Penalties will not deter...

#29
#29
the right coach from coming. We may have to offer a 5 year contract instead of 3 and a higher salary but penalties won’t be the drawback here. Penalties can also be a buffer with no pressure for a year or two for that coach to set things up without the crazies calling for his job. We have money, we have a good roster (not great, but we do have a good roster) and we seem to FINALLY have the leadership in place to be successful. I think some coaches are all over the UT job.

I missed it. Tell me of this “leadership in place to be successful” stuff, give names
 
#30
#30
I do think it's important that we have an AD in place before a coaching hire is made. Any coach worth their salt will want to know who they are working with/for before they take the job.

I also think it would be nice if we know what our sanctions are prior to hiring a coach. That will make the position more attractive (relatively speaking). That way the incoming coach doesn't feel blindsided by what he'll be up against after accepting the job. I'm pretty sure USC downplayed their sanctions to Kiffin before he accepted the job and they turned out more severe than he excpected.
Only way that happens is if you hire Steele for a few years. NCAA is slowwww. Good news is by the time they do hand out punishment, players will be getting paid legally so that may ease the punishment.

Ole Miss investigation took SIX years. That included their appeal (took almost two years)

No idea on the number UT is facing, OM had 15 violations, got 2 year bowl ban, lost 11 scholarships, on probation for a few years, vacated 33 wins, and lots of $.
 
#31
#31
Only way that happens is if you hire Steele for a few years. NCAA is slowwww. Good news is by the time they do hand out punishment, players will be getting paid legally so that may ease the punishment.

Ole Miss investigation took SIX years. That included their appeal (took almost two years)

No idea on the number UT is facing, OM had 15 violations, got 2 year bowl ban, lost 11 scholarships, on probation for a few years, vacated 33 wins, and lots of $.
I just realized our 3 wins from this year could be vacated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kcvols1
#32
#32
I just realized our 3 wins from this year could be vacated.
Would probably be all 15, supposedly violations started when Pruitt started. No one cares about vacated wins tho. Vacated championships are a different story.
 
#33
#33
Would probably be all 15, supposedly violations started when Pruitt started. No one cares about vacated wins tho. Vacated championships are a different story.
If the NCAA came in and determined that Fulmer cheated in 98 and "vacated" our natty, would you honestly care? I wouldn't. It doesn't take away the great memories I have of that season. It doesn't erase the highlights we have on film. I'll bet it wouldn't even take the trophy out of the case. It's a meaningless, toothless gesture.
 
#35
#35
We weren’t really looking at “proven” coaches anyway. Billy Napier isn’t necessarily proven, but i feel like most of the fan base would take that hire in a heartbeat.

I have to disagree. That would be an uninspiring hire to say the least.
 
#38
#38
If the impression gets out there that the admin went public with this just to tank Pruitt and kick him out the door with no buyout, then no respectable coach will want to come if that's the perception of Tennessee.
 
#42
#42
This won’t be popular, but has to be said.

“Penalties will not deter....” Seriously???

If there is any validity to the violations, particularly the cash-to-recruits, we are sunk for the foreseeable future.

For the next 4-5 years, we end up with Steele or roll the dice on an up-and-comer.

2021 - (if we’re lucky) - investigation completed.
2022 - (if we’re lucky) - sanctions begin.
2022-2025 - 3 years of sanctions likely.
2026-2028 - new, hopefully proven, coach is hired and the rebuild of our 3-star-studded roster takes place.
2029 - if we hired the right coach in 2026, he has a roster competing at least for the SEC East title.

Effectively, Fulmer’s leadership cost our football program 11 years.
 
#43
#43
I’ve been trying to think about this situation more and more and maybe someone can think of an example but.....

I couldn’t remember a great program having ncaa issues while they were “down”. It’s only bad programs that had sanctions while they were down

Every program that had an issue was in a good place when ncaa troubles came.

The only close one I could think of was Auburn as they were starting to slide, but they were ranked as recently as 1990. And then Bowden went 11-0 in his first season in 1993.

In short, in a lot of scenarios, the team won in the first couple of years and then the effect of sanctions kicked in.

So, I don’t know if the effects will be more severe or less severe considering Tennessee is already down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolNExile
#44
#44
This won’t be popular, but has to be said.

“Penalties will not deter....” Seriously???

If there is any validity to the violations, particularly the cash-to-recruits, we are sunk for the foreseeable future.
I'd guess they are valid, but nothing that any other football program doesn't do.

Did Plowman say when the violations were first reported to her?
 
#48
#48
the right coach from coming. We may have to offer a 5 year contract instead of 3 and a higher salary but penalties won’t be the drawback here. Penalties can also be a buffer with no pressure for a year or two for that coach to set things up without the crazies calling for his job. We have money, we have a good roster (not great, but we do have a good roster) and we seem to FINALLY have the leadership in place to be successful. I think some coaches are all over the UT job.
Sanctions WILL deter the Best coaches...
 

VN Store



Back
Top