Do you think Fulmer

#4
#4
We will get to see Chavis coach D against them...but I think CMK has already given him an angle!
 
#8
#8
Can we PLEASE move past Fulmer and stop starting a new thread about him every other day. We have a great new staff and they deserve our full support w/o living in the past. Thanks.
 
#11
#11
I beleive the score would have been 42-6 if Phil would have been at the helm. With that being said, the subject is moot as far as I am concerned.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#12
#12
Can we PLEASE move past Fulmer and stop starting a new thread about him every other day. We have a great new staff and they deserve our full support w/o living in the past. Thanks.
My thoughts exactly....I liked CPF and hated to see him go, it was time for a change though...We got it let's move on and play some football
 
#13
#13
Well we lost 30-6 to a better Florida team and gave up less yards last year....i'm a Kiffin fan but...just sayin we wouldnt have lost by 50 like some are saying
 
Last edited:
#14
#14
Can we PLEASE move past Fulmer and stop starting a new thread about him every other day. We have a great new staff and they deserve our full support w/o living in the past. Thanks.

Who put a gun to your head and forced you to open the thread?
 
#16
#16
Forget Lane Kiffin and Phillip Fulmer. The reason this game was within 10 was because of Monte and Monte only.

I'm not downing Lane Kiffin with this, because there is no one at the QB position, but his defensive coach kept the game close. Just like it did vs UCLA.
 
#19
#19
would have had a similar result against Florida?

Really, I don't know. It's kinda irrelevant. I can't remember a time in history when Vol fans were excited over loosing because we didn't loose by a blowout, and just lost.

The fact is, Phillip Fulmer and staff weren't that bad of game coaches. I think that part has always been obvious. Yes, in recent years the team's performance has gotten worse but I don't think it has much to do with game day coaching or team preparation. I think it had a whole lot to do with the ability of the players.

IMO: Johnny Majors wasn't very good at getting all he could get out of his players. He was a dang good recruiter. Phillip Fulmer was almost an opposite.

Yes, Tennessee has a handful of stud players but that's a far cry from what they had in the past.

I can remember a time when we had so many receivers that we were at least 3 deep. That's not the case now, nor has it been. Frankly the starters we have now couldn't have carried water cups in the 80's.

One thing that has always kind of bothered me about Phillips teams is the fact that the Offensive line has stunk for 12 years and still frankly stinks. It's the reason we didn't have a championship with Peyton at quarterback. You'd think Phillip Fulmer of all people could put together an offensive line, but it's not happened.

The fact is Crompton is as bad of a quarterback as I've seen at UT in a long long time. Couple that with an offensive line that's not capable of holding off an SEC caliber defense and we have what we have.

Lane Kiffin's test is 2 to 3 years down the road at the point where he's had a chance to bring in capable athletes and once again we go to Florida with the opinion that we can and darn well may win this game. Not this Kentuckyish attitude that "well, it's ok if we just loose by a couple touchdowns and not get blown out.." We are Tennessee, not Kentucky or Vanderbilt. We ought to be expecting to win.

Skipper
 
#23
#23
fulmer was a terrible gameday coach. spurrier had him figured out in like 3 games. are you serious. 3rd and 8 draw play what? you have got to be joking . fulmer could recruit but if the game came down to coaching we ALWAYS lost.
 
Last edited:
#25
#25
we did play a Fulmer type game, although would not think they would've played as hard for him as they did the old man and his son!
....."and the Vols run the ball again off tackle". is Philip in the press box?
 
Advertisement



Back
Top