New Poll Question: Who’s to blame for 2005?
John Adams’ Monday column — Sanders: Fall guy still is Vol guy — has generated a lot of discussion on Rocky Top over the last couple of days. The argument provoking excerpt:
Imagine how Sanders felt when he heard UT football coach Phillip Fulmer’s comments about last spring practice. Every time Fulmer praised new offensive coordinator, he buried his former offensive coordinator by implication.
“David has improved the toughness of our team,” Fulmer said in the spring. “We’re fundamentally better. He has been very demanding of tempo and execution.
“The daily practice habits improved. Not that we were practicing poorly, but not the cross-your-t’s-and-dot-your-i’s extent that we are now.”
It’s as though in his departure, Sanders was given power and responsibility he never realized he had as an offensive coordinator and quarterbacks coach.
“I have heard (Fulmer’s comments),” Sanders said. “I’m not going to get into a debate or discussion over that. There were a few things I would have liked to have done differently that we weren’t necessarily allowed to do differently. For this to come out as such does bother me some.”
The talk has centered around whether Fulmer or Sanders is most to blame for the 2005 season. On the one hand, as the offensive coordinator, Sanders was responsible for the offensive woes. Fulmer had delegated this responsibility and Sanders had failed. On the other hand, word is that Fulmer may have delegated the responsibility for the offense to Sanders without actually giving him sufficient authority. In other words, Sanders could only do what Fulmer wanted him to do, and so the onus is on Fulmer.
Me? I think it’s probably a little bit of both and a little bit of neither. A lot of little things were allowed to slide by both Fulmer and Sanders, and by the time they realized the magnitude of the problem, the situation had veered out of control so far that no one could regain traction. Fulmer’s comments about recent practices being better in a multitude of ways has some to do with new OC Cutcliffe, but probably more to do with the attitude adjustment of everyone from the head coach to the water boy resulting from the horribly disappointing season.
What do y’all think?
July 27th, 2006 at 12:09 am
This was talked about on Bill King’s show yesterday. Sanders was never
qualified to be the OC. Whoever promoted him is at fault there. Fulmer?
As for Fulmer not letting Sanders have enough control…
Fulmer probably didnt trust Sanders enough like he does Cut. That all goes
back to Sanders not being qualified. Fulmer waited to long to get rid of
Sanders after he realized that Sanders wasnt qualified to be the OC. When
it comes down to it I think more blame falls on Fulmer. Sanders is a bad
OC but it’s not his fault he was promoted to the position.
July 27th, 2006 at 12:39 am
The bottom line is that there are several factors that contributed to last years debacle. You can point the finger at the coaching staff from the head coach down to the position coaches. Coaching keeps players from fumbling balls they normally do not fumble. Coaching helps players who are normally sure handed, remain that way. However, some players just aren’t coachable and no matter what you do, they are their own individuals and things will go in one ear and out the other. AFor every point we were away from being an 8 or 9 win team, we were the same amount of points away from being a 2 or 3 win team. Coach FUlmer probably deserves the majority of the blame because he is indeed the head coach. When you listen to assistant coaches speak of him, they praise him. It isn’t from a lack of effort on his part as far as motivation goes. Anyone who thinks it’s a situation such as lack of motivation, relying too much on “talent” to win games, or anything of that sort, obviously hasn’t followed Phil Fulmer’s career. No one expects Robert Meachem and Chris Hannon to drop easy touchdown passes. No one expects Corey Anderson to fumble on a hit inside the five yard line. No one expected Erik Ainge to have a meltdown. After the Cotton Bowl, EVERYONE expected huge things from the Vols last year and rightfully so. If the fans, the administration, boosters, writers, and fellow coaches assume that you’re going to be a top team, why aren’t players allowed to expect the same thing without working just a little bit harder? Do you honestly think that USC went into every ofseason and week working as hard as they did 5 years ago? No, I don’t believe so. Tennessee is no different than any other top program. A season where you were predicted to finish 4rd in your own division ends up with a championship game and a big bowl win, followed by a top ranked recruiting class, it’s easy to get over confident. Everyone needs to calm down and realize that Tennessee is still Tennessee and Rocky Top has been on or near the top for a long time now. A year or two of misfortune, bad coaching, a bad crop of players, or a difficult schedule is part of it. Winning at the pace the Vols have been winning for the past decade is extremely difficult and a dream for the vast majority of schools across the nation. Let’s not forget who we are and why we’re Tennessee. It’s time for the finger pointing and questions to take a backseat to more positive views towards the upcoming season. A win over California, who will be a consensus Top 15 team, will make everyone forget about last year and focus on what we could accomplish this year.
July 27th, 2006 at 9:42 am
Fulmer micromanages too much. He did the same thing when
Cutcliffe was OC. We have all heard the story about
Fulmer in the 98 Arkansas game, taking the head set away.
Fulmer is the head of the ship. When a ship sinks, it is
the captains fault.