Doe River Vol
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2008
- Messages
- 103
- Likes
- 40
Phillip was NOT RESPONSIBLE for building the team in the late eighties and early nineties.That's a common misstatement made by the delusional faction of the fanbase that can't face the facts or simply don't understand the process. And I can promise you I know Phillip the person and coach, at least as well as you
2004 was Phillip's best coaching job in the 2000s, no doubt about it. We backed into it in 2007. You can't call it anything but mediocre when you lose to Florida 59-20 and a rebuilding Alabama 41-17. Forget the opening day embarrassment at Cal. We got lucky in winning the East. When is the last time we went to BCS bowl game? That's right. That's how you measure national relevance. Not divisional titles that don't mean anything if you aren't competing for a national championship
Phillip was NOT RESPONSIBLE for building the team in the late eighties and early nineties.That's a common misstatement made by the delusional faction of the fanbase that can't face the facts or simply don't understand the process. And I can promise you I know Phillip the person and coach, at least as well as you
Kiffin aided the attrition, but make no mistake, the reason we are in a rebuilding mode is mostly because of Phillip. The interior lines are the most revealing of that FACT.
He got a loaded team and left it bare. Heck, the horrid QB play alone from 2004 on is a testament to the fact he was losing it
When Fulmer started making ridiculous sounding excuses in 2005 and then, in the same year, came out with arrogant statements like "I've built up some equity here" , "we've won a bunch of games here" and "we know what we're doing here", I began to lose respect. He embarrassed himself and the university.
fyp
The drop-off of the 2000's, while certainly his fault to an extent, was awful natural evolution of college football... there was an article on espn a few years ago that discussed this. college football powerhouses rarely extend beyond a decade, just how it is.
Its truly embarrassing and sometimes disturbing to see some of you talk about one of our most distinguished former coaches. Appreciate his time with us or not, I just don't understand the need to get so personal and nasty with some of your comments.
GV
Get off the booze, Johnny.
If Johnny was such a great recruiter, then you'd have to admit he was one of the worst coaches in Tennessee football history given how mediocre a program we were from 1977-1988, as we failed to even be ranked much at all in 10 of those 12 years.
It's a fact that through the 80's and 90's Fulmer was one of the best recruiters in the country. Why is that so hard for you to believe? By the way, when's the last time you talked with Coach Fulmer, if ever?
The haters on this site will NEVER admit they were wrong about Kiffin and that fuels their hate against Phil. You people really are lame. (Lame Kiten, get it?) If not for Phil, the nation would think we are the same as Ole Miss. We were lucky to have such a great coach in our system and dedicated to TENNESSEE. Get over it and get off his back.
Its truly embarrassing and sometimes disturbing to see some of you talk about one of our most distinguished former coaches. Appreciate his time with us or not, I just don't understand the need to get so personal and nasty with some of your comments.
GV
I'd rather play in the SEC title game than not; you'd rather be a 6-7 win team, and consider both seasons "the same." That's where we disagree.
The whole thing with the Fulmer bashers is that they all wanted him gone so things would be better. He compiled a record of 152-52, since then we are 13-13. The only thing the bashers can hang their hat on is him being overweight and the loss to Wyoming. Thats all they have. As far as embarassing statements, Lane Kiffin wrote the book. There are times when it is time for changes to be made, and they were. I dont disagree with the change, but I did not like the way it was handled. CPF, yes, made a ton of money coaching the Vols. Still, firing a guy during the regular season, well, IMO, he deserved better.
So, its a new era, and it's 3 days away. I want to get back to the glory years, and the glory years to this 40 something season ticket holder were under the watch of Coach Phillip Fulmer, sorry.
GBO
If Phillip was responsible for Johnny's success late in his tenure, then you would have to say Cutcliffe and Rodney Garner were responsible for Phillip's success as a head coach. You can't have it both ways.
It also seems everone else in the country would agree with my assessment since no other high profile university with a head coach opening considered Fulmer for the job.
Absurd claim about Phil making us something better than Ole Miss. Sorry, but you have no idea what you are talking about.
What's the minimum number of negative posts required that toes the line of stating facts and bashing? 20? Stating an opinion or fact about his career is one thing. Stating it over and over, paragraph after paragraph, post after post, is another. Almost stalkeresque.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
1. Fulmer's record without Cutcliffe and Garner was a lot better than Majors' record without Fulmer; it was light years better.
2. Since when does "everyone else in the country" make hiring decisions at top universities? Actually, only Athletic Directors do, and if your source of knowledge about college football is a bunch of fund-raising political bureaucrats who've usually never played a game in their life, then that isn't much of a source. Those bozos would collectively tell you Ron Zook is better than Mike Leach.
Guess again, because we are on our way to Ole Miss-type stature, as we were most of the time pre-Fulmer from 1974-1988. You do realize we're predicted to win 7 games or less for the third year in a row.