Our last 7 coaches through their 1st 20 games

[VolArmy74]

No we didn't. Ole Miss out coached us and Purdue wanted it more. Damn Purdue game shouldn't have been close- they sucked..

With that said. Heupel has coached circles around every opponents coach this year.
And his 1st 20 games have been much harder than Fulmers!

Give credit when it's due! All the other fantasies are for soft fans!!

We scored touchdowns by the rules of football in both games that officials removed. On the field we out scored both teams.

 

[Wezcoast]

Takeaways:
Heupel appears to be a keeper, and Majors would’ve never made it in todays coaching environment.

I'm not sure Fulmer would have either. We had some wicked talent on his teams and choked against teams with comparable rosters. Had Weinke played and at full strength , I'm not sure we walk away with that one.

 

['Boro-vol]

Takeaways:
Heupel appears to be a keeper, and Majors would’ve never made it in todays coaching environment.

Neither would Fulmer.

 

[PickleRickBarnes]

Should be 16-4

 

[CR-vol]

We scored touchdowns by the rules of football in both games that officials removed. On the field we out scored both teams.

Both are losses. Games over. Can't change history.

 

[Volosaurus rex]

Conversely, if you push this exercise back farther in time, Bill Battle was 17-3 during his first 20 games, and Doug Dickey was 11-6-3. Battle inherited a top ten program and progressively drove it into the ditch, whereas Dickey inherited mediocrity and rebuilt the program quickly, with his second season (1965) being his turnaround season.

 

[iuvol]

Edit: thanks for merging. I def didn’t check first!

Saw this stat for Tennessee’s coaches first 20 games since Majors was hired. I’d say that only Fulmer and Kiffin walked in to a somewhat stable program:

Heupel: 14-6
Pruitt: 8-12
Butch: 8-12
Dooley: 9-11
Kiffin:
Fulmer: 14-6
Majors: 7-12-1

I would suggest none of the other coaches had to come in with he situation as bad as it was for CJH

 

[HuntlandVolinColo]

Add in Jim Chaney 1-0 and Brady Hoke 0-1 or 0-2.

 

[HuntlandVolinColo]

I’m feeling the excitement from the beginning of Fulmer’s career as head coach. Pretty cool!!!

Could you imagine CJHs record with the players Fulmer had for his 1st 20 games?

 

[hUTch2002]

Pretty amazing, plus the SEC is pretty treacherous these days

Exactly. The SEC is way tougher today than when Fulmer got his 14-6 and UT was a top 3 SEC roster back then too. We are middle of the pack on paper.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Takeaways:
Heupel appears to be a keeper, and Majors would’ve never made it in todays coaching environment.

Neither would Fulmer.

I'm not sure Fulmer would have either.

Of course Fulmer would have survived in today's coaching environment.

His first 3.5 seasons were:

1992 - 4-0 (standing in for Johnny Majors who had open heart surgery)
1993 - 10-2
1994 - 8-4
1995 - 11-1

You don't get fired in the first few years with a record like that. Fulmer's start as a coach was super-competitive.

Perhaps you two didn't understand what Lostsheep was saying. He was saying that Majors' start as the Vols' coach (7-12-1 in his first 20 games) was rocky enough that he'd probably have been fired within a few years, given the impatience of modern fan bases. And he might've. Because he started like this:

1977 - 4-7
1978 - 5-5-1
1979 - 7-5
1980 - 5-6

Just about any SEC program not named Vandy-Kentucky-Mizzou-Miss St would fire a guy for that kind of start. Even back in the 1970s, that might be true.

But what Lostsheep doesn't take into account are two key points:

(a) Johnny was beloved, and was coming home.
(b) He'd just won a national title at Pitt, which certainly earned him some extra time.

Now, what you probably thought he meant was that Majors wouldn't understand today's game, wouldn't be able to adapt to it. That might be true of Fulmer, too. But also of a whole lot of other coaches. Most coaches of that era, probably. Even great coaches like Neyland and Bryant had trouble adjusting to a changing game. Remember how Neyland was fixated on one-platoon football and the single wing formation? It's just human nature.

Go Vols!

 

[Flipdaddy]

Could you imagine CJHs record with the players Fulmer had for his 1st 20 games?

 

[Smokey7]

Let's Go Vols!

 

[D-Vols]

ive said it before, it’s all to do with the fat man. Lol

 

['Boro-vol]

Of course Fulmer would have survived in today's coaching environment.

His first 3.5 seasons were:

1992 - 4-0 (standing in for Johnny Majors who had open heart surgery)
1993 - 10-2
1994 - 8-4
1995 - 11-1

You don't get fired in the first few years with a record like that. Fulmer's start as a coach was super-competitive.

Perhaps you two didn't understand what Lostsheep was saying. He was saying that Majors' start as the Vols' coach (7-12-1 in his first 20 games) was rocky enough that he'd probably have been fired within a few years, given the impatience of modern fan bases. And he might've. Because he started like this:

1977 - 4-7
1978 - 5-5-1
1979 - 7-5
1980 - 5-6

Just about any SEC program not named Vandy-Kentucky-Mizzou-Miss St would fire a guy for that kind of start. Even back in the 1970s, that might be true.

But what Lostsheep doesn't take into account are two key points:

(a) Johnny was beloved, and was coming home.
(b) He'd just won a national title at Pitt, which certainly earned him some extra time.

Now, what you probably thought he meant was that Majors wouldn't understand today's game, wouldn't be able to adapt to it. That might be true of Fulmer, too. But also of a whole lot of other coaches. Most coaches of that era, probably. Even great coaches like Neyland and Bryant had trouble adjusting to a changing game. Remember how Neyland was fixated on one-platoon football and the single wing formation? It's just human nature.

Go Vols!

You don’t need to explain to me what I thought, but thanks.

My point stands. Fulmer was a talent reliant coach, who had trouble throughout his tenure with teams of equal talent but a high quality coach. This was proven with the coaching arms race that took place after the ESPN deal, and the precipitous decline in his record most especially against ranked teams. He would not have had the same start as Heupel in todays SEC. Heupel is more innovative and able to coach up talent. He’s been able to more with less, something Fulmer was never able to do.

I comprehended fully what the OP was saying because I have a slightly higher than single digit IQ, and I agree. I certainly don’t need it fansplained to me.

 

[THEONLYTENISEE]

By the end of the season, Heupel will pass both Pruitt and Dooley for all time wins.

 

[NEO]

Most fans can tell a good coach pretty quickly.

Everyone who has watched us is like “crap TN has an elite coach now.”

Whether we beat GA or not, the fact is we are back. We have an elite coach and an elite AD working together. That is what drives a program.

We are about to be regularly in the NC mix again.

Go vols!

 

[VolCalls]

Of course Fulmer would have survived in today's coaching environment.

His first 3.5 seasons were:

1992 - 4-0 (standing in for Johnny Majors who had open heart surgery)
1993 - 10-2
1994 - 8-4
1995 - 11-1

You don't get fired in the first few years with a record like that. Fulmer's start as a coach was super-competitive.

Perhaps you two didn't understand what Lostsheep was saying. He was saying that Majors' start as the Vols' coach (7-12-1 in his first 20 games) was rocky enough that he'd probably have been fired within a few years, given the impatience of modern fan bases. And he might've. Because he started like this:

1977 - 4-7
1978 - 5-5-1
1979 - 7-5
1980 - 5-6

Just about any SEC program not named Vandy-Kentucky-Mizzou-Miss St would fire a guy for that kind of start. Even back in the 1970s, that might be true.

But what Lostsheep doesn't take into account are two key points:

(a) Johnny was beloved, and was coming home.
(b) He'd just won a national title at Pitt, which certainly earned him some extra time.

Now, what you probably thought he meant was that Majors wouldn't understand today's game, wouldn't be able to adapt to it. That might be true of Fulmer, too. But also of a whole lot of other coaches. Most coaches of that era, probably. Even great coaches like Neyland and Bryant had trouble adjusting to a changing game. Remember how Neyland was fixated on one-platoon football and the single wing formation? It's just human nature.

Go Vols!

Not to be lost in the conversation is that Fulmer got the job because he went 3-0 to open the season in Majors’ absence and had us ranked in the top 10 and leading the SEC East. Majors comes back and a month later we’re on a 3-game losing streak and on the brink of falling out of the polls. Fulmer aced his audition so they knew he could win with the players we already had.

Also, the original tweet is wrong. Fulmer went 14-5-1 in his first 20 games (15-5 after the ‘93 tie vs Bama became a win when they were found guilty of NCAA violations involving Deuce Palmer). The author likely forgot about the four games in ‘92.

 

[jasonvol18]

No we didn't. Ole Miss out coached us and Purdue wanted it more. Damn Purdue game shouldn't have been close- they sucked..

With that said. Heupel has coached circles around every opponents coach this year.
And his 1st 20 games have been much harder than Fulmers!

Give credit when it's due! All the other fantasies are for soft fans!!

Ole Miss 100% did not outcoach us. I'll give you Purdue. That game had no business being close and the team that wanted it more won. Corral killed us for Ole Miss but Heupel was definitely not outcoached.

 

[Unconditional Surrender]

Takeaways:
Heupel appears to be a keeper, and Majors would’ve never made it in todays coaching environment.

Majors was a Tennessee star and had a National Championship under his belt. That's why he was given such a long leash. People got fired back then too.

 

[mscc1998]

The only thing about starting out this successfuly is expectations. Heupel is setting the bar awfully high. Fulmer was 100 games over. 500 and they still fired him. If Saban lost 2 or 3 games, the Alabama faithful would turn on him like a light bulb. As someone once said its all about what have they done for me lately. In the meantime I will enjoy the ride. GO VOLS!

 

[BanditVol]

That's right. Absolutely right.

But what strikes me most is this: Josh Heupel sat down in a broken jalopy of a program, pulled over by the police, and nursed and cajoled and encouraged it up to 14-6 in no time.

Meanwhile, Phillip Fulmer sat down in maybe not a Lamborghini, but at least a Corvette, already warmed up, and got to 15-5 in the same amount of time.

I'm one of those who appreciate Fulmer as our second-best coach ever. But what Josh Heupel has done so far is way...way...beyond what Fulmer did starting out.

Josh Heupel is on fire. I begin to expect that he'll find his way to being our second best coach in Volunteer history.

Go Vols!

Beyond what Fulmer did? Yes, Fulmer inherited a better situation (which he helped create), but I would not say "way way beyond". Fulmer did pretty well.

 

[BanditVol]

I'm shocked Dooley is slightly better than Pruitt and Jones, lol. He was clearly the worst of the lot.

 

[wmcovol]

I'm not sure Fulmer would have either. We had some wicked talent on his teams and choked against teams with comparable rosters. Had Weinke played and at full strength , I'm not sure we walk away with that one.

If if if if.........

Does OSU admit a ******** call gave them a natty? No. Does LSU admit their a 2 loss team was lucky to play a natty game in their home state and win? No. Does Alabama admit Texas probably lost cause McCoy got hurt? No.

The 1998 Vol team was special and lost a better player than Weinke in the 4th game of the season and still won them all...Weinke lost to NCSTate.

 

[salutethehill]

I’d say that only Fulmer and Kiffin walked in to a somewhat stable program:

lol no. Kiffin walked into a dumpster fire. Fulmer left the program in shambles. I'll take Heupel's first roster over Kiffin's.