Rasputin_Vol
"Slava Ukraina"
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2007
- Messages
- 72,056
- Likes
- 39,842
Long read...
I'm writing this in advance of the Apocalypse. In a matter of days, maybe hours, Coach Fulmers new contract will be formally announced. Probably through a late afternoon email to media outlets or a craftily worded press release from the UT Athletic Department.
Regardless of whether you support Coach Fulmer or you believe a regime change in the UT Football Program is necessary, the new contract will surely impart a further division of the UT fan base. Regardless of what side of the fence you are on about the new contract, this animosity toward our own is not healthy for the Program.
Trial balloons have been floated to the media by some close to the Program. Reports say the contract will be for a period of seven years averaging over the life of the contract approximately $3 million per year. It gets better Vol Fans.. The contract too has a buyout provision of roughly $5 million.
My first thought when I heard these numbers , regardless of my personal feelings about Coach Fulmer or the new contract, is someone in the Athletic Department is going to have a lot of splainin to do. Then I thought, No, they really don't have to explain anything to us we keep taking it and taking it.
Leading up to the formal announcement of the new contract, I have heard reason after reason why a contract of such length is necessary.
One of the favorite reasons I hear is for recruiting purposes. Really? Certainly, Moms and Dads would like to know who Juniors Head Coach will be for the entire time he attends college. But, when it comes down to it, when Junior is presented with the opportunity for immediate playing time at School A where the head coach is prone to move on for a better deal or to sign with a school where the head coach is a fixture, will be there for at least 7 more years, and you may not play for a year or maybe two, I wonder which school Junior signs with?
One could argue UTs recruiting started trending downward when Urban Meyer took over at the University of Florida.
Like him or not, Coach Meyer did not promise prospects anything but the opportunity to compete for immediate playing time as true freshman. In fact, he tells his recruits when they sign to train hard and plan on playing as a true freshman. Coach Meyer has also been at the forefront of getting signees enrolled at mid-term so they can get in the winter conditioning program, spring practice and be ready to play come the fall of their true freshman year. Coach Fulmer, on the other hand until recently, has been hesitant even reluctant to play true freshman. Coach Meyer has used this to his advantage against Coach Fulmer on the recruiting trail. Like it or not, Coach Fulmer has really had no choice but to play kids early in order to keep up with the Jones (or Meyers and Sabans in this case).
Lets look at recruiting. Its unfair to judge Coach Fulmer based upon in state recruiting. Coach Fulmer has recruited on a national basis since he took over as Head Coach in the early 1990s. Well examine national recruiting numbers later; however, lets look at a few in state recruiting issues before we move along.
When UT was an elite football program, recruiting from east coast to west coast, UT had its pick of the litter of prospects within the state of Tennessee. UT met little resistance for prospects from other SEC or national programs. During UTs run as an elite program, there were many a in state prospect who wanted to and could have played for UT. However, in many cases, these prospects were passed over for a similarly skilled out of state recruit. High School Coaches, High School administrators, families, and friends of families remember these things. You can dis an in state prospect when you have an elite program. UT is not an elite program anymore and these past recruiting decisions have allowed other SEC schools to gain traction in the state of Tennessee with respect to recruiting.
Also, don't forget the high school coaching fraternity is just a microcosm of the fan base. Some coaches love Coach Fulmer, some hate him, and many are simply indifferent. Further, dont discount the importance of a prospects head coach in the recruiting process. Look no further than UTs success or lack thereof at Brentwood Academy. UT gets no help at Brentwood Academy from the coaches or even from many who are close to that Program. UT is trying its best to repair the relationship. Frankly, there are hard feelings over UTs failure to recruit a couple of Division 1 level prospects from Brentwood Academy from a few years years gone by. Signing these prospects could have opened up a virtual recruiting pipeline for UT. However, UT choose to focus their efforts on others. Dave Clawson is trying but this will take time to make inroads there.
Since 2002, UT has averaged signing 7 prospects from the state of Tennessee each year. Over the same period, consider that Alabama has averaged signing 14 prospects from the state of Alabama and Auburn has averaged signing 10 in state prospects.
Since Alabama replaced Mike Shula with Nick Saban, Alabama has prioritized its efforts on in-state recruiting (ie locking down their borders). Last year 19 of Alabamas signees were in state players. Worst yet for VOL fans, Alabama signed 3 highly rated prospects from the state of Tennessee (Tennessee only signed 5 in state prospects last year) and UT and Alabama will go toe to toe this year for 3 or 4 highly rated in state prospects this recruiting season as well. Same is already shaping up for 2010. Auburn is a bit different than Alabama with respect to its recruiting base. Given Auburns proximity to the state Georgia and Florida, Auburn regularly signs its fair share of from these states as well as from Alabama.
Interestingly, when UT has had recruiting classes ranked in the top 5 in the country since 2002, UT has signed its highest number of in state prospects: in 2002 and in 2005 UT signed 9 in state prospects in each class; and, in 2007 UT signed 10 in state prospects.
National Recruiting Analysis. UT boats that the Football Program is one built on a national recruiting base. I wanted to analyze national recruiting rankings over a 5 year or more term to determine if there is a correlation between the stability of a head coach in your football program and recruiting success ( which I define as an average top ten 10 national recruiting ranking).
I compared Coach Fulmers average national recruiting rankings (all rankings have been from Scout.com) for his signing classes from 2002 through 2008 with the average national recruiting rankings of Florida State and Penn State for starters. I choose Penn State and Florida for the following reasons: each at some point over the past few years has been considered an elite program but not now; their current head coaches are fixtures within their programs; both programs over the years have been able to go most anywhere in the country and sign recruits; and, each program and head coach from time to time are discussed/compared with UT and Coach Fulmer.
Looking at the average rankings of the signing classes from 2002 through 2008, Florida States classes have ranked 11th nationally, UTs recruiting classes have ranked 12th nationally and Penn States recruiting classes have ranked 25th nationally. Both Florida State and UTs rankings are respectable but I decided to look further. I then looked at the average rankings for UT, Florida State and Penn State signing classes from 2006 through 2008. I chose to look at this subset of data because, during the past 3 years, there have been significant head coaching changes that have affected both the SEC as well as national college football landscape.
