Fulmer was on the verge of

#401
#401
99gator said:
I agree with sjt18 in more instances than he knows, but I do think it's completely unfair to blame a coach for the lack of success three years after being fired.

If probation was involved, then it's a different story.
Click to expand...

I think it was time for Fulmer to go. I have problems with how the firing was handled, but I don't have a problem with him being shown the door. I believe if he had not been fired he would have been fired within 2 seasons anyway, because I didn't have faith he was going to turn it around.

I also agree that at this point it's not fair to blame him anymore. The administration (Hamilton) royally screwed up choosing a successor, and Dooley was one of the worst coaches in the history of UT athletics.
 
#402
#402
VolsSportsFan said:
I think it was time for Fulmer to go. I have problems with how the firing was handled, but I don't have a problem with him being shown the door. I believe if he had not been fired he would have been fired within 2 seasons anyway, because I didn't have faith he was going to turn it around.

I also agree that at this point it's not fair to blame him anymore. The administration (Hamilton) royally screwed up choosing a successor, and Dooley was one of the worst coaches in the history of UT athletics.
Click to expand...

I don't think he would have turned it around either. I think he needed to go too.

I just believe

1. His post national title tenure was not as bad as people like to claim it was.

2. He is not responsible for the current state of the program unless he has to take the blame for someone hiring two jokes as head coach.

3. As proof of #2, i believe he would have had a better record from 2009-2012 than what actually took place. It doesn't mean it wasn't his time to go. But, how could the state of the program be his fault if a strong argument could be made that the program would have been better off if he wasn't fired.

His tenure suggests he would have had a 9 win season at some point during the last 4 years.

Until Tennessee has a 9 win season again, I think people should back off him
 
Last edited:
#403
#403
99gator said:
I don't think he would have turned it around either. I think he needed to go too.

I just believe

1. His post national title tenure was not as bad as people like to claim it was.

2. He is not responsible for the current state of the program unless he has to take the blame for someone hiring two jokes as head coach.

3. As proof of #2, i believe he would have had a better record from 2009-2012 than what actually took place. It doesn't mean it wasn't his time to go. But, how could the state of the program be his fault if a strong argument could be made that the program would have been better off if he wasn't fired.

His tenure suggests he would have had a 9 win season at some point during the last 4 years.

Until Tennessee has a 9 win season again, I think people should back off him
Click to expand...

I think he would have probably done as well or slightly worse as Kiffin in 2009. I have no doubt he would have done better than Dooley from 2010-2012.

I think the argument is skewed a bit because the scenario is different in both realities. Yes Fulmer would have done better, however the mindset of the fanbase would have been totally different. Instead of having a disastrous Dooley tenure to compare to, it would have likely been that the fanbase saw more mediocrity that further fueled calls for his job.
 
#406
#406
sjt18 said:
He did get a second chance though. The program was not what it had been before '99 leading up to 2005. Fulmer seemed to lack hunger. There was little discipline on or off the field. Sanders was allowed to keep his job in spite of a significant drop off in O production. That 05 team was about as talented as any UT had under Fulmer. He all but predicted a championship... then led them to a pathetic 5-6 performance.

It happens. Right? Well yes it does so because of that great resume he got a shot to turn the ship around. But he seemed to think the problem was window dressings and not deep, fundamental things. Cut came back and bought him a reprieve by virtually "willing" two offenses to be better than the sum of their talent. Cut left. Fulmer was exposed. He had another losing season and was fired.

Even those last two teams he had were less talented than what we had come to expect from Fulmer built teams. The recruiting and roster decline had been occurring for awhile even before he was fired.

Things were on the wrong track and were getting much worse under Fulmer. He had to go.
Click to expand...

In before your 3rd sentence "Fulmer seemed to lack hunger," and the Krispy Kreme jokes.
 
#407
#407
Tennessee had no choice other than hire Dooley in 2010..if there is positive proof of someone else that would taken the job and done better10 days out from NSD,please bring it forward..other than that,just drop the Dooley deal..it's over...
 
#408
#408
JohnnyBall said:
Tennessee had no choice other than hire Dooley in 2010..if there is positive proof of someone else that would taken the job and done better10 days out from NSD,please bring it forward..other than that,just drop the Dooley deal..it's over...
Click to expand...

Of course they had a choice. When they got as low as Dooley, they should have just appointed an interim.
 
#411
#411
volfanecs said:
No.....Not firing CPF was the best option.
Click to expand...

Wrong in just about every way. This notion of yours defies absolutely all reason as well as the F-A-C-T-S about the programs condition when he was fired. Discipline was an absolute embarrassment with players in trouble with the law, being booted for drugs, or failing in class on a regular basis. Go back and look at the numerous talented busts Fulmer had in those last 4 years. He was getting out-recruited and outcoached by the upper tier coaches and beginning to see it from lower level coaches.

Fulmer had a GREAT 8 to 10 years at UT. But he slipped on the back side of his career. It happens to many great achievers. He left the program in terrible shape and in decline.
 
#412
#412
Hiring Kiffin was a pretty big mistake. His leaving set up the Dooley hire but was probably better for the program than if he had stayed. He had ZERO respect for UT or its football tradition... and he thought that he would have to cheat or make out like a fool to get good players to UT.
 
#413
#413
99gator said:
Sorry for auto-correct.

All caps doesn't make your point any better.

He had tajh Boyd committed.
Click to expand...
From a purely raw talent and "fit" standpoint, Bray was better for Kiffin than Boyd. He also dispatched several players and recruits that have gone on to prove him right like a big Phillips kid that didn't even make it to the first game at FSU and Thigpen who has done little or nothing at UCLA.

Fulmer did not sign the 2009, 2010, and 2011 recruiting classes that would have been on the field in 2011.
Click to expand...
So those are the classes that would have been Jr's and Sr's in those same years? That's interesting math you're engaging in there.

Those potential players may have effected the win-loss total.

If you want to blame him for the 2009 roster fine.

2011, no.

It's my opinion.
Click to expand...

The Sr's and Jrs (not counting JUCO's) in 09 would have come from the 05-07 classes. The ones for 10 from the 06-08 classes. The ones for 11... the 07-09 classes. The only players left from Fulmer in '12 would have been RS's. HOWEVER, Fulmer is at least partially responsible for the 09 class. So the last THREE recruiting classes he signed or contributed to were almost complete busts... Tell me any program that can survive three whole class busts in a row.

The '12 roster was the first in a long time that should have competed in the East. Virtually all of the players capable of making a real impact on that team signed with either Kiffin or Dooley.
 
#414
#414
Eddie Vol Halen said:
sjt makes some good points about expectation on Butch, but he is Bush Administration retrograde trying to blame Fulmer for the Hambone, Layla's Husband, and the Bamboo Farmer's years.
Click to expand...

I am blaming Fulmer completely for the 07 and 08 classes and partially for the 09 class. Those classes should have supplied the upper classmen talent and leadership in '10, '11, and '12.

Again, no program can survive three classes that contained as many busts as Fulmer's last two and the one he and Kiffin combined on.
 
#415
#415
VolsSportsFan said:
I also agree that at this point it's not fair to blame him anymore. The administration (Hamilton) royally screwed up choosing a successor, and Dooley was one of the worst coaches in the history of UT athletics.
Click to expand...

I'm not blaming Fulmer directly for what's happening now. The roster problems he left were a primary factor in UT's losing and problems for the last 4 years so indirectly he has continued to have an impact. If he doesn't run it into the ground... rebuilding would not have been necessary.

Dooley was a terrible football coach. He did however leave the roster to Jones better than Fulmer left it to Kiffin and much better than Kiffin left it to him.

Dooley was hired because the job was pretty undesirable at that point. I personally do not think an interim would have made anything better at all. In fact, it probably would have resulted in a '10 signing class about half the size of the one UT signed and without Hunter, Stone, and other impact players.


Kiffin was the big mistake. With hindsight in full 20/20 now, I do not think he would have ever become the "right" coach for UT. I think the chances for very serious NCAA problems were MUCH greater than him competing for championships in K'ville. The BEST players Fulmer left were the Srs of 09- D Williams, Hardesty, Jones, Moore, McClendon, Scott, Richards... There were many guys willing to start with that roster and try to build. There are probably many who could have found a way to discipline guys like Creer without kicking them off the team.

Kiffin used up the narrow window then bolted... so with a roster that didn't have a QB... or a returning starter on the OL... no depth... holes all over the D... UT only managed to take a long shot on Dooley. He was likely one of many risky options.
 
#416
#416
sjt18 said:
UT only managed to take a long shot on Dooley. He was likely one of many risky options.
Click to expand...

Because risky options was the way MH operated. Given MH's lack of communicative ability and apparent real lack of contacts in coaching circles, not to mention even knowing what to look for in a prospective coach, Dooley was the result. And, arguably, Dooley turned out to be the riskiest option there was. MH operated with the idea that one carried a list of prospective coaches with one at all times (he said that at a press conference), and just interviews those on the list. Doubtful though that Dooley was on his "supposed" list, or any other list nationwide. Other risky options by Hamilton were no-names, Todd Raleigh, Lane Kiffin, and even Cuonzo Martin. MH though, turned out to be the greatest risk of all, Mike Hamilton, Doug Dickey's hand-picked successor.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top