TN's Decades of Failures Explained

[05_never_again]

I don't know about falling off ladders (actually, I do--I know the General Shelton Rule), but here's what I can state with 100% surety: we will never know the answer to your question about how Fulmer would have done, because we got rid of our championship coach. We will never know. We'll never get to find out.

And that's just a crying shame.


p.s. Hope you're okay after your fall!

Of course you'll never know - that's why we're debating this. I just find it incredibly unlikely, given that we know what happened in the SEC after Fulmer was fired, that Fulmer would have won an SEC title in 2009, 2010, or any year after that. Your argument seems to be predicated mostly on faith in Fulmer, which is fine, but other coaches (Richt and Urban in particular) had been running circles around Fulmer on the field and particularly on the recruiting trail for a number of years before his firing. None of those other great coaches you mentioned went a decade between titles, or nearly a decade between top 10 teams. Phil's program had degraded over a number of years without reversing. He was never quite the same after 2001, and his last 4 seasons were quite volatile but 2 of them were pretty bad.

 

[hog88]

Yeah, that's why you give the man a one-year sabbatical. To get his bearings back. To get hungry again. To reassess and formulate a new plan, not have to do it on the fly.

You don't kick the man to the curb. Not a championship-winning coach. No smart program does that. Ever.

A sabbatical? Talk about killing recruiting for at least 2 cycles. Come on dude that's a ludicrous idea.

Everyone has a shelf life and Fulmer had already expired and it was time for him to go. Have you ever asked yourself why no P5 team ever pursued him for a vacant HC position?

 

[VFL-82-JP]

A sabbatical? Talk about killing recruiting for at least 2 cycles. Come on dude that's a ludicrous idea.

Everyone has a shelf life and Fulmer had already expired and it was time for him to go. Have you ever asked yourself why no P5 team ever pursued him for a vacant HC position?

No, it's actually a genius idea.

The entire staff remains intact, and everyone knows the head coach is coming back. Fresh and stronger than ever, in fact. Recruiting doesn't suffer one iota.

More to your underlying point, people don't have shelf lives. We're not snack cakes. Humans adjust and adapt, reinvent themselves and get better. Fulmer's a bright fella. He certainly would've, with a year to think it all through. Naive and a little callous of you to think so poorly of people's ability to adjust. Do you not, yourself?

 

[hog88]

No, it's actually a genius idea.

The entire staff remains intact, and everyone knows the head coach is coming back. Fresh and stronger than ever, in fact. Recruiting doesn't suffer one iota.

More to your underlying point, people don't have shelf lives. We're not snack cakes. Humans adjust and adapt, reinvent themselves and get better. Fulmer's a bright fella. He certainly would've, with a year to think it all through. Naive and a little callous of you to think so poorly of people's ability to adjust. Do you not, yourself?

Fulmer had ever opportunity to adjust and bring in quality staff, he didn't. It's not in his DNA. Have you ever wondered why Fulmers coaching tree looks like a fence post?

 

[05_never_again]

No, it's actually a genius idea.

The entire staff remains intact, and everyone knows the head coach is coming back. Fresh and stronger than ever, in fact. Recruiting doesn't suffer one iota.

More to your underlying point, people don't have shelf lives. We're not snack cakes. Humans adjust and adapt, reinvent themselves and get better. Fulmer's a bright fella. He certainly would've, with a year to think it all through. Naive and a little callous of you to think so poorly of people's ability to adjust. Do you not, yourself?

I cannot imagine what that would have done to our recruiting, which was already struggling. The issue with that is the part I bolded.

Think about it - we give a struggling veteran head coach, who wasn't "old" but also wasn't a spring chicken, a one-year break to "get his head right" and come back the next year. Every other school would use that to negative recruit, say it was just a prelude to him being fired, say that if he was still a great coach he wouldn't need this break, there's too much uncertainty, etc.

Not all people adjust and adapt, and some people adjust and adapt better than others.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Fulmer had ever opportunity to adjust and bring in quality staff, he didn't. It's not in his DNA. Have you ever wondered why Fulmers coaching tree looks like a fence post?

Okay, no. It's not "in his DNA." Much as we don't come with a shelf life, we also don't come with coaching preferences built into our DNA. You keep thinking humans can't change, but the human race is defined, in part, by our ability to adapt and improvise and improve. Yes, that includes Phillip Fulmer.

Phillip's coaching tree is undeveloped (aside from Cut) because his staff were incredibly stable and loyal to him. Many of them stayed with him his entire 16 years. That's a testament to his leadership, not a condemnation of his ability to adjust. I think you're reading the tea leaves wrong, brother.

 

[hog88]

Okay, no. It's not "in his DNA." Much as we don't come with a shelf life, we also don't come with coaching preferences built into our DNA. You keep thinking humans can't change, but the human race is defined, in part, by our ability to adapt and improvise and improve. Yes, that includes Phillip Fulmer.

Phillip's coaching tree is undeveloped (aside from Cut) because his staff were incredibly stable and loyal to him. Many of them stayed with him his entire 16 years. That's a testament to his leadership, not a condemnation of his ability to adjust. I think you're reading the tea leaves wrong, brother.

It's not a testament to his leadership it's the exact opposite and what lead to his downfall. A leader needs to be surrounded by people pushing him to be better, wanting to advance and show they are the man.

 

[Volnut]

1977, last time Tennessee football hired a high profile head coach

And even then I bet they didn't have to pay top dollar for him.

 

[USAFgolferVol]

Dude.

Fulmer's last six years: 49-27. That's a .645 win rate. Two SEC East titles. Three different 10-win seasons, and another with 9 wins. Here, I'll bold the parts you seem to be missing:

• 2003 -- 10-3 (6-2 in SEC)
• 2004 -- 10-3 (7-1 in SEC) -- SEC-East champ -- Cotton Bowl victor (over #22 A&M)
• 2005 -- 5-6 (3-5 in SEC)
• 2006 -- 9-4 (5-3 in SEC)
• 2007 -- 10-4 (6-2 in SEC) -- SEC-East champ -- Outback Bowl victor (over #18 Wisconsin)
• 2008 -- 5-7 (3-5 in SEC)

Just to remind you: our very best seasons over the past 12 years since Fulmer left, our VERY best, were a couple of 9-win seasons under Butch. But nine or ten wins was the _norm_ with Fulmer. Even in those last six seasons.

Yes, Phillip got complacent. But even a complacent Fulmer is better than anything we've done since.

Anyone who thinks Fulmer has been our problem, or was even our first problem, is a fool. Getting rid of him was our first problem.

As for the rest of your post, I couldn't get past that first bone-headed statement. So I didn't read any more.

Go Vols!

Stats are meaningless without detail. You failed to mention losing to Clemson, who wasn't ranked, after the 2003 season. In that season we lost to Georgia at home, 41-14. We often lost to our biggest rivals AT HOME during those last six years. I believe 2004 was a great effort, but you completely left out the dismal 2002 season, in which we were #7 in preseason rankings. In 2007 we got blown out by Florida 59-20 and by a 6-6 Alabama team, 41-17.

We haven't been nationally relevant since before the SECCG in 2001. Getting rid of him wasn't the problem, but subsequent hires were this issue. The only boneheads are our delusional fans that think we should have held on to him longer

Just a reminder, he made it very clear he wanted to continue to coach. Fulmer believed he would be sought after by a few of the big time openings. No one came calling and there was a reason for it

 

[HollowaytoSeivers]

Pruitt is learning on the job, but the rate at which he learns is way too slow for the vast majority of Vol fans, including myself. I'm certainly not calling for his job, but I'm tired of losing. Very tired.

That part is spot on, especially considering that Kiffin, Dooley, and Butch all had HC experience before taking the Vols job. While on the Hill, each of their coaching and/or recruiting flaws were so exposed that only Kiffin has held an HC job since leaving Tennessee. Generally speaking, the SEC is not a place for a first-time Power 5 HC (I see you CPF, Kirby and Sam Pittman).

Pruitt's biggest problem to me is that his most successful coaching jobs came with top-flight programs (Bama, UGA, FSU). He has never, to my knowledge, had to build or restore a program like he's having to do now. He really should have people around him with a proven reputation for developing talent with all levels of programs, not just elite ones. I have been very surprised with the length of his rope regarding JG, however. None of the HCs he's worked with would have been this _______ (fill in the blank -- stubborn, tolerant, hopeful, blind, etc.) with a QB like JG.

 

[USAFgolferVol]

Yep. Put the blame where it should be, right at those fools feet. It all went to hell after Dickey left.

Don't let Butch coach after 2015? That's the most competitive team we've had since 2004. I agree Butch eventually showed his true colors the following season, but hey, his third year was far better than Pruitt's is at this point and it's not even close

 

[05_never_again]

Pruitt is learning on the job, but the rate at which he learns is way too slow for the vast majority of Vol fans, including myself. I'm certainly not calling for his job, but I'm tired of losing. Very tired.

I think the best way to articulate what a lot of Vols fans, including myself, are feeling is this:

I really want to like Pruitt. I think he's a much better "fit" here culturally than Butch, I think has 10x the football mind of Butch, and is a better coach than Butch. However, there isn't a lot to point to on the field in 2.5 years that shows he actually is a better coach than Butch. I can't point to any empirical data thus far that actually demonstrates that.

In year 3, he shouldn't be losing to Kentucky at home by any margin, and he should at least be able to look like his teams belong on the same field as Georgia and Alabama.

 

[05_never_again]

Don't let Butch coach after 2005? That's the most competitive team we've had since 2004. I agree Butch eventually showed his true colors the following season, but hey, his third year was far better than Pruitt's is at this point and it's not even close

That's spot on, but the SEC East and the SEC overall was also weaker in 2015 than 2020. Butch lost to a pretty mediocre (by their standards) Florida team and beat an OK (by their standards) Georgia team, plus also lost to an Arkansas team that he was clearly better than.

Having said that, you do have to consider that Butch almost beat an Alabama team that won the title that year and almost beat an Oklahoma team who won the Big 12 and made the playoff. Pruitt's team this year would have no chance at doing either of those things.

Butch's 3rd (and 4th) year teams were totally capable of winning 10 (maybe even 11) games and winning the East; Pruitt is nowhere close to that in year 3.

 

[USAFgolferVol]

That's spot on, but the SEC East and the SEC overall was also weaker in 2015 than 2020. Butch lost to a pretty mediocre (by their standards) Florida team and beat an OK (by their standards) Georgia team, plus also lost to an Arkansas team that he was clearly better than.

Having said that, you do have to consider that Butch almost beat an Alabama team that won the title that year and almost beat an Oklahoma team who won the Big 12 and made the playoff. Pruitt's team this year would have no chance at doing either of those things.

Butch's 3rd (and 4th) year teams were totally capable of winning 10 (maybe even 11) games and winning the East; Pruitt is nowhere close to that in year 3.

We had two of the four final four teams beat in the late stages of both games. The competitiveness is where the big difference is between 2015 and this year

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Stats are meaningless without detail. You failed to mention losing to Clemson, who wasn't ranked, after the 2003 season. In that season we lost to Georgia at home, 41-14. We often lost to our biggest rivals AT HOME during those last six years. I believe 2004 was a great effort, but you completely left out the dismal 2002 season, in which we were #7 in preseason rankings. In 2007 we got blown out by Florida 59-20 and by a 6-6 Alabama team, 41-17.

We haven't been nationally relevant since before the SECCG in 2001. Getting rid of him wasn't the problem, but subsequent hires were this issue. The only boneheads are our delusional fans that think we should have held on to him longer

Just a reminder, he made it very clear he wanted to continue to coach. Fulmer believed he would be sought after by a few of the big time openings. No one came calling and there was a reason for it

I didn't leave out anything, Golfer. The "six years" time window was picked by the guy ahead of me. I was simply responding to him.

And no one said those years were perfect. That wasn't the point. The point is, even Fulmer's down years beat everything we've seen since we foolishly fired the man. Even his down period was better than everything since.

You're wrong about the question of national relevance. There's no single definition of that phrase, but I'd say any team ranked in the Top 25 counts. I mean, the AP and Coaches' polls could rank any number of teams they wish. They could just do a Top 15. Or a Top 35. But they, both, choose to go with 25 teams. That tells me it's kind of where they draw the line of relevance. Lacking any universally agreed definition, let's go with that.

The Vols finished the season in the Top 25 four of Fulmer's final six seasons. Relevant, indeed.

And whatever your definition of the term, a helluva lot more relevant than we've been since.

Getting rid of our championship-winning coach was the stupidest thing our football program has ever done / had done to it.

 

[USAFgolferVol]

I didn't leave out anything, Golfer. The "six years" time window was picked by the guy ahead of me. I was simply responding to him.

And no one said those years were perfect. That wasn't the point. The point is, even Fulmer's down years beat everything we've seen since we foolishly fired the man. Even his down period was better than everything we've seen since.

You're wrong about the question of national relevance. There's no single definition of that phrase, but I'd say any team ranked in the Top 25 counts. I mean, the AP and Coaches' polls could rank any number of teams they wish. They could just do a Top 15. Or a Top 35. But they, both, choose to go with 25 teams. That tells me it's kind of where they draw the line of relevance. Lacking any universally agreed definition, let's go with that.

The Vols finished the season in the Top 25 four of Fulmer's final six seasons. Relevant, indeed.

And whatever your definition of the term, a helluva lot more relevant than we've been since.

Getting rid of our championship-winning coach was the stupidest thing our football program has ever done / had done to it.

MY definition of "nationally relevant" is the team being in the national title hunt. We got beat AT HOME during those years on a regular basis by our biggest rivals. In 2002, we lost to Florida 31-13, Alabama 34-13 and Miami 26-3...all AT HOME. In 2003 we lost to Georgia, AT HOME, 41-14. Not going to bring up 2005, except that we we loaded with talent, were ranked #3 in the preseason and lost more games than we won. In 2006, we lost to Florida and LSU at home and Arkansas on the road. In 2007, yeah we won the East, but lost to Florida 59-20 and a 6-6 Alabama team, 41-17. We were losing to our biggest rivals on a regular basis. Indeed, we weren't nationally relevant at all.

Just stop with what's happened since. Firing Fulmer should have happened sooner. No one wanted him afterwards for a reason. You're as delusional about him as he was about himself

 

[90 Vol]

If we had hired Cutcliffe after Kiffin bailed (which we could have done), it's likely that we're not having this conversation about the dumpster fire that has been our program for the past decade +.

 

[Rickyvol77]

Stats are meaningless without detail. You failed to mention losing to Clemson, who wasn't ranked, after the 2003 season. In that season we lost to Georgia at home, 41-14. We often lost to our biggest rivals AT HOME during those last six years. I believe 2004 was a great effort, but you completely left out the dismal 2002 season, in which we were #7 in preseason rankings. In 2007 we got blown out by Florida 59-20 and by a 6-6 Alabama team, 41-17.

We haven't been nationally relevant since before the SECCG in 2001. Getting rid of him wasn't the problem, but subsequent hires were this issue. The only boneheads are our delusional fans that think we should have held on to him longer

Just a reminder, he made it very clear he wanted to continue to coach. Fulmer believed he would be sought after by a few of the big time openings. No one came calling and there was a reason for it

We were nationally relevant in 2003 and 2006. 2007 defense was awful but we were literally a few minutes away from winning the SEC with that team

 

[hog88]

We were nationally relevant in 2003 and 2006. 2007 defense was awful but we were literally a few minutes away from winning the SEC with that team

No we weren't.

 

[05_never_again]

We were nationally relevant in 2003 and 2006. 2007 defense was awful but we were literally a few minutes away from winning the SEC with that team

Tennessee's only had 3 "nationally relevant" teams since 2000 - 2001, 2004, and 2007. Tennessee was in play for conference titles at the end of the season in each of those years. And as you said the 2007 team wasn't even all that great (the 2006 team, which didn't win the East, was better than that team was).

The 2007 team won the East but had a dearth of nice wins (best win was against a Georgia team that finished 11-2 and #2 in the country). They were beaten soundly by a mediocre (7-6, 3-6) Cal, absolutely annihilated by a 9-4 (5-3) Florida that did have Heisman Tebow but was reloading after winning the title the year before, and beaten badly by a totally mediocre Alabama team in Saban's first year (7-6, 4-4). Nationally relevant, yes, because they almost won the SEC, but they totally backed into that title game given they were destroyed by 2 of the big 3.

 

[MAD]

And even then I bet they didn't have to pay top dollar for him.

You would think he could get what he wanted. Majors had just won the National Championship with Pitt and would have been a hot commodity, but I guess UT was his dream job, wasn’t it.

 

[Firebirdparts]

The fact that people are still happy Fulmer was fired, and that it excites them enough to always diligently post about how happy they are with it, reveals something. I'm not sure what it is.

 

[hexnut]

MY definition of "nationally relevant" is the team being in the national title hunt. We got beat AT HOME during those years on a regular basis by our biggest rivals. In 2002, we lost to Florida 31-13, Alabama 34-13 and Miami 26-3...all AT HOME. In 2003 we lost to Georgia, AT HOME, 41-14. Not going to bring up 2005, except that we we loaded with talent, were ranked #3 in the preseason and lost more games than we won. In 2006, we lost to Florida and LSU at home and Arkansas on the road. In 2007, yeah we won the East, but lost to Florida 59-20 and a 6-6 Alabama team, 41-17. We were losing to our biggest rivals on a regular basis. Indeed, we weren't nationally relevant at all.

Just stop with what's happened since. Firing Fulmer should have happened sooner. No one wanted him afterwards for a reason. You're as delusional about him as he was about himself

Opinions vary.

 

[peaygolf]

Why, in the world, would a school hire someone that needs to "learn on the job"?

Besides Majors..................Name one single coach that had ANY major experience before coming to UT.


YOU CAN"T

 

[peaygolf]

Besides Majors..................Name one single coach that had ANY major experience before coming to UT.


YOU CAN"T

besides Kiffin