Fulmer debate extravaganza (merged)

[Big Orange 1]

Ok, so I asked name one thing good that has happened and we come up with Kiffy beat GA and USCjr. Hmmm......definitely an improvement over 152-52.

Ok, Fulmer beat Bamas weaker teams. Bama is beating our weaker teams.

Phil couldnt recruit - Who was that one kid? Taj? ah he was probably a bust anyway.

The haters are a joke.

Phil Jackson never beat Red Auerbach, he sucks.

Bellachek never beat Lombardi, he sucks.

But anyway thanks for giving me (2) good things that have happened to this FB since CPF left. Thanks for BOTH of them, God Bless and Merry Christmas.

 

[NashVol11]

People really struggle with the fact that our record the last 3 years is due to making the worst hire in SEC history. That means we should have made a better hire (Kevin Sumlin), not bring back the guy we fired for a reason.

 

[whobethis16]

Not at all.



Saban's second team is probably better than the ones Fulmer beat.



2/3 of them have 12 wins this season and one is unemployed. Guess who it is?



12-1, 12-1, heart issues, 12-0?



He lied to the NCAA? I have no idea how you're trying to connect these...



Really? You think Saban is going to randomly start going 5-7 because people "figure him out?"



Jones already "got figured out" at Cincinnati.

Meyers went 7-5 his last year at Florida. Exactly my point. Great first few years, and then people were able to figure out how to beat him. He then jumped ship.

Pearl's teams started to be figured out after his initial success, hence how they lost to a horrendous Georgia team his last year, etc.

And if you don't like beating Bama no matter what, you have issues. Think they care about us being down? Hell no, they love having a 5 game win streak in the series.

 

[whobethis16]

People really struggle with the fact that our record the last 3 years is due to making the worst hire in SEC history. That means we should have made a better hire (Kevin Sumlin), not bring back the guy we fired for a reason.

Yet again, very few of us have said that he needed to be hired again (though I wouldn't object if it happened, I'm not advocating it), but rather the firing never should'be happened.

 

[Big Orange 1]

Yet again, very few of us have said that he needed to be hired again (though I wouldn't object if it happened, I'm not advocating it), but rather the firing never should'be happened.

Exactly. It may have been time for a change but the timing and the manner in which it was handled was an absolute, 100%, undeniable MISTAKE!!!!!!

 

[volfanecs]

Meyers went 7-5 his last year at Florida. Exactly my point. Great first few years, and then people were able to figure out how to beat him. He then jumped ship.

Pearl's teams started to be figured out after his initial success, hence how they lost to a horrendous Georgia team his last year, etc.

And if you don't like beating Bama no matter what, you have issues. Think they care about us being down? Hell no, they love having a 5 game win streak in the series.

Correction, Heart condition. Then OSU gave him an IV of millions and it cleared right up. CPF has lost more character than Myers ever had.

 

[GreveHaller]

Exactly. It may have been time for a change but the timing and the manner in which it was handled was an absolute, 100%, undeniable MISTAKE!!!!!!

<clap> <clap> <clap> Thank you. Been saying that myself all along

 

[82_VOL_83]

Are you utterly incapable of reading a carefully qualified statement with precision? I broke the rivalry into two discrete periods: 1993-1996, during which Spurrier and Florida dominated Tennesee and the rest of the SEC as well; and 1997-2001. To reiterate, "After 1997, Fulmer, Cutcliffe and Chavis hit upon a workable strategy for playing Florida: Don't try to match them score for score in a shootout; it's a recipe for disaster. Shorten the clock, run the ball, play defense, keep it close going into the 4th quarter and try to pull it out at the end. . . . For four consecutive years, the games were extremely close, very competitive and we went 2-2."

Furthermore, my math adds up precisely: 7-3 overall in favor of Spurrier; that includes every game that Spurrier and Fulmer ever coached against each other, including Fulmer's interim year (1992) victory. I simply did not comment on 1997, because, in my opinion, the change in strategy occurred after that year. For the record, I expect occasional smart-aleck remarks from fans of our adversaries. I don't appreciate and won't tolerate them from, ostensibly, fellow Vol fans. If necessary, I will be more than happy to take you to the intellectual woodshed, however.

No, I read it about 10 times to make sure I was reading it right. You left out a TN loss in there to make your second (third) period sound better. But if that is how you want to make a point, go for it. Your first period or year UT was 1-0. Your second Spurrer was 4-0 (this is 4-1, with me so far?). Your third period Spurrier was 3-2 not 2-2. Your totals add to 6-3 (using 2-2), mine add to 7-3. Either way, Spurrier dominated Fulmer like no other coach. During that 0-4 period, we actually had them down at the half by big numbers two times (I think two) and were able to lose. Not making a point for or against Fulmer, just saying your numbers didn't add up as you forgot a loss to FL in your third period. Don't get all upset though, just make your numbers add up.

Too funny about you being an intellectual. I didn't even read your drivel that far until I saw Greve's reply. When you can add we will go to the woodshed, until then, I wouldn't want to take advantage of you.

 

[82_VOL_83]

11,000

Good try from number 11,034.

 

[82_VOL_83]

Quit saying backed in, unless you agree that the 85 Vols backed into that championship, Bama backed into the big one this year, etc. I've never known a fanbase that complains this much about how they made it.

The argument regarding that is if you lose the SECCG, you are the 2nd best team in the conference, much like losing the gold medal game in the Olympics. Therefore, if the Sugar Bowl takes the best SEC team, but that team plays for the NC, then you take the SECCG runner up. Not a team that didn't play for the conference championship. Same goes for the NC. If you don't win your conference, you shouldn't play for the NC.

16, I agree completely and I would go as far as to say if you only play 12 games and not 13, then you don't qualify. Last year when Bama and LSU were playing, OK St cried because they didn't get a chance. They only played 12 games and lost one in regulation. LSU and Bama were 11-0-1 in regulation that year. Also, I am WAY over the SECCG loser getting hosed. They should be in the Sugar Bowl like you and others have said.

 

[82_VOL_83]

And what about now? If the refs didn't blow it in the MCB, if Hunter wasn't injured, if we had a defense, etc. I'd take an SECCG appearance every 3 years, an average of 9 wins a season, etc. over the crap that has happened since firing Fulmer. Grass is always greener.

Then you are looking for the Vols to improve over their historical average of about 7 wins per year?

 

[whobethis16]

16, I agree completely and I would go as far as to say if you only play 12 games and not 13, then you don't qualify. Last year when Bama and LSU were playing, OK St cried because they didn't get a chance. They only played 12 games and lost one in regulation. LSU and Bama were 11-0-1 in regulation that year. Also, I am WAY over the SECCG loser getting hosed. They should be in the Sugar Bowl like you and others have said.

The only thing with the 12 games is if a team is in a conference that doesn't have a championship game. That's not the team's fault. However, in those cases, the team should almost have to be required to go undefeated. I was all for Boise State, until they lost a game.

Last year should've been LSU vs. Ok. State. (if OSU won their conference, don't recall).

 

[82_VOL_83]

And if you don't like beating Bama no matter what, you have issues. Think they care about us being down? Hell no, they love having a 5 game win streak in the series.

^THIS!!!

Yes, Bama is my number 2 team. However, ANY WIN OVER BAMA IS A WIN OVER BAMA I DON'T CARE HOW BAD THEY ARE. If posters think for one minute that they don't give me crap when I go down there because we have been down for several years you are kidding yourself. They can be unmerciful and the condescension is as bad as catching hell over losing a good game. Every win in the rivalry is as good as any other. I can't wait to be condescending to them.

 

[82_VOL_83]

The only thing with the 12 games is if a team is in a conference that doesn't have a championship game. That's not the team's fault. However, in those cases, the team should almost have to be required to go undefeated. I was all for Boise State, until they lost a game.

Last year should've been LSU vs. Ok. State. (if OSU won their conference, don't recall).

They won their conference, but played 12 games and went 11-1. Identical record to Bama. However, Bama lost to undefeated LSU in OT and OK St lost to an unranked team. OK St didn't deserve to be there based on record.

We are going to have a playoff, however, that will STILL screw the SEC if we remain as strong as we are. Bama has already played one playoff game this year in the SECCG. why should they have to play another game like that to qualify for the NC? I think the playoff system absolutely sucks for the SEC and helps all the other conferences. The Big Ten will cry foul just as soon as they have 5 teams in the top 10 and 2 or 3 in the top 5 and 2 of them have to play for a conference championship and then have to go play another top 4 team.

 

[whobethis16]

Then you are looking for the Vols to improve over their historical average of about 7 wins per year?

Looking at Fulmer alone, he averaged 8.94 (9) wins for his career. His last 8 years, or the downfall of him, he averaged 8.5 wins a year. So, he was above that average. However, yes, it needs to be equal to or better than the average and Fulmer.

 

[Ned Ray McWorkher]

A win over any SEC team is always a good thing. A win over a rival is even better. Always.
As far as Bama goes, how many times have UT & UA met when both were in the top 10? Usually one team is down while the other one is up. I recall them partying like hell when they won in 2008. I recall no mention of them tempering their celebration because we were a bad team that year.

 

[whobethis16]

They won their conference, but played 12 games and went 11-1. Identical record to Bama. However, Bama lost to undefeated LSU in OT and OK St lost to an unranked team. OK St didn't deserve to be there based on record.

We are going to have a playoff, however, that will STILL screw the SEC if we remain as strong as we are. Bama has already played one playoff game this year in the SECCG. why should they have to play another game like that to qualify for the NC? I think the playoff system absolutely sucks for the SEC and helps all the other conferences. The Big Ten will cry foul just as soon as they have 5 teams in the top 10 and 2 or 3 in the top 5 and 2 of them have to play for a conference championship and then have to go play another top 4 team.

I would still say they deserved it because they won their conference. If Bama had been 11-1, won the conference and lost to unranked Tennessee, they should be there. If records are identical, then it should be the conference winner.

I don't think a playoff is the answer for a couple of reasons. I'm not an advocate for the BCS, but based on who I think was the best team, it has only been wrong once (2004). Based on things we've discussed regarding requirements, it has been wrong a few times.

 

[GreveHaller]

I don't think a playoff is the answer for a couple of reasons. I'm not an advocate for the BCS, but based on who I think was the best team, it has only been wrong once (2004). Based on things we've discussed regarding requirements, it has been wrong a few times.

Actually, the got it right in 2004. Three undefeateds but only two of them played a full Div 1 schedule while one of them played a D1aa team. Like it or not, playing a D1 teams carries more strength than a D1aa. Look up any of the other rankings especially the SOS and you'll see that in all Auburn is always third.

If Auburn hadnt played Citadel, I'd be right there with you but they did. Its not Okl or USC's fault they played a weaker schedule. Its Auburns

 

[whobethis16]

Actually, the got it right in 2004. Three undefeateds but only two of them played a full Div 1 schedule while one of them played a D1aa team. Like it or not, playing a D1 teams carries more strength than a D1aa. Look up any of the other rankings especially the SOS and you'll see that in all Auburn is always third.

If Auburn hadnt played Citadel, I'd be right there with you but they did. Its not Okl or USC's fault they played a weaker schedule. Its Auburns

This is true. But by "wrong" I meant the best team in the country. Auburn was by far the best, but they shot themselves in the foot based on the requirements.

 

[GreveHaller]

This is true. But by "wrong" I meant the best team in the country. Auburn was by far the best, but they shot themselves in the foot based on the requirements.

I'll buy that.

 

[VegasVol]

Once the playing field was leveled and it came down to coaching, Phil was in a mis match.

Disagree. Once the borders closed, we had LESS talent, not the same amount of talent. Fulmer's performance tracked his talent level, which is true of almost all coaches. Fulmer's recruiting performance exceeded almost all other coaches. Even when the borders closed, his recruiting poached enough talent to keep us a nationally-relevant good team, just no longer an elite nationally-dominant team like the first half of his tenure when the borders were more open. Fans came to expect elite performances (BCS-or-bust; SEC-title-or-bust) when we now get to see what an average coach with average recruiting ability looks like after his firing: 4 consecutive nationally irrelevant seasons.

 

[knoxvols1]

You boys have gotten waaaaay off subject here. This thread is about why Phil is no longer the coach here, why he was fired and why no one else has even contacted him to coach again and how bad he ran the program into the ground!
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[Redstater]

You boys have gotten waaaaay off subject here. This thread is about why Phil is no longer the coach here, why he was fired and why no one else has even contacted him to coach again and how bad he ran the program into the ground!
Posted via VolNation Mobile

What's your source for "no one else has even contacted him to coach..". Have you wiretapped his phone?

 

[Volosaurus rex]

Actually, the got it right in 2004. Three undefeateds but only two of them played a full Div 1 schedule while one of them played a D1aa team. Like it or not, playing a D1 teams carries more strength than a D1aa. Look up any of the other rankings especially the SOS and you'll see that in all Auburn is always third.

If Auburn hadnt played Citadel, I'd be right there with you but they did. Its not Okl or USC's fault they played a weaker schedule. Its Auburns

Auburn also had an awfully long way to climb in the polls. I believe that they began that season ranked about 18th.

 

[Wylo]

The best part of this thread is:


Fulmer is still gone.

No amount of crying will change that.