Tennessee Football Life Cycle (1992-2007)

[allvol]

I think it illustrates that for the most part Tennessee has done alright the past 80 years when deciding whom to give the head coaching job to.

Not saying a national search wouldn't be warranted next time though.

Thanks GAVol. Just stating a fact since people were commenting on how the Vols have done things the past 80 years. The Vols are also one of just a handful of programs that have not had back-to-back losing seasons in a very long time.

 

[Cartervol]

I think it illustrates that for the most part Tennessee has done alright the past 80 years when deciding whom to give the head coaching job to.

Not saying a national search wouldn't be warranted next time though.

Still off the subject. The fact is we haven't and we likely won't again. Hard to teach old dogs new tricks. Phil may right the ship. I would like to eat crow. Might beat the bulldogs this week . Still alot of season afterwards. We will see how the season plays out.

 

[orange+white=heaven]

I think it illustrates that for the most part Tennessee has done alright the past 80 years when deciding whom to give the head coaching job to.

Not saying a national search wouldn't be warranted next time though.

This national search thing befuddles me a bit. We don't already know the best options out there? We need to go out and beat the bushes to see if someone good is hiding from everybody?

If we mean simply looking outside the program, I think that is pretty much a given this time around. But it won't be some all out search. The list is already there.

 

[Cartervol]

This national search thing befuddles me a bit. We don't already know the best options out there? We need to go out and beat the bushes to see if someone good is hiding from everybody?

If we mean simply looking outside the program, I think that is pretty much a given this time around. But it won't be some all out search. The list is already there.

Yeah been trying to explain that for half an hour.

 

[cotton]

A.Do you think Hamilton realized his firm (Football Program) was in a maturity stage (as far as on field performance) when he took over the reigns as CEO in 2003 and like stated started making a strategy, at the time, for the future market share (success) of the Tennessee Football program?

B. Do you think Hamilton notices or to a man admits that Tennessee is in a weak position of market share?

C.Do you agree with the Life Cycle assesment of Tennessee I have posted?

D. Hamilton has a major in BA so things like this are imbedded into his thinking. A smart businessman is taught to never, never, never wishful think and to always have hard evidence before he moves on. Do you think Hamilton looks at the on feild success of the football team in a business manner like this without the enviromental forces of money?

Feedback please! If you want to get all Billy Madsion on me and tell me that you are now dumber for reading this post please feel free.

A. Yes, I do. He would have to be much dumber than I think he is to fail to recognize that the football program was rolling and that his job was to do the best he could to maintain the roll.

B. I think it may be dawning on him that this might be the case. He certainly could have chalked up '05 to an anomaly and seen '06 as a rebuild. If that is the case, '07 should continue the rebuilding process. At this point, that doesn't appear to be what has happened.

C. Not bad

D. I have no idea. Money is the driving factor, but it comes from many different, non-correlated directions when talking about university athletics. Ticket sales and booster donations and merchandising and TV revenues and bowl payouts and buyouts all come into play. Some are down (bowls,) some are up (donations,) some are about the same (tickets.) NOTE: That's an estimate on my part, as I did not look up the athletic budget. Overall, the football program is still wildly profitable, even though on-the-field success has fallen.

 

[Business]

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[Business]

Very nicely done bidness. This is very helpful in understanding the "CEO" arguments that are thrown around on the board from time to time.

While I was not a business major, you might also add this to the mix when considering the life cycle. If we give credit to CPF for starting it, it is common knowledge in the business world that the person responsible for "launching the business" is rarely able to support recovery after decline. Furthermore, to that end, CPF has not attracted innovative "coaching talent" when given the opportunity.

Usually when a comapny or firm hits that maturity stage this is when the Board of directors will usually go and find a new CEO to start a new life cycle phase.

It's nothing against the CEO, and they usually understand that. In business, more than most things, people know when they have done as much as they can at a company and will move onto another company to keep the thinking fresh.

Perfect case is Scott McNealy, former Sun Systems CEO. He ran Sun Systems into the ground because he stuck around too long and stayed in the same frame of mind and kept the same strategies even when they were losing market share. He co-founded the business and couldn't let go when he needed to.

Scott McNealy is a perfect parallel to Fulmer.