darkgable
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2012
- Messages
- 2,880
- Likes
- 840
No he didn't. Following '99, UT became an "also ran" 2nd tier program. They "appeared" in SEC CG's in a time when the East was nowhere near as competitive as it has become... but didn't win the game even when he "should" have. The game passed the guy by like a bullet train. I hate it but he never changed or even admitted that he needed to.
And that we should appreciate. But it does not mean he should be allowed to drive the program into the ground.
I am not "angry" at him whatsoever. I am also not in denial about how the program got to where it was and is. I am very appreciative for what he accomplished and truly wish he had had the opportunity to leave more gracefully. But it was his ineffectiveness that prevented that and landed the program in trouble. He was ineffective in program discipline, recruiting, and coaching. And many would also argue he did a poor job of choosing and leading his staff.
Fulmer needed Cut. Their chemistry along with Chavis worked. But that ended and so did Fulmer's run.
You can dissect to validate your point but you're wrong. You're angry at the state of the program like everyone else but you take it out on Fulmer. Its the same old argument.