Right this second

#3

savannahfan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2014
Messages
4,627
Likes
3,657
#3
I have always thought that most extensions, especially when a program is as troubled as we seem to be, are mostly for recruiting proposes. It is a tool for hoping recruits will think OK the staff is going to be there, I won't have to see new coaches all the time. But I think most youngsters have enough support from those around them to see what's going on. This to me, makes this type of extension, when the ice is beginning to thin beneath a program, wasted effort.
 
#4

BigOrangeMojo

The Member in Miss December
Joined
Jan 24, 2017
Messages
6,615
Likes
19,547
#4
I have always thought that most extensions, especially when a program is as troubled as we seem to be, are mostly for recruiting proposes. It is a tool for hoping recruits will think OK the staff is going to be there, I won't have to see new coaches all the time. But I think most youngsters have enough support from those around them to see what's going on. This to me, makes this type of extension, when the ice is beginning to thin beneath a program, wasted effort.
Players who are good enough to get an SEC offer think they are going to the NFL in 3 years. The line that a coach needs 5-6 years on a contract for recruiting purposes is BS to cover up bad decision making.
 
#5

Mikevol1964

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2006
Messages
76
Likes
118
#5
I have always thought that most extensions, especially when a program is as troubled as we seem to be, are mostly for recruiting proposes. It is a tool for hoping recruits will think OK the staff is going to be there, I won't have to see new coaches all the time. But I think most youngsters have enough support from those around them to see what's going on. This to me, makes this type of extension, when the ice is beginning to thin beneath a program, wasted effort.
Agree. But when the extension was given we were on a winning streak albeit against questionable competition. I still hope he can turn it around but that looks less likely every week.
 
Likes: RoamingVol423
#6

orange parmejohn

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2007
Messages
13,176
Likes
4,486
#6
Players who are good enough to get an SEC offer think they are going to the NFL in 3 years. The line that a coach needs 5-6 years on a contract for recruiting purposes is BS to cover up bad decision making.
Are you saying that it doesn’t happen? Because it does. Coaches, whether good or bad, have to sit in players’ living rooms and convince their families to trust the next 4 years under his leadership. Impossible to do that when the university won’t even buy it.
 
#7

BeardedVol

Not-Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
8,754
Likes
15,862
#7
Are you saying that it doesn’t happen? Because it does. Coaches, whether good or bad, have to sit in players’ living rooms and convince their families to trust the next 4 years under his leadership. Impossible to do that when the university won’t even buy it.
Pruitt already had a 6-year contract, and wasn't even half way through it; extending him had nothing to do with recruiting.
 
#8

BigOrangeMojo

The Member in Miss December
Joined
Jan 24, 2017
Messages
6,615
Likes
19,547
#8
Are you saying that it doesn’t happen? Because it does. Coaches, whether good or bad, have to sit in players’ living rooms and convince their families to trust the next 4 years under his leadership. Impossible to do that when the university won’t even buy it.
The State of MS limits contracts to 4 years. That never stopped Hugh Freeze from recruiting at a high level.

I have no issue with 4 years but 6 is excessive for an unproven coach
 
#11

EconVol92

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
749
Likes
1,107
#11
All I can say is that if they are going to go and get Freeze, I would have a contract signed with him and then dismiss Pruitt right after the last game this season; otherwise, I cannot say that I would move at this time without a proven winner ready to step in and Pruitt should stay.
 
Likes: 08Vol
#14

BigOrangeMojo

The Member in Miss December
Joined
Jan 24, 2017
Messages
6,615
Likes
19,547
#14
I think your two sentences are valid for some situations, but not for all.
Giving 6 years is fine for the initial contract and in situations where performance dictates it. Nick Saban has 6 years - he deserves that. Jeremy Pruitt, not so much.

Giving 6 years to a coach with absolutely no leverage that was 13-12 with a loss to Georgia State is asinine (as well as no offset provisions and nothing resembling buyout reciprocity).
 
#15

cardvolfan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
2,825
Likes
2,327
#15
Giving 6 years is fine for the initial contract and in situations where performance dictates it.

Giving 6 years to a coach with absolutely no leverage that was 13-12 with a loss to Georgia State is asinine (as well as no offset provisions and nothing resembling buyout reciprocity).
I agree with that, just not to your original post, at least not in all cases.
 
#17

GAVol

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 24, 2003
Messages
103,853
Likes
38,847
#17
Dan Mullen has 3 years left on his deal. He has no issues recruiting.

When they extend Mullen, it will be for performance, not recruiting.
He's in year 3 of a 6 year deal and they've been talking about an extension since the off-season. It's likely already agreed on and just waiting to be announced.

Keeping a coach signed for 4-5 years beyond the current season is just the way the market works.
 
#18

Johnnyreb#VFL

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2014
Messages
4,925
Likes
6,271
#18
Im interested to see the way Fulmer navigates the football program these next 2 years to get a better sense of where his head is at. Can he see the writing on the wall, whether positive or negative? Will he have patience or does he fire Pruitt and already have someone else in mind? Basically the choice he has to make. I think if we go winless the rest of the way, he’s gonna have to pull the trigger.
 
Likes: djohnnyg
#21

OrangeTsar

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
2,311
Likes
3,818
#21
CDM just said on 104.5 the zone Nashville that Fulmer and Tennessee understand that giving a coach an extension is just part of the business and so is firing them early and paying the buyout. This is good news.
Is that a direct quote or is that hearsay? I would be very happy if Fulmer is on record saying that.
 
#23

BigOrangeMojo

The Member in Miss December
Joined
Jan 24, 2017
Messages
6,615
Likes
19,547
#23
He's in year 3 of a 6 year deal and they've been talking about an extension since the off-season. It's likely already agreed on and just waiting to be announced.

Keeping a coach signed for 4-5 years beyond the current season is just the way the market works.
My point is having 6 years on an extended contract can be justified for 4 reasons:

1. Everyone else in the league currently has 6 years so you need it for recruiting reasons - That's not the case

2. Pruitt had leverage and you needed it to keep him here - That's not the case

3. You can justify based on performance - If we justified Pruitt's extension based on a 13-12 record and a loss to GSU, then Fulmer should be fired on the spot. Mullen (after he signs), Kirby, and Saban fall into this category

4. You have provisions that protects school in circumstances like this. The most Mullen'a buyout could have been was less than 1/3 of original contract value. (12/36.6). The maximum Pruitt's can be is 60%. We took on more risk (and no offset provisions) for a coach with no leverage.
 
#24

VOLnVANDYland

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2008
Messages
469
Likes
569
#24
CDM just said on 104.5 the zone Nashville that Fulmer and Tennessee understand that giving a coach an extension is just part of the business and so is firing them early and paying the buyout. This is good news.
Wow! What an amazing strategy....This is the BS that puts us in this continuous 3 year crappy cycle... wash, rinse, repeat hiring of a nobody from jerkwater state university !!!!
 

VN Store




Sponsors
 

Top