given clear-channel status, but stopped participating after the Cuban Revolution of 1959. Thanks for the info. Very interesting. I also listened to Bob and Bill for several years on WLAC. Bob was a die-hard Vol fan. I also saw them in Jackson one time at a promotion for Rocky Topps merchandise store which was located in Lexington and Jackson. He passed away some time ago. Anyone know what ever happened to Bill? He was more of a recruiting guru. I haven’t thought about Rocky Topps in years. I used to stop by there on the way up to a football game or on the way back when I had season tickets. Drove up one time by myself on a Saturday evening when they were having some big promo. First person I saw in the parking lot was x-Vol QB Bobby Scott and his wife who had just driven down from Knoxville. He walked up to me, shook my hand and introduced himself. I thought that was pretty classy. Don’t know what Bill is doing anymore but it wouldn’t surprise me if he still somewhat involved with recruiting talk. |
|
|
|
Post by pdlglm on Jul 27, 2022 8:48:00 GMT -5
Thoughts now that I finished up....
Deacon has the best record against top 5 teams. Mildly surprised by that.
Jerry Green still with the best top 25 record but played zero top 5 opponents.
After reviewing this, I would like to revise my worst coach opinion. It's Bald Kevin and it may not be close. He won 6 road games in three seasons.
I predict that we set a record for most NCAAT appearance in a decade during the 2020s.
Jerry Green having the best road record since 1970 was a huge surprise.
Pearl's neutral court record is something else. Especially considering that his SECT record is only .500.
|
|
|
|
Post by goldenjay on Jul 27, 2022 10:32:07 GMT -5
I sometimes gag to think about it today, but Larry Munson was the voice of radio sports for me growing up in Nashville. Not only did he do Vandy football and basketball, he called the Nashville Vols minor-league baseball team. Oddly, I don't remember him being the shameless homer he became at Georgia, but maybe I was just too young to know any better. If you were the Vandy announcer, would you be a shameless homer?!  Good point, though Vandy wasn't, to the best of my recollection, quite so uniformly bad in the mid-50s as it became later. It may just be that, as my hometown team at that time, I heard more about them on the local radio and TV, and the programming was about as positive as it could reasonably be whatever their actual records were, though not nearly to the one-sided intensity Munson projected at UGA. |
|
|
|
Post by contextmatters on Jul 27, 2022 10:39:45 GMT -5
Sorry but several of us got the whole thread a little sideways before you had a chance to finish. Basketball junkies That's the Hoopsville way. Personally, I very much enjoyed reading the radio tangent, and your comments about O'Neill made me think about a question I've pondered off an on for several years. Is there a way to consistently adjust coaching evaluations to account for their different starting points--inherited players, incoming recruits, recruits in the pipeline--without simply engaging in a post hoc rationalization (i.e. justifying failures of coaches we like or minimizing achievements of those we don't)? I kind of gave up, and usually just give lower weight to a coach's first two years, but your comments made me revisit. So, you've already hampered my productivity this morning and promise to do so off and on for several days. Kudos to you, sir. |
|
|
|
Post by pdlglm on Jul 27, 2022 10:51:19 GMT -5
Sorry but several of us got the whole thread a little sideways before you had a chance to finish. Basketball junkies That's the Hoopsville way. Personally, I very much enjoyed reading the radio tangent, and your comments about O'Neill made me think about a question I've pondered off an on for several years. Is there a way to consistently adjust coaching evaluations to account for their different starting points--inherited players, incoming recruits, recruits in the pipeline--without simply engaging in a post hoc rationalization (i.e. justifying failures of coaches we like or minimizing achievements of those we don't)? I kind of gave up, and usually just give lower weight to a coach's first two years, but your comments made me revisit. So, you've already hampered my productivity this morning and promise to do so off and on for several days. Kudos to you, sir. yeah, Bald Kevin #1 started off at a pretty low point. But on the other hand, this ain't football. Two players can make a team respectable and his teams were never respectable. In retrospect, it was probably great news that Jerry Green got to coach O'Neill's recruits - which is really saying something. |
|
|
|
Post by govols85 on Jul 27, 2022 12:00:17 GMT -5
Sorry but several of us got the whole thread a little sideways before you had a chance to finish. Basketball junkies That's the Hoopsville way. Personally, I very much enjoyed reading the radio tangent, and your comments about O'Neill made me think about a question I've pondered off an on for several years. Is there a way to consistently adjust coaching evaluations to account for their different starting points--inherited players, incoming recruits, recruits in the pipeline--without simply engaging in a post hoc rationalization (i.e. justifying failures of coaches we like or minimizing achievements of those we don't)? I kind of gave up, and usually just give lower weight to a coach's first two years, but your comments made me revisit. So, you've already hampered my productivity this morning and promise to do so off and on for several days. Kudos to you, sir. Must also consider one and done circumstances. CRB has had more one and dones than maybe all previous coaches combined. To think that the Vols had Grunfeld, Johnson, Ellis, and Houston for four years and King for three, that’s just not going to happen anymore. And honestly to think that Mears had three of those players together for a year, is another reason for me that I don’t look at Ray in the same stratosphere as Bruce and Rick. |
|
|
|
Post by Stopspopsdrops83 on Jul 27, 2022 12:47:53 GMT -5
Sorry but several of us got the whole thread a little sideways before you had a chance to finish. Basketball junkies That's the Hoopsville way. Personally, I very much enjoyed reading the radio tangent, and your comments about O'Neill made me think about a question I've pondered off an on for several years. Is there a way to consistently adjust coaching evaluations to account for their different starting points--inherited players, incoming recruits, recruits in the pipeline--without simply engaging in a post hoc rationalization (i.e. justifying failures of coaches we like or minimizing achievements of those we don't)? I kind of gave up, and usually just give lower weight to a coach's first two years, but your comments made me revisit. So, you've already hampered my productivity this morning and promise to do so off and on for several days. Kudos to you, sir. Always willing to do whatever I can for the cause |
|
|
|
Post by contextmatters on Jul 27, 2022 13:37:17 GMT -5
That's the Hoopsville way. Personally, I very much enjoyed reading the radio tangent, and your comments about O'Neill made me think about a question I've pondered off an on for several years. Is there a way to consistently adjust coaching evaluations to account for their different starting points--inherited players, incoming recruits, recruits in the pipeline--without simply engaging in a post hoc rationalization (i.e. justifying failures of coaches we like or minimizing achievements of those we don't)? I kind of gave up, and usually just give lower weight to a coach's first two years, but your comments made me revisit. So, you've already hampered my productivity this morning and promise to do so off and on for several days. Kudos to you, sir. yeah, Bald Kevin #1 started off at a pretty low point. But on the other hand, this ain't football. Two players can make a team respectable and his teams were never respectable. In retrospect, it was probably great news that Jerry Green got to coach O'Neill's recruits - which is really saying something. Yep. I tend to think O'Neill's recruiting impact is overrated, but SPD now has me wondering if I'm biased against O'Neill on that. In any event it doesn't matter, because Bald Kevin got worse as he went along.
By year three, a coach's team is his own, and O'Neill's year three was abysmal. Only the 5-22 season is even in the same ballpark. How bad?
(1) The Vols lost 13 games by double digits . . . one more than the 5-22 season. (2) They lost 6 games by 20+. . . three times as many as the 5-22 team. (3) The Vols scored 50 or fewer points in 7 games. For comparison, Cuonzo Martin had 9 50-or-fewer games in his entire three-year tenure. Cuonzo Martin, ya'll! (4) Overall, Bald Kevin had 20 50-or-fewer games in three years. For comparison, the Vols have had approximately 50 games with 50-or-fewer points in the entire shot-clock era . . . spanning 37 years! O'Neill managed to get 40% of that total in only 83 games. How is that possible?
And he was even worse and Northwestern and USC. Really.
Even if we were to assume a Marvel-style multiverse of infinite possibilities, I could not conceive of any universe in which Tony Harris could have succeeded in Bald Kevin's system. I don't have that much imagination.
|
|
|
|
Post by cherokee04 on Jul 27, 2022 14:19:33 GMT -5
yeah, Bald Kevin #1 started off at a pretty low point. But on the other hand, this ain't football. Two players can make a team respectable and his teams were never respectable. In retrospect, it was probably great news that Jerry Green got to coach O'Neill's recruits - which is really saying something. Yep. I tend to think O'Neill's recruiting impact is overrated, but SPD now has me wondering if I'm biased against O'Neill on that. In any event it doesn't matter, because Bald Kevin got worse as he went along.
By year three, a coach's team is his own, and O'Neill's year three was abysmal. Only the 5-22 season is even in the same ballpark. How bad?
(1) The Vols lost 13 games by double digits . . . one more than the 5-22 season. (2) They lost 6 games by 20+. . . three times as many as the 5-22 team. (3) The Vols scored 50 or fewer points in 7 games. For comparison, Cuonzo Martin had 9 50-or-fewer games in his entire three-year tenure. Cuonzo Martin, ya'll! (4) Overall, Bald Kevin had 20 50-or-fewer games in three years. For comparison, the Vols have had approximately 50 games with 50-or-fewer points in the entire shot-clock era . . . spanning 37 years! O'Neill managed to get 40% of that total in only 83 games. How is that possible?
And he was even worse and Northwestern and USC. Really.
Even if we were to assume a Marvel-style multiverse of infinite possibilities, I could not conceive of any universe in which Tony Harris could have succeeded in Bald Kevin's system. I don't have that much imagination.
I have always put Wade Houston as UT's worst coach ever, with BK1 behind him. But I have been convinced to reverse that order too. As a younger guy during the Houston era, I could not conceive how you could only win 5 games, considering you played more than that number against teams that were supposed to be creampuffs. And make no mistake, that team was bad. But I recall going back through the game by game results of that season a few years ago and being surprised to see how many of our SEC games were actually pretty competitive based on the scores. That was not the case under BK1. I recall watching BK's teams struggle to even inbound the ball, over and over again. The team was truly inept. |
|
|
|
Post by pdlglm on Jul 27, 2022 14:34:48 GMT -5
I think the 'idea' of Kevin O'Neill as a coach sounds good. Knows alot abut hoops, comes across and bright if abrasive. But in reality he is too much of a @$$ to let what he may know about hoops translate. Keeps getting jobs and, except for a short stretch at Marquette, keeps failing pretty soundly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stopspopsdrops83 on Jul 27, 2022 15:19:59 GMT -5
It really is a tossup between BK and Houston but from strictly a coaching standpoint I still feel like Houston was the worst. As already stated just a couple of players can impact BB, Wade had Allan and I think many times he just said “score son”. This was really evident in season 5 w/o Allan and only 5 wins. Now from a person standpoint I believe everyone at UT really wanted Houston to succeed, he was just a good guy and wanted to be liked. BK on the other hand could care less about likability was abrasive to a fault and by his 3rd year I believe was to the point that his stubbornness had influenced his coaching ability. He was just gonna do it his way and to he— with anyone who didn’t like it. I will also always believe BK’s recruiting set Green up for success, need look no farther than by Green’s fourth year he was telling fans to go to Wal-Mart instead of TBA. That’s still kinda funny
|
|
