Interesting look inside the Dooley era...

[Black Diamond Vol]

http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/outkick-the-coverage/story/derek-dooley-era-at-tennessee-an-oral-history-070615

The whole article is worth a read, but this comment by Chris Low in particular got me to thinking:

When (former Vols offensive coordinator and Duke Head Coach) David Cutcliffe turned down UT, that's when you knew things weren't going well.  Had they gotten back to Cutcliffe that night and said he was their guy, he would still be at UT today.  But UT felt that they had a chance to get some other guys.  Cutcliffe told Hamilton that if he went to bed and didn't hear back, then "Don't consider me."  That morning Cut told Duke that UT would no longer be an issue.

For argument's sake, let's assume the bolded statement is correct (and I personally have my doubts about that).  It's generally accepted among UT fans that Cut has a specific ceiling as an upper tier SEC coach (especially if he had brought Roper and Luke with him, as was reported at the time).  So if we had hired him, and he were still UT's coach, we could have avoided the Dooley years altogether.  But 7-8 win seasons (or maybe 9-10 if he has a rare talent like Eli Manning at QB) is probably the best we could ever have hoped for. 

Likewise, even without any hard evidence to this point, we seem to agree that Butch Jones' ceiling is much higher, especially given the way he has recruited.  So let's assume that he follows the script, takes a big step forward this season, and puts us in championship contention next year. 

So the question is, was it worth it?  If you could go back in time, put yourself in Hamilton's shoes and make that choice again with the benefit of hindsight, would you have hired Cut, avoided the Dooley disaster, and settled for future of Peach Bowls and Belk Bowls?  Or would you have let things play out the way they have?

[Clockwork Orange]

So the question is, was it worth it?  If you could go back in time, put yourself in Hamilton's shoes and make that choice again with the benefit of hindsight, would you have hired Cut, avoided the Dooley disaster, and settled for future of Peach Bowls and Belk Bowls?  Or would you have let things play out the way they have?

I'd have hired Cut, even if it meant him bringing that lousy staff he insisted on keeping together. I think he's a 7-9 win coach at Tennessee, and we'd have been looking at maybe 1-2 SECE titles in the last 6 years. Probably no SEC titles, maybe no BCS bowls, probably no wins over Alabama. But we'd have beaten our East foes several times each and the Tennessee brand would still be intact. I mean, just think about this one nugget: we'd have had either Tajh Boyd or Bryce Petty and maybe both, and that solves the worst problem we had in the last 6 years.

Whoever took his place (and that wouldn't be too far from now . . . I can't imagine he'll coach more than a few more years) would have had a challenge with the roster, I bet, since recruiting would undoubtedly be his weakness. But he'd at least inherit a program that wasn't an embarrassment.

Most of all, think of all of the pain and embarrassment we'd each have been spared.

[BanditVol]

Something like this was my preferred route.  Ease Fulmer out, let an old hand like Cut take over and have a transition that is much less painful, if nothing else.

I am a bit more optimistic than you on what Cut could have accomplished.  You are describing his level of performance at Ole Miss, but when he took over there, they were at a much lower level than UT even when Fulmer left.  And as you point out, he would have kept Boyd which definitely would have helped.  I think he might have gotten to 11 wins once and maybe even won one SECC, but I agree that for the most part we would have been in the 8-9 win category.

What still amazes me is the expectations that some had for getting rid of Fulmer.  There were some, mostly younger and very vocal fans that apparently thought we could jettison Fulmer and just immediately start winning 11-12 games a year.  Saban is often cited in that argument, but Saban is a very unique situation and definitely not the norm.  And my views on his recruiting are well known as well.

The bottom line is that we definitely would have been better off.  I just wonder if he would have kept Chavis. 

[BanditVol]

I managed to read all the way through that. Quite a bit of revelations in there for me.  Such as, Dooley did not enjoy doing media and often avoided it.  Given his "winning the press conference" and quick quips, I would have thought the opposite.  Also I had forgotten that he went 38 days without commenting on the Kentucky loss (or speaking to the media at all!).  There were quite a few other nuggets in there as well.  More than I can comment on now.

I will say this on a "non-Dooley" note.  I knew Kippy Brown was unhappy and left, but I did not know that he had been considered as a one-year interim coach and I also didn't know he was interviewed AFTER Dooley was hired.  No wonder he left!  My God, Hamilton was an even bigger idjut than I thought, which hardly seems possible, but there it is.   

[Creek Walker]

I may have been in the minority, but I favored Dooley over Cutcliffe at the time. (I doubt I was in the minority when it came to not wanting Cutcliffe; I recall that most of us went into panic mode when Hamilton appeared to be zeroing in on him. But I don't think many UT fans actually WANTED Dooley . . . and I'm guessing even fewer would admit it now.) It's too soon for me to say whether the benefit of hindsight changes my mind. Obviously if Butch Jones doesn't pan out, Cutcliffe becomes the hindsight no-brainer in 2010. If Butch proves his worth, then, yes, I think enduring the Dooley era will have been worth it IF the alternative was Cutcliffe still being here and UT still being an also-ran in the SEC. But there are two flies in that ointment: 1.) I'm not sure Cutcliffe would still be here. I think it's more likely that he would've lasted a couple of years, then retired due to fan pressure, in which case our chances of a home-run hire would've been much greater because the program would've been in much greater shape. 2.) Increasingly, I believe that 8-9 wins is probably the new normal in the SEC for a program like Tennessee. If we assume that Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Auburn, Texas A&M and LSU are going to be perennially powerful, and that Arkansas, South Carolina, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Missouri and even Kentucky are going to occasionally have a great season, I think a return to the '90s era of 10-win seasons for years on end is probably unlikely. More likely is probably 8-9 seasons most years with a run at the SEC championship every 3-4 years or so.

[Black Diamond Vol]

I may have been in the minority, but I favored Dooley over Cutcliffe at the time. (I doubt I was in the minority when it came to not wanting Cutcliffe; I recall that most of us went into panic mode when Hamilton appeared to be zeroing in on him. But I don't think many UT fans actually WANTED Dooley . . . and I'm guessing even fewer would admit it now.) It's too soon for me to say whether the benefit of hindsight changes my mind. Obviously if Butch Jones doesn't pan out, Cutcliffe becomes the hindsight no-brainer in 2010. If Butch proves his worth, then, yes, I think enduring the Dooley era will have been worth it IF the alternative was Cutcliffe still being here and UT still being an also-ran in the SEC. But there are two flies in that ointment: 1.) I'm not sure Cutcliffe would still be here. I think it's more likely that he would've lasted a couple of years, then retired due to fan pressure, in which case our chances of a home-run hire would've been much greater because the program would've been in much greater shape. 2.) Increasingly, I believe that 8-9 wins is probably the new normal in the SEC for a program like Tennessee. If we assume that Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Auburn, Texas A&M and LSU are going to be perennially powerful, and that Arkansas, South Carolina, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Missouri and even Kentucky are going to occasionally have a great season, I think a return to the '90s era of 10-win seasons for years on end is probably unlikely. More likely is probably 8-9 seasons most years with a run at the SEC championship every 3-4 years or so.

If given a choice between the two at that time, I would have slightly preferred Cut over Dooley, but I wasn't high on either one.  Of course, I wanted Muschamp more than anyone, so WTH do I know?

[VOLMAN]

my answer and given that situation I would say no I wouldn't have hired Cut. Cut is a much better coach than Dooley but I think in the long run Butch is going to benefit us more than Cut would have. Cut was getting a little long in the tooth and we needed Butch's enthusiasm (like Bruce brought to the BB program) to bring back the energy and excitement to the program which had dwindled away to just a spark under Fulmer and Dooley.   

[volsboy]

What has Butch shown us fans since he has been here? He can recruit.  Other than that he lost to a pathetic UF team last year. Until he wins 10 games don't tell me he is a good coach. A good coach would have beat UF last year with what each team had. I'm still in "show me" mode for Jones. We don't know how this season will play out, but right now, 9 wins should be expected. Only real underdogs preseason are Bama and maybe UGa and Mizzou. What record will be a disappointment to you guys? Anything less than 8-5 will be to me. With the talent he has, will 7-5 put him on the hotseat?

[Tnphil]

What has Butch shown us fans since he has been here? He can recruit.  Other than that he lost to a pathetic UF team last year. Until he wins 10 games don't tell me he is a good coach. A good coach would have beat UF last year with what each team had. I'm still in "show me" mode for Jones. We don't know how this season will play out, but right now, 9 wins should be expected. Only real underdogs preseason are Bama and maybe UGa and Mizzou. What record will be a disappointment to you guys? Anything less than 8-5 will be to me. With the talent he has, will 7-5 put him on the hotseat?

Agree with this^. Butch lost me some after the Florida cluster. Still not completely over that game.

Yes Butch is a good PR person.....yes he can fire up a fan base.....yes he has shown he can recruit with the best of them, so far. He has the talent now and he needs to show me he can coach. 

[murfvol]

This was just a massive reminder I hope Butch is the guy. I predicted he'd be our Jim Donnan, and I'd take that right now. I hate coaching searches.

[VOLMAN]

the Florida loss....we had a terrible offense at that time (OL and QB ring a bell?) and if not for Florida having an equally bad offense we wouldn't have been in the game. I think we'll have better info with which to gauge Butch as a coach after this year and not fully IMO until 2 more years (when we should be on a fairly equal talent level with most teams).   

[BanditVol]

the Florida loss....we had a terrible offense at that time (OL and QB ring a bell?) and if not for Florida having an equally bad offense we wouldn't have been in the game. I think we'll have better info with which to gauge Butch as a coach after this year and not fully IMO until 2 more years (when we should be on a fairly equal talent level with most teams).   

This is also what I think.  We just had not arrived yet, and UF got a lucky break from the refs IIRC.   

[BanditVol]

One thing missing from the discussion of Cut is his recent performance at Duke.  That was not apparent in 2010 but IMO carries a lot of weight now.  Duke had not won more than 2 games in many years and now they actually compete for the title (even if it is the ACC).

I also cannot forget the tremendous difference between 2006-07 when compared with 05 and 08. 

Cut might not have had us at the top tier but we would have been competitive.  I think the problem was that he likely would have been about like Fulmer from 2002-2004 and that was just not good enough for many.  I found our performance during those years (as well as 2006-07) to be at the lower end of what I expect.  Barely acceptable, but still meeting the minimum requirement that we win 9-10 games and occasionally go to the SECC (which did take place in 2007 and 2004).  Would have liked to have won in 2007, but at least we were there.  Have not sniffed that since