Which one of these coaches would you rather have hired?

#126
#126
b_gann said:
Given who was truly interested... I would have ranked them like this:

A - Freeze - Given the NCAA is now essentially defunct, that takes away a lot of the danger here. I get the decision though. UT never gets away like the other schools do (LSU, UNC, Kansas, etc.)

B - Heupel - Safe hire. He's won and been in the league. He also knows the AD. I get it.

C - Chadwell - If Heupel said no, this would've been who I wanted. Local boy that is blowing up right now.
Click to expand...
I agree that there were no easy choices here. Tennessee has a terrible habit of needing a coach right when there really aren’t any. (Or waiting just a tad too long like we did when Mullen came available)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 08Vol, Doberman and b_gann
#128
#128
OrangeTsar said:
I agree that there were no easy choices here. Tennessee has a terrible habit of needing a coach right when there really aren’t any. (Or waiting just a tad too long like we did when Mullen came available)
Click to expand...
What could've been w/ Mullen... Once UF came open, we were never getting him. I think Chadwell COULD be a big hire for somebody after this year though. Risky hire with a limited track record though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 08Vol
#129
#129
OrangeTsar said:
I agree that there were no easy choices here. Tennessee has a terrible habit of needing a coach right when there really aren’t any. (Or waiting just a tad too long like we did when Mullen came available)
Click to expand...
Mullen was never going to sign here while Florida still had an open job. We were Plan B for him.
 
#131
#131
SGMVols said:
Mullen was never going to sign here while Florida still had an open job. We were Plan B for him.
Click to expand...

Revisionist history is revisionist. Chip Kelly taking the UCLA job over Florida, is what prompted Florida to go after Mullen who was their number #2.

Currie sent a message on Nov. 25 to Clint Dowdle, who is part of the sports agency group that represents Mullen, asking Dowdle to send Mullen a memorandum of understanding.

"Good luck today," Mullen wrote to Currie. "Talked with Peyton (Manning) last night. Look forward to seeing you tomorrow."

"Thanks — hope the cold ones are good!" Currie replied to Mullen, before messaging Dowdle to send Mullen the MOU.

Currie arranged to meet with Mullen the following morning, but the Gators won the pursuit and announced Mullen as their coach on Nov. 26.

UT Vols: John Currie Tennessee texts pursued Dan Mullen, Mike Gundy
 
  • Like
Reactions: 08Vol and OrangeTsar
#132
#132
SGMVols said:
Mullen was never going to sign here while Florida still had an open job. We were Plan B for him.
Click to expand...
Fair point. I just think we should have opened up the vault and started throwing numbers at him. Who knows what could have happened?
 
#133
#133
The thing is, someone has to be willing to take the job if offered. Some fans have this belief that UT can just offer anyone they want and they will say yes. That's never been the case at UT. There is a long history before Kiffin of long tenured coaches with "Tennessee roots." Tennessee has handled the transition into the modern era of college football disastrously and has been 10 steps behind every other schools since 2005, when UF hired Urban Meyer from Utah.

I am fine with the Heupel hire and am willing to give him his shot. I admit, I did expect better from the QB position and am concerned if he can recruit well, but he took the job when others didn't.

That being said, I wanted Freeze. I think he would have been a perfect fit and would have been successful, but again UT is a step behind as usual. With UT's luck he will take the job at Missouri or Vanderbilt in a couple of years and crush UT every year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CJBlaze and golfballs
#134
#134
bigl3327 said:
Where's the lie? First off, it's my opinion, albeit an educated one. Secondly, if you think that there would be no consequences for hiring Freeze after the way the university went about firing Pruitt and Fulmer under the pretenses of cheating, then you are crazy.
Click to expand...
Do you understand the concept of a precedent? I asked you to give me one where the NCAA punished a school for hiring a coach with past infractions; you couldn't do so. You do understand that they can't suddenly make up a whole new set of rules and arbitrarily apply them? Or do you?

Go ahead and give any kind of evidence at all of the NCAA ever doing what you claim they would have done. You can't, because it's a b.s. argument put forth to cover for the execrable negligence of our boosters and administration for hiring Heupel over Freeze.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CJBlaze, Mtnvol80 and Doberman
#135
#135
golfballs said:
I hate to contribute to these kinds of conversations but, I watching Miss St dominate a middling ACC school at home right after we lost to one, made me think a little. He wasn’t a home run hire, but he also wouldn’t have been a failure.
Click to expand...
After he needed a last second call to beat a CUSA team? No thanks.
 
#136
#136
vol_smoothie said:
Hugh Freeze wanted this job in the worst way and he is a proven winner.
I would say he has learned his lessons and would not cheat like he did at Ole Miss and probably gave up the call girls as well, plus Hazel's closed years ago.
Some argue the NCAA would hit us harder if we had hired Freeze. So what ? What's the difference in three years. The sanctions are over and we have a better coach.

Though I wouldn't want him, Lane Kiffin wanted this job as well.
Click to expand...
Freeze had a losing SEC record Before his vacated cheating wins. He’s a loser
 
#138
#138
lifeisdeep said:
Do you understand the concept of a precedent? I asked you to give me one where the NCAA punished a school for hiring a coach with past infractions; you couldn't do so. You do understand that they can't suddenly make up a whole new set of rules and arbitrarily apply them? Or do you?

Go ahead and give any kind of evidence at all of the NCAA ever doing what you claim they would have done. You can't, because it's a b.s. argument put forth to cover for the execrable negligence of our boosters and administration for hiring Heupel over Freeze.
Click to expand...
I can't give you a precedent because what you are suggesting is unprecedented. If you can give an example of a school that had fired a coach for cheating, and then immediately hired another coach that was recently fired for cheating as well, then you have a valid argument. It hasn't been done because it would be stupid to do so. Thus making this a stupid argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 08Vol
#139
#139
bigl3327 said:
I can't give you a precedent because what you are suggesting is unprecedented. If you can give an example of a school that had fired a coach for cheating, and then immediately hired another coach that was recently fired for cheating as well, then you have a valid argument. It hasn't been done because it would be stupid to do so. Thus making this a stupid argument.
Click to expand...
See if you can follow this: Freeze has been cleared by the NCAA. He was at one point under a show-cause penalty; now he is not. The purpose of the show-cause penalty is to warn NCAA member schools that if they hire that particular coach, they could potentially be disciplined for it. The NCAA removes the clause when they deem that the coach has served his time and has a right to get on with his life and career - you know, kind of like the whole justice system works in this country that we live in.

Don't you think that if the NCAA wanted to punish any school that hired Freeze or any coach that had once had infractions, regardless of when said coach was hired, that maybe they wouldn't remove the show-cause? Do you think they're really trying to send some sort of secret message that they're pretending Freeze has done his time and has a right to get on with his career, when in truth they really don't mean it? Do you understand that he has been at his present school for three years and has had zero infractions? Do you think it's simply a facade or pretense when the NCAA removes the show clause and they don't really mean it? Do you think for a second that if we had hired Freeze, and then the NCAA had turned around and added even one day to our punishment, that Freeze would not hire a lawyer the second the ruling was announced and sue them into oblivion, as would we?

It's a disingenuous argument with no basis in reality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CJBlaze and Doberman
#141
#141
lifeisdeep said:
See if you can follow this: Freeze has been cleared by the NCAA. He was at one point under a show-cause penalty; now he is not. The purpose of the show-cause penalty is to warn NCAA member schools that if they hire that particular coach, they could potentially be disciplined for it. The NCAA removes the clause when they deem that the coach has served his time and has a right to get on with his life and career - you know, kind of like the whole justice system works in this country that we live in.

Don't you think that if the NCAA wanted to punish any school that hired Freeze or any coach that had once had infractions, regardless of when said coach was hired, that maybe they wouldn't remove the show-cause? Do you think they're really trying to send some sort of secret message that they're pretending Freeze has done his time and has a right to get on with his career, when in truth they really don't mean it? Do you understand that he has been at his present school for three years and has had zero infractions? Do you think it's simply a facade or pretense when the NCAA removes the show clause and they don't really mean it? Do you think for a second that if we had hired Freeze, and then the NCAA had turned around and added even one day to our punishment, that Freeze would not hire a lawyer the second the ruling was announced and sue them into oblivion, as would we?

It's a disingenuous argument with no basis in reality.
Click to expand...
Ok smart guy, if that's the case and Freeze was such a sparkling candidate, then why didn't Auburn hire him? Why didn't South Carolina hire him‽ Why didn't Texas hire him‽ Hell, why didn't any freaking power 5 school that had an opening hire him? How's that for reality? I'll hang up and listen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 08Vol, Rickyvol77 and Lurker
#145
#145
No one wanted the job… for what the admin was offering. They aren’t fishing in deep waters. It’s been clear with every hire. The school wants a cheap HC and are perfectly happy with hiring a new one every 3-5 years.

I just hope they accidentally stumble into a winner. Maybe the current ones got what it takes. If not we’ll roll the dice again in a few years.
 
#146
#146
VolunteerHillbilly said:
probably five. forget the favorite son coming home stuff. if you hire a guy fresh from coming off a natty, you give him time. you hire a guy with a less impressive record, the chain is gonna be shorter. that's just how it is.
Click to expand...
Not true. Look at Chizik. He won a championship while at Auburn and was fired 2 years later. Leashes are shorter than ever. 3 years max. Now if he’s going 8-4 then ok, he probably gets more than 3. If he’s winning 6 games or less then forget it. No way it goes past 3 years just because of having a NC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 08Vol
#147
#147
LWSVOL said:
they hired the default hire. Why would coaches want to come here to rebuild something that has been broke 13 years going on 14? There have been 5 coaches hired since Fulmer was fired and they have probably been turned down or gotten not interested in discussing from 7 times that many.
Click to expand...
Yet somehow, Fulmer managed to hang around for most of that time.
 
#148
#148
Rickyvol77 said:
Freeze had a losing SEC record Before his vacated cheating wins. He’s a loser
Click to expand...
Any coach to beat Saban more than once is light years ahead of anything we have had in the past two decades IMHO. That is at the top of a resume for me if I am searching. You don’t „accidentally“ beat Saban/Bama
BTW. I am convinced too that is the entire reason the NCAA went after Mississippi. Saban didn’t appreciate the embarrassment and „sicked the dogs“ on Freeze.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top