CTT Staying At UT

#26
#26
MG1968 said:
why would you want Gruden to come here and coach?
he's won one Super Bowl and he did it with Tony Dungy's talent. What has TB done since then? What would make him a better HC than Fulmer?
Click to expand...


Yeah, that was said of Pete Carroll minus the Super Bowl. If Gruden were at UT he would be the ultimate recruiting machine ala Carroll. The guy never sleeps.
 
#27
#27
MG1968 said:
why would you want Gruden to come here and coach?
he's won one Super Bowl and he did it with Tony Dungy's talent. What has TB done since then? What would make him a better HC than Fulmer?
Click to expand...

He is a proven winner. He had alot of success with the Oakland Raiders. Then went to the Bucs and won a Superbowl. Yes, maybe he had Dungy's talent, but so what.

He will get alot of talent at Tennessee because of his name. Players would want to play for a coach that won a superbowl in the NFL. Not too mention if we still had Trooper by then, he would bring in alot of talent.

What would make him better than Fulmer? Well first, he has more heart for the game as it stands now. He shows it on the field.

Second, Fulmer is not good when it comes to controlling the Off the field problems. Cutcliffe is, Fulmer isn't, just take notice. With the attitude of Gruden, you would think he is pretty good at it.

Third, I am sure that Gruden would be a great coach in College, what does it matter what kind of success Gruden had in the NFL. What did Pete Carroll do? Exactly!

Pete Carroll was mediocre in the NFL, came to College and won back to back National Championships. Yes that is in the PAC-10, but he still had success. So that goes to show, it doesn't matter how good they are in the Pro's.

It would be hard to get him here, but look what Bama did. They threw an offer at everybody.

Why not UT?



:matrix:
 
#29
#29
XtennesseeX said:
Second, Fulmer is not good when it comes to controlling the Off the field problems. Cutcliffe is, Fulmer isn't, just take notice.
Click to expand...

Based on what?

XtennesseeX said:
Third, I am sure that Gruden would be a great coach in College, what does it matter what kind of success Gruden had in the NFL. What did Pete Carroll do? Exactly!
Click to expand...

Therein lies the difference. Carroll came to college after the NFL discarded him twice. Nobody is telling Gruden that he can't coach in the NFL.
 
#30
#30
GAVol said:
Based on what?



Back in the 90's, UT never had many Off the field problems. He left, then starting around 2001, UT had continuously Off the field issues.

I am not saying, Fulmer can't control it period, but obviously isn't great at it either.

Anyways, this past year ( Cutcliffe's first year back )UT never did have that serious of Off the Field issues. Unlike it was when he was gone.

Its a huge distraction when that kind of stuff happens.
Click to expand...
 
#32
#32
Therein lies the difference. Carroll came to college after the NFL discarded him twice. Nobody is telling Gruden that he can't coach in the NFL.[/QUOTE]


I was replying to the poster who said, Gruden won with Dungy's talent. Well he didn't have his talent with the Raiders and seem to do fine.
 
#33
#33
Glad that Trooper is staying. Never really thought he would go to Howard though, I think he believes he has alot more to accomplish at UT, but if TN's team and receivers continue to get better so will Troopers offers and the chance of him leaving will become greater.
 
#34
#34
oklavol said:
a step down? i dont see it. It would have conservatively doubled his salary, probably close to trippling it.
Click to expand...

Howard was reportedly offering between $200,000 and $230,000 a year for the position. Troopers present salary $138,850 a year. That's not really close to double and a far far far cry from triple. Troopers contract is up for negotiation after next year and he will almost certainly receive a pay increase then.
 
#36
#36
Thank you Troop! I truly believe that if he's willing to wait a couple years Trooper will move up the ladder at UT, I could see him working his way through OC and on to the top spot. Although he's got a look of work to do, and doubters to disprove before either of those things happen. But think about this: when Croom was hired at MSU, the talk was how big a deal it was to have an African American HC in the SEC. Wouldn't it stand to reason that if Troop eventually moved into the HC spot on the hill that it would be that much bigger deal? I think it'd be great for the program as a whole. Just a thought. Thanks Again Troop!
 
#37
#37
XtennesseeX said:
I was replying to the poster who said, Gruden won with Dungy's talent. Well he didn't have his talent with the Raiders and seem to do fine.
Click to expand...

Gruden's pro record:
Raiders: 38-26 two post season wins in 2000, 2001 eliminated both years by eventual super bowl champs

Buccaneers: 39-41

overall 77-67 and 5-3 in the playoffs. 3 seasons with losing records, all with Tampa Bay, 2 seasons his Raiders finished 8-8. He's had only 2 winning seasons with Tampa Bay. His best record, not counting playoffs, is 12-4 which he did with the Raiders in 2000 and the Bucs in 2002.

with the exception of the Super Bowl victory, there's nothing in Gruden's record that indicates he's anything more than an average coach.
 
#38
#38
MG1968 said:
Gruden's pro record:
Raiders: 38-26 two post season wins in 2000, 2001 eliminated both years by eventual super bowl champs

Buccaneers: 39-41

overall 77-67 and 5-3 in the playoffs. 3 seasons with losing records, all with Tampa Bay, 2 seasons his Raiders finished 8-8. He's had only 2 winning seasons with Tampa Bay. His best record, not counting playoffs, is 12-4 which he did with the Raiders in 2000 and the Bucs in 2002.

with the exception of the Super Bowl victory, there's nothing in Gruden's record that indicates he's anything more than an average coach.
Click to expand...
Kind of hard to make an exception for that.
 
#39
#39
tvolsfan said:
Kind of hard to make an exception for that.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Walking onto a team and winning a Super Bowl with another coach's players, then having an overall losing record afterwards isn't an indicator of a great coach.
 
#41
#41
Yeah . . . In the NFL, everybody is playing with someone else's talent. You can't minimize a Super Bowl run.
 
#42
#42
ok, whatever you say. maybe you'll get what you wish for and I'll be proved wrong about Gruden. I doubt that I'm wrong about Gruden, but you might get what you wish for.

and I'm not minimizing his Super Bowl victory, I'm just being realistic about it not being an indicator of how good a coach he is.
 
#43
#43
Yeah . . . In the NFL, everybody is playing with someone else's talent. You can't minimize a Super Bowl run.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree considering how free agents move around these days. Plus Tampa never could get over the hump with Dungy. Then Gruden shows and they pounded Oakland in the super bowl. Plus Gruden did get screwed over in the Tuck rule game while at the raiders.

Tampa also won the south the year before when no one gave them a chance.
 
#44
#44
I am not sure that gruden would be any better than fulmer.. but if fulmer doesnt get it done this year then it time to start talking to gruden or somene else.
 
#46
#46
Back to the original thread, I'm pleased that Taylor is staying but for heaven's sake, he's only a position coach, not even a coordinator. Has our football program sank to this nadir where losing one assistant would impact our sucess. Good programs lose their best assistants on a regular basis and continue to win.
 
#49
#49
XtennesseeX said:
Back in the 90's, UT never had many Off the field problems. He left, then starting around 2001, UT had continuously Off the field issues.

I am not saying, Fulmer can't control it period, but obviously isn't great at it either.

Anyways, this past year ( Cutcliffe's first year back )UT never did have that serious of Off the Field issues. Unlike it was when he was gone.

Its a huge distraction when that kind of stuff happens.
Click to expand...
Huh? i guess you don't remember Nilo Silvan or Erick Locke.......Dale CArter ring a bell?

the difference between now and then, is that the media exposure to every little thing that happens is much, much greater today than it ever has been in the past.........the same things that we read about every other day now, were happeing back then too....just back then it wasn't as newsworthy as it is today. it's harder manage it now, but the issues are the same.:thumbsup:
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top