ionaVOL
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2011
- Messages
- 5,239
- Likes
- 2,695
What's laughable to me is that everyone responds with "Spurrier was a proven winner." Okay, fine. If Spurrier was a proven winner and it took him 5 years to turn it around, why does Dooley only get 3? Dooley walked into a tougher situation, yet he's expected to have better results than Spurrier.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Its almost right place, wrong time for Dooley. Not only what you mentioned above, but his 3 years just happen to be during arguably the strongest stretch of success the SEC has had in a long, long time.
