To Those already turning on CBJ...

[Sandvol]

what number was Butch...I didn't realize he had played a down...or fumbled at the goal line...

Based upon that logic only the players should ever be fired.

 

[Sandvol]

Go look up Akansas' yearly records and then talk to me again about this "immediate" impact Bobby Petrino had. He was successful, but it took until year 3 to get things rolling compared to where Houston Nutt had the program.

Re-read what he wrote. Then re-read it again. Then re-read it again until you comprehend it.

 

[K-town Vol Fan]

Based upon that logic only the players should ever be fired.

No he's saying you have to hold the players accountable. You can't just go after coaches for a players every mistake. Coaches aren't some kind of
Puppet masters.

 

[TDawg]

I think more were expecting us to be more competative and better than last three years but there isn't any noticable improvement!

Agree .. I really thought the Dawgs were going to get beat after seeing so many of them go out with injuries during the game and it being in Knoxville. I think if they win that game, maybe some other things turn out differently.

 

[Sandvol]

No he's saying you have to hold the players accountable. You can't just go after coaches for a players every mistake. Coaches aren't some kind of
Puppet masters.

The head coach like every other head coach is captain of his ship. He is ultimately responsible.

 

[sjt18]

Go look up Akansas' yearly records and then talk to me again about this "immediate" impact Bobby Petrino had. He was successful, but it took until year 3 to get things rolling compared to where Houston Nutt had the program.

The culture change was immediate. He instituted things like 6:00 AM mandatory team breakfasts. He tightened up things like missing or being late for meetings. There were many institutional things like that which were changed overnight.

The Nutt to Petrino move was different though. Nutt was dismissed primarily for off the field issues. Interesting that one of those issues was tied to his personal moral behaviors... then they hire Petrino as if they did not learn.

 

[sjt18]

You lost me when you thought Missouri and auburn were only same level of talent as we are....,,, they have team speed .....we do not and of story.... Until we admit this and get speed in the right positions we will be no better.... just hold on for Pete's sake.... Speed is on the way...,SIGH!!!!!!

MU is not "faster" than UT. They play faster... but much of that is due to coaching and having been in the same system for their whole college career.

 

[Sandvol]

MU is not "faster" than UT. They play faster... but much of that is due to coaching and having been in the same system for their whole college career.

Accurate.

 

[sjt18]

If you don't know the restrictions the administration puts on the football program as well as the tight leash put on the money spent on facilities, it would be difficult to make an educated statement there.

No. Not really. Those were not arbitrary things. They were responses to misconduct and poor mgt.

UGA probably enjoys the greatest loyalty in the SEC with regards to top HS prospects from across the state being inclined to go there. They really have no substantial in state competition for talent. GT does not really compete with them.

Richt is a great guy by most reports. He is a middling coach.

 

[TDawg]

No. Not really. Those were not arbitrary things. They were responses to misconduct and poor mgt.

UGA probably enjoys the greatest loyalty in the SEC with regards to top HS prospects from across the state being inclined to go there. They really have no substantial in state competition for talent. GT does not really compete with them.

Richt is a great guy by most reports. He is a middling coach.

Again, you don't know the administration stuff behind the scenes at UGA. Most UGA fans know that any replacement coach after Richt is going to ask that stuff like that be removed or he ain't coming. That and open up the purse strings to upgrade a lot of facilities.

 

[VOLINVONORE]

The head coach like every other head coach is captain of his ship. He is ultimately responsible.

Get your head out of the and use just a little common sense about there rebuilding of a football which had dropped to the depths our VOLs have over the last 8-10 years. Reference to your latest statement, the caption chooses his crew. Butch is in the process of choosing his crew. I can rarely wait, but have enough sense to realize it will take another year or two.

 

[WesternKyVol]

# of people turning on CBJ - 3

# of threads about this - 300

# of times a day fans lambast other fans for not praising CBJ unconditionally - 3000

# of people sick of all the above - 300,000

# of days it will continue - infinity or until we win a NC, whichever comes first

poty nominee

 

[VolSinceIwasborn]

I'm excited about the future of Tennessee football for the first time since Tee Martin. For those of you that don't understand that. A quarterback with some wheels on him is important for the college game these days. Especially in the SEC with DE and LB that run like freight trains gone wild. You got to be mobile. And this recruiting class is insane so far.

Yeah you have to be mobile.. Just like AJ at BAMA....

Lets be real it helps but It's not the be all end all.

 

[volfan2024]

I don't care who is coaching. After 2 years and we don't have at least 8 wins I will be looking I will wonder if we made the right move.

 

[Orange_Crush]

It was 7-6... and still an improvement over the previous year. But why pick out the exception to the rule??

Successful coaches almost always make an immediate improvement in the quality of play and win total of their new team.

Remind me what was the impact of.... Sumlin, Carroll, MeyerX4, Saban at LSU, Freeze, Malzahn, Franklin, Hoke, Kelly,....?

Why even make a "rule" concerning such vastly differing circumstances?

Sumlin walked into a pot of talent. (9-4; 7-6; 11-2; That's a "culture change" comparable to UT? really?)

Meyer did too. And he rode Tebow until he lost him, then struggled.

Saban struggled at both MSU and LSU.

Malzah was a former coordinator that had just taken them to the BCSNC, returned to a string of top-10 classes and coached them in the system they were recruited to.

Franklin improved VU... I guess. He took Vandy to a bowl game after they had been to one three years earlier. Doesn't seem like an earth-shattering turnaround. (It's worthy of note that Matthews was already on campus for him.)

Freeze? Really? You consider that a comparable situation? Ole Miss record...

2008 (Nutt) -- 9-4
2009 -- 9-4
2010 -- 4-8
2011 -- 2-10
2012 (Freeze) -- 7-6

So, he went 7-6 with a team, 2 years removed from back-to-back 9-4 seasons? You consider this a "culture change"?

(PS: Note Nutt's awesome start and following decline. Combine it with my points from ND history per the veracity of your "rule".)


Kelly? Look at ND and test your "rule".

Willingham went 10-2, then 11-12 over two seasons. Weis went 9-3 to improve ND's fortunes, then the wheels fell off for 2 years.

Kelly came in and went 8-5 his first year (that's the third best season over the span of three coaches, in a 7 year span). So... The TWO coached before him had better seasons than he started with, in their first year in the program.

Yet, you credit Kelly with "changing the culture" at ND?

Then, we have to consider the inverse of your rule... That was two coaches at ND that showed improvement in their first year, yet proved they were not up for the job. There was also the case of Mr. Nutt the Rebel.

So, while you promote so few "exceptions" to the rule, it appears that your rule is almost completely untrustworthy from either side!

We have coaches that have struggled their first year, then went on to win big.

We have coaches that have gone gang-busters their first year, and then proven to be overall failures.

So, any rule you seem to be applying to judge a coach by their first year results seems to be very malleable.

An immediate success doesn't seem to be the best indicator of a coach's abilities.

Immediate struggles doesn't seem to be the best indicator of a coach's inabilities.

When does it cease to be a "rule"?

 

[ShoalCreekVol]

Why even make a "rule" concerning such vastly differing circumstances?

Sumlin walked into a pot of talent. (9-4; 7-6; 11-2; That's a "culture change" comparable to UT? really?)

Meyer did too. And he rode Tebow until he lost him, then struggled.

Saban struggled at both MSU and LSU.

Malzah was a former coordinator that had just taken them to the BCSNC, returned to a string of top-10 classes and coached them in the system they were recruited to.

Franklin improved VU... I guess. He took Vandy to a bowl game after they had been to one three years earlier. Doesn't seem like an earth-shattering turnaround. (It's worthy of note that Matthews was already on campus for him.)

Freeze? Really? You consider that a comparable situation? Ole Miss record...

2008 (Nutt) -- 9-4
2009 -- 9-4
2010 -- 4-8
2011 -- 2-10
2012 (Freeze) -- 7-6

So, he went 7-6 with a team, 2 years removed from back-to-back 9-4 seasons? You consider this a "culture change"?

(PS: Note Nutt's awesome start and following decline. Combine it with my points from ND history per the veracity of your "rule".)


Kelly? Look at ND and test your "rule".

Willingham went 10-2, then 11-12 over two seasons. Weis went 9-3 to improve ND's fortunes, then the wheels fell off for 2 years.

Kelly came in and went 8-5 his first year (that's the third best season over the span of three coaches, in a 7 year span). So... The TWO coached before him had better seasons than he started with, in their first year in the program.

Yet, you credit Kelly with "changing the culture" at ND?

Then, we have to consider the inverse of your rule... That was two coaches at ND that showed improvement in their first year, yet proved they were not up for the job. There was also the case of Mr. Nutt the Rebel.

So, while you promote so few "exceptions" to the rule, it appears that your rule is almost completely untrustworthy from either side!

We have coaches that have struggled their first year, then went on to win big.

We have coaches that have gone gang-busters their first year, and then proven to be overall failures.

So, any rule you seem to be applying to judge a coach by their first year results seems to be very malleable.

An immediate success doesn't seem to be the best indicator of a coach's abilities.

Immediate struggles doesn't seem to be the best indicator of a coach's inabilities.

When does it cease to be a "rule"?

Spilled drink on keyboard now ENTER key is stuck to period key, IMO.

 

[volgrad500]

I think you can have an honest debate on whether or not we should have seen a more competitive team this season. However, I think those that belittle anyone who has ANY questions or concerns would have a little more credibility if they weren't almost all the same posters who lashed out and said the same things during Dooley's first years.

 

[sjt18]

Why even make a "rule" concerning such vastly differing circumstances?

ALL of the circumstances aren't "vastly" different.

Sumlin walked into a pot of talent. (9-4; 7-6; 11-2; That's a "culture change" comparable to UT? really?)

He had Manziel that no one knew about at that point. Otherwise, what he inherited was VERY similar to what Jones inherited.

Saban struggled at both MSU and LSU.

Yes at MSU... I'm guessing you're kidding about LSU. The year before he arrived they went 3-8. In his first year they were 8-4. He never finished with less than 8 wins there, won two SEC titles in 5 years, 3 times the west, and had a NC there.

Freeze? Really? You consider that a comparable situation? Ole Miss record...

2008 (Nutt) -- 9-4
2009 -- 9-4
2010 -- 4-8
2011 -- 2-10
2012 (Freeze) -- 7-6

So, he went 7-6 with a team, 2 years removed from back-to-back 9-4 seasons? You consider this a "culture change"?

Absolutely. It is even more impressive when you understand that those first two teams lost most of their best players before the last two.

When does it cease to be a "rule"?

Well, when it stops holding true for the vast, vast majority of situations. Can you find a coach that has proven to be very good who was not more successful record wise in his first year than his predecessor? If you can, they are few and very far between.

Do you really want to try to argue that no one ever had it as hard as poor ol' Butch Jones? You are really and truly trying to say that none of those coaches walked into a situation with talent deficiencies, depth issues, and difficult schedules?

 

[volfan411]

ALL of the circumstances aren't "vastly" different.

He had Manziel that no one knew about at that point. Otherwise, what he inherited was VERY similar to what Jones inherited.

Yes at MSU... I'm guessing you're kidding about LSU. The year before he arrived they went 3-8. In his first year they were 8-4. He never finished with less than 8 wins there, won two SEC titles in 5 years, 3 times the west, and had a NC there.

Absolutely. It is even more impressive when you understand that those first two teams lost most of their best players before the last two.



Well, when it stops holding true for the vast, vast majority of situations. Can you find a coach that has proven to be very good who was not more successful record wise in his first year than his predecessor? If you can, they are few and very far between.

Do you really want to try to argue that no one ever had it as hard as poor ol' Butch Jones? You are really and truly trying to say that none of those coaches walked into a situation with talent deficiencies, depth issues, and difficult schedules?

I think there have been coaches who have walked into teams with worse rosters than what Jones had but I am not sure there has ever been a coach walk into a schedule like he has faced in year one. This schedule combined with talent and the culture these kids have lived with the last few years has had to take its toll. I believe all of the above and the beating they took at Alabama led to the on the field performances we seen against AU and MO.

 

[Orange_Crush]

ALL of the circumstances aren't "vastly" different.

He had Manziel that no one knew about at that point. Otherwise, what he inherited was VERY similar to what Jones inherited.

Yes at MSU... I'm guessing you're kidding about LSU. The year before he arrived they went 3-8. In his first year they were 8-4. He never finished with less than 8 wins there, won two SEC titles in 5 years, 3 times the west, and had a NC there.

Absolutely. It is even more impressive when you understand that those first two teams lost most of their best players before the last two.



Well, when it stops holding true for the vast, vast majority of situations. Can you find a coach that has proven to be very good who was not more successful record wise in his first year than his predecessor? If you can, they are few and very far between.

Do you really want to try to argue that no one ever had it as hard as poor ol' Butch Jones? You are really and truly trying to say that none of those coaches walked into a situation with talent deficiencies, depth issues, and difficult schedules?

I am saying that none of the people you listed were in the same same situation that CBJ is in. I listed specific differences.

It would also be interesting to go back and have a look at the schedule each team played when your example coaches posted an improvement, and compare it to this year's. You want to bet hard money they won't be anything close to what CBJ has faced this year? I'll do the legwork if you'll lay $ on the outcome of the research.

I never said no one has ever had it as bad as CBJ. But "no one" is a far cry from your statement that almost all decent coaches have been program changes in year 1.

 

[GrowVol]

As a measuring stick, what was sabans record his first season at bubba? What was his schedule like? What talent did he have to work with? How did he finish in recruiting year one?

 

[tm3]

As a measuring stick, what was sabans record his first season at bubba?

saban 6-7

dooley 6-7

saban = dooley

 

[maotai]

"It's Bush's fault" pretty much sums up this whole thread.