Next Man Up - Butch Jones out @ Tennessee

[FfldCntyFan]

The comments some on this board make on schools like Nebraska and Tennessee make me wonder what they think we could possibly ever accomplish in football (if those schools are destined to be second division programs in P-5 conferences we can never do anything in a G-5 conference).

I also view the comments as evidence of how little much of our fan base knows about college football. The same comments could have been made a dozen years ago about Alabama. The reality is any school with fan bases like Nebraska or Tennessee is no more than one good hire and a couple recruiting classes away from being a power.

 

[UConnJim]

The comments some on this board make on schools like Nebraska and Tennessee make me wonder what they think we could possibly ever accomplish in football (if those schools are destined to be second division programs in P-5 conferences we can never do anything in a G-5 conference).

I also view the comments as evidence of how little much of our fan base knows about college football. The same comments could have been made a dozen years ago about Alabama. The reality is any school with fan bases like Nebraska or Tennessee is no more than one good hire and a couple recruiting classes away from being a power.

But, finding and hiring the right guy is extremely difficult. And, expectations at both Tennessee and Nebraska are out of whack.

Think about this. Nebraska's all time winning percentage is 0.696. They fired Frank Solich after 6 years despite 3 top 10 finishes and 5 top 20 finishes in 6 years and a 0.753 winning percentage. Bo Pelini was fired after 6 top 25 finishes in 7 years, 4 conference division championships, and a 0.710 winning percentage.

As for Tennessee, they have a very difficult schedule as they play Florida, Georgia, and Alabama every year. Combined, those 3 schools have won 16 out of the last 25 SEC titles. Jones record against the 3 schools? 3-12. Dooley's record? 0-9. Kiffin's record? 1-2. Even Fulmer who had great success at Tennessee? 25-23. In the past 25 years, Tennessee has gone 3-0 against their rivals twice. They have 2 SEC championships in the past 25 years with the last almost 20 years ago and Fulmer coached for 10 years after his last SEC championship.

Tennessee has great fan support and Neyland Stadium is a great place to see a game, but it is a very tough place to win SEC championships.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

UConnJim,

I don't believe the fan expectations for football at Nebraska & Tennessee are any more"out of whack" than our expectations for our men's basketball program. I will go so far as to argue that the two football programs in question would never have deteriorating fan support a few years after a national championship similar to what we are experiencing, regardless of who the opponents would be.

Yes, it is very difficult to find the right coach. Look at how many years Alabama was an afterthought. The same could have been said about Southern Cal before Carroll (and it may be time to say since Carroll) and unlike the schools mentioned, USC has a very fickle fan base (they support the school when a national title is possible but it's hit or miss outside of that).

 

[ZooCougar]

There is really no reason for Tennessee to be this bad. They have access to tons of talent. If Ohio State can be good then so can Tennessee.

They just need a bigtime coach like a Les Miles to guide the ship.

 

[UConnDan97]

UConnJim,

I don't believe the fan expectations for football at Nebraska & Tennessee are any more"out of whack" than our expectations for our men's basketball program. I will go so far as to argue that the two football programs in question would never have deteriorating fan support a few years after a national championship similar to what we are experiencing, regardless of who the opponents would be.

Yes, it is very difficult to find the right coach. Look at how many years Alabama was an afterthought. The same could have been said about Southern Cal before Carroll (and it may be time to say since Carroll) and unlike the schools mentioned, USC has a very fickle fan base (they support the school when a national title is possible but it's hit or miss outside of that).

What you're saying has some truth to it; the fact that the right coach and the right recruits could lead to the right outcome. And I've argued that point to death in this thread as it pertains to Tennessee.

But keep this in mind; for all of the financial resources and institutional advantages that Notre Dame has, they haven't won the championship since 1988. Thirty years without a championship, paying the top dollar to coaches and getting the top recruits in the country. Thirty years. Their own tv contract with NBC. Freedom to schedule whomever the heck they want. Thirty years.

The point I'm trying to make is this; you can be successful in football. You can be EXTREMELY successful in football. But winning it all is ridiculously tough (somehow Alabama has won 4 of the last 8 though). Even more so than basketball, where one player can dominate and change the entire outcome (place Carmelo Anthony right here ___). Extremely extremely hard, even with the best coaches (i.e., Harbaugh with Don Brown) and the best recruiting.

Expecting 10-2 every year? Doable at many of these schools. Expecting championships? Go find a different hobby...

 

[UConnJim]

What you're saying has some truth to it; the fact that the right coach and the right recruits could lead to the right outcome. And I've argued that point to death in this thread as it pertains to Tennessee.

But keep this in mind; for all of the financial resources and institutional advantages that Notre Dame has, they haven't won the championship since 1988. Thirty years without a championship, paying the top dollar to coaches and getting the top recruits in the country. Thirty years. Their own tv contract with NBC. Freedom to schedule whomever the heck they want. Thirty years.

The point I'm trying to make is this; you can be successful in football. You can be EXTREMELY successful in football. But winning it all is ridiculously tough (somehow Alabama has won 4 of the last 8 though). Even more so than basketball, where one player can dominate and change the entire outcome (place Carmelo Anthony right here ___). Extremely extremely hard, even with the best coaches (i.e., Harbaugh with Don Brown) and the best recruiting.

Expecting 10-2 every year? Doable at many of these schools. Expecting championships? Go find a different hobby...

This will be my last comment.

10-2 every year? Over the last 5 years, only 2 schools have had 2 or less losses every year including bowls, Alabama and Ohio St. And there are only 6 schools that have had 2 or fewer losses in at least 3 out of the last 5 years: Clemson, Oklahoma, Oregon, and FSU. One 2 or fewer loss seasons in the past 5 years include: Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, and ND, and all of them have had coaches fired in the past 5 years (Florida, Georgia, Michigan) or the coach has been on an incredibly hot seat (Auburn and ND).

I think you have to look at each team's competition to judge how many wins are possible each year. I think in the Big 10 West, going 10-3 every year is possible for a school as the division is pretty weak. In the SEC East, I think going 10-3 every year is not likely. It looks like only 1 or 2 teams per conference can consistently have 2 or 3 losses every season.

Bottomline is that expectations are too high for all of the top schools which is why they go through so many coaches.

 

[UConnDan97]

This will be my last comment.

10-2 every year? Over the last 5 years, only 2 schools have had 2 or less losses every year including bowls, Alabama and Ohio St. And there are only 6 schools that have had 2 or fewer losses in at least 3 out of the last 5 years: Clemson, Oklahoma, Oregon, and FSU. One 2 or fewer loss seasons in the past 5 years include: Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, and ND, and all of them have had coaches fired in the past 5 years (Florida, Georgia, Michigan) or the coach has been on an incredibly hot seat (Auburn and ND).

I think you have to look at each team's competition to judge how many wins are possible each year. I think in the Big 10 West, going 10-3 every year is possible for a school as the division is pretty weak. In the SEC East, I think going 10-3 every year is not likely. It looks like only 1 or 2 teams per conference can consistently have 2 or 3 losses every season.

Bottomline is that expectations are too high for all of the top schools which is why they go through so many coaches.

Holy wow, man.

By "10-2 every year", what I mean is something like 11-1, 10-2, 9-3, where the average is about 10-2. Some years are a little better or a little worse than others. I mean, hell, Butch Jones just got fired because he went 9-4 each of the last two years and won his bowl games...

 

[UConnJim]

Holy wow, man.

By "10-2 every year", what I mean is something like 11-1, 10-2, 9-3, where the average is about 10-2. Some years are a little better or a little worse than others. I mean, hell, Butch Jones just got fired because he went 9-4 each of the last two years and won his bowl games...

OK. One last message .

Over the past 5 years, not including this year, only 4 schools have averaged 2 or less losses per season: Ohio St., Alabama, Clemson, and Florida St. (and after this year, FSU will fall off the list.) There are only 2 schools that averaged 3 losses per year: Oklahoma and Stanford. So, 6 schools average 3 losses or less per season over the past 5 years, but there are another 15+ schools that think they should average 3 or fewer losses per year: Oregon, USC, Washington, UCLA, Michigan, Penn St., Nebraska, Wisconsin, Texas, Miami, Virginia Tech, Texas A&M, LSU, Auburn, Tennessee, Georgia, and Florida. Mathematically, it can't happen and there will be a lot of disappointed fan bases. (Side note: The other powers in the SEC: Georgia 3.6 losses per year, LSU 3.6 losses per year, Texas A&M 4.2 losses per year, Florida 4.6 losses per year, Auburn 5.4 losses per year, Tennessee 5.6 losses per year.)

End of the day, the expectations of college football fans are out of whack relative to what is possible.

 

[UConnDan97]

OK. One last message .

Over the past 5 years, not including this year, only 4 schools have averaged 2 or less losses per season: Ohio St., Alabama, Clemson, and Florida St. (and after this year, FSU will fall off the list.) There are only 2 schools that averaged 3 losses per year: Oklahoma and Stanford. So, 6 schools average 3 losses or less per season over the past 5 years, but there are another 15+ schools that think they should average 3 or fewer losses per year: Oregon, USC, Washington, UCLA, Michigan, Penn St., Nebraska, Wisconsin, Texas, Miami, Virginia Tech, Texas A&M, LSU, Auburn, Tennessee, Georgia, and Florida. Mathematically, it can't happen and there will be a lot of disappointed fan bases. (Side note: The other powers in the SEC: Georgia 3.6 losses per year, LSU 3.6 losses per year, Texas A&M 4.2 losses per year, Florida 4.6 losses per year, Auburn 5.4 losses per year, Tennessee 5.6 losses per year.)

End of the day, the expectations of college football fans are out of whack relative to what is possible.

Good grief.

What is it about the words "something like 11-1, 10-2, 9-3" that you are failing to grasp?? You've arbitrarily chosen a 5 year period to analyze a mathematical formula to see which team is achieving an absolute value of equal to or less than 2 losses per year. That is completely NOT the point that I'm making. And you can and SHOULD take out outlier years that don't match the norm (hurt QB? coaching change? superior conference mate performance that year?).

For example, let's take Georgia, who you've pointed out does not mathematically achieve 2 or less losses over a 5 year average:

2002: 13-1
2003: 11-3
2004: 10-2
2005: 10-3 (one loss was a bowl game)
2006: 9-4
2007: 11-2
2008: 10-3
2009: 8-5
2010: 6-7 (one loss was a bowl game)
2011: 10-4 (one loss was a bowl game)
2012: 12-2
2013: 8-5 (one loss was a bowl game)
2014: 10-3
2015: 10-3
2016: 8-5 [first year coach]
2017: 9-1 (current)

So their average losses during the regular season since 2002 is 3 losses per year. However, if I take out the first year of the new head coach and the obvious outlier of 2010, their average losses per regular season less than 2.5 losses when factoring in the three losses that came from the SEC championship games (2003, 2011, 2012). And Georgia absolutely should expect to be in that range of losses per regular season. And since we both agree, I think, that Tennessee has similar recruiting classes, they should expect to be within that range, give or take. Of course, with the caveat that a coaching change normally means a change in system and typically means a "down year" in terms of wins and losses.

So, no, I don't think that I'm off base with this. If you have Georgia level talent, you should expect to have the majority of your years in the 1 to 3 loss range in a 12 game season, not including championship games and bowl games. If you perform this same exercise for Oregon going back to 2005, you'll find their number to be even better than Georgia (PAC12 vs. SEC is the difference there, likely). Same thing for LSU. Almost the same for Wisconsin. And so on and so on...

 

[UConnJim]

Good grief.

What is it about the words "something like 11-1, 10-2, 9-3" that you are failing to grasp?? You've arbitrarily chosen a 5 year period to analyze a mathematical formula to see which team is achieving an absolute value of equal to or less than 2 losses per year. That is completely NOT the point that I'm making. And you can and SHOULD take out outlier years that don't match the norm (hurt QB? coaching change? superior conference mate performance that year?).

For example, let's take Georgia, who you've pointed out does not mathematically achieve 2 or less losses over a 5 year average:

2002: 13-1
2003: 11-3
2004: 10-2
2005: 10-3 (one loss was a bowl game)
2006: 9-4
2007: 11-2
2008: 10-3
2009: 8-5
2010: 6-7 (one loss was a bowl game)
2011: 10-4 (one loss was a bowl game)
2012: 12-2
2013: 8-5 (one loss was a bowl game)
2014: 10-3
2015: 10-3
2016: 8-5 [first year coach]
2017: 9-1 (current)

So their average losses during the regular season since 2002 is 3 losses per year. However, if I take out the first year of the new head coach and the obvious outlier of 2010, their average losses per regular season less than 2.5 losses when factoring in the three losses that came from the SEC championship games (2003, 2011, 2012). And Georgia absolutely should expect to be in that range of losses per regular season. And since we both agree, I think, that Tennessee has similar recruiting classes, they should expect to be within that range, give or take. Of course, with the caveat that a coaching change normally means a change in system and typically means a "down year" in terms of wins and losses.

So, no, I don't think that I'm off base with this. If you have Georgia level talent, you should expect to have the majority of your years in the 1 to 3 loss range in a 12 game season, not including championship games and bowl games. If you perform this same exercise for Oregon going back to 2005, you'll find their number to be even better than Georgia (PAC12 vs. SEC is the difference there, likely). Same thing for LSU. Almost the same for Wisconsin. And so on and so on...

You can't use caveats for victories. The records are the records.

And, what don't you understand about math? If Tennessee is playing Georgia, Florida, and Alabama every year, they have to beat 2 out of the three to have a chance at a 2 loss or 3 loss season. Just like Florida plays Georgia, Tennessee, and LSU and has to beat 2 out of the three to have a chance of a 2 or 3 loss season. Georgia plays Tennessee, Florida, and Auburn and has to beat 2 out of the 3 to have a chance of a 2 or 3 loss season. That is why only Alabama out of the SEC has averaged 2 or fewer losses per season over the past 5 years. It's simple math that you can't have Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Auburn, Alabama, and LSU all averaging 2 or less wins per season. At best, only 1 or 2 of the schools can do it over any 5 year period. But that is not the fan expectation and that is why Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, and LSU have all dumped coaches and Auburn has been close to dumping their coach last year.

I used to work in Tennessee and consistent 3 and 4 loss seasons are not acceptable to the fan base, but that is the ceiling for Tennessee in the SEC unless they find the next Nick Satan.

 

[UConnDan97]

You can't use caveats for victories. The records are the records.

And, what don't you understand about math? If Tennessee is playing Georgia, Florida, and Alabama every year, they have to beat 2 out of the three to have a chance at a 2 loss or 3 loss season. Just like Florida plays Georgia, Tennessee, and LSU and has to beat 2 out of the three to have a chance of a 2 or 3 loss season. Georgia plays Tennessee, Florida, and Auburn and has to beat 2 out of the 3 to have a chance of a 2 or 3 loss season. That is why only Alabama out of the SEC has averaged 2 or fewer losses per season over the past 5 years. It's simple math that you can't have Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Auburn, Alabama, and LSU all averaging 2 or less wins per season. At best, only 1 or 2 of the schools can do it over any 5 year period. But that is not the fan expectation and that is why Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, and LSU have all dumped coaches and Auburn has been close to dumping their coach last year.

I used to work in Tennessee and consistent 3 and 4 loss seasons are not acceptable to the fan base, but that is the ceiling for Tennessee in the SEC unless they find the next Nick Satan.

There aren't any caveats if the majority of your regular seasons only contain 2 losses, with the occasional outlier, which I've already shown you. And this argument is tired at this point. The records are all out there on wiki. Do what you'd like with them...