Big time hire

#1

LocoVol

Shiny Red Trucker
Joined
Oct 25, 2007
Messages
3,564
Likes
1,067
#1
Everyone talks about big name hire for UT. Just wondering what names you all consider as big name? Where on you list do u go from Big time hire to good hire to C'mon man? Feel free to add to the list.

Big time...
Gruden
Kelly
Carroll
Stoops
Patterson
Peterson
Del Rio
Tressel
---------------
good hire.....
Gundy
Strong
Tuberville
Roman
Mullen
Mangini
Cutcliffe

----------------------------
C'mon man.......
Mora
Smart
Briles
Holgerson
Malzahn
Dykes
Jones
Golden
Petrino
Davis
Franklin
Taggart
Fitzgerald
 
Last edited:
#3
#3
I was skeptical they would go after a big name. If this is true I hope they do it soon .
 
#4
#4
Don't think Tressel can be hired.


No Pat Fitzgerald or Jim Mora?
 
#6
#6
Gruden. That's the list.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

That's a pretty awesome list.



Any idea why Arkansas 'insiders' claim to have info about Gruden going their too though? It's really annoying so I just write them off as being stupid pigs.
 
#7
#7
Good list overall. I would put Roman in the Big Time category, but that's because I think he will be a HC soon and will do very well whereever he goes.
 
#8
#8
We need a proven winner. IMO that would be an improvement compared to what we have.
 
#9
#9
Curious where you'd put Cutcliffe, since he's the guy who will eventually be hired.
 
#11
#11
Everyone talks about big name hire for UT. Just wondering what names you all consider as big name? Where on you list do u go from Big time hire to good hire to C'mon man? Feel free to add to the list.

Big time...
Gruden
Kelly
Carroll
Stoops
Patterson
Petersen
---------------
good hire.....
Gundy
Strong
Roman
Mullen
Mangini
Dykes
Jones

----------------------------
C'mon man.......
Smart
Briles
Holgerson
Malzahn
Golden
Petrino
Davis
Franklin
Taggart
Tressel
Del Rio
Tuberville

Good list. I fixed it for you.
 
#22
#22
File under "Total Disaster"?

Our definitions of Disaster are very different. I'd file Retaining Dooley as that, but not hiring Cutcliffe. It's not a sexy hire, I'll give you that, but I believe our team would improve immediately.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#23
#23
Our definitions of Disaster are very different. I'd file Retaining Dooley as that, but not hiring Cutcliffe. It's not a sexy hire, I'll give you that, but I believe our team would improve immediately.

Yeah I don't buy into the "if it's better than Dooley, it's good" argument. Cutcliffe would be better than retaining Dooley, but so would hundreds of coaches. Why can't we hire a coach with a winning record? Oh, I know, I know, "It's Duke, you just can't win there." Yeah, and I heard the same thing about La Tech when we hired the joker we've got now. I don't want another losing coach.

The thing is, if it weren't because he was here before, no one would be looking to hire him. Kentucky probably isn't even going to interview him for their job. But Tennessee should give him a much bigger job, just because he was once our OC? Really?

And does anyone expect him to outcoach Saban? Spurrier? Muschamp even? And what about recruiting? He's not really considered a big motivator or a smooth operator.

He's a detailed, thorough guy wth a losing record at a much smaller program. Who else fit that description?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#24
#24
#1Gruden #2Strong#3Peterson#4Patterson#5Gundy. I believe those are the only coaches that would come and fall under great hire.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 

VN Store



Back
Top