Fulmer debate extravaganza (merged)

[vol_in_ar]

I know what I am, a fan of UT..That wishes Hamilton would have made better decisions on the direction of UT football and the men he chose to lead it..

[Gramps]

Originally Posted by vol_in_il

I know what I am, a fan of UT..That wishes Hamilton would have made better decisions on the direction of UT football and the men he chose to lead it..

Yes he should have made betters decisions and fired Phil years earlier

[vol_in_ar]

it's not about firing Phil, it's about hiring someone that can win

[PimpVol]

Originally Posted by 2ironVol

Great game but we did not give Georgia the ass whipping Florida and Alabama gave us. That's a fact for whatever reason, you don't want to acknowledge. BTW, we weren't the best team in the SECeast. I notice you don't want to debate facts that matter, like the last time we were nationally relevant or the last time we went to a BCS bowl.

We gave Georgia enough of an ass whipping to win the Eastern division. That (and our 6-2 record) would make us the best team in the Eastern division by definition. The fact is UA & UF pounded us that year is not dismissable. But it does not mean we were not the best team in our division (we were) or that that we backed into the title game (we didn't). It also had no bearing on title game participation (clearly). -- So, how do you decide which facts matter? The last time we were "nationally relevant" as determined by whom, you? Me? Sports Illustrated? UTVOLPJ? The last time we went to a BCS bowl is not debatable, as it is a fixed answer. There ultimately is no real debate. You just have your thoughts on Fulmer and I have mine.

[PimpVol]

Originally Posted by Gramps

It will be difficult to be better than the first 12 years of CPF. His record was 123-31 winning 79.8% of his games.
The SEC is much stronger now.

The last 4 years of CPF can be greatly improved. His record was 29-21 winning 58% of his games. I think that will be surpassed during the next 4 years.
2007 was a good year 10-4 if it is not counted Fulmer went 19-17 in 3 of his last 4 years.

The SEC is always tough. The fact that we won 79 percent of our games in the first 12 years of CPF should not be cast off as being the product of a weak league. That whole "thought process" is bush league at best. The SEC has typically had 2 dominant teams. It still does today. Nothing has changed except who the dominant teams are. Fulmers' wins are as good as any other coaches wins, and the record books reflect them as such. Why our own Vol fans don't is beyond me, and can stay there. I am perfectly fine being a Fulmerite. The second part about Dooley winning more than 59% of his games should be do able.

[vol_in_ar]

let's just dooley to 50% first

[Gramps]

Originally Posted by vol_in_il

it's not about firing Phil, it's about hiring someone that can win

One of the best moves Hamilton could have made on the direction of UT football and the men he chose to lead it was fire Phil in 2005.

[Gramps]

Originally Posted by PimpVol

The SEC is always tough. The fact that we won 79 percent of our games in the first 12 years of CPF should not be cast off as being the product of a weak league. That whole "thought process" is bush league at best. The SEC has typically had 2 dominant teams. It still does today. Nothing has changed except who the dominant teams
are. Fulmers' wins are as good as an other coaches wins, and the record books reflect them as such. Why our own Vol fans don't is beyond me, and can stay there. I am perfectly fine being a
Fulmerite. The second part about Dooley winning more than 59% of his games
should be do able.

The SEC is much stronger now. The final polls last year had Al, LSU, AR & SC all finishing in top 10. At one point in the season SEC Teams were 1,2,3 in polls.

Fulmer had a great run but to say the SEC was as strong as it is today is insane.

[Big Orange 1]

Originally Posted by Gramps

One of the best moves Hamilton could have made on the direction of UT football and the men he chose to lead it was fire Phil in 2005.

Ok, so now he should have been fired in 2005? His first losing season. Hmmmm. Firing a championship coach after one losing season. Boy that would have had coaches lined up at Hamilton's door Monday morning wouldnt it.

Why shouldnt they have fired him after the '99 season? We had the same team, we should have won the NC again. Repeat NC's happen all the time.

Nope, I think we should have fired him the day after the Fiesta Bowl. "Coach Fulmer, we're gonna have to let you go, this years team was lucky." I know, I know, this is our first championship in 47 years, but Johnny left you loads of talent" "Most of your wins were against Vandy and Kentucky anyway". "We don't have a clue who were gonna get, we're looking for an unproven NFL coach".

[volfanecs]

Originally Posted by Big Orange 1

Ok, so now he should have been fired in 2005? His first losing season. Hmmmm. Firing a championship coach after one losing season. Boy that would have had coaches lined up at Hamilton's door Monday morning wouldnt it.

Why shouldnt they have fired him after the '99 season? We had the same team, we should have won the NC again. Repeat NC's happen all the time.

Nope, I think we should have fired him the day after the Fiesta Bowl. "Coach Fulmer, we're gonna have to let you go, this years team was lucky." I know, I know, this is our first championship in 47 years, but Johnny left you loads of talent" "Most of your wins were against Vandy and Kentucky anyway". "We don't have a clue who were gonna get, we're looking for an unproven NFL coach".

"and you stabbed Johnny in the back" /sarcasm and everything you accomplished was luck, and your outta here.

[vol_in_ar]

Originally Posted by Gramps

One of the best moves Hamilton could have made on the direction of UT football and the men he chose to lead it was fire Phil in 2005.

but he didn't and the decisions he made after that have been catastrophic

[Gramps]

Originally Posted by vol_in_il

but he didn't and the decisions he made after that have been catastrophic

Its to early to say the Dooley hire was a catastrophe.

[GreveHaller]

Originally Posted by Gramps

Its to early to say the Dooley hire was a catastrophe.

agree but this year will be pivotal. 8 or more wins an he's in the right direction. Anything less, he's got problems

[GmanTN]

Originally Posted by Gramps

Its to early to say the Dooley hire was a catastrophe.

Originally Posted by GreveHaller

agree but this year will be pivotal. 8 or more wins an he's in the right direction. Anything less, he's got problems

I agree with both of these statements, you cannot declare a coach a failure or a bad hire unless they have the talent to compete with. DD has been working on that the past 2 years so now it is time for him to show what he can do.

[PimpVol]

Originally Posted by Gramps

The SEC is much stronger now. The final polls last year had Al, LSU, AR & SC all finishing in top 10. At one point in the season SEC Teams were 1,2,3 in polls.

Fulmer had a great run but to say the SEC was as strong as it is today is insane.

That is one year you are talking of (the last one btw). The west was top heavy. But the "much stronger" nonsense needs to quit. The week national scene had something to do with 3 SEC teams at the top as well. Was South Carolina ever a title contender at any point last year? Arkansas never got over the LSU/Bama hump, so they were not title contenders either. So, there you are left with 2 dominant teams, LSU and Bama, as usual in this league. -- Yes, Fulmer had an excellent run that put him in nice company as far SEC coaches go. Which by default puts you in nice company among all coaches.