Ainge is on Locker Room

#29
#29
GAVol said:
On this topic, Ras puts Gibbs to shame. It's like he caught Ainge simultaneously slashing his tires, burning down his house and sleeping with his girlfriend.
Click to expand...

Well...from what I've seen, he might have with how much Ras hates Ainge.
 
#31
#31
StlCardinals2618 said:
hahah as a journalist tho, he should know that everybody is not going to agree with his opinions. I don't have a problem with the guy either, but he is constantly getting ridiculed by the actual players on the show.
Click to expand...

it became more about him then his article, yeah he had a lot of detractors here.
 
#32
#32
VOLtownUSA said:
I know I'm going to regret this but, how?
Click to expand...

He should have never seen the football field after September 2005. From that point on, Fulmer and his staff should have been moving in another direction. Instead, not only does he stay on campus, but Cutcliffe turns around and force feeds Ainge down our throats, at the expense of Crompton's development. He lost all kinds of time, development, and confidence those 2 years under Cutcliffe. Then, when Cutcliffe leaves, we are left with Crompton, who has to now learn under a 3rd OC in his time in Knoxville (Sanders his redshirt freshman year when he was injured, Cutcliffe and Clawson). 2008 is what we have as a result. The evaluation of what Crompton could or couldn't do should have been done in 2006 and early 2007. At that point (and really, after the 2005 debacle), Fulmer and the gang should have been pressing to find a quarterback. Instead, Clawson (and later on Kiffin/Chaney) are given a quarterback that is damaged mentally.

And another thing. I can make the argument that Aineg actually stunted the development of 2 other quarterbacks on campus. He stole snaps away from Brent Scheaffer and got him distracted and frustrated and he stole snaps away from Rick Clausen.

So as a result of Cutcliffe and Fulmer turning a blind eye to Ainge's drug use/abuse and bad play, we end up having 2008, which prompted tghe firing of Fulmer and hiring of Kiffin, which in turn caused us to go out in a hurried manner to find Kiffin's replacement once he left. 3 years, 3 different coaches. 3 years, 3 different OCs (Cutcliffe, Clawson and Chaney/Kiffin).

Ainge was the catalyst for the most turbulent 6 years in UT football history. His drug use/abuse and kid glove pampering from the Fulmer staff ended up setting UT back 10 because of the chain of events and consequences that occurred if the guy would have instead simple exited stage left after halftime of the 2005 LSU game and never put on the Orange and White again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#33
#33
Rasputin_Vol said:
He should have never seen the football field after September 2005. From that point on, Fulmer and his staff should have been moving in another direction. Instead, not only does he stay on campus, but Cutcliffe turns around and force feeds Ainge down our throats, at the expense of Crompton's development. He lost all kinds of time, development, and confidence those 2 years under Cutcliffe. Then, when Cutcliffe leaves, we are left with Crompton, who has to now learn under a 3rd OC in his time in Knoxville (Sanders his redshirt freshman year when he was injured, Cutcliffe and Clawson). 2008 is what we have as a result. The evaluation of what Crompton could or couldn't do should have been done in 2006 and early 2007. At that point (and really, after the 2005 debacle), Fulmer and the gang should have been pressing to find a quarterback. Instead, Clawson (and later on Kiffin/Chaney) are given a quarterback that is damaged mentally.

And another thing. I can make the argument that Aineg actually stunted the development of 2 other quarterbacks on campus. He stole snaps away from Brent Scheaffer and got him distracted and frustrated and he stole snaps away from Rick Clausen.

So as a result of Cutcliffe and Fulmer turning a blind eye to Ainge's drug use/abuse and bad play, we end up having 2008, which prompted tghe firing of Fulmer and hiring of Kiffin, which in turn caused us to go out in a hurried manner to find Kiffin's replacement once he left. 3 years, 3 different coaches. 3 years, 3 different OCs (Cutcliffe, Clawson and Chaney/Kiffin).

Ainge was the catalyst for the most turbulent 6 years in UT football history. His drug use/abuse and kid glove pampering from the Fulmer staff ended up setting UT back 10 because of the chain of events and consequences that occurred if the guy would have instead simple exited stage left after halftime of the 2005 LSU game and never put on the Orange and White again.
Click to expand...

Ahhh...Ainge was a drug using butterfly that caused a tsunami


Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#34
#34
Rasputin_Vol said:
He should have never seen the football field after September 2005. From that point on, Fulmer and his staff should have been moving in another direction. Instead, not only does he stay on campus, but Cutcliffe turns around and force feeds Ainge down our throats, at the expense of Crompton's development. He lost all kinds of time, development, and confidence those 2 years under Cutcliffe. Then, when Cutcliffe leaves, we are left with Crompton, who has to now learn under a 3rd OC in his time in Knoxville (Sanders his redshirt freshman year when he was injured, Cutcliffe and Clawson). 2008 is what we have as a result. The evaluation of what Crompton could or couldn't do should have been done in 2006 and early 2007. At that point (and really, after the 2005 debacle), Fulmer and the gang should have been pressing to find a quarterback. Instead, Clawson (and later on Kiffin/Chaney) are given a quarterback that is damaged mentally.

And another thing. I can make the argument that Aineg actually stunted the development of 2 other quarterbacks on campus. He stole snaps away from Brent Scheaffer and got him distracted and frustrated and he stole snaps away from Rick Clausen.

So as a result of Cutcliffe and Fulmer turning a blind eye to Ainge's drug use/abuse and bad play, we end up having 2008, which prompted tghe firing of Fulmer and hiring of Kiffin, which in turn caused us to go out in a hurried manner to find Kiffin's replacement once he left. 3 years, 3 different coaches. 3 years, 3 different OCs (Cutcliffe, Clawson and Chaney/Kiffin).

Ainge was the catalyst for the most turbulent 6 years in UT football history. His drug use/abuse and kid glove pampering from the Fulmer staff ended up setting UT back 10 because of the chain of events and consequences that occurred if the guy would have instead simple exited stage left after halftime of the 2005 LSU game and never put on the Orange and White again.
Click to expand...

yet he kicked Lamarcus Coker off the team for drug use :question:
 
#35
#35
Ras is nuts on this subject. None of what he says is ainges fault.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#36
#36
Rasputin_Vol said:
He should have never seen the football field after September 2005. From that point on, Fulmer and his staff should have been moving in another direction. Instead, not only does he stay on campus, but Cutcliffe turns around and force feeds Ainge down our throats, at the expense of Crompton's development. He lost all kinds of time, development, and confidence those 2 years under Cutcliffe. Then, when Cutcliffe leaves, we are left with Crompton, who has to now learn under a 3rd OC in his time in Knoxville (Sanders his redshirt freshman year when he was injured, Cutcliffe and Clawson). 2008 is what we have as a result. The evaluation of what Crompton could or couldn't do should have been done in 2006 and early 2007. At that point (and really, after the 2005 debacle), Fulmer and the gang should have been pressing to find a quarterback. Instead, Clawson (and later on Kiffin/Chaney) are given a quarterback that is damaged mentally.

And another thing. I can make the argument that Aineg actually stunted the development of 2 other quarterbacks on campus. He stole snaps away from Brent Scheaffer and got him distracted and frustrated and he stole snaps away from Rick Clausen.

So as a result of Cutcliffe and Fulmer turning a blind eye to Ainge's drug use/abuse and bad play, we end up having 2008, which prompted tghe firing of Fulmer and hiring of Kiffin, which in turn caused us to go out in a hurried manner to find Kiffin's replacement once he left. 3 years, 3 different coaches. 3 years, 3 different OCs (Cutcliffe, Clawson and Chaney/Kiffin).

Ainge was the catalyst for the most turbulent 6 years in UT football history. His drug use/abuse and kid glove pampering from the Fulmer staff ended up setting UT back 10 because of the chain of events and consequences that occurred if the guy would have instead simple exited stage left after halftime of the 2005 LSU game and never put on the Orange and White again.
Click to expand...

Wow. Just. Wow. Stupid conspiracy theorist is stupid.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#37
#37
Rasputin_Vol said:
He should have never seen the football field after September 2005. From that point on, Fulmer and his staff should have been moving in another direction. Instead, not only does he stay on campus, but Cutcliffe turns around and force feeds Ainge down our throats, at the expense of Crompton's development. He lost all kinds of time, development, and confidence those 2 years under Cutcliffe. Then, when Cutcliffe leaves, we are left with Crompton, who has to now learn under a 3rd OC in his time in Knoxville (Sanders his redshirt freshman year when he was injured, Cutcliffe and Clawson). 2008 is what we have as a result. The evaluation of what Crompton could or couldn't do should have been done in 2006 and early 2007. At that point (and really, after the 2005 debacle), Fulmer and the gang should have been pressing to find a quarterback. Instead, Clawson (and later on Kiffin/Chaney) are given a quarterback that is damaged mentally.

And another thing. I can make the argument that Aineg actually stunted the development of 2 other quarterbacks on campus. He stole snaps away from Brent Scheaffer and got him distracted and frustrated and he stole snaps away from Rick Clausen.

So as a result of Cutcliffe and Fulmer turning a blind eye to Ainge's drug use/abuse and bad play, we end up having 2008, which prompted tghe firing of Fulmer and hiring of Kiffin, which in turn caused us to go out in a hurried manner to find Kiffin's replacement once he left. 3 years, 3 different coaches. 3 years, 3 different OCs (Cutcliffe, Clawson and Chaney/Kiffin).

Ainge was the catalyst for the most turbulent 6 years in UT football history. His drug use/abuse and kid glove pampering from the Fulmer staff ended up setting UT back 10 because of the chain of events and consequences that occurred if the guy would have instead simple exited stage left after halftime of the 2005 LSU game and never put on the Orange and White again.
Click to expand...

You are clearly on drugs.

I will correct one thing in your post and let the rest of it stand as a testament to your lack of credibility. You say that an evaluation of Crompton should have been done in 2006 and 2007 and if he couldn't do something, they would have pressed hard to find a QB.

In reality, that's exactly what happened. Cutcliffe told Fulmer that Crompton would not be the quarterback of the future, that they needed to get somebody else. Cut and Trooper hand-picked B.J. Coleman. That's who Cut wanted. If he had stayed here, Coleman would have been your QB in 2008 and we would have leaned on Hardesty and Foster all season and been poised to make a run in 2009 and 2010. Instead, Cut left, Fulmer didn't listen to Cut (or Clawson, for that matter) and insisted that Crompton was the guy. He's not the coach anymore, pretty much for that decision.

I don't know if Coleman would have been an SEC QB. But he's the guy Cutcliffe hand-picked to replace Ainge. With his history with QBs here, I have to think that Cut would have gotten Coleman to win games at Tennessee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#42
#42
Rasputin_Vol said:
He should have never seen the football field after September 2005. From that point on, Fulmer and his staff should have been moving in another direction. Instead, not only does he stay on campus, but Cutcliffe turns around and force feeds Ainge down our throats, at the expense of Crompton's development. He lost all kinds of time, development, and confidence those 2 years under Cutcliffe. Then, when Cutcliffe leaves, we are left with Crompton, who has to now learn under a 3rd OC in his time in Knoxville (Sanders his redshirt freshman year when he was injured, Cutcliffe and Clawson). 2008 is what we have as a result. The evaluation of what Crompton could or couldn't do should have been done in 2006 and early 2007. At that point (and really, after the 2005 debacle), Fulmer and the gang should have been pressing to find a quarterback. Instead, Clawson (and later on Kiffin/Chaney) are given a quarterback that is damaged mentally.

And another thing. I can make the argument that Aineg actually stunted the development of 2 other quarterbacks on campus. He stole snaps away from Brent Scheaffer and got him distracted and frustrated and he stole snaps away from Rick Clausen.

So as a result of Cutcliffe and Fulmer turning a blind eye to Ainge's drug use/abuse and bad play, we end up having 2008, which prompted tghe firing of Fulmer and hiring of Kiffin, which in turn caused us to go out in a hurried manner to find Kiffin's replacement once he left. 3 years, 3 different coaches. 3 years, 3 different OCs (Cutcliffe, Clawson and Chaney/Kiffin).

Ainge was the catalyst for the most turbulent 6 years in UT football history. His drug use/abuse and kid glove pampering from the Fulmer staff ended up setting UT back 10 because of the chain of events and consequences that occurred if the guy would have instead simple exited stage left after halftime of the 2005 LSU game and never put on the Orange and White again.
Click to expand...

This is golden - because you hated him long before you were aware of any drug issues with him. Your argument was solely on "bad play" before all the crap on Ainge came out... and "bad play" is highly debatable. He was certainly better than a large majority of the QBs to play on the Hill.
 
#43
#43
People loved Crompton when Ainge was stinkin up the field. Then they hated him when he stunk up the field, and now people are loving him because he isn't playing on any field. Makes sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#44
#44
I looked for an ok'd article I read Ainges SR year about how Cut didn't care for Crompton as a whole very much, but I couldn't find it. I also have to agree with DeerPark12. Ras seems very bitter over this whole Ainge thing.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#45
#45
DeerPark12 said:
You are clearly on drugs.

I will correct one thing in your post and let the rest of it stand as a testament to your lack of credibility. You say that an evaluation of Crompton should have been done in 2006 and 2007 and if he couldn't do something, they would have pressed hard to find a QB.

In reality, that's exactly what happened. Cutcliffe told Fulmer that Crompton would not be the quarterback of the future, that they needed to get somebody else. Cut and Trooper hand-picked B.J. Coleman. That's who Cut wanted. If he had stayed here, Coleman would have been your QB in 2008 and we would have leaned on Hardesty and Foster all season and been poised to make a run in 2009 and 2010. Instead, Cut left, Fulmer didn't listen to Cut (or Clawson, for that matter) and insisted that Crompton was the guy. He's not the coach anymore, pretty much for that decision.

I don't know if Coleman would have been an SEC QB. But he's the guy Cutcliffe hand-picked to replace Ainge. With his history with QBs here, I have to think that Cut would have gotten Coleman to win games at Tennessee.
Click to expand...

I agree with MOST of this, except that Coleman DID stay for the 2008 season. Crompton, Stephens, & Coleman all 3 played in the Clawfense.

Coleman played in the 2009 O&W game (& looked good, I thought), but transferred before the season after LK buried him on the depth chart.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#46
#46
Bassmanbruno said:
This is golden - because you hated him long before you were aware of any drug issues with him. Your argument was solely on "bad play" before all the crap on Ainge came out... and "bad play" is highly debatable. He was certainly better than a large majority of the QBs to play on the Hill.
Click to expand...

Bad play and I also said that he was a headcase or had issues mentally.

The drug use answered a lot of questions and further validated me.
 
#47
#47
PastorVolFan said:
I agree with MOST of this, except that Coleman DID stay for the 2008 season. Crompton, Stephens, & Coleman all 3 played in the Clawfense.

Coleman played in the 2009 O&W game (& looked good, I thought), but transferred before the season after LK buried him on the depth chart.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I was referring to Cutcliffe when I say "if he had stayed." Cutcliffe had pegged Coleman to start in 2008 or at least be starting by the middle of 2008.

Believe me, I'm well aware of the timing and circumstances around Coleman leaving.
 
#48
#48
Vols520 said:
Ras is nuts on this subject. None of what he says is ainges fault.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Fulmer carries about 90% of the blame for re-hiring Cutcliffe, hiring Clawson, letting recruiting slip, and not sending Ainge packing after the 2005 LSU game. I give Ainge the remaining 10% for his drug use and not having the honor to go up to Fulmer after that 2005 game and offering to leave the team.
 
#49
#49
DeerPark12 said:
I was referring to Cutcliffe when I say "if he had stayed." Cutcliffe had pegged Coleman to start in 2008 or at least be starting by the middle of 2008.

Believe me, I'm well aware of the timing and circumstances around Coleman leaving.
Click to expand...

Was he just mad because he wasn't getting a fair shake, his thought process not mine.
 
#50
#50
DjCrenshaw said:
Was he just mad because he wasn't getting a fair shake, his thought process not mine.
Click to expand...

Kiffin declined to discuss his place on the team with him. Cancelled multiple appointments, etc. Coleman ended up sitting outside his office and waiting. He had the best spring camp of any of the three QBs. But Kiffin thought that a rising sophomore winning the QB job in the spring would hurt recruiting, and he desperately wanted his own high-level QB recruit. So he lists Coleman 3rd on the post-Spring depth chart, cancels scheduled meetings with him, and drops hints thru third parties that if he doesn't like it he could leave. So he did. And Kiffin declined to give him a release. So he has to go to UTC.

I'm not arguing that Coleman should have stayed, would have been successful, etc., a game of ifs and buts benefits no one. Just pointing out one of Ras's "should have" arguments actually happened.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top