Fulmer subpoenaed by Pruitt

#102
#102
89 VOLS grad said:
Oh, I guess 51 don't count. There will be another one in the next 5 years.
Click to expand...
If you graduated from UT in 89, odds are you weren’t around in 51. And that is very wishful thinking there on the next 5 years. Odds are better Heupel isn’t here in 5 years than that he brings us a natty during that time. The gap between us and the actual contenders is growing.
 
#103
#103
89 VOLS grad said:
Even if he doesn't, CJH is still a much better coach that Fulmer and it isn't even close! UT was recruiting much better back then. Now, there are lots more schools recruiting as good or better than UT. A lot of you will say Fulmer was an awesome recruiter. He was good. But, I don't even think he would be recruiting as good as Heupel right now. UT is a good brand now. But, it was a much bigger brand when Majors and Fulmer were coaching. Tons of teams now are big brand now unlike the 90s.
Click to expand...
Recruiting is a big part of coaching, bub. Heupel isn’t recruiting that great, Fulmer was an ace at it.
 
#105
#105
SpookyAction said:
Seems like an obvious move for Pruitt's team.

I think he should get a probation for Show Cause. The game itself has changed since the punishment was meted out to Pruitt and his crew.
Then this ends if he, Niedermeier, and the rest can keep their noses clean for a few seasons.
Click to expand...
Why would anyone other than Fulmer, Pruitt, and their attorneys care?
 
#107
#107
Rocky Top T said:
Curry was gonna hire Mike Leach which would have been much better than Pruitt. Also, Curry hired Tony V, so he was not incompetent.
Click to expand...
I think you are mistaken. Curry interviewed Leach and Leach wanted the job, but Curry did not offer Leach and made his only offer to Schiano instead.
 
#108
#108
LegionnaireOfTheMiserable said:
But if the program had been destroyed, don’t you think that it would have taken a little longer to have become competitive?

You’ll never see another run like the one he gave us. To dismiss him entirely because of a failed AD stint that was immediately corrected is just foolish.
Click to expand...
1) "Failed AD stint" is putting it mildly.
2) It wasn't just his AD stint. The last 4 years he had here as HC weren't very good, and it didn't exactly leave the program in a great spot. Sure, it got much worse after he left due to admin incompetence, but it wasn't like everything was great with the football program when he was shown the door.

His legacy at UT is very mixed, IMO, even though he did win our only modern era national title.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rocky Top T
#109
#109
LegionnaireOfTheMiserable said:
Recruiting is a big part of coaching, bub. Heupel isn’t recruiting that great, Fulmer was an ace at it.
Click to expand...
Yeah, he was so good the roster had ZERO OL talent when he left. The OL was probably the weakest link on the team his last couple of years. That isn't the definition of an 'ACE RECRUITER' when your HC was a former OL himself!!! He did a lot of good recruiting. But, the success of the team before he took over and the lack of competition and lack of recruiting battles he had worked in his favor. No one will never know. But, I doubt he would be recruiting as good as Heuple and staff have done the last four years after the had Fulmer took over a 10 year mess that started because of his lack of coaching and continued with him meddling in the program when he should have sailed off into the sunset!!!
 
#110
#110
LegionnaireOfTheMiserable said:
If you graduated from UT in 89, odds are you weren’t around in 51. And that is very wishful thinking there on the next 5 years. Odds are better Heupel isn’t here in 5 years than that he brings us a natty during that time. The gap between us and the actual contenders is growing.
Click to expand...
If you are going to be specific, be specific. Lots of people have seen the 1951 NC whether they were born or not. I guess people can't stream it to see it when they weren't alive at that time. LOL

 
#112
#112
LegionnaireOfTheMiserable said:
Recruiting is a big part of coaching, bub. Heupel isn’t recruiting that great, Fulmer was an ace at it.
Click to expand...
When Fulmer became a head coach, UT had a successful recruiting model that had been highly functioning for over a decade. In other words, Fulmer didn't take over a shat show with scholarship restrictions. Huge difference. Heupel is having to rebuild this program as HC. Fulmer took over a powerhouse as HC. When Fulmer had to do some rebuilding in the 2000s, it didn't turn out so well, having 2 losing seasons in his last 4
 
#113
#113
89 VOLS grad said:
Yeah, he was so good the roster had ZERO OL talent when he left. The OL was probably the weakest link on the team his last couple of years. That isn't the definition of an 'ACE RECRUITER' when your HC was a former OL himself!!! He did a lot of good recruiting. But, the success of the team before he took over and the lack of competition and lack of recruiting battles he had worked in his favor. No one will never know. But, I doubt he would be recruiting as good as Heuple and staff have done the last four years after the had Fulmer took over a 10 year mess that started because of his lack of coaching and continued with him meddling in the program when he should have sailed off into the sunset!!!
Click to expand...
Fulmer recruited every player on a national championship team. He recruited more than one Pro Football Hall of Famer. It will have taken Heupel at least 5 years to recruit an offensive lineman out of high school who started a game at UT.

We know who the better recruiter was.
 
#114
#114
89 VOLS grad said:
If you are going to be specific, be specific. Lots of people have seen the 1951 NC whether they were born or not. I guess people can't stream it to see it when they weren't alive at that time. LOL

Click to expand...

You are the only person who had even an ounce of trouble discerning what I was saying. I don’t think specificity was the problem.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top