Pruitt's buyout

#126
#126
Thorp32 said:
5 million is nothing to a 150 million a year business. A previous poster said charles Anderson was at practice today. 5 million to him is like a hundred bucks to us. The buyout looks bad but in reality it is nothing for UT and its boosters.
Click to expand...

BS. If it was nothing we wouldn't have hired bottom tier coaches for the last decade.
 
#127
#127
XknoxvolsX said:
Just so you know, in case any of you guys are wondering, there is no buy out for Jon Gruden.

Jon Gruden: If I fail, I won't take Raiders' money
Click to expand...
For the love of God and all things orange—please don't even go there.
VolFreakJosh said:
Stability hasn’t got us anywhere.

You fire Pruitt now vs waiting 5 years from now to do it, you gain nothing.

That’s the problem with the last few HCs we hired. They were all here longer than they should have been.
Click to expand...
Exactly! No more five year plans. You start to show significant improvement in year two or you get the keys to the street.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lifeisdeep
#128
#128
lifeisdeep said:
I remember reading the same thing on here when Dooley was coach. How did that work out? Or when Botch was in his fifth year and the pumpers/AD employees were screaming that he would get three more years to turn it around?
Click to expand...

Dooley and Butch shared one thing that was their ultimate downfall: underwhelming seasons with REALLY good teams. Pruitt may do that too, but let’s let the man get a good team before we decide that.
 
#129
#129
So, you guys are saying we should have given Dooley more years? Butch too? Then, what about two losing season in four years Fulmer? Should he have been given five more years to turn things around?
 
#130
#130
JMSqb11 said:
In Butch’s case, he was on the right path for the first 3 seasons.

2015 is when UT really overachieved and was ahead of the curve. His downfall was the second half of the 2016 season when the wheels game officially off. Butch was very popular coming out of the 2015 season and no one was really questioning him.

He had success early but couldn’t handle it and couldn’t keep up the recruiting either.
Click to expand...
He had enough playmakers the first three years that he was able to mask his coaching ability, which was zero. I was never a believer; I felt when he was hired that he was a mistake, and even when we were winning some games under him I was constantly trying to talk myself into believing he was a competent coach, because what I saw in games, and what I heard whenever he opened his mouth, just wasn't very convincing.
 
#131
#131
Hey here’s a MF’n thought.....base the buyout on the # of wins vs # of losses. As it is, what’s the freakin incentive to win? Either way they are set for life. Damn.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MWR and davethevol
#132
#132
lifeisdeep said:
He had enough playmakers the first three years that he was able to mask his coaching ability, which was zero. I was never a believer; I felt when he was hired that he was a mistake, and even when we were winning some games under him I was constantly trying to talk myself into believing he was a competent coach, because what I saw in games, and what I heard whenever he opened his mouth, just wasn't very convincing.
Click to expand...

Yes and no.

He was the reason he had playmakers.

He also had continuity on his staff as well with Jancek being a big reason for that. Butch dropped him for a big hire in Shoop only for that to flop.....

While we can all pick apart Butch’s time here, literally no one had any issues with how his first 3 years went. Everyone expected 2016 to be our year to really compete but by overachieving in 2015, the stage to make a deep run to a potential playoff spot was the consensus goal.

Midway thru 2016 is when everything turned sour and major cultural issues started popping up like Hurd and Preston Williams and then the “player falling on the helmet” in 2017 and Butch telling fans to “F off” being caught on tv. That’s even before the coaching issues.

Butch was a complete disaster here but it is very hard to find a consensus that had serious problems with how his first three years went
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol and BigThunder
#133
#133
Saban didn't really improve things at MSU starting out. They won 6, 6, and 7, The three years before he came they won 6,6, and 7. He had to weed out the crap before the program turned around And his teams at LSU laid a few eggs early on. Losing to UAB in that span. We cant keep firing coaches every 2 years.. Let CJP weed out the crap that Butchie brought in before we burn him at the stake....
 
#143
#143
For the past decade, the only thing renewing hope in this program is a new coaching search every few years. Based on last Sat’s game and many comments on this forum, they may need a new search soon to keep hope alive. Stability may be the answer but it better turn around quickly. Another couple of years of 6 win seasons and Neyland will need the black curtains from the basketball arena. They are getting closer and closer to a catch 22 situation. Can’t afford to fire a coach and cannot afford to keep the coach. Money does matter. Big donors didn’t get wealthy by throwing away money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JustinVol
#144
#144
lifeisdeep said:
How long have you been employed by the UTAD?

Auburn played for the national championship one year after winning three games for an entire season, and it was under first-year head coach Gus Malzahn.

Florida won ten games last year after winning only four the year prior to that...Guess what? Another first-year head coach (the one we should have hired).

Here are the coaches for Bama in the ten years prior to Saban - either you don't know that team's history or you're willfully misrepresenting it because they were in every bit as big of a hole as we are now when Saban took over, and he won twelve games in his second year there i.e. it didn't take him twenty years to fix it.

Mike Dubose - 51% winning percentage: lost 23 games in four years, including losses to Southern Miss and UCF in the same season
Dennis Franchione - 68% winning percentage, bolted after one year (Bama's Lane)
Mike Price - never coached a game because of a scandal (Bama's Schiano)
Mike Shula - 49% winning percentage: lost 24 games in four years
Click to expand...
That could just be attributed to good players bad coaching. If the talent is there, with a **** coach...I’d imagine it’s fixed when you have the talent and good coach. We’ve been on the downfall In both over the decade.

By all means, if they wanna drop me a few shirts for saying that, they can drop me an email.
 
#145
#145
XknoxvolsX said:
So, you guys are saying we should have given Dooley more years? Butch too? Then, what about two losing season in four years Fulmer? Should he have been given five more years to turn things around?
Click to expand...
I think the guy probably deserves more than 1 year and 13 games to make a fire or keep decision. But I suppose the forums know best
 
#146
#146
Saban understood that Alabama was desperate enough to give him the keys to the program, which he demanded. No more meddling by Board members, AD's or influential boosters, no blackballing of potential assistants because of past grudges, and virtually no limitations on the checkbook for assistants. Unlike Pruitt, Saban had the skills and experience of both a position coach and a CEO of a football program. During Saban's first year, even with the losses, you could tell based on the recruiting and overall trends that Alabama as going to be substantially better the second year, which it was. Looking back, the tragedy is that Curries best decision as AD (maybe his only good decision) , to hire Mike Leach, was blackballed by Fulmer and others in the midst of the effort to fire him for prior misdeeds. Leach wanted the job, and hiring him would have immediately changed the dynamic in the SEC. Leach would have been a perfect contrast to Saban. He has a brilliant offensive football mind. The media would have loved him, and students and alumni would have grown to love him. Instead, the Vols ended up with a micromanaging AD and a coordinator as a coach who is way over his head. The idea of elevating T to head coach would just extend the pain for the same reasons. The Vols need a strong head coach, with a proven record, who is looking for a new challenge, and who is not worried about being second guessed by Fulmer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolArmy74, lifeisdeep, bag12day and 5 others
#147
#147
Mtnvol80 said:
I'm not calling you out or even disagreeing but in today's game freshmen are used heavily even on loaded teams. Lots of people like to reference Bama and Saban so here's a little fact. They played 13 freshmen Saturday and are still going to be elite this year. 5 were starters and boat raced Cut and shut down his offense. Granted 2 were linebackers that were pushed into the role cause of injuries but they played excellent. If we got elite talent like we think, I mean look at all the BOOMS in the threads and the recruiting forum, and this coaching staff is as great as it's been touted all off season in this forum then yes we should be competitive (not with Bama or Georgia tho). At the minimum win by a couple of touchdowns against Georgia State. Look at how many freshmen have played in the championship game the past few years. This isn't your grandpa's football anymore
Click to expand...

I see your point. I would guess that is easier to do with depth, talent, and team leadership. Not arguing with what your saying, would just think plugging freshman in with Bama level talent isn’t the same as freshman with UT talent.
 
#148
#148
If Pruitt were to go 0 and 12 this year, would he be fired? Probably so. UT was warned that Pruitt wasn't a stable person and that they were betting the house when hiring him. The question is probably how many wins he'll need to keep the job. If he goes 5 and 7 again, that might not get him fired. But 4 and 8 would be going backwards, so I wonder if that might be the magic number.
 
#149
#149
EZE said:
Goodness, a first time HC with no leverage...and we give him that. Fulmer might need to be fired too if this is true. Simply ridiculous.
Click to expand...

To be fair, no one was coming (after all the coaching changes, and disastrous coaching searches) without protection.

Come to Tennessee and either make it or end your career.......yea you prob going to make sure you got at least some $ to fall back on.

Not saying I like it, but seriously it is what it is.
 
#150
#150
Knoxvilleborn said:
Saban understood that Alabama was desperate enough to give him the keys to the program, which he demanded. No more meddling by Board members, AD's or influential boosters, no blackballing of potential assistants because of past grudges, and virtually no limitations on the checkbook for assistants. Unlike Pruitt, Saban had the skills and experience of both a position coach and a CEO of a football program. During Saban's first year, even with the losses, you could tell based on the recruiting and overall trends that Alabama as going to be substantially better the second year, which it was. Looking back, the tragedy is that Curries best decision as AD (maybe his only good decision) , to hire Mike Leach, was blackballed by Fulmer and others in the midst of the effort to fire him for prior misdeeds. Leach wanted the job, and hiring him would have immediately changed the dynamic in the SEC. Leach would have been a perfect contrast to Saban. He has a brilliant offensive football mind. The media would have loved him, and students and alumni would have grown to love him. Instead, the Vols ended up with a micromanaging AD and a coordinator as a coach who is way over his head. The idea of elevating T to head coach would just extend the pain for the same reasons. The Vols need a strong head coach, with a proven record, who is looking for a new challenge, and who is not worried about being second guessed by Fulmer.
Click to expand...

Where’s the double like button?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 'Boro-vol and EZE
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top