VTTW Board Index

did we fire Phil a year...or two too soon?  If we wait just a year then we don't through Kiffin and the NCAA investigation and most likely we don't wind up with Dooley as our coach.  I wanted Phil gone as well but was it too soon...oh well, it is what it is.  I think our motto next year needs to be "no excuses".

Not even close. Fulmer STILL bears partial responsibility for this crap with his subpar recruiting the last four years he was head coach. The mistake was Hamilton hiring Kiffin. That's where it went from being held together with scotch tape to being completely derailed.

Kind of my point....if we waited then Kiffin wouldn't have been our guy he would have been at USC anyway.  I realize a great deal of our problems lie on Phil's shoulders.

If you wait then it's no better and maybe even worse because you have another crappy Fulmer recruiting class.

I understand you are venting like everyone else... I just disagree with any premise that says that Phil should've been kept any longer. People want to blame Kiffin and he bears fault but Fulmer is MORE at fault than Kiffin. Keeping Fulmer another year does nothing but sidesteps hostess gate which we didn't get punished for anyway.

Hopefully, this loss will do good for the long term success of the program. It will allow time for Dooley to review and plan for 2012 to determine what is needed because I am sure he knows he is at a cross-road with the program.

I asked the guys the same thing after Kentucky beat us.

 :powert:

With all due respect, hindsight sucks.

http://www.youtube.com/v/jyb1KYiFkBM

No, Fulmer was fired a year or two too late. I wasn't calling for his head after 2005 so I can't sit here and claim any "I told ya so's". But with regard to your question and having hindsight and all, it's obvious the old boy needed to be put out to pasture back then.

CW

I'm not venting.  I did that yesterday and got chastised because I think the defense letting that converted WR run all over them was criminal.  I'm just wondering out loud if things would be different if we waited and someone besides Dooley were now our coach. 

I'm with ya.. hard not to wonder what might've been.   :dunno: :bawl:

Fine. Sorry if I offended you by "chastising" you.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

Oh good Lord...seriously?!  How many times have I joked about being "chastised" by you?  I wasn't offended and I darn sure didn't mean to offend you.  I guess I should never post here again.  SMH  :frown:

You are reading way too much into what I meant. No big deal. I'm done discussing the Vols for a little while anyway... it only raises my blood pressure.

Watching the Vols play this year RAISED MINE................... :banghead:

 :powert:

Yes, IMO we did.   However, Phil dug himself a very deep hole n 2008.  He had his worst recruiting class ever (35th in the country), and hired a terrible OC that led to the debacle of 2008.  There was already considerable pressure on him.  My position at the time was that I wanted him to do well enough to hold on for a few more years, and hopefully leave on his own terms with the program in good shape.  I think we would have had to struggle through a few more 9-3, 8-4 years, but ... and I am in perhaps a small minority here, I think he could have won another SEC title and who knows, maybe even the big one, given time and maybe some luck.

But enough speculating about what might have been.  How bad the program was is greatly overstated IMO.  We were a couple bad breaks away from being in the SECCG and maybe even BCS in 2006.  In 2007, we struggled with the only truly bad defense of Chavis' career here and in spite of that still went to the SECCG and almost beat the NATIONAL CHAMPIONS.  Had Ainge not thrown those teo picks, maybe we would have.  From where I sit, that's pretty dam good.

The problem is, our fanbase was so dam spoiled that this was not good enough for them.  We lost by big margins in 2007 to Florida and Alabama.  So what if we went to the SECCG?  was the cry.  Well shizzle, those two coaches have accounted for three of the last five MNCs...maybe that has something to do with it?  And in spite of that, we beat the shizzle out of Georgia that year and like I said we were really close to BEATING THE NATIONAL CHAMPS.

I have to continue this, because the editor always screws me up after about 40 lines.

Let's also examine the supposition that Phil finished with nothing but lousy recruiting classes.  He was in fact 35th in the country in 2008.  His 2007 class, however, was pretty good.  Now, I know a lot of those players didn't work out, but how much of that was Kiffin running them off to clean house for his own guys?  How much of it was some of them not trusting the program anymore?  Could Phil have helped some of those guys stay?  His 2009 class was also shaping up to be pretty good.

But I said it above, let me say it again.  It was impossible to defend 2008.  I can't even recall the name of the OC he hired from Richmond, but the guy was a DISASTER.  It falls completely on Phil.  He hired the dude, so it's his fault.  That and Crompton was a head case in 2008.  Phil needed to have a good showing in 2008, and he didn't get it done.  So he is gone.  Hamilton didn't handle it well either, but that's a whole other topic.

It is what it is.  I thought that in 2007 and 2008 we actually had two problems.  One, Phil was slipping, two, we have fans with unrealistic expectations.  But IMO the best thing for the program was to hunker down and let Phil leave on his own terms in a few years, if that was possible.  I don't know if even that would totally solve the problem though.

The problem with all that is that there isn't one person - well, except maybe the really naive ones - who didn't KNOW that Tennessee would have to take a step back in order to move forward. The exact scenario that we have watched play out post-Fulmer, where it takes us more than one coach to find the right guy to lead the program, is exactly what a lot of folks were warning about for the last couple of years of the Fulmer era.

It's easy to forget it now and say "what if."

IMO, there was absolutely no hope of the Fulmer era resurrecting itself. As has already been pointed out on this thread, a lot of Tennessee's struggles today are exactly because of the Fulmer era. 2008 wasn't like 2005...Fulmer couldn't have come back in '09 and immediately jumped back into the hunt for the SEC East, because he didn't have the players to do it in '09 like he had in '06. It was a totally different scenario in 2008, and keeping him would have only delayed the inevitable. If Fulmer wanted to go out on his own terms, he should've done it after winning the East in 2007. There's the possibility that UT would've been able to hire a much better coach to replace him in that scenario (though I have my doubts with Hamilton running the show). But Fulmer refused to go out that way, having the audacity to think he deserved another 6 or 7 years despite being in the midst of what turned out to be a few disastrous recruiting classes.

If anything, we waited a couple of years too late before firing Fulmer. I liked Fulmer, I look back on the Fulmer years with a lot of fondness...but, to drag out a tired old cliche, it is what it is. Fulmer ran the program into the dirt and would've ran it further into the dirt. The last 3 years have been miserable, but at least we're 3 years into this process of picking up the pieces and moving on.

I think there were quite a few of these actually.


I think he definitely had the players.  For that matter, he may have had them in 2008.  Our defense was really good that year.  REALLY good.  It was only the offense that sucked.  Our offense also sucked in 2005.  In between, Cutcliffe was the OC.  Coaching does matter.  Fulmer just made a lousy hire at OC in 2008.  Then again, maybe Cut knew the cupboard was bare and got out...but I doubt it.  I think Duke just made him an offer he could not refuse.


2008 was a disaster.  I think 2009 was going well when he got fired, and as I post above, 2007 might have turned out better without a coaching change.


I think in summary, my perspective is that 2008 was unfortunate.  Phil needed to, IMO for the GOOD OF THE PROGRAM (and not him) do well enough to buy a couple more years.  Then in an ideal situation he would win another SEC and retire.  But maybe it would not have played out that way, I don't know.

I think there were quite a few people who thought all we had to do was change a coach and we could win the MNC the next year or two. 

I hope that we win at least 8 games next year.   I think at least some of our fanbase will have learned to appreciate that if we do. 

Sooooo much revisionist history in this thread.  :dunno:

Why am I still here?

Something about a train wreck that sucks you in like a moth to a flame.

Same.

Revisionism is suddenly deciding that the 2007 recruiting class of Fulmer was sub-par, when that class underwent not only a major staff change in 2008, but then HC changes in 2009 and 2010, and the last one under the worst possible circumstances.  It's very fair to ask that if Fulmer had stayed, would that still have been the case?  The source of pointing out that the 2007 class did not turn out well is a blog that came out this year, which makes sense because maybe it took this long to figure that out.  But nevertheless, coaching changes will definitely take a toll on a class.  Where is Kiffin's 2009 class right about now?  And if Fulmer stays and has a top 10 class that year, which he was heading toward when he got fired, would they have stayed and helped overcome issues with the 2007 class had that gone the same way?  All fair questions!

As for me defending the 2007 season, which I freely admit left a lot to be desired, I did that for the entire season of 2007 and my view has not changed.   We had our worst D in 20 years that season but still managed to make the SECCG game and almost win it.  That is SUCCESS no matter what our whiny spoiled-brat fanbase had to say about it.  My view on 2007 has never changed.  So I would not call that revisionism at all.

OK. Debating what is in the past is an exercise in futility and I have better things to do.

Agree that debating the past is futile.  Looking forward to the future.   :thumbup:

I think it is interesting to talk and argue the merits of Fulmer staying on a couple of more years. Personally, only my opinion, but when I see how Fulmer left the program and how his players reacted, it showed me that he had lost control. Fulmer is a throwback to the old days and college football has changed. A head coach is not a micromanager but a true manager of coaching talent. All he did with bringing Cut back after 05 was prove in 08 that it was Cut and Cut only that would be allowed free reign to run the Offense. Frankly, it was ridiculous the silly system he had with Sanders. He couldn't let go of the reins. Sanders has proven himself to be a pretty capable OC at KY.

That said, it could be worse. My biggest fear was Cutcliffe taking over the program. UT needed to move into the future and the luck of the draw was that we had a rough transition. A lot of teams in the SEC have had that. Alabama floundered for a number of years. UF got zooked before Tebow came along. Georgia had Goff and Donan for a long time.

I still have hope for Dooley. I know the patience is running thin but I'm trying to remember the slack I was willing to cut anyone for taking over the program in the state it was in. Next year will be a different matter. Crockett