Look at us now compared to other programs in the same situation

tpsdave

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2017
Messages
114
Likes
90
How the hell do you figure they are not?!?...Who have we beaten?...Every team we have beaten sucks...Miss St is terrible, Chattanooga?...Really?...South Carolina has a worse record than us..UAB had a good record against bad teams so if you want to go out and celebrate that then go for it...UCLA has won 3 in a row and beaten Colorado, Stanford, a good Arizona St team and Washington St...Quality teams... And they are getting better...they need a defense in the worse way but offensively they are really good and fast...You don't watch a lot of football do you?...It shows
You're right; we really haven't beaten a really good football team. Outside of Alabama, LSU, Georgia, Florida, and maybe Auburn; the rest of the league is not strong at all.
 
Likes: VOLnMiami

DonjoVol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
195
Likes
226
People don't realize how much money there is in college football. Assume Doak seats 80k, 7 home dates a year, that is 560,000 seats to sell. Assume they average $50 each, That is $28,000,000. Literally 1 season of football covers the buyout and that's before you look at other revenue. The mistake wasn't firing him, the mistake was hiring him in the first place.
Not really a mistake hiring him. He had turned the South Florida program a few years earlier. He was considered one of the top up and coming coaches at the time. I say he more than likely lands back on his feet at a smaller program and does well again.
 

RDU VOL#14

I’m a Flawed Character
Joined
Sep 11, 2007
Messages
10,842
Likes
8,629
Not really a mistake hiring him. He had turned the South Florida program a few years earlier. He was considered one of the top up and coming coaches at the time. I say he more than likely lands back on his feet at a smaller program and does well again.
It was a mistake. He was a combo of Dooley and Butch. Oregon should be thanking their lucky stars they have Cristobal because Taggart left.
 

finn

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2011
Messages
393
Likes
278
How is Matt Rhule at Baylor being left out of this? 2nd season, undefeated and #12 ranking. They basically sucked last year and he took over a PR/locker room nightmare after all the crap Briles turned a blind eye to.

Rhule has done an amazing job of turning that program around in a short time.

Sonny Dykes (also year 2) has done extremely well after taking over for Chad and Scott, the Morris twins. He has clearly taken the program to a new level.

There are 2nd yr coaches both over and under performing compared to UT. CJP is trending the right direction but it is a bit early to take a victory lap.
 

DonjoVol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
195
Likes
226
It was a mistake. He was a combo of Dooley and Butch. Oregon should be thanking their lucky stars they have Cristobal because Taggart left.
I'll still disagree it was a mistake hiring him. He turned around both W Kentucky and South Florida prior to Oregon hiring him. He was only at Oregon for a year before Florida St hired him though.

As for Cristobal. He didn't do too well when he was head coach at Florida International. Looks like he's getting a second chance like Orgeron got at LSU. So hopefully he does well the second time around.
 

Chad F

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2007
Messages
1,327
Likes
638
We still have to play UK, Missouri, and Vandy. How the team performs in those games will decide how everyone is feeling about the Pruitt hire. These are probably the most important 3-game span in his short time as the UT head coach. If the team plays well and even wins out, we'll all be singing his praises. If they drop all 3 (a real possibility) or if we go 1-2 the mood will be much different. I am hopeful, but my Battered Fan Syndrome keeps me cautious in my enthusiasm.
 

West Vol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2019
Messages
193
Likes
155
How is Matt Rhule at Baylor being left out of this? 2nd season, undefeated and #12 ranking. They basically sucked last year and he took over a PR/locker room nightmare after all the crap Briles turned a blind eye to.

Rhule has done an amazing job of turning that program around in a short time.

Sonny Dykes (also year 2) has done extremely well after taking over for Chad and Scott, the Morris twins. He has clearly taken the program to a new level.

There are 2nd yr coaches both over and under performing compared to UT. CJP is trending the right direction but it is a bit early to take a victory lap.
Rhule is the guy. He’s now resurrected two flatlined programs in a short span. I’d love to have him, but I’d guess his next stop is he NFL.
 

West Vol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2019
Messages
193
Likes
155
We still have to play UK, Missouri, and Vandy. How the team performs in those games will decide how everyone is feeling about the Pruitt hire. These are probably the most important 3-game span in his short time as the UT head coach. If the team plays well and even wins out, we'll all be singing his praises. If they drop all 3 (a real possibility) or if we go 1-2 the mood will be much different. I am hopeful, but my Battered Fan Syndrome keeps me cautious in my enthusiasm.
The talk of Bielema in this thread reminds me of the ups and downs of his tenure at Arkansas. Seems like they had several years where they started slow and then finished with a big win, making you think they’d turned a corner. I remember one year they thrashed LSU. And then the next season they’d suck again. This offseason we are losing an awful lot of key contributors from these last few games. I’m not saying a bunch of instant impact guys in the recruiting class to replace them, either.
 

RDU VOL#14

I’m a Flawed Character
Joined
Sep 11, 2007
Messages
10,842
Likes
8,629
I'll still disagree it was a mistake hiring him. He turned around both W Kentucky and South Florida prior to Oregon hiring him. He was only at Oregon for a year before Florida St hired him though.

As for Cristobal. He didn't do too well when he was head coach at Florida International. Looks like he's getting a second chance like Orgeron got at LSU. So hopefully he does well the second time around.
I understand that WKU is WKU and USF is USF, but overall he was below .500 at both schools and 7-5 at Oregon. Hes had one double digit win season during his career. That might not make him a bad coach, but I don’t think it makes him worthy of the FSU job. I’ve watched a handful of FSU games since he took over and every time they have looked undisciplined, unorganized and just sloppy. That first game versus Va. Tech was an incredible indicator of what they were getting on that Monday night. I’m sure he’ll land on his feet, but he’ll never land anything better than a low level P5 job, and that’s a real stretch .
 

05_never_again

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Messages
11,357
Likes
7,655
People don't realize how much money there is in college football. Assume Doak seats 80k, 7 home dates a year, that is 560,000 seats to sell. Assume they average $50 each, That is $28,000,000. Literally 1 season of football covers the buyout and that's before you look at other revenue. The mistake wasn't firing him, the mistake was hiring him in the first place.
Think about what you're saying though. You're talking about dedicating an entire season's worth of football ticket revenue towards the buyout of one guy. That's a staggering sum when you put it in that context. They have other stuff to pay for too, not just a buyout.

FSU actually did that part right - before they fired Taggart they made phone calls and got assurances from boosters for the $20m.
 

DonjoVol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
195
Likes
226
I understand that WKU is WKU and USF is USF, but overall he was below .500 at both schools and 7-5 at Oregon. Hes had one double digit win season during his career. That might not make him a bad coach, but I don’t think it makes him worthy of the FSU job. I’ve watched a handful of FSU games since he took over and every time they have looked undisciplined, unorganized and just sloppy. That first game versus Va. Tech was an incredible indicator of what they were getting on that Monday night. I’m sure he’ll land on his feet, but he’ll never land anything better than a low level P5 job, and that’s a real stretch .
His first season at WKU was bad but after that he was fine. His first two at USF were but once he got his talent in there he was fine. He seems to be the type of coach that goes through some growing pains his first season or two but then after that he starts winning. Honestly, he should have never left Oregon. I think he would have been successful there. But Florida St was a little premature in firing him. One more season and he probably would have been fine.
 

BootheelVol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2009
Messages
215
Likes
195
Let's not forget Joe Moorhead from MS State. Imagine if we were in his division... He has a good recruiting class coming despite having to go toe to toe against LSU, Bama & all of Texas A&M's money....
 

Gandalf

The Orange/White Wizard
Joined
Dec 7, 2012
Messages
2,436
Likes
5,387
While I agree, I'd also point out that all those situations were huge rebuilding jobs; some even bigger than ours.

Nebraska is a much tougher job in general. It's so difficult to recruit out there. I honestly feel like Frost had a better chance of winning a national title at UCF, but he took the Nebraska job out of home-state pride (and the salary increase, but mostly the former).

Chip Kelly has actually been surprisingly good as this season has gone on, winning 4 out of his last 6, but his recruiting is still abysmal. I don't think he'll ever get back to "Oregon levels" given this.

Chad Morris has always had a 4-5 year rebuild in front of him. The problem is that Morris' offense may as well be the exact opposite of Bielema's. So a lot of the players on that roster are really playing in a completely mismatched scheme. Similar to the situation at Georgia Tech.

I think, in general, fans are underestimating how long it takes to rebuild in the modern game. Scholarship limits have made it much more difficult to turn things around quickly. The 2-year turnaround job just doesn't happen unless someone inherits an already stacked roster.
I think this is the issue that most fans, including myself, have overlooked when thinking how long it would take to turn a program. You now have the 25 limit and you have early signing day, both of which are major impediments to new coaches needing to come in, often late in the season, and flip the roster. This essentially makes it impossible to do a 2 year turnaround by stacking with shiny new recruits that fit your system unless the new coach's style is very similar to the old one (which is highly unlikely).

The rules essentially benefit already successful, stable programs - you could almost say Nick Saban wrote them that way. The turnaround speed we are used to seeing, 10, even 5 years ago, are no longer possible under the current rules, except in very rare circumstances.
 

RDU VOL#14

I’m a Flawed Character
Joined
Sep 11, 2007
Messages
10,842
Likes
8,629
His first season at WKU was bad but after that he was fine. His first two at USF were but once he got his talent in there he was fine. He seems to be the type of coach that goes through some growing pains his first season or two but then after that he starts winning. Honestly, he should have never left Oregon. I think he would have been successful there. But Florida St was a little premature in firing him. One more season and he probably would have been fine.
I think they might have been somewhat premature. IMO, the FSU administration sees what’s a growing divide between FSU and their rivals. The ACC is horrible ( Wake is probably going to the Orange Bowl FFS) and they aren’t even competing , they lost to a mediocre Miami team badly, they almost certainly will get blown out by UF in a few weeks, you put all that together with the new early signing period and they pulled the trigger before the divide grew more. If they can get a good hire to start the turnaround now, then they can maybe salvage a good class and start working on 2021. They get the benefit of a potentially quick turnaround in that subpar conference.
 

AM64

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
9,486
Likes
7,876
I think this is the issue that most fans, including myself, have overlooked when thinking how long it would take to turn a program. You now have the 25 limit and you have early signing day, both of which are major impediments to new coaches needing to come in, often late in the season, and flip the roster. This essentially makes it impossible to do a 2 year turnaround by stacking with shiny new recruits that fit your system unless the new coach's style is very similar to the old one (which is highly unlikely).

The rules essentially benefit already successful, stable programs - you could almost say Nick Saban wrote them that way. The turnaround speed we are used to seeing, 10, even 5 years ago, are no longer possible under the current rules, except in very rare circumstances.
Exactly. I'm constantly amazed by the VN experts who ignore the new rules and spout the old adage that if a coach hasn't done it in two years it's not happening. Early signing kills the first year for any new coach unless he's been sitting on a bench somewhere cooling his heels - and that in itself brings up questions of his worth as a coach. For anybody who has been around long in the corporate or military world, the idea of a new boss is generally not one of immediate acceptance - particularly when the old guy was the one who recruited you. With enough defections, it's going to be tough to fill the roster much less have some depth to handle injuries and spell tired starters ... making wins and signs of progress tougher.

Rebuilds are going to take longer; facts are facts. Rules changes almost always work to the advantage of the teams at the top ... that's just the way it is ... the rich keep getting richer in the college football world.
 

vettefool

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
768
Likes
572
Exactly. I'm constantly amazed by the VN experts who ignore the new rules and spout the old adage that if a coach hasn't done it in two years it's not happening. Early signing kills the first year for any new coach unless he's been sitting on a bench somewhere cooling his heels - and that in itself brings up questions of his worth as a coach. For anybody who has been around long in the corporate or military world, the idea of a new boss is generally not one of immediate acceptance - particularly when the old guy was the one who recruited you. With enough defections, it's going to be tough to fill the roster much less have some depth to handle injuries and spell tired starters ... making wins and signs of progress tougher.

Rebuilds are going to take longer; facts are facts. Rules changes almost always work to the advantage of the teams at the top ... that's just the way it is ... the rich keep getting richer in the college football world.
Yep, I’m as impatient as anyone and not a bit sure Pruitt is the right hire. I thought he was an Alabama sand mountain Bubba. Sure talks like one. We are however showing signs of improvement on defense especially. If we had an average q.b. I’d be a lot more confident. Not a believer yet, but hopeful he is the right guy. Go Vols.
 

vols40

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2010
Messages
1,144
Likes
880
What a moronic post - leaving out Dan Mullen, who has UF in the top 15/National conversation for yet another year. I like what Pruitt has done to improve this year but wow this is a stretch
I think it's also fair to point out that the situation Mullen inherited is probably a good bit better than the ones the other 3 inherited
 
Likes: AM64

AM64

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
9,486
Likes
7,876
Yep, I’m as impatient as anyone and not a bit sure Pruitt is the right hire. I thought he was an Alabama sand mountain Bubba. Sure talks like one. We are however showing signs of improvement on defense especially. If we had an average q.b. I’d be a lot more confident. Not a believer yet, but hopeful he is the right guy. Go Vols.
I've seen several coaching changes starting with Doug Dickey ... enough to know there are no sure things, and that often first time head coaches work out better than "proven" ones. A new coach is a new coach regardless of whether he's "been there" or not because all situations are different. I still believe that there are similarities between Pruitt's tenure so far and Dickey's first teams ... enough for a lot of hope, but we'll just have to be somewhat patient to see how it works out. The road to progress always includes some potholes and setbacks, so I wish more of us were simply hoping we get to a bowl game than wondering where and who we play.

Dickey went through a few QBs before he found Dewey Warren; we'll get there ... I think with Pruitt, but possibly not. At least in this iteration, we are starting with an SEC coach rather than hoping to scale up somebody from elsewhere.
 

Shades

Shady member
Joined
Dec 15, 2014
Messages
626
Likes
2,020
How is Matt Rhule at Baylor being left out of this? 2nd season, undefeated and #12 ranking. They basically sucked last year and he took over a PR/locker room nightmare after all the crap Briles turned a blind eye to.
The flavor of this thread has been about performance of coaches that were in the discussion for replacing Butch at the end of his tenure. I don't think Rhule was much in the discussion back then, after coaching Baylor to 1-11 record in 2017.

But agreed that he as done a fantastic job turning Baylor around from the Briles fiasco, 1-11 to 7-6 to 8-0 so far this season.
 

VolArmy74

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
2,765
Likes
2,692
I think this is the issue that most fans, including myself, have overlooked when thinking how long it would take to turn a program. You now have the 25 limit and you have early signing day, both of which are major impediments to new coaches needing to come in, often late in the season, and flip the roster. This essentially makes it impossible to do a 2 year turnaround by stacking with shiny new recruits that fit your system unless the new coach's style is very similar to the old one (which is highly unlikely).

The rules essentially benefit already successful, stable programs - you could almost say Nick Saban wrote them that way. The turnaround speed we are used to seeing, 10, even 5 years ago, are no longer possible under the current rules, except in very rare circumstances.
What new rules are you talking about? The SEC rule that has been in place for nearly a decade is 28 football signees from December-May. Several teams in the league signed 28 last year. Alabama actually doesn't benefit from a cap and have fewer scholarship players than many programs each year due to large numbers of players leaving early all the time.

Great coaches can and still show big movement within 2 years.
 

rocky top buzz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
760
Likes
405
Think about what you're saying though. You're talking about dedicating an entire season's worth of football ticket revenue towards the buyout of one guy. That's a staggering sum when you put it in that context. They have other stuff to pay for too, not just a buyout.

FSU actually did that part right - before they fired Taggart they made phone calls and got assurances from boosters for the $20m.
But that's the thing look how empty their stadium was. 2-3 years of that would be bad. If UT could blow 1 season of revenue to win a natty would they do it? Absolutely. Think about all the lost revenue from the past 10 years. Tickets, merchandise, sponsorships. It is absolutely worth it.
 

VN Store



Sponsors
 

Top