In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1342
Online now 1531 Record: 6475 (12/7/2012)
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Thought: if Tenn had stuck with Fulmer and Clawson how different would we be?...the guy is winning, has a good offensive, and chief would still be here as DC. If we make a change (again) it is critical that all the pieces be in place prior to making that change. We made a change based on 1st year performance before. If we knew then, what we know now, would we still want that change to happen?
I'll buy the Fulmer part; not the Clawson part. Clawson did not make any adjustments to the personnel he had at the time. He was not a good OC. Fulmer should never have hired him. UT did not have the personnel to run that offense. It cost Fulmer his job. Clawson is not winning in the SEC - which is totally different from the MAC or any other conference.
I listened to Swain's interview with Crompton, and it sounds like that offense was going to be a mess from the get go. I remember the whole offensive line flipping thing (which was crazy), but they did the same thing with the holes by flipping them based on strong side, weak side. Crazy stuff. You've got to have pretty smart kids wo have been in the system for a while to handle that. Completely goes against everything you're taught as a kid. I just don't think it ever would've worked here.
Interesting point OP, and I somewhat agree with you if the parallel is with Sal. It would not surprise me to see Sal go to a smaller school, get a comfortable 3 years to install his system, and then have a very good and very aggressive defense. I think college coaches often fail to consider how busy student athletes are and the time restrictions really hurts them when they bring in something new.
I agree. I think Clawson's offense would have looked much better at UT if he'd of had 3 years to install and I think Sal's defense will look much better if he's given 3 years to install.
If we can maintain our offensive production long enough for the defense to learn what they're suppose to do, we should be able to win some big games and recruit well enough to compete on a yearly basis.
One big difference. Clawson had installed and been very successful with his system, albeit at FCS Richmond, prior to coming to UT. I'm not sure that Sunseri was successful as a D-coordinator at Illinois State or Alabama State. You can't overlook past performance, which is not only an indicator of future success, but essential to giving fans something tangible to rely upon if initially things go south, as they are now. As a fan you want to be able to know that the coach or coordinator or position coach, etc has been successful at their job before, giving you basis for hope that they can do it again.
I though i had heard that Fulmer restricted Clawson some as well? Indicating that he could have done more. Maybe that was a good thing though, based on what I'm hearing as far as that offense being complicated.
I'm doing my best to bring a positive feel to the board today. No doubt Sal is a mystery.. but it's basically impossible for our defense to not improve from what it is now. I'll leave it at that and give you a +1
This post was edited by volfan28 17 months ago
I 100% agree with you and I think the biggest lesson from Sal (hint hint Kirby Smart) is that being in the Saban system is not an equal equivalent to past success. If Sal has ran a great defense at Illinois for example the last few years, I think the fanbase would feel much better about the defense than they do now.My only point is that some systems take time to install, but there is no telling if the end product with Sal will be worth it.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports