VTTW Board Index

We had a discussion a couple of weeks ago on Phil Fulmer's involvement, or heavy thumb if you will, on Randy Sanders and other coaches and not allowing them to coach.  This was posted on another forum by a poster who was actually there and close to the program at the time.  I found it interesting, and another confirm on several of the things I have been told both at the time and later that were problems within the coaching staff:

    Softy pretty much nailed it. Phildo interfered with Trooper recruiting, interfered with Randyman as OC, and TOTALLY interfered with Greg as OLine coach. When coaching tight ends and as recruiting coordinator, Greg shined. After he took over for Billy Ray or whoever as OLine coach, he didn't smile nearly as much. CPF would- on the practice field- undercut Greg's instructions to the players. I watched several practices where AdMan was almost a fifth wheel as CPF overrode his instructions. If you remember the big off tackle runs during the SECCG against Auburn- one I think by Ced Houston, the other by Gerald Riggs? One was cheaply called back and the other was a TD? That was an old Marshall play which Greg put into the game plan with great results. Phildo took credit for noting the tendencies of Aubie on the old game filmum. Greg told me before the game to watch for this play.

    Things peaked during the Clawfense experiment. Greg was not keen on the "strong side, quick side" concept or whatever it was called. But he soldiered on and taught it to the OL. He felt that that was not the year to teach an entirely different concept- he knew that Vol fan's patience was at an end. He was very upset that CPF didn't go for an entire game without reverting back to his old terminology/ scheme against UCLA.

    Greg is a VERY loyal dude. Probably too loyal. If you remember- before his first season at UT, he was quoted by a golf buddy,Georgia fan that he thought UGA under Donnan was bad, but "The inmates ran the asylum at UT." He was very embarrassed by that- although he did say it. I think he overcompensated for this while at UT. I know him through three different friends and got to know him very well while he was at UT. I still stay in contact with him. I would not be surprised if he's not a Monvolian- he certainly agreed with us about most everything, but was too loyal to rock the boat.

   


*** Note: The original subject of the thread was former UT offensive line coach Greg Adkins being hired by Doug Marrone as the OL coach of the Buffalo Bills. 

Fulmer may have micromanaged but I saw the best years of UT Football under his watch.

I don't think he did that Cutcliffe. I think the micromanage part started after he left.

Apprciate you sharing that 101st.  I do take anonymous posts on message boards with a huge grain of salt though.  Seen Gruden in orange lately?   :naughty:

But assuming we take it at face value, whether Fulmer was heavily involved with Sanders or not does not affect my opinion of Sanders.  If Phil was heavily involved, then maybe it was because Sanders could not hack it.  At the end of the day "the HC micro-managed me" is just an excuse.  If you are the OC, the performance of the offense is your responsibility.  If the HC is micro-managing, then get the hell out and find one that doesn't. 

As for the rest of that, if Phil had been really hands-off, people would have criticized him for that also. 

One thing about that I am happy to see is the criticism of the switching around of the OL.  That simply didn't make sense to me. I have heard that some high schools do it though.   :naughty:

I can guarantee, one thing that will not convince me of any anti Fulmer sentiment is some random poster from Outermonvolia.

OTOH, maybe this guy has the same sources as Basilio.   :dielaughing:

Fulmer had many faults, and his firing was more than justified.  But if he meddled in Trooper's recruiting, then he probably kept us from some pretty devastating NCAA sanctions.  So I'll give him a pass on that one. :dunno:

Keep shooting that messenger, Vinnie.   :rolleyes:

That particular person was actually a UTAD employee for a good number of years, including during that period of time. 

Honestly, I bring up Fulmer's heavyhandedness (or, at least, perceived heavyhandedness) because I think Sanders and Clawson get a bum rap and it isn't fair to them.

But I'm not too interested in rehashing every fault that Fulmer ever had because, at the end of the day, I can't forget the 1990s. And holy smokes those were glorious times.

You are correct.  The 90s were the good ole days of Tennessee football.  

I've said all along that Fulmer's first 10 years were about as good as it gets, but his last 6 were a steady downhill slide.  I don't see how that can even be realistically denied.  

I may have said this in an earlier thread, but a while back Hyams and crew on Sportstalk were talking about Fulmer and stated that his best success was during the years that Cutcliff was the OC. When He was the OC Fulmer won a bit better than 80% of his games, without Cutcliff in the mix he won a shade over 60%. From my own personal obsrevations Fulmer had two horrible years without Cut one being with Clawson as the OC, but when Cut came back the next two years were very good years. Then again with Cut out of the loop Tennessee went down the tubes.

Cut brought discipline to the offense.  That perhaps was Sanders' biggest shortfall while on the Hill.  You did it Cut's way or your game viewing position was rather close to the hedges.
One can talk about micromanage this or that but Fulmer neded his coordiantors to lead the discipline for their respective sides.

Discipline from the coordinators and recruiting from the other assistants. Subpar recruiting is what will keep Cut and his staff from having great success, and it's half of the decline of UT football. Recruiting gradually decayed and I would argue that those years when Cut came back were still a mere shadow of what UT was in the 90s because the talent was not up to snuff.

Fulmer was an average coach himself but concocted a magic elixir with the staff he assembled in the 90s. The minute the staff started to come apart, UT football started to decline. Losing both the recruiters and Cut led to its ultimate failure.

Did it decay or did we have a few high ranked classes go bust? 

I think the two are related and that both happened.

One thing missing from this discussion, and every discussion of the issue of the whys and wherefores of UT's decline.  People say Fulmer lost it and also did not recruit as well.  Both are certainly true, though I don't think our recruiting fell nearly as much as many seem to think.  We had three top five recruiting classes in Fulmer's last 6 years.  Making the top 5 half the time is pretty good.

But to my point, what is missing is  that the rest of the league improved tremendously during this time period.  First Richt turned uga back into a top program, then Saban rebuilt LSU, something that likely cost us two SEC championships.  Then Urban rebuilt Florida from the Zook days and finally Saban brought Alabama their current success.  Oh and let's not forget SOS continuing what Lou Holtz started at USCe, and even Tuberville's work at Auburn, which hurt us in the years we played them.

Did Phil slip a notch?  Undoubtedly, and I suppose recruiting also suffered some.  But you can't just ignore the huge improvement in the rest of the league.  The SEC OOC record and 7 consecutive BCS championships do not lie.

I take huge exception to this statement.  The number and lack of high picks of NFL draftees from Fulmer's last 4 or 5 classes prove the point that recruiting fell off drastically.  Fulmer and his staff got lazy and started recruiting by Rivals and Scout star numbers instead of doing what they did best for the earlier years, which was evaluate and work recruits that actually could play and fit the UT schemes.  It's not rocket science, Bandit.  Those numbers tell the tale. 

Is this your opinion or do you know this as fact? 

That came from more than one person very close to the situation, including a member of the coaching staff during Fulmers last couple of years.  

Not sure where you are getting your information.  Tennessee drafted well throughout the Fulmer era.  In fact, if anything, it might be an indictment of him that he didn't do more with the talent he had.  It's an interesting question though, because this year's class of fifth-year seniors was the last recruited by Fulmer.  Which means that anyone in the NFL now, with the exception of early departures last year and in 2011, was recruited by Fulmer! LOL.  So you can say that all these guys in this list were recruited by Fulmer after 2001, with the exception of Peyton.

http://www.utsports.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/vols-nfl.html

And I never said that recruiting didn't nosedive a bit.  Just not as much as some would have it.  We didn't just completely suck at it in Fulmer's final years. 

But more to the point 101st, whatever you or anyone thinks about recruiting, the rest of the league has improved.  Tremendously.  And that is definitely a factor in our decline under Phil....

Hello McFly - look at the draft picks from Fulmer's last 4 or 5 recruiting classes. 

Fess up - you really didn't read what I posted, did you? 

Yes, it has, and whether you meant to or not you just admitted that Fulmer's best years were in a weaker SEC. 

I have no problem with that at all.  The SEC was weaker in the 90s, period, dot.    The respective destructions of UT and UF by Nebraska prove that.  I doubt the Tom Osbourne teams of the mid-90s could get it done today, but ICBW.

Saying the SEC has improved considerably is not rocket science either, BTW.  It's pretty freaking obvious.   :naughty: