P.J. Fleck

#26
#26
When you go 152–52 and you're 66 years old, you're an entitled to have an opinion of another football coach. I didn't take it as sour grapes. He's being honest.
 
#27
#27
Well, he's arguably in one of the weakest divisions in college football. So if he can't make it there...

As a "future big time" head coach, if he goes to a big time program. I like Kyle Whittingham better. He's got a 104-50 record as a head coach. Has a 10-1 bowl game record. And a 13-0 season in 2008 where he beat Alabama in the Sugar Bowl.
 
#30
#30
Booker512 said:
Well, he's arguably in one of the weakest divisions in college football. So if he can't make it there...

As a "future big time" head coach, if he goes to a big time program. I like Kyle Whittingham better. He's got a 104-50 record as a head coach. Has a 10-1 bowl game record. And a 13-0 season in 2008 where he beat Alabama in the Sugar Bowl.
Click to expand...

Now that Chris Petersen made the playoff and is getting some more pub, Whittingham is probably the most underrated coach in college football now. Completely maintained what Urban started. Four double-digit win seasons, including an undefeated season, and is 10-1 in bowl games.
 
#31
#31
05_never_again said:
Now that Chris Petersen made the playoff and is getting some more pub, Whittingham is probably the most underrated coach in college football now. Completely maintained what Urban started. Four double-digit win seasons, including an undefeated season, and is 10-1 in bowl games.
Click to expand...


Whittingham has never won a Pac 12 championship. He has never been to the Pac 12 championship game and has never won a Pac 12 south division. That is mostly how good coaches get noticed.
 
#32
#32
TUSKtimes said:
Whittingham has never won a Pac 12 championship. He has never been to the Pac 12 championship game and has never won a Pac 12 south division. That is mostly how good coaches get noticed.
Click to expand...

How soon do you expect a MW team to compete in the Pac12?

He's a good coach.
 
#33
#33
TUSKtimes said:
Whittingham has never won a Pac 12 championship. He has never been to the Pac 12 championship game and has never won a Pac 12 south division. That is mostly how good coaches get noticed.
Click to expand...

Their program has only been in the Pac 12 7 years. Utah is not the easiest place to recruit, doesn't have much tradition, and, IMO, isn't a natural fit in that conference (like Colorado).
 
#35
#35
05_never_again said:
Their program has only been in the Pac 12 7 years. Utah is not the easiest place to recruit, doesn't have much tradition, and, IMO, isn't a natural fit in that conference (like Colorado).
Click to expand...

According to this guy I know named 05_never_again, Butch has had MORE than enough time, 5 years as head coach, to win championships. Can reinvent a whole program in 5 years, he and others tell me.

You say Whittingham and Utah have been in the PAC for 7 years?

What is it that causes us to give a coach for another school breaks that we won't give our own coach?

NOTE: not making this about Butch. I'm asking why you're giving Whittingham so much leeway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#36
#36
05_never_again said:
Their program has only been in the Pac 12 7 years. Utah is not the easiest place to recruit, doesn't have much tradition, and, IMO, isn't a natural fit in that conference (like Colorado).
Click to expand...

But Colorado came into the Pac 12 a wreck of their former selves. I give them a lot of credit for digging out. But the Pac 12 south division is also the same division so weak that a 6-6 UCLA team made the championship game. It's also the same division that has never beaten the North.
 
#37
#37
VFL-82-JP said:
According to this guy I know named 05_never_again, Butch has had MORE than enough time, 5 years as head coach, to win championships. Can reinvent a whole program in 5 years, he and others tell me.

You say Whittingham and Utah have been in the PAC for 7 years?

What is it that causes us to give a coach for another school breaks that we won't give our own coach?

NOTE: not making this about Butch. I'm asking why you're giving Whittingham so much leeway.
Click to expand...

I don't watch to make it about Butch either, but I believe you're misquoting me about him. I've only said that Butch should have won the East title last year specifically; I generally was not that critical of him prior to the South Carolina and Vandy losses last year. He met expectations his first 3 years here, but he did underachieve last year. I wouldn't say that 4 years are "more than enough" time to win championships, although as he goes into year 5 his time is definitely getting shorter.

I am more complimentary of Whittingham because he is in a different situation. Instead of taking over an established but down program in a P5 conference he had to break into a P5 conference as a good mid-major program. Utah will never be able to consistently recruit with its rivals in that conference (who are their conference rivals anyway) and they don't really seem to fit in that conference geographically/within the recruiting landscape. You can't say any of that stuff about Tennessee. The ceiling of their program is probably making a Group of 6 bowl as an at-large, and he already went through the ceiling of their program when Utah was in the Mountain West.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#38
#38
Fair enough. Makes sense.

On the other hand, think it's entirely possible we and the nation are going to think much more highly of Butch than Kyle a couple of years from now.

Again, not making it about Butch. Just saying that Kyle may be at his absolute peak right now in public perception. As you said about the program (already went through its ceiling), perhaps so too Whittingham.

Time will tell.
 
#39
#39
VFL-82-JP said:
Fair enough. Makes sense.

On the other hand, think it's entirely possible we and the nation are going to think much more highly of Butch than Kyle a couple of years from now.

Again, not making it about Butch. Just saying that Kyle may be at his absolute peak right now in public perception. As you said about the program (already went through its ceiling), perhaps so too Whittingham.

Time will tell.
Click to expand...

I dunno - Whittingham's cache was probably higher after the 13-0 season where they beat Alabama in the Sugar Bowl. A lot of people thought he was about to leave for a bigger job in the couple years after that, but he remained. He is still really highly thought of because they entered a P5 conference and have been competitive in it, and would at least maintain that reputation unless Utah started becoming a Pac 12 whipping boy.
 
#42
#42
05_never_again said:
He did, but admittedly Bama was trash for the vast majority of Fulmer's tenure at Tennessee.
Click to expand...

If my math is right, Bama won 118 games, lost 75, and tied 6* during the period of Fulmer's reign at Tennessee.

They weren't champions, but they weren't chopped liver, either. Fulmer and our lads beat some good Bama teams.




*actual wins and losses counted, to show team ability. Significant number of those wins were vacated after the fact by the NCAA because Bama is a cheating scumbucket of a program.
 
#43
#43
VFL-82-JP said:
If my math is right, Bama won 118 games, lost 75, and tied 6* during the period of Fulmer's reign at Tennessee.

They weren't champions, but they weren't chopped liver, either. Fulmer and our lads beat some good Bama teams.




*actual wins and losses counted, to show team ability. Significant number of those wins were vacated after the fact by the NCAA because Bama is a cheating scumbucket of a program.
Click to expand...

Fulmer was a HC against Alabama from 1993 - 2008. He went 10-5-1 against them (actual wins/losses/ties counted for the same reason you mentioned above).

For the years below, I've listed Alabama's record that year followed by if Tennessee beat them:

1993: 9-3-1 (tie)
1994: 12-1 (loss)
1995: 8-3 (win)
1996: 10-3 (win)
1997: 4-7 (win)
1998: 7-5 (win)
1999: 10-3 (win)
2000: 3-8 (win)
2001: 7-5 (win)
2002: 10-3 (loss)
2003: 4-9 (win)
2004: 6-6 (win)
2005: 10-2 (loss)
2006: 6-7 (win)
2007: 7-6 (loss)
2008: 12-2 (loss)

We really cleaned up against them in the down years. We only beat them when they were also a good team 3 times (1995, 1996, and 1999). In the years when we beat them, they had a combined record of 72-62 (.537). That isn't very good. When they had sporadic good years during the down period, like 2002 and 2005, they won. And of course, we haven't beaten them at all since Saban arrived.
 
#45
#45
05_never_again said:
...We...beat them when they were a good team 3 times (1995, 1996, and 1999).
Click to expand...

So, from your own words. We beat them when they were down, and sometimes we beat them when they were up.

That sounds a lot like Phil Fulmer usually had Alabama's number during his tenure, to me.

No, he didn't win them all, but he won a lot of them.

jpope9 said:
yeah, thanks to Fulmer lol
Click to expand...

Heh, lot of truth to that. If Fulmer hadn't beaten them so often, Bama would've been 129-64-5 during his tenure.

He's a significant part of why they weren't champions in those years...and we sometimes were.

Go Vols!
 
#46
#46
05_never_again said:
I don't watch to make it about Butch either, but I believe you're misquoting me about him. I've only said that Butch should have won the East title last year specifically; I generally was not that critical of him prior to the South Carolina and Vandy losses last year. He met expectations his first 3 years here, but he did underachieve last year. I wouldn't say that 4 years are "more than enough" time to win championships, although as he goes into year 5 his time is definitely getting shorter.

I am more complimentary of Whittingham because he is in a different situation. Instead of taking over an established but down program in a P5 conference he had to break into a P5 conference as a good mid-major program. Utah will never be able to consistently recruit with its rivals in that conference (who are their conference rivals anyway) and they don't really seem to fit in that conference geographically/within the recruiting landscape. You can't say any of that stuff about Tennessee. The ceiling of their program is probably making a Group of 6 bowl as an at-large, and he already went through the ceiling of their program when Utah was in the Mountain West.
Click to expand...

At the same time, whittingham took over a Utah program, that had sustained success already under Urban Meyer.

Butch took over a program that was waining from years of losing records and roster depletion from Derek Dooley/Lane Kiffin and was borderline on NCAA sanctions.

There is a difference. Regardless if people want to admit that or not. It takes 4 years of recruiting, at a minimum, for any head coach to rebuild a roster that's been destroyed the way Tennessees was. if you figure 85 scholarships, signing 20ish players a year. That's not even considering roster turnover or guys leaving after 3 yrs. When you start from bare bones, rebuilding a roster to compete with Florida or Alabama can be like trying to dig a hole in water.

I actually think 2017-2018 are the two seasons that everyone mistook 2015-2016 for. We now have the players and the coaching staff at levels not seen in a lonnggggg time at Tennessee. There is going to be a lot of egg on a lot of faces this year and next.

The last two seasons, Tennessee has been blown out only 1 time. By Alabama last year. Other than that, they have been in every game they have played. Even with depleted defense from injuries and poor coaching at times. We have just needed that one extra down or that one extra kick to have been in Atlanta for two years now. I think 17-18 will be two very good seasons.
 
#47
#47
VFL-82-JP said:
So, from your own words. We beat them when they were down, and sometimes we beat them when they were up.

That sounds a lot like Phil Fulmer usually had Alabama's number during his tenure, to me.

No, he didn't win them all, but he won a lot of them.



Heh, lot of truth to that. If Fulmer hadn't beaten them so often, Bama would've been 129-64-5 during his tenure.

He's a significant part of why they weren't champions in those years...and we sometimes were.

Go Vols!
Click to expand...

Yeah, 3 times over a span of 16 years. We beat them an isolated number of times when they had good (not great) years and they even beat us a few times during their overall down period.

As I said, in the years where we beat them, their combined record was barely over .500. They weren't very good. Fulmer had their number, but they weren't very good overall.

And now that they are good, we haven't beaten them since 2006. It sucks. Other teams that they play every year (Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss) have at least been able to pick off a couple of wins against them since Saban arrived.

We have not had success against them, generally speaking, for as long as we have been playing them. They lead the series 53-38-7.
 
#48
#48
05_never_again said:
He did, but admittedly Bama was trash for the vast majority of Fulmer's tenure at Tennessee.
Click to expand...

This is a ridiculous statement.

Tennessee has been trash during Bama's current reign. So, Saban is average too?

Did it ever occur to you that Bama was trash due to Fulmer instead of the other way around? And I am not that big of a Fulmer fan.
 
#49
#49
onevol74 said:
This is a ridiculous statement.

Tennessee has been trash during Bama's current reign. So, Saban is average too?

Did it ever occur to you that Bama was trash due to Fulmer instead of the other way around? And I am not that big of a Fulmer fan.
Click to expand...

He contributed but I wouldn't say they were trash just because of Fulmer, in the same way Saban has contributed to us being "trash" for a decade but it's in no way just because of him.
 
#50
#50
onevol74 said:
This is a ridiculous statement.

Tennessee has been trash during Bama's current reign. So, Saban is average too?

Did it ever occur to you that Bama was trash due to Fulmer instead of the other way around? And I am not that big of a Fulmer fan.
Click to expand...

Eh, no. Alabama was trash because they were in NCAA trouble and put on multiple probations. And Tennessee isn't trash purely because of Saban. The wheels of Fulmer's demise were set into motion well before Saban arrived in T-town.

Alabama is a program that if they are struggling, it is self-inflicted. They are one of a handful of programs that control their own destiny (i.e., if they have the right HC/admin people, they will be good and nobody else can really do anything about it). Exactly how good they'll be is an open question, but they will be good.

Programs like Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Ohio State, Southern Cal, Texas, etc. have all sorts of inherent advantages that schools like Tennessee, Nebraska, Oregon, Auburn, Virginia Tech, etc. don't.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top