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

[3L with debt]

Check what? Are you stating that there is no evidence to those points? 90 percent of it came straight from statements he made in his press conferences.

Testimony is indeed evidence.

That would be subjective. AD reports, internal studies, awards, etc. would be objective evidence to support your claims.

School is over.

 

[SaintLouisVol]

It is my opinion that winning is the measuring stick that SEC coaches should be judged, so long as it is done by being both legal and ethical. Everything else is just hoopla.

I guess that would make him the greatest coach in the SEC by far, being that he is undefeated as an SEC coach.

 

[NashVol11]

I guess that would make him the greatest coach in the SEC by far, being that he is undefeated as an SEC coach.

He talked about winning and you say this when Dooley has 0 wins...

 

[SaintLouisVol]

. . .School is over.

And I don't think you listened very well.

 

[Vercingetorix]

You are one of my favorite posters so I don't want to get sideways with you but, for the sake of discussion, no, I don't think that CDD was at the top of MH's list. I don't think that MH had a list. He was clueless and put his own future before the program. He had to make a hire and make it fast to save his job and, to a lesser degree, save this recruiting class. It was rushed and by all accounts, a bad hire. I rarely agree with Hat but he is right in this regard. The powers to be should have let MH go with CLK and hired a competent AD and then go get a quality coach. To end up with the 5th best recruiting class in the SEC and a questionable hire, makes me puke in my mouth a little. The focus should have been on getting the right coach (and, yes, that could have happened) then let the rest follow.

The Clay Travis article about the coaching search made it clear that Hamilton keeps and constantly tinkers with a list of potential replacements for his coaches. There's no reason to think he's quit doing that. I just don't think he could get anybody on it.

I don't disagree with you about the quality of the hire. I think the best thing to do, once Hamilton was down to the dregs of his list, would probably have been to name Kippy Brown interim coach and be first on the coaching carousel next year. But had Hamilton done that, we all know that there's a good chance he wouldn't have still been around to make the hire next year. I can't exactly blame the guy for making a move, ANY move, to save his own job. I also don't disagree that maybe that decision should have been taken out of Hamilton's hands, especially once it became obvious that he was being repeatedly turned down in his coaching search, but with UT not currently having a president, ousting Hamilton wasn't likely to come together that quickly. Simek isn't going to fire Hamilton on his own.

The fundamental problem is that, for various reasons, the roster and depth situation at Tennessee has been brought to the point where we can't even attract promising coaches from mid-majors. Leaving Utah for Tennessee ought to be a no-brainer. Leaving TCU for Tennessee ought to be a no-brainer. Leaving Air Force for Tennessee ought to be a no-brainer. But right now it's not.

 

[DaddyChad]

It's a message board. Speculation and debate are the cornerstones of message boards.

And yet are worth nothing in the grand scheme of reality. I think Dooley is a big gamble but was the best candidate for the job given the timing of everything. It is always a safer bet to bet against a new coach in the shark tank that is the SEC also. I can't concede failure when I have not seen Dooley coach a game at UT though like some of the experts on this board.

 

[Vercingetorix]

There were other coaches available, Leach, Malzahn, etc who would have taken it that he didn't interview.

Leach was a flake and a proven mediocrity to begin with, and now he's radioactive. Malzahn would be a total gamble as an SEC head coach. Either would have fallen firmly into the "bad, risky hire" category, and neither of them would have been a meaningful upgrade over what we ended up with.

 

[KingNick865]

Leach got freaking Texas Tech to be relevant. That's a pretty good job by him.

 

[NashVol11]

Derek Dooley's success is key to future of Tennessee Volunteers AD Mike Hamilton - ESPN

While Kiffin's departure caught Hamilton off guard, he says he keeps a list of potential candidates and Dooley has been on his list ever since Louisiana Tech won the 2008 Independence Bowl.

Since there was some confusion over this...

 

[WA_Vol]

Leach was a flake and a proven mediocrity to begin with, and now he's radioactive. Malzahn would be a total gamble as an SEC head coach. Either would have fallen firmly into the "bad, risky hire" category, and neither of them would have been a meaningful upgrade over what we ended up with.

Leach coached 10 years at TT and never had a losing record, Dooley had 2 in 3 years at La Tech. IMO they were looking for an excuse to fire Leach.

To me Malzahn proven himself as OC at Arkansas, Tulsa, and now Auburn. They put up some big numbers at Tulsa.

 

[NashVol11]

Leach coached 10 years at TT and never had a losing record, Dooley had 2 in 3 years at La Tech. IMO they were looking for an excuse to fire Leach.

To me Malzahn proven himself as OC at Arkansas, Tulsa, and now Auburn. They put up some big numbers at Tulsa.

No way I would want either of these coaches...

 

[utmba93]

The Clay Travis article about the coaching search made it clear that Hamilton keeps and constantly tinkers with a list of potential replacements for his coaches. There's no reason to think he's quit doing that. I just don't think he could get anybody on it.

I don't disagree with you about the quality of the hire. I think the best thing to do, once Hamilton was down to the dregs of his list, would probably have been to name Kippy Brown interim coach and be first on the coaching carousel next year. But had Hamilton done that, we all know that there's a good chance he wouldn't have still been around to make the hire next year. I can't exactly blame the guy for making a move, ANY move, to save his own job. I also don't disagree that maybe that decision should have been taken out of Hamilton's hands, especially once it became obvious that he was being repeatedly turned down in his coaching search, but with UT not currently having a president, ousting Hamilton wasn't likely to come together that quickly. Simek isn't going to fire Hamilton on his own.

The fundamental problem is that, for various reasons, the roster and depth situation at Tennessee has been brought to the point where we can't even attract promising coaches from mid-majors. Leaving Utah for Tennessee ought to be a no-brainier. Leaving TCU for Tennessee ought to be a no-brainer. Leaving Air Force for Tennessee ought to be a no-brainer. But right now it's not.

This is a great post again, Verci. So much of it rings true.

On the why UT can't attract a quality coach thoughts, I have to wonder if--although most of us believe it was time for Fulmer to go--most coaches just don't care to put their careers in Hamilton's hands. I have a hard time figuring out whether Hammy is part of what makes UT undesirable to proven coaches and/or the up-and-coming coaches he approached.

 

[utmba93]

No way I would want either of these coaches...

Versus Dooley?

I'd take either... with a preference for CGM to avoid CML's publicity issue (which incidentally could go away while Kippy Brown coached for at least a year). On the field, Leach is head and shoulders above Dooley and I argued heavily against him versus Kiffin or Davis during the previous search.

Add a good DC to CGM and I can't see the risk being anywhere close to the one taken with Dooley.

 

[Vercingetorix]

Leach never won anything at Texas Tech and, with the exception of one year, his records weren't much better than where TT was when he took over. He ran a gimmicky offense in a league where they don't play defense. He is also a fruitcake. Malzahn is building good resume as an OC, but nobody knows what kind of head guy he would be, and he'd be a huge reach right now for any SEC team other than Vandy and Kentucky and Ole Miss. If we'd hired him instead of Dooley, people would be foaming at the mouth about that too.

Complaining that we hired Dooley when these two guys were available is like making fun of your friend for going home with the 300-pound fat chick when there were still two 275-pounders left at the other end of the bar.

 

[BuckeyeVols]

Versus Dooley?

I'd take either... with a preference for CGM to avoid CML's publicity issue (which incidentally could go away while Kippy Brown coached for at least a year). On the field, Leach is head and shoulders above Dooley and I argued heavily against him versus Kiffin or Davis during the previous search.

Add a good DC to CGM and I can't see the risk being anywhere close to the one taken with Dooley.

CDD was definitely a risk.....but he was also a risk we were forced to take. I would much rather have CDD over Malzahn because of his roots under Saban and he also already has HC and AD experience. A lot is made about his overall record at LTU. It should also be mentioned that he got them into, and won their first bowl game in something like 30 years.....and if you take a sec to research it, his bad record last year was heavily influenced by TONS of injuries. His team gave LSU and BSU all they wanted. I know that means jack in the SEC....but you cant act like Malzahn is a better hire. Leach would have been a PR nightmare if he was hired. Noway the boosters would have allowed that hire.

 

[utmba93]

Leach never won anything at Texas Tech and, with the exception of one year, his records weren't much better than where TT was when he took over. He ran a gimmicky offense in a league where they don't play defense. He is also a fruitcake. Malzahn is building good resume as an OC, but nobody knows what kind of head guy he would be, and he'd be a huge reach right now for any SEC team other than Vandy and Kentucky and Ole Miss. If we'd hired him instead of Dooley, people would be foaming at the mouth about that too.

Complaining that we hired Dooley when these two guys were available is like making fun of your friend for going home with the 300-pound fat chick when there were still two 275-pounders left at the other end of the bar.

:lolabove: :lolabove:
Been there... we may know one another.

 

[utmba93]

CDD was definitely a risk.....but he was also a risk we were forced to take. I would much rather have CDD over Malzahn because of his roots under Saban and he also already has HC and AD experience. A lot is made about his overall record at LTU. It should also be mentioned that he got them into, and won their first bowl game in something like 30 years.....and if you take a sec to research it, his bad record last year was heavily influenced by TONS of injuries. His team gave LSU and BSU all they wanted. I know that means jack in the SEC....but you cant act like Malzahn is a better hire. Leach would have been a PR nightmare if he was hired. Noway the boosters would have allowed that hire.

OklaVol may run with this, but I don't think I'll push this one. Verci's analogy was good enough for me as that's about where I see the argument.

 

[PennVol]

Its just amazing that other so-called "vol fans" could slam fellow vol fans for getting behind their new coach and offering him support - WHEN HE HAS GIVEN THEM NO REASON NOT TO. Don't you get it?? We are going to support whoever our HC is. For God sakes, we supported "ex" while everyone dawged him. We will support our HC except for two reasons:

1) If his record and ability is SHOWN to be at a level not satisfactory to the expected results, despite being given ample time to do his job.

2) His last name is Fulmer.

 

[PennVol]

Its absolutely ludicrous for anyone in their right mind to think Mike Leach would have been a good hire, talk about a bottomless hell. Its just amazing that other so-called "vol fans" could slam fellow vol fans for getting behind their new coach and offering him support - WHEN HE HAS GIVEN THEM NO REASON NOT TO. Don't you get it?? We are going to support whoever our HC is. For God sakes, we supported "ex" while everyone dawged him. We will support our HC except for two reasons:

1) If his record and ability is SHOWN to be at a level not satisfactory to the expected results, despite being given ample time to do his job.

2) His last name is Fulmer

 

[Vercingetorix]

This is a great post again, Verci. So much of it rings true.

On the why UT can't attract a quality coach thoughts, I have to wonder if--although most of us believe it was time for Fulmer to go--most coaches just don't care to put their careers in Hamilton's hands. I have a hard time figuring out whether Hammy is part of what makes UT undesirable to proven coaches and/or the up-and-coming coaches he approached.

I don't think that there's any evidence that Hamilton's the problem. I'm not sure I've ever read a quote in which has said anything negative about him other than Fulmer. I think that right now it's mostly the roster and the lack of depth. It is the same thing as taking over a team on probation. So you have to claw your way out of a hole, and you have to do so with Tennessee's notoriously crappy recruiting base, and you have to do it while going up against Florida and Alabama every year. It's easy to see why, if you're an ambitious up-and-coming coach at a mid-major, you might look at that situation, think about whether you'd stake your career on it, and think......you know, I'll just let this one go by and catch the next big opportunity. A decade of irrelevance has eroded the Tennessee brand enough that it doesn't make up for the rest of it.

 

[utmba93]

Its absolutely ludicrous for anyone in their right mind to think Mike Leach would have been a good hire, talk about a bottomless hell. Its just amazing that other so-called "vol fans" could slam fellow vol fans for getting behind their new coach and offering him support - WHEN HE HAS GIVEN THEM NO REASON NOT TO. Don't you get it?? We are going to support whoever our HC is. For God sakes, we supported "ex" while everyone dawged him. We will support our HC except for two reasons:

1) If his record and ability is SHOWN to be at a level not satisfactory to the expected results, despite being given ample time to do his job.

2) His last name is Fulmer

So, if MH had hired Mike Leach you'd be defending him with the same blind faith? Yet, this is what you really think about him.

Somehow I think everyone 'gets it.' They call it Homerism.

 

[TXA&M07]

I think I stated several times before, that Leach would have been pretty decent for yall, all things considered.

 

[NashVol11]

Versus Dooley?

I'd take either... with a preference for CGM to avoid CML's publicity issue (which incidentally could go away while Kippy Brown coached for at least a year). On the field, Leach is head and shoulders above Dooley and I argued heavily against him versus Kiffin or Davis during the previous search.

Add a good DC to CGM and I can't see the risk being anywhere close to the one taken with Dooley.

No, just in general. I thought about that. But I really don't have near as much confidence in Malzahn as many on here seem to. He's a high school coach with a video game offense. I wouldn't be any more excited about him than I am about Dooley.

 

[NashVol11]

I think I stated several times before, that Leach would have been pretty decent for yall, all things considered.

Pretty decent, sure. Better than Dooley probably. But we could still do better than Leach given a full offseason.

 

[utmba93]

your first 5k posts on VN told us that's what we needed to expect. Trying to act like the big boy realist now just isn't going to fly.

BTW, before this thread fades into VN oblivion, PJ, I didn't expect this from you.

Et tu, Brute?