Lou Holtz & Phil Fulmer, Birds of a Feather

#1
rexvol

rexvol

The Minister of Defense
Joined
Apr 29, 2006
Messages
18,124
Likes
54
#1
Lou Holtz said, “John, I’ve coached teams with good players and I’ve coached teams with bad players. Im a better coach when I’ve had good players.”

Fulmer's downfall is his ufailing belief that talent alone is enough to win.
 
#2
#2
rexvol said:
Fulmer's downfall is his ufailing belief that talent alone is enough to win.
Click to expand...
How can you say that when we have guys like Kenny O'Neal and Nevin McKenzie spending most of their time on the bench? Fulmer is a good recruiter and a good leader, but just an average coach. What coach says, "I've got talented guys. There is no need for me to try to improve their skills or knowledge of the offense." Fulmer's downfall involves his ability to coach the players. No way he actually believes he can just recruit, and then sit back and watch.
 
#3
#3
Lou&


5stmiw02.jpg
 
#8
#8
What's the record for Fulmer threads started by 1 poster in a day? Can't imagine anyone else is in the top-10 with rex around.
 
#10
#10
from Ohio State coach Jim Tressel's packet on OSU football called "The Winner's Manuel", is an article called "Things That Do Not Require Talent"...It emphasized that characteristics such as punctuality, effort, patience, and unselfishness are important to the OSU culture. Do any of you honestly think Phil has anything like this? Say all you want Pj, but the head coach of an eroding team should be the subject. Can you say that Phil is cerebral enough for something of this nature? Or can you admit that for Chubby, coaching begins and ends with recruiting?
 
#11
#11
Subject of a couple threads is fine but not all.

Amazing that a guy who takes such great offense to a drug reference is so easy to throw out insults and fat jokes. :eek:hmy: Little strange don't ya think?
 
#12
#12
utvolpj said:
Subject of a couple threads is fine but not all.

Amazing that a guy who takes such great offense to a drug reference is so easy to throw out insults and fat jokes. :eek:hmy: Little strange don't ya think?[/


I agree Almost childish
Click to expand...
 
#14
#14
utvolpj said:
Subject of a couple threads is fine but not all.

Amazing that a guy who takes such great offense to a drug reference is so easy to throw out insults and fat jokes. :eek:hmy: Little strange don't ya think?
Click to expand...


if you saw drugs destroy people's lives every single day as I do maybe you would understand why it bothers me so. just to give you a small window into my world, I had a young girl (19yrs) tell me a little of her life story last week. How her mother was strung out as she grew up, how she was abused over and over and over by a series of men that flopped in their home. How she contracted a std at 10yrs old. what hurt me the most was when she said that her mom would take off on a crack binge or two to three days at a time and she would stand in their kitchen, rocking back and forth, asking God to bring her mother back. You're right, I shouldnt have called Phil chubby, but I hardly think the two are comparable. By the way, tell your little echo that called me childish to read 1 Corinthians 13:11.
 
#15
#15
rexvol said:
Lou Holtz said, “John, I’ve coached teams with good players and I’ve coached teams with bad players. Im a better coach when I’ve had good players.”

Fulmer's downfall is his ufailing belief that talent alone is enough to win.
Click to expand...

Fulmer believes the schemes and plays he won an NC with in 98 will work now.

If it still works then why hasn't he won anything with it since then, 2-7 bowl game record, 0 SEC championships?

The recruiting classes are as highly ranked as the ones he won an NC with. He teaches the same way he did in 98, why cant they execute?
 
#17
#17
oklavol said:
Fulmer's problem is he things the schemes and plays he won an NC with in 98 will work now...The bottom line is, if it still works why hasn't he won anything with it since then...Fulmer refused to adapt to change, he refuses to believe its anything other then execution...
Click to expand...

I've always thought CPF was self-delusional. He seems to dismiss processes and outcomes that do not align with the way he thinks they should be; it's sort of like he revises history.

Example: 2002 FL at home was an aberration; 2003 GA was an aberration; 2005 was a perfect storm; 2006 ARK was an aberration; and 2007 FL was an aberration. Our special teams really aren't that bad. Our running game is just a block here and there away from being really good. We were just a few plays away from being 9-3 in 2005. On and on...

One point about 98 is that he began to believe the reason they won is due to the way he coached (the manner, not the quality). People can debate this, but I truly believe he vastly overestimates his staff's ability and therefore eliminates it from consideration as a problem. This can be seen in his de facto position of always blaming the players whenever they have a meltdown for which his teams are classically known...regardless of talent or 90s or thereafter.
 
#18
#18
Liper said:
I've always thought CPF was self-delusional. He seems to dismiss processes and outcomes that do not align with the way he thinks they should be; it's sort of like he revises history.

Example: 2002 FL at home was an aberration; 2003 GA was an aberration; 2005 was a perfect storm; 2006 ARK was an aberration; and 2007 FL was an aberration. Our special teams really aren't that bad. Our running game is just a block here and there away from being really good. We were just a few plays away from being 9-3 in 2005. On and on...

One point about 98 is that he began to believe the reason they won is due to the way he coached (the manner, not the quality). People can debate this, but I truly believe he vastly overestimates his staff's ability and therefore eliminates it from consideration as a problem. This can be seen in his de facto position of always blaming the players whenever they have a meltdown for which his teams are classically known...regardless of talent or 90s or thereafter.
Click to expand...


Nice,

:yes:
 
#19
#19
Liper said:
I've always thought CPF was self-delusional. He seems to dismiss processes and outcomes that do not align with the way he thinks they should be; it's sort of like he revises history.

Example: 2002 FL at home was an aberration; 2003 GA was an aberration; 2005 was a perfect storm; 2006 ARK was an aberration; and 2007 FL was an aberration. Our special teams really aren't that bad. Our running game is just a block here and there away from being really good. We were just a few plays away from being 9-3 in 2005. On and on...

One point about 98 is that he began to believe the reason they won is due to the way he coached (the manner, not the quality). People can debate this, but I truly believe he vastly overestimates his staff's ability and therefore eliminates it from consideration as a problem. This can be seen in his de facto position of always blaming the players whenever they have a meltdown for which his teams are classically known...regardless of talent or 90s or thereafter.
Click to expand...
I don't know if its overestimating or just plain ole stubborness. I would have to go with the latter.
 
#22
#22
"What a piece of work is man! How noble in reason! how infinite in faculties! in form and moving, how express and admirable! in action how like an angel! in apprehension, how like a god! the beauty of the world! the paragon of animals! And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust? Man delights not me; no, nor woman neither, though by your smiling you seem to say so."
--From Hamlet (II, ii, 115-117)
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top