Cbj

[Oskie Volum]

Like we discussed the other day, I have no problem giving Dooley credit for cleaning up off field issues in the program. I agree that his national recruiting was good to great at times. But, he and his staff did a lot of damage to UT's instate recruiting, as well as their relationships with many high schools and coaches.

Just as I said before, I'm sure Dooley has a good football mind, he's an intelligent guy, and does have redeemable qualities. It's just my personal opinion that he is a much Administrator than an on field coach.

The sad fact is that his players quit on him, he lost control of the team, or at least some of the key players. Had Dooley hired virtually any other DC, to compliment the offense we had last year, he's still the coach. But that Sal DC hire, combined with the other apparent on field misses led to the inevitable.

Was the Sunseri hire 100% on him though is the question. He gets it attached to him but he could have been pushed on him by Hart just as easily. Also, everyone knew the 3-4 transition was going to be tough. Heck our D this year was almost as bad as last yrs, so what's the excuse there?? At least the move to 3-4 was a risk that was for the future of the team. It a risk taken b/c the O was so potent, but having to kick DR off and Hunter not being 100% confident were unknowns and to late to look back.

Like I've said before I can really care less about the feelings of in-state coaches in one of the least talented states in the country. Dooley using his past to get into fertile grounds like GA and even TX/LA. That's what we need to compete. A few here and there from TN does nothing for us in the long run. Not a single person would complain if there weren't a single TN kid on the team and we were winning NCs. Also, imagine all the people coaches have to talk to for recruiting combined with all the other crap I mentioned before...is there enough time in a day??? One thing I've been waiting to see that could hamper my support for the guy is if there are real reports of him not putting time into his work. When there are so many issues u get pulled way to much in many directions. Why I say that this year would have been a better tell to me.

The team quit?? Did they not take USCJr to the wire in '12, how about a very similar mizzou team, UGA was also a well fought game as well as Miss St. It's funny how people don't throw the Troy game out as much after the USA game as they did when they wanted dooley fired. The team didn't quit those games, but people were to busy in the gruden forum to recognize that and still think it was '11. If someone quit it was Bray and he pretty much said it in the Vandy game when he put it on the D. A D he knew had trouble, but one that fought hard. Last I checked they gave the O the ball back twice in the 4th of the mizzou game and the O didn't do anything to seal it up but everyone only remembers dooleys decision to not go for it in the last min as if something was going to change from the last few O possessions. How about the Florida game when the D stopped a fake punt attempt in the third?? Then the O goes 3 and out??? Putting the tired D back out. I can't stand when people bash the '12 D as if they didn't go out and play HARD. They were learning a new scheme. A hard one too. Plenty of moments the '12 O could and should have sealed it up, but they didn't.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[butchna]

K
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[thadolphinman]

All I have to say about Dooley's first year, is go look at the schedule number 1. That schedule wasn't even close to as hard as this one was.

Number 2, go look at the experience he had in the back end, plus the experience he had at the skill positions. Add to that the fact that the team was basically still in the same system on both sides of the ball, and had the same offensive coordinator as the year before.

The fact that people are even comparing the two years is ridiculous. The schedule was much easier, plus the team was a lot different.

 

[Oskie Volum]

All I have to say about Dooley's first year, is go look at the schedule number 1. That schedule wasn't even close to as hard as this one was.

Number 2, go look at the experience he had in the back end, plus the experience he had at the skill positions. Add to that the fact that the team was basically still in the same system on both sides of the ball, and had the same offensive coordinator as the year before.

The fact that people are even comparing the two years is ridiculous. The schedule was much easier, plus the team was a lot different.

much easier?? Yeah...no.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[Other_Guy]

much easier?? Yeah...no.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Did you even watch any of the games that year or remember the other teams records?

 

[Oskie Volum]

Did you even watch any of the games that year or remember the other teams records?

Yes. And I was even at the LSU game, so why I don't hold on to the 13 players deal like so many do. I also remember that people were saying then how it was one of the toughest schedules we had played. The next year the same. The year after the same. This year the same. Next year the same. At the end of the day it's the life we live as UT fans.

I was on here telling people not to overlook Malzahn or Mizzou when people were writing them off as auto wins. If an "idiot" like me saw it then a coach making 3 mil a year that "gets it" should have seen it too.

I understand it's tough to "rebuild" with hard schedules, so not dismissing it. Just have an issue with people using it as if it's something new only to CBJ. Dooley to most of yall is an incompetent bafoon, and he had tough schedules to face during his rebuilding efforts. So if y'all do think CBJ "gets it" then he doesn't need to have that automatic out.

I like the following I'm stealing from SJT...dooley played 4 of the 6 BCS NC teams. So...again...yeah not much.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[butchna]

Some athletic department is going to steal you from Taco Bell one of these days
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[Other_Guy]

Yes. And I was even at the LSU game, so why I don't hold on to the 13 players deal like so many do. I also remember that people were saying then how it was one of the toughest schedules we had played. The next year the same. The year after the same. This year the same. Next year the same. At the end of the day it's the life we live as UT fans.

I was on here telling people not to overlook Malzahn or Mizzou when people were writing them off as auto wins. If an "idiot" like me saw it then a coach making 3 mil a year that "gets it" should have seen it too.

I understand it's tough to "rebuild" with hard schedules, so not dismissing it. Just have an issue with people using it as if it's something new only to CBJ. Dooley to most of yall is an incompetent bafoon, and he had tough schedules to face during his rebuilding efforts. So if y'all do think CBJ "gets it" then he doesn't need to have that automatic out.

I like the following I'm stealing from SJT...dooley played 4 of the 6 BCS NC teams. So...again...yeah not much.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

I get what you're saying but the schedules aren't even comparable. Georgia was bad, he got LSU and Ole Miss, Butch gained Mizzu and Auburn. Again, I know what you mean but they aren't the same toughness.

 

[thadolphinman]

Yes. And I was even at the LSU game, so why I don't hold on to the 13 players deal like so many do. I also remember that people were saying then how it was one of the toughest schedules we had played. The next year the same. The year after the same. This year the same. Next year the same. At the end of the day it's the life we live as UT fans.

I was on here telling people not to overlook Malzahn or Mizzou when people were writing them off as auto wins. If an "idiot" like me saw it then a coach making 3 mil a year that "gets it" should have seen it too.

I understand it's tough to "rebuild" with hard schedules, so not dismissing it. Just have an issue with people using it as if it's something new only to CBJ. Dooley to most of yall is an incompetent bafoon, and he had tough schedules to face during his rebuilding efforts. So if y'all do think CBJ "gets it" then he doesn't need to have that automatic out.

I like the following I'm stealing from SJT...dooley played 4 of the 6 BCS NC teams. So...again...yeah not much.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

It was 4 of the previous 6 BCS national Champions, but that stat has nothing to do with how the teams did that year.

Georgia had 7 losses
Alabama had 3 losses
Ole Miss had 8 losses
Vandy had 10 losses
Florida had 5 losses
South Carolina had 5 losses
Kentucky had 7 losses

That schedule is much easier than what CBJ faced this year. The skill position players that Dooley had were much more experienced than the ones this year.

I have heard multiple times that Dooley coached better in his first year than CBJ did, and that is so hypocritical considering the criteria you use to judge CBJ. It took overtime to beat UAB, and if UAB had a kicker they would have won. Blown out by Georgia, Blown out by Bama, Blown out by Oregon. All I hear is how CBJ should have coached better against Missiouri, but Dooley got blown out by a 7 loss Georgia team. Go ahead and tell me that they were coming off a heartbreaking loss at LSU. I will just take your argument and say that he should have coached better and had his team ready.

The fact that this is even being brought up is ridiculous tho. The fact of the matter is you can't make a judgement on coaching in a rebuilding year, especially like the one CBJ had this year. I didn't make a judgement on Dooley's coaching after his first year. I didn't look at his team and say that it was a horribly coached. The fact that people use Dooley's first year to compare it to CBJ shows nothing but hypocrisy.

 

[sjt18]

I fully understand Jones' shortcomings. Was as disappointed as you were about the team peaking during the SCar game and getting the brakes beat off them the next 3, followed by the disappointing Vandy loss. As you know, I've also been very critical of Azzani... I see no evidence that he's done much with the WR group.... the pathetic Vandy performance was the best evidence.

Yet, I don't agree that Dooley was given a more difficult hand than he left Jones. I've read all the arguments and disagree with them. I believe firmly believe that the damage Dooley did to this program can't be measured just by looking at the roster, looking at player ratings, etc. There were more aspects of the program left in shambles by Dooley that reach beyond the roster .... and before anybody starts, I'm not making excuses for why Jones was 5-7, that's on him.

I find it interesting that Dooley's best year as coach was his first, with what he was left by Kiffin. His teams then got progressively worse, winning only 4 of 11 games with him on the sidelines his 3rd and last year.

If the program was in such utter disrepair by the year Kiffin spent as HC, why did Dooley actually have the most success year 1? Wouldn't it stand to reason that it had to get better since he took over such a train wreck, that there was nowhere to go but up? Dooley was a pathetic coach, most all of us agree there, but shouldn't we have seen incremental improvements in the W-L record?

The simple answer is that Dooley was a decent program manager but not much of a football coach. It is one of those hypotheticals we could go on about but IMHO his tenure turned the day Hunter went down. The D in '11 under Wilcox was decent (with not as much talent as this one had). The O would have been much better with Hunter than without him.

His first year was better IMO for the same reason I think Jones' first year SHOULD have been better. It was a new start. There was hope.... and he had the best staff of his tenure.

In this post you have proven that Dooley was a coach that got caught up in a situation he could not handle that spiraled downward. He was completely over his head. You didn't say one thing that compares what he was left or what he did with it to Jones' situation in '13.

Whatever "damage" Dooley did... did not carry over or limit Jones in anyway except the possibility that players weren't developed. That is likely to be somewhat true. But outside of last year... his coaches were very good. I doubt individual development is nearly the good excuse so many of you think it was.

The "damage" I have heard of was with HS coaches and alums. Jones fixed that almost immediately. No one held a grudge against him because of Dooley. The one other thing was grades but Dooley and staff had pretty much quit by mid-season 2012. Before that I don't remember it being as much of a problem. A few have pointed to S&C but that was one coach and not the last one. McKeefery (sp?) is/was a very good S&C coach.

Every time you see "VFL"... just remember that program was started by Dooley. It has been VERY effective in limiting and almost eliminating off the field problems. Do you remember Fulmer's last few days after it became almost impossible to cover up police issues and failed drug screens? I do. It wasn't good.

What is this unseen damage you think Dooley did?

He couldn't get it done on the field. Not unique to him, when things went so hard against him he was overwhelmed. He had to have felt snake bit by injuries and such. He reacted badly and entered into an emotional state of hopelessness. I've seen it and even experienced it in jobs. You just don't feel you can do anything to escape. You work harder and harder only to see things get worse. Every zig... should have been a zag. Every change ends up with you wishing you hadn't. Every "hold the course" ends up being something that should have changed.

A lot of people here "hate" Dooley as if he somehow intentionally failed and tanked the program. I don't. He's just a guy hired for a job much bigger than he was. He did some good (especially in program management until fall '12) and did some bad (mostly on the field.) But I really don't see how most of the things he did poorly should have inhibited Jones very much... and certainly don't see them being an excuse for what we saw.

 

[sjt18]

Like we discussed the other day, I have no problem giving Dooley credit for cleaning up off field issues in the program. I agree that his national recruiting was good to great at times. But, he and his staff did a lot of damage to UT's instate recruiting, as well as their relationships with many high schools and coaches.

Just as I said before, I'm sure Dooley has a good football mind, he's an intelligent guy, and does have redeemable qualities. It's just my personal opinion that he is a much Administrator than an on field coach.

The sad fact is that his players quit on him, he lost control of the team, or at least some of the key players. Had Dooley hired virtually any other DC, to compliment the offense we had last year, he's still the coach. But that Sal DC hire, combined with the other apparent on field misses led to the inevitable.

5* post.

 

[sjt18]

I can't fathom how people say Dooley did better than Jones his 1st year.

Dooley drew Ole Miss.

Butch drew Auburn. He HAD to beat a ranked team to make a bowl (altho I will credit Dooley they might have won his bowl had the refs not screwed up).

Then go look at the records of the teams Dools did face. SCjr

I do think Dools was wise in retaining Chaney, but if Jones is better off with his guy I can't blame him.

No. Dooley "drew" LSU. He also played an Oregon team that WAS in the NC game. UF was MUCH better than year.

Let's say you are right and that schedule was a little easier... you are still saying that equaling Dooley's results in '10 was good enough in '13. That is setting the bar WAY, WAY too low. UT needs an elite coach. They don't need a repeat of Dooley... nor someone just a little better.

 

[Doyle Hargraves]

People want to defend Butch by saying he did as well/better than Dooley did in his first year. I'm not getting in that argument because it is pathetic. If you use anything from the past few years as a measuring stick for excellence, you really need to raise your standards.

 

[Boca Vol]

People want to defend Butch by saying he did as well/better than Dooley did in his first year. I'm not getting in that argument because it is pathetic. If you use anything from the past few years as a measuring stick for excellence, you really need to raise your standards.

Welcome to VN. This place is starving for any sort of turd polish to make the current state of UT football look any better.

Using the Dooley years as a measuring stick is sinking pretty low.

 

[sjt18]

And Butch losing to Vandy is equivilent to Dools losing to Georgia that year. So idk why we're even debating this.

No it isn't. Vandy has NEVER... EVER had as much talent as UGA.

Butch didn't do great but he did what we figured he would and it wasn't a train wrech with the SCjr win. So let's forget the past and stop comparing him.

No. He didn't. The "reasonable" amongst us said six with a bowl game. That was VERY reasonable. He would have gained a lot of credibility and taken a step toward proven he was the elite coach UT needs by winning 7. He FAILED and won only five. He may become great at UT. I hope as much as anyone that he does. But it is worse than ridiculous to excuse the '13 season.

Let's compare him to Kiffins 1st year!

You can't be serious, can you?

Kiffin won 7 games and went bowling. Jones won 5 and watched Vandy go bowling. Including VT, ten of the 13 opponents were bowl teams. He lost to 14-0 national champ Bama on a last second FG block, 12-10. He frustrated a 13-1 UF team eventually losing by 10. UT thumped UGA that year who was similar to USCe this year but with a more difficult schedule. He didn't lose a single game by more than 28 pts (Jones lost 4). His avg margin of loss was 11 (Jones' was 21).

O scored 29 ppg in spite of very limited talent and TWO WALK ON'S starting on the OL. This year? 24 in spite of 3 or 4 OL's headed to the NFL draft. QB? Kiffin had one... Crompton who was a head case.

The D allowed 22 ppg vs 29 ppg this year. A walk on LB started games for them. Injuries forced them to play guys like King and Nelson at LB... who would never see significant PT at LB again. Three of their starting DL's (Walker, Martin, W Brown) had severe knee issues. The only SEC worthy DT on the team was D Williams.

 

[sjt18]

All I have to say about Dooley's first year, is go look at the schedule number 1. That schedule wasn't even close to as hard as this one was.

LOL. Yes it was. Oregon actually went to the NC game that year rather than just talking about it.

UF won twice as many games that year.

UGA was a worse but still won six.

USCe and Bama were similar. UK was a bowl team that year. LSU was more talented than any team UT faced this year except Bama. IIRC, there were the same number of teams ranked at the end of the year that year than there will be this year.

Number 2, go look at the experience he had in the back end, plus the experience he had at the skill positions.

Or the total lack of talent and experience on the OL, lack of talent on the DL, lack of even a QB on the roster when he arrived, lack of a returning RB,....

Add to that the fact that the team was basically still in the same system on both sides of the ball, and had the same offensive coordinator as the year before.

Wilcox and Kiffin were as different as Wilcox and Jancek. Only two years removed from Wilcox... these players didn't forget everything.

The fact that people are even comparing the two years is ridiculous. The schedule was much easier, plus the team was a lot different.

You are simply wrong. You are either misinformed or else intentionally trying to massage the facts so that you can avoid seeing the shortcomings. Even if the schedule was slightly easier then the best you can argue is that Jones equalled Dooley's "year zero" performance. Is that really the kind of coaching UT needs to "rise to the top"?

 

[Other_Guy]

No. Dooley "drew" LSU. He also played an Oregon team that WAS in the NC game. UF was MUCH better than year.

Let's say you are right and that schedule was a little easier... you are still saying that equaling Dooley's results in '10 was good enough in '13. That is setting the bar WAY, WAY too low. UT needs an elite coach. They don't need a repeat of Dooley... nor someone just a little better.

Have you not compared schedules???
Yes he drew LSU, Butch drew Mizzu!
UF better? Ok, and the rest of the league was worse.

Its not even debatable. This season was a ton harder.

 

[KBVol]

The simple answer is that Dooley was a decent program manager but not much of a football coach. It is one of those hypotheticals we could go on about but IMHO his tenure turned the day Hunter went down. The D in '11 under Wilcox was decent (with not as much talent as this one had). The O would have been much better with Hunter than without him.

His first year was better IMO for the same reason I think Jones' first year SHOULD have been better. It was a new start. There was hope.... and he had the best staff of his tenure.

In this post you have proven that Dooley was a coach that got caught up in a situation he could not handle that spiraled downward. He was completely over his head. You didn't say one thing that compares what he was left or what he did with it to Jones' situation in '13.

Whatever "damage" Dooley did... did not carry over or limit Jones in anyway except the possibility that players weren't developed. That is likely to be somewhat true. But outside of last year... his coaches were very good. I doubt individual development is nearly the good excuse so many of you think it was.

The "damage" I have heard of was with HS coaches and alums. Jones fixed that almost immediately. No one held a grudge against him because of Dooley. The one other thing was grades but Dooley and staff had pretty much quit by mid-season 2012. Before that I don't remember it being as much of a problem. A few have pointed to S&C but that was one coach and not the last one. McKeefery (sp?) is/was a very good S&C coach.

Every time you see "VFL"... just remember that program was started by Dooley. It has been VERY effective in limiting and almost eliminating off the field problems. Do you remember Fulmer's last few days after it became almost impossible to cover up police issues and failed drug screens? I do. It wasn't good.

What is this unseen damage you think Dooley did?

He couldn't get it done on the field. Not unique to him, when things went so hard against him he was overwhelmed. He had to have felt snake bit by injuries and such. He reacted badly and entered into an emotional state of hopelessness. I've seen it and even experienced it in jobs. You just don't feel you can do anything to escape. You work harder and harder only to see things get worse. Every zig... should have been a zag. Every change ends up with you wishing you hadn't. Every "hold the course" ends up being something that should have changed.

A lot of people here "hate" Dooley as if he somehow intentionally failed and tanked the program. I don't. He's just a guy hired for a job much bigger than he was. He did some good (especially in program management until fall '12) and did some bad (mostly on the field.) But I really don't see how most of the things he did poorly should have inhibited Jones very much... and certainly don't see them being an excuse for what we saw.

He actually did more bad off the field than he did on the field. From the APR, to recruiting relationships, to PR, to relationships with former players, to (putting it kindly) the "malaise" enveloping the program.... I don't remotely hate the guy. I just hate the job he did "on" my university's football program.

 

[Other_Guy]

You are simply wrong. You are either misinformed or else intentionally trying to massage the facts so that you can avoid seeing the shortcomings. Even if the schedule was slightly easier then the best you can argue is that Jones equalled Dooley's "year zero" performance. Is that really the kind of coaching UT needs to "rise to the top"?[/QUOTE]

Please go look at the records of those teams that year. Please do it because you are the one who has no clue what he's talking about.

Point is Dooley had to beat Vandy and Ole freaking Miss to make a bowl, while Butch HAD to beat a top 15 team on top of Vandy.

 

[KBVol]

You are simply wrong. You are either misinformed or else intentionally trying to massage the facts so that you can avoid seeing the shortcomings. Even if the schedule was slightly easier then the best you can argue is that Jones equalled Dooley's "year zero" performance. Is that really the kind of coaching UT needs to "rise to the top"?

Please go look at the records of those teams that year. Please do it because you are the one who has no clue what he's talking about.

Point is Dooley had to beat Vandy and Ole freaking Miss to make a bowl, while Butch HAD to beat a top 15 team on top of Vandy.[/QUOTE]




Easy on the empirical evidence there Other. You can lay it out all you want, it ain't gonna register with a few guys. If you keep responding, know what you're getting yourself into....gonna end up in a strait jacket in a rubber room. Dude genuinely believes what he writes, I'll give him that.

 

[sjt18]

Have you not compared schedules???

Yes. Just a few moments ago.

Yes he drew LSU, Butch drew Mizzu!

Mizzou was not even CLOSE to as talented as LSU. In fact, Mizzou STILL isn't top half of the SEC talented. They had a schedule that laid out for them all but perfect. They caught UGA and UF at low ebb injury wise. Their West opponents were Ole Miss and TAM. That's 4th and 6th respectively in the SECW. They should have been about an 8 win team... not the East champ. Sometimes things happen like the 98 fumble that put UT in the NC game.

UF better? Ok, and the rest of the league was worse.

Its not even debatable. This season was a ton harder.

Yes. It obviously IS VERY debateable. You guys are just determined to make excuses... but this one doesn't even rescue you. Even if the schedule was a little more difficult... he won fewer games. The best you can claim is that it was a wash. Is Dooley really the standard you think Jones needs to match? Even if he equalled Dooley's performance in '10... why should that give anyone confidence he's an elite coach that can pull UT up.



FTR- I think Jones has some ideal traits for the UT job. Overall, I think Dooley's first staff was better than the "best staff in America". Both coordinators were better. Smith and Stripling are maybe a wash. I like Thigpen but Thompson is better. W Martinez is better. Not sure about the TE's yet. Baggett is pretty much inarguably better than Azzani. Hinshaw@ QB vs Gillispee @ RB is pretty tough to call and especially since DH had no returning QB's to work with. Chaney/Hiestand vs Mahoney based on progress over the season tilts to the former.

 

[thadolphinman]

Other Guy. He is only gonna respond to the stuff that he wants to respond too. If it doesn't fit his agenda, he will ignore anything that you say. Just put him on ignore and stop worrying about arguing with him, cause no matter what you say, he will always ignore whatever doesn't fit his agenda.

 

[sjt18]

Yo
Please go look at the records of those teams that year. Please do it because you are the one who has no clue what he's talking about.

Point is Dooley had to beat Vandy and Ole freaking Miss to make a bowl, while Butch HAD to beat a top 15 team on top of Vandy.

Both will end up playing 5 ranked teams and one that went to the BCS title game.

If you want to argue that there was one more winnable game on that schedule... I won't waste time on that debate because it DOES NOT MATTER. You are still trying to say that equalling Dooley's year Zero performance is good enough. It isn't.

 

[sjt18]

Other Guy. He is only gonna respond to the stuff that he wants to respond too. If it doesn't fit his agenda, he will ignore anything that you say. Just put him on ignore and stop worrying about arguing with him, cause no matter what you say, he will always ignore whatever doesn't fit his agenda.

I have one agenda. Honesty. Not blind optimism. Not blind pessimism. Not love for a coach. Not hate for a coach.

Your agenda is denial. Players can be criticized and condemned in long, hate laced threads. But any criticism of the coaching performance this year... just gets you all upset.

What have I not answered?

 

[Doyle Hargraves]

You are still trying to say that equalling Dooley's year Zero performance is good enough. It isn't.

What is so difficult for some to see that the quoted is the only point that matters in this whole debate?