VTTW Board Index

Regarding Dooley and the 2012 season, what does he have to do to stay?  Or, would he stay regardless of record? I'm trying to get a sense of how tolerant the Vol nation will be of Dooley this year.  What is the magic win number for you: 7? 8? 9? Greater?

I think SEC teams differ slightly in how much they are willing to put with from their football coaches.  The KYs, Vandys and Ole Miss' would be willing to put up with more mediocrity than, say, the LSUs, bammers and Gators.  Just trying to figure out where UT fits on that scale right now.  For us (Auburn), I think we are somewhere in the middle.  If Chizik cranks out more than 2 mediocre seasons (mediocre being defined as 7-9 wins with a lower level bowl win), Tiger fans will get restless.

Oh, and are y'all still having the VTTW summer get together?  Or did that fizzle out?  I want another chance to see if I can out eat the bossman, and tell Clocky and Jethro how much fun I have watching them in the VS Lounge.

For me, the magic number is 9 wins.  But I think 8 would be enough to save his job.

8-9 Florida is a must win to me because they are minus the best two defensive players they have. It's at and they are about even on paper I think.

GO VOLS!   :powert:

Yup... If we lose to UF I'm done with Dooley.

IMO he is safe if he wins 8. I expect him to win 9 this year, but I wouldn't be for firing him if we wins 8. I wouldn't feel very good about him with less than 8 wins this year.

So it would come down to one game? This surprises me a little.  What about the scenario that Dooley gets 9 wins, but looses to the Gators?

I'm egging you on a bit, but just curious about your stance.

By the way, how's the boy?

A lot of people tell me I'm asking too much at 9 wins.  But when you break down our schedule, I don't think so.  Out of conference, we have NC State and three tomato cans.  That's 4 games that we should win.  In conference, we have UK, MSU, and Vandy- 3 more that we should win for a total of 7.  Which means that to get to 9, we would have to win 2 of the following:

UF- They're as vulnerable as they've been since Zook was there, and we get them at home.  We'd better win that one, or it gets ugly for Dooley very early.

Bama- They won't be as dominant as last season, and we get them at home.  Still, this is a probable loss.

Mizzou- I honestly don't know much about them.  Maybe they belong in the other group, but I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and put them here.

UGA- They weren't nearly as good as their record indicated last year (thanks to a cakewalk of an SEC schedule).  If we were healthy when we played them, it might've been a different game.

USC- See UGA.

We return 20 starters, folks.  20!  It wasn't that long ago that we would be talking national titles with that many guys coming back.  For the first time in several years, we have talent, experience, and depth.  We recruited some bonafide run-stoppers, so hopefully opponents won't be able to grind us down in the 2nd half (seriously, our 2nd half T.O.P. last year had to be among the worst in CFB history).  The schedule is as easy as any SEC team not named UGA has a right to expect. This is the year we've all been pointing to since Fulmer was fired.  No more excuses.  It's time to demand more.  

At the risk of beating a dead horse, I still don't understand the "must-win" logic behind the UF game. What if UT loses to UF and goes undefeated the rest of the way? What if we lose to UF and beat Bama?

As for the question, I side with the majority: I think if UT wins fewer than 8, Dooley is in big, big trouble. I expect 9.

That would be fine- I just want 9 wins, by hook or by crook.  My only observation is that with the UF game coming so early, and us riding a 7 game losing streak against them, the pressure on Dooley and the noise in the system will ratchet up exponentially if he loses that one.  And if that happens, I don't know that Dooley would be very effective the rest of the year.  He hasn't demonstrated that he's a guy who responds well to adversity.

 

This.  If we lose to UF, the noise will reach a fever pitch and most of the fan base will be lost IMO.  I have friends and family, typically level headed folks, who are already done with him.  I am teetering on the edge, and losing to UF again this year, considering all circumstances, will push me fully into "Dooley is NOT the guy" mode.

Dooley will likely then become more and more snarky in interviews, in turn further alienating the fan base and increasing the pressure on himself.  I think it will snowball out of control at that point.  Dooley hasn't accomplished anything, so keep in mind he has no equity built up.  I just think the noise will be too much.

If by some miracle we still manage 9 wins then I will be ok.  But that is quite a stretch for me to envision.

Our boy is fantastic.  It's been the best time our lives, just amazing.  Thanks for asking.  :wave:

BDV, about Missouri, they're pretty much going to be the only team in the SEC that runs that wide open spread offense. They have a good QB, but they return the least amount of players overall in the entire SEC. They also won't have a very good defense.

When I think of them, I think Cincinnati 2011. I think they can score with their offense, but won't be able to handle our QB/WR combo.

Good analogy IMO

I think we have to win 7 for him to keep his job, but less than 8 wins with the ugly last couple of seasons and Dooley will lose the fan base.  We(should) have enough talent and depth to win 8 games. 

 :powert:

I think Dooley has to win at least 8 to keep the wolves at bay. That being said, I'm not sure he'll get there. Looking at the schedule, I see 4, hopefully, highly probably wins: GSU, Akron, Troy and UK (Surely to goodness we won't lose to them two years in a row, especially since we play them at home), 3 probable losses: Bama, UGA, and USC (with the latter two being on the road, it will be a tough task to beat them IMO), and a bunch of tossups. Of the remaining 5 games, all those opponents had better records than us last year, two of them are on the road (MSU and Vandy) and one (NCState) is on a neutral field where we haven't had much success lately. Mizzou and UF at home are no sure things either IMO. After last season, I don't see how anyone can go down the schedule and say,"Yep, we're going to win that one, no doubt."

So to get to 8, we'd have to win 4 out of 5 of these games that I consider tossups. Can we do it? I hope so. I might sound overly pessimistic, but I'm in a "show me" kind of attitude. After the UK debacle, I'm not going to get overhyped about the season. We should be improved, we should be competitive in all the games with the probable exception of Bama, and even that should be more competitive than last year, when we got blown out in the second half.

IMO, it all comes down to the OL. Hopefully they will finally gel and be a reliable strength, instead of a glaring weakness. If they can block better in the running game enough to keep defenses honest, then the offense should be more consistent and hopefully help win the TOP battle, therefore keeping the D fresher. Better pass blocking to help keep Bray healthy wouldn't hurt either.

The kicking game also needs to get much better.

I think you're misreading my post.  I'm not "overhyped" for this coming season- far from it.  All I'm saying is that with what we have coming back against this schedule, we should expect 9 wins, if not more.  Do I think we'll actually get there?  No, not based on what I saw last year.  I anticipate about 6-7 wins, and yet another new coach next year.  But for now, I'm still onboard with Dooley.  Nine wins is what it will take for me to stay there.  

Looking at last year if Hunter doesn't go down I think we have awhile different story on our hands right now. I mean Him and Brat were on what seemed to be a record pace last year. If we stay healthy and get alittle run support we should atleast be competitive this year.

GO VOLS!  :powert:

We have great reasons to be optimistic and great reasons to be pessimistic. 

To be  optimists, we can note the 20 returning starters and easy schedule.

To be pessimists, we can note that these same players sucked last year and Dooley is still the coach.

We can offset the players sucking by noting that 3 of our best were out most of last year.

So it really will come down to the coaching.  We can only wait and see what happens.

I completely lost confidence in Dooley last season. I'm still rooting for him (though to be honest if I had been granted one football wish he would've probably been canned at the end of last season) and hope he can turn it around and remain the coach here for a long time to come. In the SEC, you are seldom going to get an easier schedule than the one we have this year. Frankly, I see no reason why this team should NOT win 8 or 9 games, but I don't really hold out much hope for that happening. Another thing to take into consideration is the fact that our coaching staff this year isn't as good as our coaching staff last year. I'm excited by the Graham hire, but the rest of the hires left me saying "meh." Losing Wilcox was a big blow.

Nine is my number. He'll be safe with 8. He's in way over his head and I'll continue to believe that until he shows otherwise.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Unless we implode again I think Dooley gets another year regardless. We should be better. We have more depth at some positions but at others like lb, dl & wr we are thin either with talent or numbers.

Our 1st 22 should be as good as anyone else. The problem is after that. We are deeper than we have been for sure but a lot of depth is still freshmen,
 rs freshman or sophomores. A few of those are expected but we still rely on too many even for backups.

All that said I see no reason we can't win 8 or 9.

If any of our peer schools in the SEC returned as many guys as we do, their fanbases would be demanding a lot more than 9 wins.  And these aren't scrubs, either- for the most part, they're 4* and 5* guys, and for the most part, they're Dooley's recruits.  Maybe we have a few stray depth issues at a few positions, but unless you oversign every year like Bama, every school is going to have some depth issues. 

I don't think 9 wins is asking too much.  It's time to stop talking about improving, and just improve already.

thin at wr?  really?  I can see that we lack some depth, but with hunter and rogers out in front it's hard to see for me.  Throw in some talented younger players and we have depth imo, and we definitely have that.  I

I agree about the dl...probably our weakest link, but I am more concerned about db than lb.   We have two young talents at lb and Lathers returning...depth again is a concern but we at least have bodies to throw in there.  As I scan the list of dbs, I only see two starters I have any confidence in, and not a single backup that impresses me.  Much more concerned about them....

Perhaps thin with proven depth is a better description. Of course if we have a run game this year we could  better absorb an injury at wr without the offense grinding to a halt.

The offense has potential to be dynamic and that will cover up a lot of defensive issues with depth. We could look a lot like Arky the past couple years. 

We're pretty thin at WR man. Remember Hunter is coming off a knee injury, and Da'rick has had off the field issues. Patterson is not on campus yet, and will have about 2 months to get ready. He is supposed to be a physical freak so I have high expectations, but he has never played a down in the SEC. Behind those guys we have no one that's proven a thing.

This is true. Hunter, Rogers and Patterson have the potential to be a hell of a dynamic receiving trio...maybe the best receiving corps in the SEC. But there's no depth behind them, and there are issues with all three of them that could prevent them from living up to potential.

I think we'll be fine at WR.  Besides the big 3, we have Dallas and Z. Rodgers returning, and Bowles, Croom, and Howard are as good a group of freshmen as anyone signed last year.  I especially look for Croom to contribute early and often.

I'm not counting the head case or injury thing as "thiness" though maybe I should.  The fact that we have two well established starters that will likely play on Sunday to me means depth.  It's true there is not much behind them, (and I think Dallas(?) is gone?), but surely there are a couple young guys we can plug in and Zac Rogers at least has experience.

So if Dallas is back (I thought he got in trouble?) then he also provides some veteran depth.  Granted he didn't do as much last year as I thought he would, but without Hunter and particularly without Bray, he did well enough.  With Dallas, Z Rogers and with Patterson coming in, I say we have enough depth...not a lot, but enough.

Dallas didn't get in any trouble- you may be thinking of Arnett, who transferred out.  Dallas didn't do a whole lot last year, but I wasn't expecting much from him as a freshman anyway.  If Hunter hadn't gotten hurt, he probably would've redshirted.  This season, he'll have a year of experience and a year in weightroom under his belt, so hopefully he'll be ready to contribute some more. 

Yes I was thinking of Arnett. 

To continue this line of thought a bit, even factoring in Rodgers possible attitude problem and Hunter's knee, I am far more worried about our depth at RB than I am WR, which is why I was a little puzzled that IV singled out the WRs.

As far as I am concerned, until proven otherwise, we have ZERO depth at RB, and I mean that literally.  I mean, pencil in a ZERO at that position.  If we crack the top 80 in rush yards, I will change my tune, but not until then.

Compared to RB, we are fat dumb and happy at WR.