Fulmer Debate II

[VegasVol]

He wasn't interested. He was approached before Dooley was hired

Wrong. He was interested until Hamilton told him he had to keep several current assistants that Cutcliffe didn't want.

 

[VegasVol]

Your post doesn't really vouch for Fulmer all that well, IMO (assuming that's the intention).

Fulmer was 8 over .500 over 4 years with 2 top-5 recruiting classes. Kiffin/Dooley/Jones are 5 under .500 over 4 years with mediocre-at-best recruiting classes. The records aren't tremendously different by any stretch, although the talent differential between Fulmer and his successors is.

Fulmer's worst every 4-year stretch is still better than the four years after his firing. Additionally, Fulmer kept the talent level higher than his successors have, which was as important in deciding the timing of his exit, which would have likely been this year under his then likely time-table. We rushed it for no reason other than the stupidity of the fan base and our then AD.

 

[VegasVol]

Those stats don't mean anything to those of us who know far more about it than you. Here's a stat you need to wrap that one-track delusional mind of yours around: From 1987 until 2005, UT was in the top three of all colleges in the number of players on active NFL rosters. We're now #10. That's a clear indicator of our downward trend in recruiting during the last 10 years.

Fulmer was always an exceptional recruiter; in the 90's, that translated into top-5 talented rosters that gave us a top-5 program, because the talent-rich programs were not as lock-down in their local talent; in the 00's, that translated into top-15 rosters that gave us a top-15 program, as the talent-rich programs got good. After Fulmer, we now have rosters somewhere in the 30's, and a program that is still trying to lose fewer than 6 games in the 5 years since his firing. Oh, by the way, Fulmer only lost 6 or more games twice in his 16 years on the hill. If you want delusional, find a mirror.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

Fulmer's worst every 4-year stretch is still better than the four years after his firing. Additionally, Fulmer kept the talent level higher than his successors have, which was as important in deciding the timing of his exit, which would have likely been this year under his then likely time-table. We rushed it for no reason other than the stupidity of the fan base and our then AD.

I am glad to see someone who sees the light. Fulmer should have never been fired when he did. We should have kept him until getting CBJ. The program would have avoided attrition, recruiting violations and would at the very least had stability. There is no way we could be in any worse shape if Fulmer would have stayed. Hamilton was a moron.

 

[vol_in_ar]

What's Hamilton doing now?

 

[Roustabout]

I'm so sick of this debate. The state of affairs (SOA) now are not the result of firing Fulmer. Auburn fired Tuberville who had much better recent (@ time of firing) success. CPF wasn't going to change. He never had to coach in THIS SEC.

The SOA now is from piss poor hires and terrible leadership. Hammy didn't have the cred to sit down with CPF and have his respect in terms of staff.

You think Auburn us lamenting Tubervilles firing?

 

[volfanecs]

I'm so sick of this debate. The state of affairs (SOA) now are not the result of firing Fulmer. Auburn fired Tuberville who had much better recent (@ time of firing) success. CPF wasn't going to change. He never had to coach in THIS SEC.

The SOA now is from piss poor hires and terrible leadership. Hammy didn't have the cred to sit down with CPF and have his respect in terms of staff.

You think Auburn us lamenting Tubervilles firing?

Yet, here you are.

 

[bamacheats]

What's Hamilton doing now?

Same thing as Fulmer.

 

[VFLnSFD]

I'm so sick of this debate. The state of affairs (SOA) now are not the result of firing Fulmer. Auburn fired Tuberville who had much better recent (@ time of firing) success. CPF wasn't going to change. He never had to coach in THIS SEC.

The SOA now is from piss poor hires and terrible leadership. Hammy didn't have the cred to sit down with CPF and have his respect in terms of staff.

You think Auburn us lamenting Tubervilles firing?

You are correct that CPF never coached in THIS SEC, however Chavis is coaching in THIS SEC right now, and he is quite successful at it. Also, Randy Sanders, while not in the SEC, is LIKELY going to be at the Rose Bowl. Is it POSSIBLE that CPF would have been successful again with his ability to surround himself with a quality staff?

I think that it is. Remember in the movie, "The Blind Side," how all the other coaches reacted when CPF walked up. They thought they didn't have a chance when they saw him, because he was that good of a recruiter.

 

[utvolpj]

You are correct that CPF never coached in THIS SEC, however Chavis is coaching in THIS SEC right now, and he is quite successful at it. Also, Randy Sanders, while not in the SEC, is LIKELY going to be at the Rose Bowl. Is it POSSIBLE that CPF would have been successful again with his ability to surround himself with a quality staff?

Chavis, who I would welcome back, just got blown up by bama with a loaded D. Sanders has gone from OC to position coach. Fulmer's final hire as OC didn't really turn out too well for him

I think that it is. Remember in the movie, "The Blind Side," how all the other coaches reacted when CPF walked up. They thought they didn't have a chance when they saw him, because he was that good of a recruiter.

That's what a movie will do. Fulmer wasn't recruiting against the same guys we face now.

 

[butchna]

You are correct that CPF never coached in THIS SEC, however Chavis is coaching in THIS SEC right now, and he is quite successful at it. Also, Randy Sanders, while not in the SEC, is LIKELY going to be at the Rose Bowl. Is it POSSIBLE that CPF would have been successful again with his ability to surround himself with a quality staff?

I think that it is. Remember in the movie, "The Blind Side," how all the other coaches reacted when CPF walked up. They thought they didn't have a chance when they saw him, because he was that good of a recruiter.

So your point is based on a Sandra Bullock movie?...with a surprising performance by Tim McGraw...introducing Nick Saban as a haughty dwarf
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[Gramps]

Fulmer was always an exceptional recruiter; in the 90's, that translated into top-5 talented rosters that gave us a top-5 program, because the talent-rich programs were not as lock-down in their local talent; in the 00's, that translated into top-15 rosters that gave us a top-15 program, as the talent-rich programs got good. After Fulmer, we now have rosters somewhere in the 30's, and a program that is still trying to lose fewer than 6 games in the 5 years since his firing. Oh, by the way, Fulmer only lost 6 or more games twice in his 16 years on the hill. If you want delusional, find a mirror.

The problem with that argument is those two 6 or more loss years came during Fulmers last 4 years. Add those two losing season to not being able to win against the elite teams the last few years does show the program was no longer near the elite level was at during the 1990's - 2001. IMO The 2001 team was the most talented team I have ever saw at TN.

I am glad to see someone who sees the light. Fulmer should have never been fired when he did. We should have kept him until getting CBJ. The program would have avoided attrition, recruiting violations and would at the very least had stability. There is no way we could be in any worse shape if Fulmer would have stayed. Hamilton was a moron.

We may not have been worse but we be the elite program we were during the 1990's - 2001?
I say no.

 

[#16s Dad]

Big boy also won a NT....

T Martin's legs won that NT imo.







:bammer:

 

[Gramps]

T Martin's legs won that NT imo.

:bammer:

I thought it was well past CPF's time to go. I do give him 100% credit for winning the NC. Fulmer did a great job until he beat Florida in 2001. We started slowly going downhill from that time.

 

[hillccs]

I thought it was well past CPF's time to go. I do give him 100% credit for winning the NC. Fulmer did a great job until he beat Florida in 2001. We started slowly going downhill from that time.

I do not get these arguments...look at our program now. We did not perform better after 2001 as before, but we are way way better then where we are at now.

 

[utvolpj]

T Martin's legs won that NT imo.







:bammer:

if we're just picking one thing then UT's D led by Mr Wilson won that NC

 

[Roustabout]

You are correct that CPF never coached in THIS SEC, however Chavis is coaching in THIS SEC right now, and he is quite successful at it. Also, Randy Sanders, while not in the SEC, is LIKELY going to be at the Rose Bowl. Is it POSSIBLE that CPF would have been successful again with his ability to surround himself with a quality staff?

First, you are guilty of moving the goalposts. The argument isn't about Chavis. Chavis, despite his 3rd down issues, always managed to put up respectable defenses. Even the first 5-7 team played good D.
Next, Fulmer was given the opportunity to turn it around. He hired Clausen and it blew up in his face.

3rd- Sunseri will also likely be going to the Rose Bowl. Do you want him back as well? At least be willing to follow your argument all the way through to its logical conclusions.
Sanders is right where he needs to be. A position coach. And, he was a very good one (RB) at UT. Fulmer flubbed that up in promoting him to OC.

I think that it is. Remember in the movie, "The Blind Side," how all the other coaches reacted when CPF walked up. They thought they didn't have a chance when they saw him, because he was that good of a recruiter.

And that is the real shame of it. Fulmer had worked himself into a position as dean of the SEC, only to fumble it away with meetings at Shoneys and trying to play Matlock. Had he worried about his own affairs instead of Bama's, his decline likely would not have happened. Period. End of story. FWIW, maybe you missed the part in the movie where Oher picked Ole Mess.

What also is lost is that Fulmer was going 5-7 with good talent. I can understand Dooley and CBJ, because the roster was decimated by Kiffin. Fulmer had very good talent and still had losing seasons.

 

[Gramps]

I do not get these arguments...look at our program now. We did not perform better after 2001 as before, but we are way way better then where we are at now.

I said we slowly started going downhill after 2001.
In 2005 we won 5 games, in 2008 we won 5 games. How is that better than we are now?

Fulmer stated he considered stepping down after the NC season, the again after the 2001 season. That says he had reached his goal. It appears he did not not do all the things he needed to do to keep the program elite.

 

[GAVol]

What also is lost is that Fulmer was going 5-7 with good talent. I can understand Dooley and CBJ, because the roster was decimated by Kiffin. Fulmer had very good talent and still had losing seasons.

Nobody ever points that out, but it's a very good point. 2005 and 2008 were about as egregious as it gets as far as coaching disasters go.

The problem is, you can't say that without people going nuts and saying you're bashing a legend. The fact is, it's just hard to be in a leadership position for that long and keep everyone, including yourself, motivated.

 

[MustafaRasta]

One question:

If Butch lost to Wyoming at home(homecoming) with the assload of talent that Fulmer had how many of you Fulmerites would be calling for his head?

 

[Gramps]

Nobody ever points that out, but it's a very good point. 2005 and 2008 were about as egregious as it gets as far as coaching disasters go.

The problem is, you can't say that without people going nuts and saying you're bashing a legend. The fact is, it's just hard to be in a leadership position for that long and keep everyone, including yourself, motivated.

excellent post GA.. You speak the truth.

 

[JMSqb11]

I said we slowly started going downhill after 2001.
In 2005 we won 5 games, in 2008 we won 5 games. How is that better than we are now?

Fulmer stated he considered stepping down after the NC season, the again after the 2001 season. That says he had reached his goal. It appears he did not not do all the things he needed to do to keep the program elite.

Why is that? Why did we only play 11 games in 05?

 

[JMSqb11]

One question:

If Butch lost to Wyoming at home(homecoming) with the assload of talent that Fulmer had how many of you Fulmerites would be calling for his head?

I do not think thats the argument with most folks. Especially mine. My argument was with the coaching pool out there, there wasn't one coach that was better than a 29-21 Fulmer in 4 years. I grew up watching Phil as my coach of the Vols. However, I do understand that he was on the back end of his career. I never thought, and continue to think this to this day, that there was a viable candidate out there worth replacing Phil with.

 

[Obsessed]

I said we slowly started going downhill after 2001.
In 2005 we won 5 games, in 2008 we won 5 games. How is that better than we are now?

Fulmer stated he considered stepping down after the NC season, the again after the 2001 season. That says he had reached his goal. It appears he did not not do all the things he needed to do to keep the program elite.

How is that better than now?

We are praying and hoping to win 5 this year. We are looking at 3 years in a row at 5-7

Fulmer was on record for a sec championship game once every 3 years.

I miss the days of 9-3/10-2.

The things we take for granted

 

[Boston Vol]

I do not think thats the argument with most folks. Especially mine. My argument was with the coaching pool out there, there wasn't one coach that was better than a 29-21 Fulmer in 4 years. I grew up watching Phil as my coach of the Vols. However, I do understand that he was on the back end of his career. I never thought, and continue to think this to this day, that there was a viable candidate out there worth replacing Phil with.

You don't think Brian Kelly or Gary Patterson would have been viable candidates?