In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1603
Online now 317 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.
The first and greatest fear is obvious--that whoever he hires can't win and stinks it up.
But what would be almost as bad? A "good" hire who may eventually win, but engenders as much if not more apathy in the process of building the team. Assume the next guy is NOT a perceived (remember, in the "splash" hire game, perception matters as much if not more than reality) big time hire, and thus the national reaction from the media and recruits is a collective "yawn, more of the same" engendering no buzz whatsoever.
You fired Dooley because, even in a time of financial hardship for the Ath. Dept., he became more of a liability than the "step back" and gamble aspect of a new hire, due to fan apathy and lack of fannies in the Neyland bleachers. So after 5 horrible seasons, by our standards, and now on a new, 4th coach in year 6 who no one knows, is the fan base gonna start donating and ticket buying (and those who do actually showing up), or will they stay away until he starts winning. Will they come back and wait and see if he loses, or will they stay away until, and wait and see, if he wins? At this point, I think most of the fan base is at the latter point: "Yeah, I'm still a VFL; they'll always be my team; and I'll always root for them. But until they, and the new coach, show me something, I'll be rooting for them on the big screen in HD from the comfort of my couch."
Assume further that this new coach wins more than Dooley, but no "signature wins," and still can't be fired b/c he's early in his tenure and IS in fact doing better. Let's say we lose to Oregon, but win three SEC games every year (below .500, but better than CDD). He gets us to a bowl game his first two seasons, but we lose both to perceived inferior conferences. He doesn't lose to Vandy or KY.
After that hypothetical 2 year period, though improved marginally, we'd be more irrelevant than we are now, because we'd be ever further from '98, and our last SECC game appearance in 07.
You can't fire the guy, because we're getting better, but apathy is worse than now, and the athletic dept. is hemorrhaging even more money. That's the nightmare. I am NOT predicting that will happen, just saying that's the nightmare scenario for Dave Hart to avoid. A guy who lost all of his games in year one and was fired by game 8 would be far preferable.
He HAS to get someone who can show some BIG improvement by year 2, or it won't matter whether we fire him and get a new AD. We may be hosed for at least another decade, unless and until we luck out and hire a no-name coach who is the equivalent of catching lightning in a bottle.
All we can do now is and .
We all know this hire is critical. But even that word doesn't convey the seriousness or importance to the program long term of this hire. JMO
This post was edited by doberVol 17 months ago
"Bravely taking to his feet, he beat a very brave retreat." Sir Robin's Minstrels.
I think this is why many of us stayed on the CDD train for so long.
Dead on; it's why my wife and I did, too.
. . . but starting a thread called, "My wife's and my greatest fear" just doesn't have quite the same "sex appeal."
Great post! +1 My greatest fear, too.... I don't see anyone we've talked about as a new coach that's gonna come in here and make a huge difference (other than the G-man).
and even the G-man will have some real challenges out of the gate. If the Gruden hire actually becomes a reality (and who the heck knows!), there's little doubt that he & his staff should provide a real jumpstart to recruiting. Translating that into results on the field is a whole other Q. Just hope everyone manages expectations yrs 1&2.
Sorry, I'll stop there...cart's way in front of the horse guys!
Pulling the boys tonight...Go Vols.
+1. Your post was great and on point. However, fear of not getting a home run hire shouldn't preclude a change when the coach you have doesn't appear capable of being a single. If Dooley's background and resume said more than it does, I'd be with you. But his resume, no coordinator (successful or otherwise) experience (recruiting coordinator doesn't count) and a losing record at a mid-major doesn't really differ from the results we've witnessed here at UT. So you have to do something, even if it means you get someone who's had success coordinating and more success as a head coach, who may not unite the fanbase- not a big enough name (Strong, Cut, Mullen, Patterson, for instance). Because atleast you have a chance that the new guy actually knows how to build, coach, organize, and motivate a winning team. You have a better comfort level with his ability to recognize and hire competent coordinators and position coaches. He's been in pressure situations before and has not only managed to get the right personel in the game, but after the substitution, 11 men are on the field for the important play, which succeeds. Just my two cents, but homerun hire or not you have to do better than having Dooley as your coach going into next year..
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by DCVolunteer 17 months ago
I sure bet Kiffie is wishing he kept his "rock star" status at Tennessee right now.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports