dew1679666265

I wish at the top of the list (though I'd put Lovie ahead of him if there's anything to this), but realistically he's not involved in the UT coach search.

Does he know what he's talking about with rumors? I haven't heard directly from Basilio (whose show does suck, but he's also pretty connected), but one of his cohosts. Both have heard from separate people that Lovie is possible, and AA says that Tony's sources are much better than his own. This is an aside, but this would fit Hamilton's MO to have everyone waiting for him to announce Cutcliffe while he's secretly courting Lovie. Happened that way with Pearl. Maybe I'm just hoping it's right, but I'm beginning to think there might be something to this. However, Hubbs apparently said Lovie's not interested. Are you aware of this and who is more likely to be accurate here (if there's any way to know that)?

I just don't buy the "relic" stuff. When he was at UT as the OC most recently, the offense averaged over 30 points per game and we went to the SEC Championship game and nearly won it. He then went to Duke and made an absolutely abysmal program (sorry Vanilla Ice and chuckywang, no offense intended) respectable, competing for a bowl game in two seasons. I do wonder about his ability to recruit as is necessary at a school like UT, but it's not because he's not young and energetic. There are plenty of coaches Cut's age and older succeeding at a very high level in college football at major programs.

Recruits want stability and bringing in a one-year guy (even if it's Fulmer returning) is not a good idea. The idea has been floated to give the job to Kippy for a year and then run an actual coaching search next year. I just don't see any what that works and we be able to recruit. Too many coaches would use the instability of it all to turn recruits against us. So you willing to settle, instead of waiting out the storm. That's ok with me, I'm just wondering what's so important in 2010 that it makes it worth settling for a solid, but not a spectular coach? It's not just 2010, though. Starting right around Feb. 3, recruiting for 2011 begins and if we have an interim coach trying to recruit against other SEC schools, we'd have no chance. So, a team with next to no depth already would have forfeited two consecutive recruiting classes. That has long term effects just like hiring a poor coach would. Getting an experienced, good coach like Cutcliffe for 3-4 years may not be ideal, but it stabilizes the program and gives us a chance to recruit for this class and the next.

Recruits want stability and bringing in a one-year guy (even if it's Fulmer returning) is not a good idea. The idea has been floated to give the job to Kippy for a year and then run an actual coaching search next year. I just don't see any what that works and we be able to recruit. Too many coaches would use the instability of it all to turn recruits against us.

Does he know what he's talking about with rumors?

Not crazy about that. There are a lot of good coaches here and I'd like to keep a few of them (Kippy and Lance Thompson especially).

"Too premature" to say Cutcliffe is the new UT head coach, says Brent Hubbs (Volquest Rivals guy). And the merry-go-round continues to run.

That's the biggest thing right now is that Johnson is running the triple option with a bunch of players brought in to be in a non-triple option offense. Let's see how he does 2-3 years from now when more of his type of players are there.

Who knows of the accuracy of this 10-millionth source, but here we go.

At this point in the offseason, there's no coach available who the entire fanbase can rally behind from the start. Even Muschamp wouldn't have been that type of hire. If we can pull off a Stoops coup, that'd do it, but Stoops just isn't realistic if we want to stay in the $3 million range for our HC. As for Cutcliffe, he's not ideal, but he's a fantastic coach who can assemble a very good staff. If he does that, then he's be about the best option possible when hiring a coach in the middle of January when almost every other position has been filled. He'd be a short term guy, but would give us the ability in 3-4 years to really find a great long-term coach.

I'd love to see if the triple option would work in the SEC. With the right talent, I think it would. It can work anywhere with the right personnel. It's worked very well in the ACC and GT fans insist that the current o-line is not a good fit. No one else runs it so you get the same advantages that versions of the spread had when less talented teams were the only ones running it. The "defenses" got too fast argument is bunk. I just hate seeing so many damn teams going shotgun with 4-5 wide and throwing bubble screens and 3 yard hitches all game. I like the spread option a lot too, but moreso the more imaginative ones like Meyer's or Malzahn's. And the triple option is based more on misdirection than speed, so the "defense is too fast" argument doesn't mean much.

I'd love to see if the triple option would work in the SEC. With the right talent, I think it would. As for Cutcliffe, I thought he shouldn't have been fired from Ole Miss and his short tenure at Duke so far is showing more what he's capable of. I do have some questions on his ability to recruit, but if he keeps guys like Kippy Brown and Lance Thompson and could bring in a guy like Rodney Garner, there will be plenty of recruiting ability on the staff.

[expletive] Air Force released a statement from Troy Calhoun saying that he will remain at the school. Rumors are that Hamilton is hot on the trail of Cutcliffe. I think Cutcliffe could do really well at Tennessee, but I am really hoping he stays. We could not get anybody like him this time around I think. Yeah, I really hate to poach a coach from Duke at this point, but Cutcliffe is simply a fantastic coach and would be a good hire, I think. I wonder if hiring him would give us a shot at Rodney Garner from Georgia?

[expletive] Air Force released a statement from Troy Calhoun saying that he will remain at the school. Rumors are that Hamilton is hot on the trail of Cutcliffe.

Now Calhoun may have turned down the job. Cutcliffe may be in play yet.

If the hire is Calhoun, I'm happy enough with it. Obviously, a Muschamp, Stoops or somebody like that would be more exciting, but Calhoun's resume is solid and he turned Air Force from a 5-7 win team to an 8-10 win team in no time. He's young enough to be a long term hire (one of the negatives concerning Kippy Brown and Cutcliffe) and won't likely bolt to another program any time soon. While I'd like to see it, I doubt he brings along the triple option since he's very familiar with running a pro-style offense with Denver and Houston. My only question is, can he recruit at Tennessee?

Calhoun's called a team meeting for 5:50 pm today. Meanwhile, Skip Holtz just got hired at South Florida. Really good hire by USF. And I think the choice is Calhoun, but there are still some rumblings that Cutcliffe has the job.

Hearing on the local radio that "multiple reports" are saying Troy Calhoun is the choice at Tennessee.

I'm not sure how much Lovie is getting with the Bears, but from what I've heard, Tennessee is willing to pay $3+ million to the new head coach. Lovie would be interesting, but much like with Gruden or Cowher, I'd wonder about his adjustment to the college game (especially recruiting). He does seem to have the teaching mindset, though, that would be important in college. Everything I've read says they owe him $11m over 2 years. And in his mind, he might believe that a solid 2010 season could put him in-line for a contract extension in Chicago after the season, assuming they won't go into a 2011 season in the last year of a deal. So he's owed $11m with hopes for another $5+m added on for an extra year if 2010 is a success. I can't imagine the Bears paying much in a buyout if Lovie wants to leave. They made it clear they want to go into 2010 with him, so if he leaves, he's leaving that money on the table, or at least the vast majority of it. They might be happy to see him walk, but they would have to then send Jerry and Ted on another coach finding mission, which could wind up costing more this year and next (all the coaches signed through next season would be on the hot seat for being replaced with the theoretical new guy). yeah, it's $11m over 2 years, so 5.5 per... If UT is willing to pay $4mil of that (per year), I think the Bears would jump at the chance to pay $3million over the next 2 years to buy him out and let the two salaries add up to his current contract with the Bears. Plus Lovie would have more job security... I don't think it happens, but I refuse to rule it out...lol Yeah, Lovie's about as realistic a target as Cowher or Gruden.

That's the only name I've heard that I like better than Leach. I put no stock whatsoever into those rumors, but the thought is rather awesome. I'm interested in Calhoun, but not overly excited by the hire. He'd be very similar to Turner Gill, in that he's done a good job at the position he's in, but I'm not sure how that would translate to a program like UT. As a KU fan, I can be happy about a Turner Gill type hire. Tennessee should be aiming much higher. Generally I would hope we would be, but there's not a plethora of candidates in the middle of January. I'd still probably prefer Kippy Brown or Cutcliffe over Calhoun, though.

I'm not sure how much Lovie is getting with the Bears, but from what I've heard, Tennessee is willing to pay $3+ million to the new head coach. Lovie would be interesting, but much like with Gruden or Cowher, I'd wonder about his adjustment to the college game (especially recruiting). He does seem to have the teaching mindset, though, that would be important in college.

Not exciting, but I'd be fine with that.

Not a denial, but interesting.

I was just reading that. If accurate, does that mean Calhoun? Or is the #2 candidate still in doubt?