The Bear, Bowden and Paterno all had consecutive down years in their tenures but they got the opportunity to turn it around. Fulmer earned that but he wasn't given the chance. Had we stuck with him, Clawson would have probably been our coach the last 5-10 years and we most likely would have avoided the debacle of the last 15 years. Fulmer gave us the greatest era of Vol football in our lifetimes and idiots refuse to give him credit!
Several things:
First of all, as head coach at Bama, Bear Bryant never had a losing season, let alone 2 losing seasons in 4 years.
Bowden never had 2 losing seasons in 4 years. In fact, Bowden had a grand total of 1 losing season during his 30+ year career at FSU, and it was in his very first season. That's it.
Paterno did have a stretch of some bad seasons from 2000 to 2004, but he stayed on until 2011.
So the only coach of the three you mentioned that you really have a case for is Joe Paterno. He was there for 45 years. Fulmer was there for 17. That's a big difference, not even remotely the same. And we could talk about what was going on while Paterno was there all those years...you don't want to do that, and neither do I. Let's just say that Paterno is not a great example to support the argument that keeping a coach for a very long time is good for a program.
Finally (even though this standard really only applies to Paterno), things were very different during Bowden's, Paterno's, and Bear's time. Colleges were much more forgiving with bad seasons. That is not the case today. You can argue that as a good or a bad thing. It isn't like the Vols did something to Fulmer that other schools have not done to other coaches. Auburn fired Tuberville after his first losing season, after he went undefeated only 4 years earlier, then they won a national championship after firing him. That worked out pretty well for them. Georgia fired Mark Richt after back-to-back 10-3 seasons. Since then, they've been to the playoffs, played in a national championship game, and are currently #1 in the nation. That worked out pretty well for them too, didn't it?
Like I said, firing Fulmer was not the bad decision. The bad decisions came after getting rid of Fulmer, and just because I agree with firing Fulmer, that does not mean I agree with the hiring decisions they made afterwards.