This has really bugged me lately

[Liper]

Originally posted by allvol@Dec 7, 2005 3:28 PM
If you are going to say that Fulmer has a weakness, its that he delegates duties. He is a manager. It works very well when the people surrounding you are good at their jobs.  In some of Fulmer's writings, that is how he explains his success... surrounding himself with qualified people.  He is much more of a manager/recruiter/pr than anything else.  That is how most head coachs are.  However, there are a few, like Spurrier, Meyer, etc that like to be more hands on regarding play calling.  But Spurrier hates to recruit and knows almost nothing about coaching defense. Each coach has his own kryptonite.  I'm sure there are plenty of coachs that could be better than Fulmer on gameday, however, I don't think those same coachs would have anywhere near the talent that Fulmer has brought to UT and the results would be worse than a 70% winning percentage.  If Fulmer has failed anywhere, its in his management skills of putting the right people in the right places to make the program is always successful.  However, he is taking the right steps to correct that issue.

[snapback]209991[/snapback]​

I think that is a fair assessment of his skills and job description.

CPF, Mack Brown, Lloyd Carr, and John Cooper are the same person. I'm convinced that aliens just make them look different to fool us.

Point: The aforementioned description may very well -- because it has -- produce consistently good teams over time. But it typically produces mediocre production for a given level of ability. Thus, this type of leadership would create a lot of pretty good job but no championships. See the above list of coaches for serial underachievement.

 

[WA_Vol]

Originally posted by allvol@Dec 7, 2005 4:28 PM
If you are going to say that Fulmer has a weakness, its that he delegates duties. He is a manager. It works very well when the people surrounding you are good at their jobs.  In some of Fulmer's writings, that is how he explains his success... surrounding himself with qualified people.  He is much more of a manager/recruiter/pr than anything else.  That is how most head coachs are.  However, there are a few, like Spurrier, Meyer, etc that like to be more hands on regarding play calling.  But Spurrier hates to recruit and knows almost nothing about coaching defense. Each coach has his own kryptonite.  I'm sure there are plenty of coachs that could be better than Fulmer on gameday, however, I don't think those same coachs would have anywhere near the talent that Fulmer has brought to UT and the results would be worse than a 70% winning percentage.  If Fulmer has failed anywhere, its in his management skills of putting the right people in the right places to make the program is always successful.  However, he is taking the right steps to correct that issue.

[snapback]209991[/snapback]​

Fulmer's mistake was deciding to promote Randy Sanders and develop him as an O.C. Fulmer either doesnt have the energy, time, motivation, etc to develop an O.C. or Sanders didn't have the instincts. Second, Fulmer kept unproductive assistants around who need to go. He still probably should get rid of Slade and hasnt done it. Thats poor management.

 

[RealVol]

The previous points are well taken, BUT just how many years does it take a good manager to realize changes have got to be made. As we all know UT annually recruits only the elite talent this universe offers. Additionally, UT has great facilities, fans, resources & tradition. The problem as everyone has seen this season is the total lack of quality COACHING! By that, I mean you must develop young all the young talent we get to compete. And please don't be brainwashed in being satisfied that UT wins by a narrow 2, 3, 4, 6, 10 point victory against a less talented team in front of 100,000 + UT Fans. That my friends is totally unacceptable. A very disappointing fact over the last several years is a lack of improvement throughout the season. I hope to see UT get out of the 30 plus year old, 8 play offensive rut we're mired in. Please let's see UT's offense get real! If not let's settle in to remaining 2nd or 3rd (at best) in the SECE. My friends as sorry as the SEC was this year that's a pathetic level.

UT players & fans deserve better.

 

[VOL_AHOLIC]

slade has been stinking up that backfield for years.

 

[VolBeef88]

Originally posted by Liper@Dec 7, 2005 3:57 PM
I think that is a fair assessment of his skills and job description.

CPF, Mack Brown, Lloyd Carr, and John Cooper are the same person.  I'm convinced that aliens just make them look different to fool us.

Point: The aforementioned description may very well -- because it has -- produce consistently good teams over time.  But it typically produces mediocre production for a given level of ability.  Thus, this type of leadership would create a lot of pretty good job but no championships.  See the above list of coaches for serial underachievement.

[snapback]210009[/snapback]​

But CPF and Carr seperate themselves From Brown and Cooper. They can win the big games.
I think Fulmer is more like Bobby Bowden in that he is a manager but knows the game very well and can win the big games, while at times making a mess of a simple game.

 

[VolBeef88]

Originally posted by allvol@Dec 7, 2005 3:28 PM
If you are going to say that Fulmer has a weakness, its that he delegates duties. He is a manager. It works very well when the people surrounding you are good at their jobs.  In some of Fulmer's writings, that is how he explains his success... surrounding himself with qualified people.  He is much more of a manager/recruiter/pr than anything else.  That is how most head coachs are.  However, there are a few, like Spurrier, Meyer, etc that like to be more hands on regarding play calling.  But Spurrier hates to recruit and knows almost nothing about coaching defense. Each coach has his own kryptonite.  I'm sure there are plenty of coachs that could be better than Fulmer on gameday, however, I don't think those same coachs would have anywhere near the talent that Fulmer has brought to UT and the results would be worse than a 70% winning percentage.  If Fulmer has failed anywhere, its in his management skills of putting the right people in the right places to make the program is always successful.  However, he is taking the right steps to correct that issue.

[snapback]209991[/snapback]​

I agree with you but would add that another flaw (if this is) is that he is a little too loyal to his staff. I will take a coach with that type of character flaw.

 

[cotton]

Originally posted by RealVol@Dec 7, 2005 4:17 PM
The previous points are well taken, BUT just how many years does it take a good manager to realize changes have got to be made.

Well, I agree that the changes needed to be made, but I can also see how many of the Vols' "successes" masked some teams that underacheived. Beginning with the Sanders era (without the bowls): '99 9-2, BCS bid; '00 8-3, Cotton Bowl appearance; '01 10-2, top 10 ranking; '02 8-4; '03 10-2, east co-champ; '04 10-2, east champ (55 wins in 6 years.) Add to that some devastating injuries and some last minute recruiting flip-flops, and I can see why it was hard to recognize overall problems in the program.

Yes, we have not won a lot of those games because of the genius of our offensive staff, and yes, there were some memorable bowl busts, but how can you recommend major changes in a program winning 9+ games a year?

Originally posted by VolBeef88@Dec 7, 2005 5:28 PM
I agree with you but would add that another flaw (if this is) is that he is a little too loyal to his staff. I will take a coach with that type of character flaw.

I agree with that, too. We would all like to see a coaching staff composed of ex-Vol players stay together for a decade. The hard part is deciding when those guys, who you've coached as players, taught as coaches, and known as friends and coworkers for years, aren't living up to expectations. Add to that the "successes" I mentioned above, and it is very difficult to kick these guys out on the street. Still, a strong leader does just that, and I think that is what Fulmer has done, albeit maybe a little too late.

 

[orangetd88]

Originally posted by VolBeef88@Dec 7, 2005 4:27 PM
But CPF and Carr seperate themselves From Brown and Cooper. They can win the big games.
I think Fulmer is more like Bobby Bowden in that he is a manager but knows the game very well and can win the big games, while at times making a mess of a simple game.

[snapback]210078[/snapback]​

He may be like Booby as far as a manager goes, but Booby has no clue as to what is going onhalf the time.

I saw a replay of the 2003 FSU-Clemson game awhile back. Booby was being interviewed at halftime as he was leaving the field. The reporter asked him what he thought about a player getting kicked out of the game for dirty play, and Booby's response was "What? He got kicked out?"

I about fell out of my chair laughing.

 

[VolBeef88]

Originally posted by orangetd88@Dec 7, 2005 7:48 PM
He may be like Booby as far as a manager goes, but Booby has no clue as to what is going onhalf the time. 

I saw a replay of the 2003 FSU-Clemson game awhile back.  Booby was being interviewed at halftime as he was leaving the field.  The reporter asked him what he thought about a player getting kicked out of the game for dirty play, and Booby's response was "What?  He got kicked out?" 

I about fell out of my chair laughing.

[snapback]210187[/snapback]​

I meant BB of a few years ago. Point taken.

 

[orangetd88]

I know, I just thought that was hilarious and figured now would be as good a time to tell that story as any.

That may be a closer comparison than some of us would like to admit, considering Fulmer stated he didn't even know Riggs was at the stadium during the SC game and he was standing right behind him with his bluetooth headset on.

 

[allvol]

Originally posted by Liper@Dec 7, 2005 3:57 PM
I think that is a fair assessment of his skills and job description.

CPF, Mack Brown, Lloyd Carr, and John Cooper are the same person.  I'm convinced that aliens just make them look different to fool us.

Point: The aforementioned description may very well -- because it has -- produce consistently good teams over time.  But it typically produces mediocre production for a given level of ability.  Thus, this type of leadership would create a lot of pretty good job but no championships.  See the above list of coaches for serial underachievement.

[snapback]210009[/snapback]​

Yes but Joe Paterno and Bobby Bowden are the same type coachs too. You can't just blanket say that those coachs have mediocre production with a given level of talent. Its all in the chemistry of the coaching staff and team. It a program, not one individual coach. Granted the HC has alot of say in the makeup of the program but its still the program itself that dictates success and failure. Paterno's record got worse when his long-time assistants retired. Bowden's teams are not as dominant since he lost some of his top assistants. Yet for decades, they produced some of the most dominant teams in college football.

From 1997-2004, 8 seasons, the Vols program has played in 4 of the SEC Championship games, won 2, and also won a national title.

Since the inception of the SEC, the Vols have won at least 2 SEC titles each decade with the exception of the 1970's. Halfway through this decade, the Vols have failed in 2 tries to capture the SEC title. They are due and I predict will win 2 SEC titles in the next 4 seasons.

 

[jakez4ut]

Originally posted by RealVol@Dec 7, 2005 5:17 PM
The previous points are well taken, BUT just how many years does it take a good manager to realize changes have got to be made. .....

And please don't be brainwashed in being satisfied that UT wins by a narrow 2, 3, 4, 6, 10 point victory against a less talented team in front of 100,000 + UT Fans. That my friends is totally unacceptable.

. I hope to see UT get out of the 30 plus year old, 8 play offensive rut we're mired in. Please let's see UT's offense get real! If not let's settle in to remaining 2nd or 3rd (at best) in the SECE. My friends as sorry as the SEC was this year that's a pathetic level.

UT players & fans deserve better.

[snapback]210019[/snapback]​

You make 4 points here....
1. How many managers have you ever been around that are regularly stating that they are wrong and change is needed, esp. when the results aren't exactly TERRIBLE. It's only when the company falls on it's face and brand or product becomes devalued that change is made, or in our case a 5-6 season and no bowl. is it right? no, but it's the reality.
2. I'm sick of margin of victory argument. If winning by 30 makes you feel good, then so should losing by 1. at the end of the day the W is the only thing that matters, or at least that should matter. Sometimes a team finding a way to win a game is a better indication of how good a team is...would you rather they lose the close games? i keep saying it: STYLE POINTS SUCK.
3. The offense works when it's executed correctly. Does it need some modificaitons and tweaks? sure...but we have been and will continue to win with this offense...ask Nebraska how they like change....
4. yes we do, but if if you expect to win the conf. every year, then you will never be happy. the point of any program is to be in contention year in and year out. As a TN fan, expecting to win the East and/or Conf is fine, but you can't be overly disappointed if you don't and still win 8 or more games...the rest of the conf. has a lot of the same expectations, and will have a say in what we do and don't do on the field....

let's just be realistic from now on...expectations are good, don't get me wrong, but as we know, expectations are just that....they're not written in stone as they are going to come to fruition...