Would You All Compromise???

#1
DOCTORLOOMIS

DOCTORLOOMIS

Smith’s Grove - Warren County Sanitarium
Joined
Sep 17, 2007
Messages
1,831
Likes
5,158
#1
If Fulmer were told he must fire ALL assistants...a total housecleaning....would you agree to keep him as head coach?
 
#3
#3
That would be utterly stupid. Further, if Fulmer would agree to such an arrangement, it would prove that all of his ad nauseum talk about the "UT Family" over the years was garbage.
 
#5
#5
I dont want to see house cleaned we are playing good on the offensive side of the ball, i do want to see a new head coach and im not sure if chavis can still hold it down on D or not i think he could if the new HC is able to bring in talent
 
#6
#6
First I don't think he would do that. But if he did I would not want him or any coach that would do that. The decisions about staff should be made by the HC not the AD or the BOT. If the HC cannot make those type of decisions then he should be fired. No matter who "he" is. That would not be the action of a leader, that would be the action of a follower and the HC needs to be a leader.
 
#7
#7
Sidebar - What's the NCAA rules on tranfers when coaches leave? Would our players be able to transfer to another SEC school without the loss of a year's eligibility?
 
#8
#8
Sometimes new coaches keep assistants on the new staff. If UT got a new coach than which assistant should he keep if any?
 
#10
#10
NO. He had that chance in '05.

By the way, I don't think there would be very many worthy candidates that would want to take a job like that.
 
#12
#12
DOCTORLOOMIS said:
If Fulmer were told he must fire ALL assistants...a total housecleaning....would you agree to keep him as head coach?
Click to expand...

What you are saying is like applying a new coating of paint over a rusted metal... sooner or later the paint will fall off and off it goes back to its original state....
 
#13
#13
I wish I could back him on this, but its time for Fulmer to back out gracfully.
 
#14
#14
Maybe,...now this is a stretch...but just maybe yall will trade. We'll give ya Franchonie..if you give us Fulmer.
 
#15
#15
hatvol96 said:
That would be utterly stupid. Further, if Fulmer would agree to such an arrangement, it would prove that all of his ad nauseum talk about the "UT Family" over the years was garbage.
Click to expand...

Dammit hat! Do I actualy agree with you on something? :)
 
#19
#19
I think it's excellent that we all have our own opinion about Fulmer...but need I remind you that he's still our coach and we should still back him up... he's done a lot for us and so has Chavis

I seriously think we need a Special Teams coach it's a vital part of the game... we're in desperate need of one and the fact that we don't have one is popping it's big ugly head every Saturday.
 
#21
#21
Also, are you still supporting Fulmer by criticizing him for not having a special teams coach?
 
#22
#22
pretty-in-orange said:
I think it's excellent that we all have our own opinion about Fulmer...but need I remind you that he's still our coach and we should still back him up... he's done a lot for us and so has Chavis

I seriously think we need a Special Teams coach it's a vital part of the game... we're in desperate need of one and the fact that we don't have one is popping it's big ugly head every Saturday.
Click to expand...

Special teams has been lackluster for several seasons now. Our offense pre-2005 was lackluster for several seasons until a 5-6 campaign forced change. Why does it take complete disaster for something to be done about a problem that has been apparent for some time? Fulmer is at fault there. He has had opportunity to look at weak areas on his team, even when the team wasn't doing so horribly, and fix them. Instead of being proactive and staying ahead of the curve, he has been reactive and is not trying to stamp out a forest fire with a garden hose.

To answer the question, the whole staff needs to go. I can't see Fulmer keeping his mits off of the offense if he did go outside of the family. I can't see him bringing in an offensive system he is not used to. And I can't see him bringing in a strong OC or DC that might one day challenge for his job. Even if he did those things, his leadership at the helm has been lackluster and lazy. 2005 should have been the wakeup call, but it wasn't. Why would 2007 be any different?
 
#23
#23
hatvol96 said:
None.
Click to expand...

Not that I'd be upset with that scenario, but is there any benefit (recruiting) to keeping an assistant or two who are making inroads with key recruits?

Didn't CBP keep someone when he took over (Kerry Keating)? I know he made the right move in regards to getting rid of C.B.
 
#24
#24
bigtime said:
I dont want to see house cleaned we are playing good on the offensive side of the ball,
Click to expand...

So what part of a non-existent run game have you forgotten to remember.

Additionally:

1) California has only played cupcakes so far: Tenn, Colorado State, La. Tech, Arizona and Colorado State. Furthermore, Colorado State and Arizona nearly put up as many points as we did (28 and 27 respectively)

2) Don't brag about beating Southern Miss

3) We only scored 13 offensive points against Florida

4) So I guess that leaves us putting up 45 points on Arkansas State, which is great, but it is also Arkansas State.

So again, what part of our offense is "good"?
 
#25
#25
I will say this for Arky State, they hadn't given up a 100 yard rusher or a 100 yard receiver until UT played them.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top