For the people that do not live in Knoxville, you would not believe the supportive phone calls this man still gets on local sports radio.
I have not called any shows. I thought something needed to be changed. That said, this man will go down as arguably the best coach in Tennessee history. I think you argue him against Neyland. CPF is definitely the best I have seen in my 33 years.
Regardless of what happens against Vandy, I think he DESERVES a standing ovation against Kentucky.
I have not called any shows. I thought something needed to be changed. That said, this man will go down as arguably the best coach in Tennessee history. I think you argue him against Neyland. CPF is definitely the best I have seen in my 33 years.
Regardless of what happens against Vandy, I think he DESERVES a standing ovation against Kentucky.
Neyland had something like 130 shutouts including an undefeated season in which no one scored a point on the Vols. There is a very good reason Fulmer's name is on a street and Neyland's is on the stadium. Not to mention our uniforms were pink and we were one of the worst teams in the country before Neyland came to UT. He made the program. And have you seen his record against the Bear? Please read more about Neyland before making a statement like that. Fulmer is definitely the second best coach at UT.
When people say Fulmer refused to adapt and change with the rest of the country - what, exactly, are they talking about?
"I understand the emotion. Tennessee fans who felt the program was slipping, and it was, looked around the league and saw Nick Saban (Alabama), Urban Meyer (Florida), and Mark Richt (Georgia), three coaching stars who will have their programs in the Top 10 for more seasons than not in the future. Then they looked at their guy who is today what he has always been: A former offensive lineman who believed that that answer to just about every problem was to work a little harder tomorrow than you did today."
Will Tennessee get the rock star coach it wants? | Mr. College Football | ajc.com
There was nothing in that article about coaching/recruiting philosophy or any on-the-field issues, simply a astatement about rock-star coaches and Phil's answers to questions from the media and fans.
"Now to be fair to Fulmers critics, Tennessee was not a well-coached team this season. The transition to new offensive coordinator Dave Clawson was just terrible on every level. And the facts are that with David Cutcliffe as his offensive coordinator, Fulmers teams were 85-19. Without Cutcliffe Fulmers Tennessee teams were 65-32. Again, after 16 years, the case could be made to bring in another head coach."
So when people say a coach isn't changing or adapting to the times or whatever, they simply mean the coach has gotten bad?
refusing to change = getting bad?
If that is the case then I think it is a flat out inaccurate way to describe things. In general, you can have a coach that constantly tries to change and adapt to the current trend and still be bad. And specifically relating to Fulmer, he made one of his boldest, most changing moves this year in hiring Clawson, and it was very clearly a disaster.
So when people say a coach isn't changing or adapting to the times or whatever, they simply mean the coach has gotten bad?
refusing to change = getting bad?
If that is the case then I think it is a flat out inaccurate way to describe things. In general, you can have a coach that constantly tries to change and adapt to the current trend and still be bad. And specifically relating to Fulmer, he made one of his boldest, most changing moves this year in hiring Clawson, and it was very clearly a disaster.
You got it. When someone says, "...they looked at their guy [CPF] who is today what he has always been: A former offensive lineman who believed that that answer to just about every problem was to work a little harder tomorrow than you did today.
They mean, "getting bad". :crazy: