What's best for the future of UT football: Dooley teams win or... (merged)

[utmba93]

I only hope Coach Dooley and his staff do not have the misfortune of running into some of these pitiful excuse for Vol fans.

Finally, a realistic goal. You can probably guess where they are and avoid them.

 

[jarvol]

So, in your mind, the talent void excuses whatever outcomes our new skipper delivers? And, setting any expectations for him would be unreasonable. At the same time, claiming the last 10 years were total failure since they produced 'no hardware' makes sense.

I'm simply trying to figure out what standard applies. Is a Dooley season that doesn't produce hardware a complete failure? How many such seasons is reasonable?

Dooley inherited a program just starting move out of the ditch and it is only starting to move because of what seems to be 2 good recruiting classes though they seem a little short on lineman especially DT. Fulmer inherited a championship program with the most talent in the SEC and promptly left it in the ditch. The expectations at the outset need to be different.....much different.

Of course a season that doesn't produce any hardware is disappointing, but none of the next 3 seasons should be considered a failure by any stretch. 2010 will be painful. 2011 won't be all that much better with the schedule. 2012 should be a telling year. 2013 will be the first year of all Dooley players though the 2010 signing class was really probably only 1/3 Dooley's actually. It really isn't about putting a number on the years or a number on the titles. It is about players playing hard and not quitting on the field, which was evident several times in the past decade. It is about having players prepared. It is about developing player's talent year upon year. It is about making halftime and in-game adjustments to counter the opponents. It is about recruiting. If those things are done well then the hardware will take care of itself.

 

[jarvol]

Are 'being competitive' and 'winning hardware' semantic differences?

You wouldn't consider the worst record in UT history a failure... because of the talent void, right?

Being competitive means not getting beat by Florida and Alabama in 2 consectutive years by a score of 159-52 as Fulmer did in his final 2 years.

A losing season is disappointing but in no way can it be laid at the foot of a first year head coach. Neyland, Lombardi, and the Bear could roam the sidelines next year and not produce a winning record.

 

[utmba93]

Dooley inherited a program just starting move out of the ditch and it is only starting to move because of what seems to be 2 good recruiting classes though they seem a little short on lineman especially DT. Fulmer inherited a championship program with the most talent in the SEC and promptly left it in the ditch. The expectations at the outset need to be different.....much different.

Of course a season that doesn't produce any hardware is disappointing, but none of the next 3 seasons should be considered a failure by any stretch. 2010 will be painful. 2011 won't be all that much better with the schedule. 2012 should be a telling year. 2013 will be the first year of all Dooley players though the 2010 signing class was really probably only 1/3 Dooley's actually. It really isn't about putting a number on the years or a number on the titles. It is about players playing hard and not quitting on the field, which was evident several times in the past decade. It is about having players prepared. It is about developing player's talent year upon year. It is about making halftime and in-game adjustments to counter the opponents. It is about recruiting. If those things are done well then the hardware will take care of itself.

You might recheck what Fulmer did with the program after inheriting it. Those were the best years of the program. The downturn started later (many consider the 2001 SEC CG a turning point).

All those things you say 'it's about' are factors that my contribute to how Dooley will be evaluated. He'll have to produce championships. There is no double standard.

I don't think he can. The thread is about how long does he get to try.

 

[utmba93]

Being competitive means not getting beat by Florida and Alabama in 2 consectutive years by a score of 159-52 as Fulmer did in his final 2 years.

A losing season is a disappointing but in no way can it be laid at the foot of a first year head coach. Neyland, Lombardi, and the Bear could roam the sidelines next year and not produce a winning record.

Would 159-53 be competive?

I thought you had two season outcomes: championship or failure. I was using your standards, not mine. You can't expect one thing from one coach and something else from another and consider that objective. At some point, Dooley must deliver against the same standards you have for evaluating Fulmer, right?

And, nobody expects Dooley to be Neyland, Lombardi, or the Bear, but being slightly better than the worst outcome any other UT coach has produced seems reasonable.

 

[jarvol]

You might recheck what Fulmer did with the program after inheriting it. Those were the best years of the program. The downturn started later (many consider the 2001 SEC CG a turning point).

Fulmer inherited a program with the most talent in the SEC coming off co and outright SEC championships in 1990 and 1991. Fulmer kept the talent level high and for the most part avoided the upset losses out of left field that plagued Johnny for over a decade. Fulmer had the luxury of many power programs in the conference going through lulls and pitfalls and poor coaching hires and squandered many more opportunities at championships by looking across the field at Spurrier and allowing that sight to make his knees wobble and his sphincter to get tight enough to produce diamonds from coal.

 

[tm3]

I don't necessarily believe that Gruden or Smith would have been home run hires (although Gruden is about as "home run" as you can get), but they both have much more impressive resumes than Dooley.

home run because of his extensive experience, and success, at the collegiate level, correct?

 

[volintears]

home run because of his extensive experience, and success, at the collegiate level, correct?

and CDD is a good hire because of his success?Pretty sure satan had VERY god recruiting classes after he left for LA Tech.

 

[3L with debt]

Won't happen. I'll be here when Dooley is gone.

Same here! This was a "Shula" hire... No more, no less.

 

[jarvol]

Would 159-53 be competive?

I thought you had two season outcomes: championship or failure. I was using your standards, not mine. You can't expect one thing from one coach and something else from another and consider that objective. At some point, Dooley must deliver against the same standards you have for evaluating Fulmer, right?

And, nobody expects Dooley to be Neyland, Lombardi, or the Bear, but being slightly better than the worst outcome any other UT coach has produced seems reasonable.

Where did I say championship or failure? A decade without a championship is a failure especially when you take a top 10 program into that decade.

As I said the scenarios are completely different. It isn't Dooley's fault less than 50 scholarship athletes return to form the least talented team in 25 years or that an entire class was effectively dismissed from the team. After 4 or 5 years then yes the standards are the same but not while the program is in the ditch. A Ferrari in the ditch with a broken axle ain't going to outrun a Toyota Corolla.

You need to work on reading comprehension instead of trying to parse my sentence fragments together in an attempt to prove your highly flawed opinion that Dooley will suck at UT because he had a losing record at LaTech.

 

[utmba93]

Fulmer inherited a program with the most talent in the SEC coming off co and outright SEC championships in 1990 and 1991. Fulmer kept the talent level high and for the most part avoided the upset losses out of left field that plagued Johnny for over a decade. Fulmer had the luxury of many power programs in the conference going through lulls and pitfalls and poor coaching hires and squandered many more opportunities at championships by looking across the field at Spurrier and allowing that sight to make his knees wobble and his sphincter to get tight enough to produce diamonds from coal.

The man won a national championship after inheriting the program. You said he 'promptly ran it into the ground.' I watched some pretty good Vols football teams for several years and CPF promptly running the program into the ground is simply not what happened. Fulmer did not finish strong, but he started strong.

I don't understand why people can't respect what both Johnny Majors and Phil Fulmer did for the program. Majors took over after winning a NC at Pitt. Fulmer took over after years under Majors and frustration with continued failure to beat Alabama, among other SEC competitors.

They contributed to the same program that just got turned over to a 4-8 coach from LA Tech.

Fulmer was fired almost 18 months ago. Did you miss that?

 

[usafvol01]

To say that there is some doubt about whether CDD can ever win a championship at UT is a gross understatement.

There's also doubt that he can ever win the SEC East.

Instead, many here and in other UT circles, feel the best he can do is win may 10 games in his third year at UT, but never any more than that. In the meantime, many concede that he will help recruiting, but that he can not recruit as well as CLK and company. So, even his recruiting upside is limited versus the trajectory we were on.

Before anyone starts claiming that I don't want to Vols to win, let me clarify in saying that we all want the Vols to win.

Yet, is winning and restoring 'mediocrity' at UT over the next 6 or 7 years better for the Vols program, or would simply seeing Dooley repeat his LA Tech record at UT over the next two years get a proven coach on the Hill faster?

Well I guess its time to face the facts, since CDD didnt win a national championship at LATech. I mean any coach could win at LaTech with their rich tradition in winning championships. I am sure he endless resources as well. There is no possible way he could win at Tennessee. He destined for Mediocrity.


I guess X and his staff were best ever to grace the sidelines at Tennessee and we will be doomed without them.

How about you lay off the guy and give him a chance to win. He hasnt even coached a game yet. I believe Dooley is going to do great things at Tennessee.

 

[DD4ME]

utmba93, bigpapavol and others. CDD's success or failure cannot be based on his W-L record at La Tech alone. You would need to be there when he arrived to see what he inherited and have watched the transformation in the program and team. You speak of all the programs in the SEC being equal in terms of facilities, S $, etc. but the same is and was not true for the WAC. La Tech was the bottom feeder by a long shot in that conference. The team he inherited believed it could only compete w/ only a few teams and was never destined to be even a .500 team. Compare that to last years team, even with the 4-8 record. There is no comparison. Last years team competed against every team they played and improved every game. Ask Tomey of San Jose State if Tech's record reflected the type of team they were. CDD's success at UT will be because of what most people don't know about him and that's what makes him tick, how he relates to players, their families and his staff, how he teaches and how meticulously he plans. Could he fail here? Of course. Will he fail here? If he does, it will be the 1st time and having followed his career, seen over 50% of games he has coached starting with SMU, I will be very surprised and so will many others including his Dad and Saban.

+1
For better or worse Dooley's gambled the future of his career on UT. If he fails he'll never see a HC job at a top school again. I'll take those odds over a guy riding into and out of town on his Dad's name anyday! Most people on here though want gauranteed money. Sure things are very rare though especially 3 weeks before NSD. I'm good just knowing that MH and DD understand their careers are on the line. That to me is as sure a bet as you can ask for. How many big name HC's you know wiling to double down on ol' UT????? Get back to me when DD is driven out with pitchforks like the doomsville folks are predicting.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[utmba93]

Where did I say championship or failure? A decade without a championship is a failure especially when you take a top 10 program into that decade.

As I said the scenarios are completely different. It isn't Dooley's fault less than 50 scholarship athletes return to form the least talented team in 25 years or that an entire class was effectively dismissed from the team. After 4 or 5 years then yes the standards are the same but not while the program is in the ditch. A Ferrari in the ditch with a broken axle ain't going to outrun a Toyota Corolla.

You need to work on reading comprehension instead of trying to parse my sentence fragments together in an attempt to prove your highly flawed opinion that Dooley will suck at UT because he had a losing record at LaTech.

You should be Dooley's head excuse maker. You've earned that much.

If you had confidence in the man, you'd let his record speak for itself. He has the job. He didn't earn it, but he'll have to earn the right to keep it. And, it will not matter how far up his tail you climb.

 

[tm3]

and CDD is a good hire because of his success?

any name you wish to throw on the table is debatable.

satan was about the closest thing to a "lock" there was when bama hired him (NFL experience and a history of winning SECC). even CUM was questioned as "his offense will never work in the SEC."

if there had been a satan analogue out there that we realistically could have hired, and we didn't try or missed, i think that all this hating on the CDD hire might have some justification.

 

[utmba93]

Well I guess its time to face the facts, since CDD didnt win a national championship at LATech. I mean any coach could win at LaTech with their rich tradition in winning championships. I am sure he endless resources as well. There is no possible way he could win at Tennessee. He destined for Mediocrity.


I guess X and his staff were best ever to grace the sidelines at Tennessee and we will be doomed without them.

How about you lay off the guy and give him a chance to win. He hasnt even coached a game yet. I believe Dooley is going to do great things at Tennessee.

If you guy would read the first page or two of the thread before posting, you wouldn't look like such morons.

For the umpteenth time, there is no choice but to give the man a chance. He has the job. What more chance could he get?

 

[jarvol]

The man won a national championship after inheriting the program. You said he 'promptly ran it into the ground.' I watched some pretty good Vols football teams for several years and CPF promptly running the program into the ground is simply not what happened. Fulmer did not finish strong, but he started strong.

I don't understand why people can't respect what both Johnny Majors and Phil Fulmer did for the program. Majors took over after winning a NC at Pitt. Fulmer took over after years under Majors and frustration with continued failure to beat Alabama, among other SEC competitors.

They contributed to the same program that just got turned over to a 4-8 coach from LA Tech.

Fulmer was fired almost 18 months ago. Did you miss that?

I appreciate what both Majors and Fulmer did for UT. I didn't appreciate Fulmer trying to hang on several years longer than he should have by pulling constant power plays with the BOT. Fulmer's final decade produced no hardware. Fulmer's final 4 seasons produced a 29-21 record with 2 losing seasons, a 159-52 score in his final 4 games against UT's 2 biggest rivals, and players that quit on field during games. That is the equivalent of the ditch.

 

[tvolsfan]

any name you wish to throw on the table is debatable.

satan was about the closest thing to a "lock" there was when bama hired him (NFL experience and a history of winning SECC). even CUM was questioned as "his offense will never work in the SEC."

if there had been a satan analogue out there that we realistically could have hired, and we didn't try or missed, i think that all this hating on the CDD hire might have some justification.

Gruden would still have been an excellent hire. Unless he's a lazy recruiter, he'd have a ton of success in college.

 

[utmba93]

I appreciate what both Majors and Fulmer did for UT.

Why not just leave it at that? Fulmer is gone.

The thread is about Dooley, the guy who just got hired. There was another coach (Kiffin) who was between them. Fulmer is old news.

The point is about standards. If you expect championships from Fulmer, you should expect them from Dooley. If he doesn't deliver them, he meets the same fate. It's as simple as that.

 

[jarvol]

You should be Dooley's head excuse maker. You've earned that much.

If you had confidence in the man, you'd let his record speak for itself. He has the job. He didn't earn it, but he'll have to earn the right to keep it. And, it will not matter how far up his tail you climb.

I'm far from being a Dooley apologist. The man has done nothing at UT to get over excited or disappointed about. If he hauls in 30th ranked recruiting classes and gets outcoached by Joker Phillips and loses to the equivalent of Wyoming and has players quitting on the field during games then I will be the first calling for his head.

I'm realist and live in the real world. Coach K is one of a hundred examples that could be cited who walked into a proud program that was in the ditch without any championships from his previous job, a losing record in his last year at his previous job and who had a losing record in his first couple of years trying to pull the proud program out of the ditch.

 

[utmba93]

I'm far from being a Dooley apologist. The man has done nothing at UT to get over excited or disappointed about. If he hauls in 30th ranked recruiting classes and gets outcoached by Joker Phillips and loses to the equivalent of Wyoming and has players quitting on the field during games then I will be the first calling for his head.

I'm realist and live in the real world. Coach K is one of a hundred examples that could be cited who walked into a proud program that was in the ditch without any championships from his previous job, a losing record in his last year at his previous job and who had losing record in his first couple of years trying to the proud program out of the ditch.

That's fair. We want the same thing. Championships. Anything short of that and we want a new coach.

Whether Dooley is like Coach K is to be seen. But UT is not like Duke basketball before Coach K. The ditch is not that deep.

 

[jarvol]

Why not just leave it at that? Fulmer is gone.

The thread is about Dooley, the guy who just got hired. There was another coach (Kiffin) who was between them. Fulmer is old news.

The point is about standards. If you expect championships from Fulmer, you should expect them from Dooley. If he doesn't deliver them, he meets the same fate. It's as simple as that.

If you want me to start parsing your sentence fragments then you are saying Dooley has 10 years to produce a piece of hardware aren't you?

 

[utmba93]

If you want me to start parsing your sentence fragments then you are saying Dooley has 10 years to produce a piece of hardware aren't you?

Are you really that dense?

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

So, in your mind, the talent void excuses whatever outcomes our new skipper delivers? And, setting any expectations for him would be unreasonable. At the same time, claiming the last 10 years were total failure since they produced 'no hardware' makes sense.
I'm simply trying to figure out what standard applies. Is a Dooley season that doesn't produce hardware a complete failure? How many such seasons is reasonable?

　

I don't understand why people can't respect what both Johnny Majors and Phil Fulmer did for the program. Majors took over after winning a NC at Pitt. Fulmer took over after years under Majors and frustration with continued failure to beat Alabama, among other SEC competitors.

You do realize that Coach Majors took over a program which was at about the same talent level as we have now, and it took him seven years to have a 9 win season, and 9 years to win the SEC, yet you are wanting to fire Coach Dooley before he coaches his first game.
　
　
　
　
　
　
　
　
　
　

 

[Vercingetorix]

Would 159-53 be competive?

I thought you had two season outcomes: championship or failure. I was using your standards, not mine. You can't expect one thing from one coach and something else from another and consider that objective. At some point, Dooley must deliver against the same standards you have for evaluating Fulmer, right?

And, nobody expects Dooley to be Neyland, Lombardi, or the Bear, but being slightly better than the worst outcome any other UT coach has produced seems reasonable.

In every area of life, there are four possible outcomes:

1. Success
2. Failure, but with evidence of progress towards eventual success
3. Failure with no evidence of progress
4. Aimless failure, without the introspection to know what it means

You either win or you lose, yes. But not all failures are the same. Even the Great Jackass Nick Saban, best college coach in America, began with a better situation than Dooley inherits and still went 6-6 his first year with a loss to Louisiana-Monroe. Evidence of progress will not be hard to see. You look for a tough, disciplined team that plays hard regardless of the score. You look for a staff that doesn't seem to be schematically overmatched by Florida and Alabama, even if their superior players push ours around. You look for a team that, injuries notwithstanding, generally gets better as the season goes on.

We're going to know whether Dooley's a legitimate SEC coach next season. Maybe then we can start worrying about whether he's a championship-level coach, but if he's the complete pretender that his raw WAC record would suggest, he'll be exposed quickly.