You think hiring a proven HC doesn't matter?

[RollerVol]

I didnt say most tennessee fans......I said "real fans" meaning the posters on vn that consider themselves the only real fans here and anyone that disagrees with them isnt a real fan.

gotta throw the BS flag on this play...your hole is getting deeper...

GO VOLS...BEAT TIGERS!

 

[BeardedVol]

If you would rather have Mullen then you're stupid.

Pruitt will have growing pains because he has never been head coach. I don't like it, but we don't know what he can do yet.

I know what Mullen's ceiling is though, and I'm not impressed.

Do please enlighten us Nostradamus?

 

[jakez4ut]

An inexperienced coach may grow into a great coach if they aren't one. Talent has nothing to do with a coach's ability. A great coach gets the most of that talent. Guys like Jones... don't. Where they're coaching may factor into success but has nothing to do with how well they coach. Meyer was a great coach at Bowling Green... then at Utah... UTAH for heaven's sake. Saban… became a great coach. He wasn't all that great when he started at MSU and it wasn't just the talent.

You are either missing the point or else being purposefully disagreeable for some other reason. Les Miles' circumstances made him successful for a while. He was NEVER a great coach.

You indicated with this statement that you DO understand that a guy can be a great coach and not succeed due to talent. The point is... he doesn't stop being a great coach. A great coach gets 6 wins out of a 4 win roster... just like a Butch Jones gets 8 wins out of an 11 win roster.

No. I said the idiots were the ones who think "patience" with guys like Jones or McElwain will somehow make them better. It isn't NOT idiotic to have high standards and expectations. It is historically stupid to think you get great results with low expectations.


Umm, you can call it "foolish" if you want but the fact still remains that if a guy does not start showing some signs by year 3... the players stop buying the promises of better times schtick. That's exactly what happened to Jones. It happens all over the place. There's always a new coach who can sell "I'm here to turn things around and will give you a chance to play right away". UT isn't the only program that has that.

If Pruitt doesn't start winning by year three it doesn't really matter what his potential is. He won't be able to get the players that you started out by saying were critical to success. It isn't fair. It isn't a "nice" profession where you competition helps you and gives you the time you need to figure things out.

a lot here i agree with.

i think the sentiment i get the the most is "being patient for the sake of being patient" doesn't guarntee anything.

neither does being quick to pull the trigger.

sometimes it's easier than others to "see" the right choice. i don't think it was difficult in Mac's or Jones' cases, both had opportunities in their last two years to change the narrative, and they didn't.

but then you look at other examples where by year 3, the results weren't necessarily "screaming" winner, but patience was warranted for whatever reason deemed important by that program. i'll use Dabo as an example there. by the end of his 3rd year, they were 6-6, and i'm sure (i know actually) there were a lot of clemson fans that were definitely not sure about the WR coach turned head coach. but their patience was rewarded with a conf title in year 4.

by year 3 (end of 2020), we'll have 3 seasons of results, a very good idea of what the roster will look like for year 4, a pretty good picture on what recruiting looks like...i do think by the end of that season you should be able to say "yes" or "no" as to whether or not the direction of the program is on a positive trajectory.

understanding of course, there's no indication right now that programs like aTm, GA, Bama...and probably USCe, LSU and FL too....are going to go away, or not also be on a positive trajectory.

we're in a race to just get even with some of those programs, so we have a chance to pass some of those programs....some of the time.

 

[JMSqb11]

If you would rather have Mullen then you're stupid.

Pruitt will have growing pains because he has never been head coach. I don't like it, but we don't know what he can do yet.

I know what Mullen's ceiling is though, and I'm not impressed.

And what is his ceiling? Because his career isn't even close to being over with and he's already proved a lot of naysayers wrong who bashed his time at Starkville.

 

[BeardedVol]

You said great coaches coach great from day 1. That depeneds very largely on their experience level, talent and where they are coaching at. If a coach comes to a program having a great winning record with championships, then its more than likely they will be great much sooner. But we all know thats not always the case.

No great coach is winning at a high rate, especially championships without great talent. Sorry, it just doesnt work that way. Were UT fans idiots for expecting too much? Absolutely. But you said yo have to demand better. So which is it? I personally think many UT fans are idiotic because they are expecting a rookie HC with a rookie OC and DC to produce much. This team went 4-8 last year with an experienced HC. Also factor in the talent gap. If a UT fan cannot see the vast differences between our team and vurtually every other team just in the SEC, then they need their eyes checked. Also, even speaking the words great coach when talking about Pruitt is foolish. He may end up being one. But you are right, he yas a long way to go. And you say his curve should be steep, so I assume you are one who thinks if we dont see the major improvement by year 2, then he likely isnt the guy right? If so, then that is equally foolish.

The problem I believe most have, is that we bought into the idea that Butch was a "good recruiter", but a terrible game-day coach, and that Pruitt would be able to do more with that talent than Butch. So far, that's not been the case. We know that all of the players that Butch recruited aren't all busts who were overrated to begin with, for some that is the case (looking at you Kongbo), but not for the majority. So was Butch a worse recruiter than we all believed? Probably, but he was also recruiting for his infallible system which is demonstrably incongruous with success in the SEC. Is this staff that Pruitt put together, as a whole, the right staff for the sort of turnaround necessary for UT? Probably not. A first time HC is most likely not going to get all of his first hires correct, and I'll be surprised if all of the current coaches are coaching at UT in 2019.

Unfortunately, the bar was pretty low to begin with at "be better than Butch", and right now, it's hard to argue that what we've seen so far this year is hitting that expectation, and those expectations are only going to increase next year.

 

[jakez4ut]

The problem I believe most have, is that we bought into the idea that Butch was a "good recruiter", but a terrible game-day coach, and that Pruitt would be able to do more with that talent than Butch. So far, that's not been the case. We know that all of the players that Butch recruited aren't all busts who were overrated to begin with, for some that is the case (looking at you Kongbo), but not for the majority. So was Butch a worse recruiter than we all believed? Probably, but he was also recruiting for his infallible system which is demonstrably incongruous with success in the SEC. Is this staff that Pruitt put together, as a whole, the right staff for the sort of turnaround necessary for UT? Probably not. A first time HC is most likely not going to get all of his first hires correct, and I'll be surprised if all of the current coaches are coaching at UT in 2019.

Unfortunately, the bar was pretty low to begin with at "be better than Butch", and right now, it's hard to argue that what we've seen so far this year is hitting that expectation, and those expectations are only going to increase next year.

also some stuff here i agree with. i am definitley one that said "they can't all be busts, can they?" but you factor in that yeah, some were, and that the s&c was soooo poor the last 3 years, it's more ground up rebuild, than say, what mullen walked in to. at least that roster 'looked' like an sec roster.

but what i've basically done is acknowledge the s&c issue, and that's just not something that gets fixed in a single off season.

the other thing is we don't know for sure what approach this staff has taken toward this season. i don't think there's any doubt this staff believes there's limitations based on the personnel. they've been saying it all off season, in round about ways. there's been no over promising regarding results, and we've been told more than once "we have a long way to go".

maybe they werent' lying???

so, back to the approach.......is this just a development year? get it ingrained with the younger guys, and guys that will return next season, that this is the way it is going to be, these are the things we HAVE to do and be good at to get where we want? and the staff has just made their minds up that they're willing to take the hit this year, to see a jump in production/peformance next?

or, are they not as good as we thought they were?

siap, but we probably wont' know the answer for a while. maybe we'll get some hints in november.

 

[bigslk]

All head coaches use to be assistant coaches at one time!!! They had to start somewhere..

 

[BeardedVol]

All head coaches use to be assistant coaches at one time!!! They had to start somewhere..

The SEC, any P5 conference really, isn't the best environment for on-the-job learning when it comes to being a head coach.

 

[jakez4ut]

The SEC, any P5 conference really, isn't the best environment for on-the-job learning when it comes to being a head coach.

mark richt and bob stoops, and dabo swinney and phil fulmer....beg to differ....and that's only to say that there's just no absolutes in this coaching deal. i don't know why folks have to think there's only 1 way to do things, and if we don't do it that way, it's doomed.

the bottom line is we haven't made good hires because we've had poor leadership that's made decisions for all the wrong reasons.

 

[MaTaLa]

Until Haslam influence is curbed...

Pretty sure everyone would prefer to have an already proven winner that's still on the upside but we fans are hamstrung and relegated to meaningless discussions about coaches. Kinda like politics, opposite ends of the same sh#tstick

 

[hUTch2002]

We do. Some of these posters are damn moronic. When Alabama hired Nick Saban his first year, NO ONE was ready to get rid of him because the Bama fans realized it takes time for him to put in his system and get his players. We have a hell of a coach. But we also have a fan base that seems to ONLY look at the negatives. Noah also didn’t build his big a** ark in one day. Chill out. We will see something unexpected this year that wasn’t supposed to happen, then we’ll have people to name a street after Pruitt. We’re way to dramatic, smh...
Go big

Agreed. People see situations where a coach has success in year 1 or 2 and think that should be us but no 2 situations are the same. Should we have high expectations? Absolutely. But we have to give Pruitt some time to meet them.

 

[hUTch2002]

mark richt and bob stoops, and dabo swinney and phil fulmer....beg to differ....and that's only to say that there's just no absolutes in this coaching deal. i don't know why folks have to think there's only 1 way to do things, and if we don't do it that way, it's doomed.

the bottom line is we haven't made good hires because we've had poor leadership that's made decisions for all the wrong reasons.

Dead on. I would venture to guess there’s more coordinator hires that turn into a good HC than someone having success at a power 5 school and going to another power 5 school and being successful again. Usually when a coach goes from P5 to P5 it isn’t for a good reason.

 

[Behr]

mark richt and bob stoops, and dabo swinney and phil fulmer....beg to differ....and that's only to say that there's just no absolutes in this coaching deal. i don't know why folks have to think there's only 1 way to do things, and if we don't do it that way, it's doomed.

the bottom line is we haven't made good hires because we've had poor leadership that's made decisions for all the wrong reasons.

!

 

[volsportsfan]

The SEC, any P5 conference really, isn't the best environment for on-the-job learning when it comes to being a head coach.

I agree with this for a guy with Pruitts level of experience. Gonna be tough for him to keep the fans and powers at be happy with enough wins over the 3 to 4years and save his job. I said tough, not impossible. I am talking percentages/chances of's - here.

It would have been more wise, we had better probability of success, with a guy like Mullen imo. Though Mullen, to me, is not proven either as of yet. He is further along, by the evidence, than Pruitt. Thus, his probability of getting through that first 3 year trial period, having sufficient amount of wins to keep the masses/powers at be happy, is greater than Pruitts.

Hopefully we can all realize Pruitts lack of experience, forgive an extra misstep or two ( compared to a guy like Mullen who has more experience and positive results ), and give him the correct amount of time. The man ( Pruitt ) obviously can't go winless in the sec his first two years though, for example.

 

[timsplace]

Not sure if this was mentioned on prior posts or not, but I myself, am not convinced that our QB is the right QB. He holds the ball too long, overthrows, or to the wrong person. We have some talent at WR, just not using it, and is it because Jarrett isnt seeing the field fast enough, is the play calling, is our oline that bad (yes in some regards). This dump offs to the wide set dont work. And some of the calls are so obvious. Its like our offense isnt creative enough to get down the field. I do believe it will take at least another season, probably two before we see impact of Coach Pruitts hire. He inherited some tough decisions to make.

 

[superdave1984]

Since 2000 there has been a total of 11 different coaches win the NCAA title.

Butch Davis. Miami was his first HC job other than a stint as a HS HC. I don't know if you would say he was a proven HC or not given his NFL experience.
Bob Stoops. Oklahoma was his first and only HC job. He did pretty well.
Larry Coker. Miami was his first HC job. Granted they were already loaded with talent. His career did not work out very well overall, but he doea have a winning record.
Jim Tressell. OSU was his second HC job, he had done extremely well at Youngstown St.
Nick Saban. HC at Michigan St prior to winning his first NC at LSU. We know how this story goes.
Mack Brown. Previous HC experience at Tulane and North Carolina before winning the NC at Texas. He did pretty well overall.
Urban Meyer. HC at Bowling Green and Utah before winning his first NC at florida. He had great success at every job. We know how his story goes too.
Les Miles. HC at Okie St before winning his first NC at LSU. He did pretty well, but got complacent.
Gene Chizik. HC at Iowa St before landing at Auburn and winning the NC. Would not have if not for (s)Cam Newton. Probably the worst career of this list other than Larry Coker.
Jimbo Fisher. No previous HC experience before taking over for Bobby Bowden at FSU. He's had a decent career so far.
Dabo Swinney. No previous HC experience, however he had been at Clemson as an assistant for several years before becoming HC. He's done pretty well.

Only Tressell, Saban, and Meyer are what I would call "proven" at the time they were hired at the school they won their first NC at. Stoops and Miles are the best of the coordinators who became first time HC.

My point with all of it is, you don't have to be a proven HC to build a winning program. Maybe Les, Bob and Jimbo rode the coat tails of already established programs, but they did maintain them. Well, until Les and Jimbo got lazy.
[begin pipe dream]
I think the only fair comparison for Pruitt on this list would be Stoops. The years between Switzer and Stoops (88-98) weren't exactly the stuff of legend. It looked more like the stuff of UT the last decade. After Switzer "resigned", OK had 3 HC's before hiring Stoops. OK had hired a brash (albeit proven) head coach in Howard Snellenberger and he did not do them any favors during his tenure. They also hired a couple guys who were really not ready for the task. Bob's predecessor had recruited some good athletes, but failed to develop them or turn those athletes into winners. Sounds like UT huh? Gary Gibbs was our Dooley. A guy who had the job of righting the ship and cleaning up the mess. Snellenberger was our Kiffin and John Blake was our Butch. I would love it if Pruitt had the success Stoops had at OK. We will have to wait and see if it happens.
[/end pipe dream]

 

[jakez4ut]

Dead on. I would venture to guess there’s more coordinator hires that turn into a good HC than someone having success at a power 5 school and going to another power 5 school and being successful again. Usually when a coach goes from P5 to P5 it isn’t for a good reason.

exactly. Rich Rod is a good example of that failing, multiple times. Mike Price. Dennis franchione. houston Nutt. Tommy Tubberville.

when it usually does work, it's usally becuase of a specific set of circumstances, and usually the coach is really really good.

Nick Saban, Ubran Meyer, Steve Spurrier, all did it. though all three had some "breaks" along the way in between a couple of stops. but again, look at those names....Jimbo will probably do well...shocker.

Les Miles, but again, think about circumstance. he's not being brought in to replace a failed experiment. he replaced nick saban after a national title cause he left for the NFL.

generally speaking, just because you have P5 experience, even if it's "good" doens't necessarily mean it's gonna be great at the next stop.

which brings us full circle. there is no formula. no one way.

 

[jakez4ut]

Not sure if this was mentioned on prior posts or not, but I myself, am not convinced that our QB is the right QB. He holds the ball too long, overthrows, or to the wrong person. We have some talent at WR, just not using it, and is it because Jarrett isnt seeing the field fast enough, is the play calling, is our oline that bad (yes in some regards). This dump offs to the wide set dont work. And some of the calls are so obvious. Its like our offense isnt creative enough to get down the field. I do believe it will take at least another season, probably two before we see impact of Coach Pruitts hire. He inherited some tough decisions to make.

nope. never been mentioned. thanks for bringing it up.

 

[BeardedVol]

mark richt and bob stoops, and dabo swinney and phil fulmer....beg to differ....and that's only to say that there's just no absolutes in this coaching deal. i don't know why folks have to think there's only 1 way to do things, and if we don't do it that way, it's doomed.

the bottom line is we haven't made good hires because we've had poor leadership that's made decisions for all the wrong reasons.

"isn't the best environment for on-the-job learning"

 

[jakez4ut]

I agree with this for a guy with Pruitts level of experience. Gonna be tough for him to keep the fans and powers at be happy with enough wins over the 3 to 4years and save his job. I said tough, not impossible. I am talking percentages/chances of's - here.

It would have been more wise, we had better probability of success, with a guy like Mullen imo. Though Mullen, to me, is not proven either as of yet. He is further along, by the evidence, than Pruitt. Thus, his probability of getting through that first 3 year trial period, having sufficient amount of wins to keep the masses/powers at be happy, is greater than Pruitts.

Hopefully we can all realize Pruitts lack of experience, forgive an extra misstep or two ( compared to a guy like Mullen who has more experience and positive results ), and give him the correct amount of time. The man ( Pruitt ) obviously can't go winless in the sec his first two years though, for example.

i'm not sure exactly what to say to that. it's like no one pays attention.

Currie/haslam-haslam/currie didn't pursue Mullen, and by the time they did, FL had been told no by Kelly and they went after him....and we weren't going to get him, if FL wanted him.

failure: on the leadership...we probably could have gotten mullen, if we had acted like we gave a crap.

then we know what happened after that with currie.

enter Fulmer, and the mullen issue was already put to bed, and whatever list any one had made up prior to that wasn't worth the paper it was printed on.

oh and not to mention that plenty of coordinators have done just fine in their first gigs as head coaches.

 

[jakez4ut]

"isn't the best environment for on-the-job learning"

fair. i got kinda triggered i guess. LOL.

 

[volsportsfan]

i'm not sure exactly what to say to that. it's like no one pays attention.

Currie/haslam-haslam/currie didn't pursue Mullen, and by the time they did, FL had been told no by Kelly and they went after him....and we weren't going to get him, if FL wanted him.

failure: on the leadership...we probably could have gotten mullen, if we had acted like we gave a crap.

then we know what happened after that with currie.

enter Fulmer, and the mullen issue was already put to bed, and whatever list any one had made up prior to that wasn't worth the paper it was printed on.

oh and not to mention that plenty of coordinators have done just fine in their first gigs as head coaches.

I wish our leadership would look at coaching searches with the standard I have proposed, but, who am I? Hopefully there is sufficient logic behind what I am saying and it somehow begins to trickle through the fan base and maybe up the ladder. Yes, our powers at be have consistently screwed up at the hiring of coaches so far. We can all agree on that. Pruitt still to be determined obviously, so not including him yet in that statement.

I think if they had a standard to go by, like I proposed, it would help to identify the man available that gives us the best chance. And maybe we could get the right man in place after 1 or 2 hires instead of 3 plus hires for example.

 

[superdave1984]

I agree with this for a guy with Pruitts level of experience. Gonna be tough for him to keep the fans and powers at be happy with enough wins over the 3 to 4years and save his job. I said tough, not impossible. I am talking percentages/chances of's - here.

It would have been more wise, we had better probability of success, with a guy like Mullen imo. Though Mullen, to me, is not proven either as of yet. He is further along, by the evidence, than Pruitt. Thus, his probability of getting through that first 3 year trial period, having sufficient amount of wins to keep the masses/powers at be happy, is greater than Pruitts.

Hopefully we can all realize Pruitts lack of experience, forgive an extra misstep or two ( compared to a guy like Mullen who has more experience and positive results ), and give him the correct amount of time. The man ( Pruitt ) obviously can't go winless in the sec his first two years though, for example.

Haslam has let Hue Jackson keep his job so Pruitt should be safe for at least 3 years.

 

[jakez4ut]

I wish our leadership would look at coaching searches with the standard I have proposed, but, who am I? Hopefully there is sufficient logic behind what I am saying and it somehow begins to trickle through the fan base and maybe up the ladder. Yes, our powers at be have consistently screwed up at the hiring of coaches so far. We can all agree on that. Pruitt still to be determined obviously, so not including him yet in that statement.

I think if they had a standard to go by, like I proposed, it would help to identify the man available that gives us the best chance. And maybe we could get the right man in place after 1 or 2 hires instead of 3 plus hires for example.

i'm not familiar with your proposed standard.

it just didn't sound like from your post you accounted for any of the reality of our search. like we just looked at Mullen and said "hard pass", and went for Pruitt instead.

 

[volsportsfan]

There is no absolutes/for sures in my standard ( for example, Gene chizick won a national title then fell off the map. Its rare - going back to probabilities here, but he is an example that it can happen. I wouldn't consider him proven. No continued consistent success ), only probabilities of greater and lesser. And a wise man would choose the greater probability of "good", and avoid the lesser probability of "bad".