Fulmer as AD is probably a lot different than Fulmer as coach.
First, its been said that Phil didnt hire assistants well because he was afraid of hiring his replacement. The dynamic is certainly different as AD where your success is dependent on the winning of the coaches you hire. Theres no competition from a potential replacement.
Second, while Fulmer has not been coaching for a decade, he has to know what to look for in someone to lead our football program.
Third, Fulmers strengths always seemed more like those of a CEO, not as a tactician (the Xs and Os Of in-game coaching). That would be more suitable for AD duties.
Fourth, isnt Fulmer less likely to be a puppet of Haslam? Or anyone else?
Fifth (and last), there is no reason to doubt that he loves our university. We might question other things, but that is not a debate.
I dont know the situation as well as some of you, but those are my initial thoughts. At the end of the day, I just want strong leadership and good decision-making for our program.