Posts Tagged ‘No Pass Out Checks’

[Note:  This post is exceptionally long—even for me—and I apologize for this.  I simply felt that a lot of these things needed saying, and I really haven't heard them elsewhere.  Thus, if you'll forgive my long-windedness,  I promise there is a point to this.  I just felt this that this isn't a simple issue, and thus I needed to explain.  -Lawvol]

Of all the posts I have ever written as a blogger, all the comments I have ever posted on message boards and other blogs, all the public professions I have ever made regarding the Tennessee Volunteers, this one is by far the most difficult one for me.  I’d really rather not be in the position of feeling it necessary to write this.  To fail to address the issue, however, would be to ignore the giant looming cloud over the heads of all of the Vol-faithful, regardless of their thoughts or position.

Obviously, I am talking about the “situation” with the Tennessee Football coaching staff.

For the record, I am a Phillip Fulmer fan.  I believe that he has done more for the Tennessee program than anyone else over the last fifteen years.  I credit him with taking Tennessee from the mish-mash of the middle tier of college football and propelling the Vols to the very pinnacle of success.  I credit him with bringing the program into the modern era.  I credit him with making many of the things to which we as Tennessee fans have become accustomed possible.  I like Coach Fulmer, or the “Great Punkin” as I routinely refer to him (with no slight or insult intended).

I guess that makes me a homer…

To the best of my recollection, the only time I have ever openly criticized the Tennessee coaching staff was during the past off-season when off-field incidents involving Vol footballers were escalating alarmingly, by my mind calling into question the integrity of the program and the University of Tennessee itself.  Aside from that, I have always refrained from going after the coaches like so many seem to want to do.  I wrote a little about this after the UCLA game, stating:

… I would say that I am more appropriately a Homer for all coaches across the landscape of college football who are constantly questioned, rebuked, and derided by tens of thousands of come-lately armchair geniuses.

It is a peculiar characteristic of so many fans that they believe that simply being a follower of a team for a given length of time makes them an expert on how things should be done.  Make no mistake, as a sports blogger, I am as guilty of this offense as anyone—at least to some extent.  There are things that anyone with a brain can assess and analyze based purely upon common sense, life experience, and the fluff that resides between our ears.

* * * * *

These sorts of basic truths are fairly and frankly within the grasp of us all, and thus the rightful ability to comment on such profundities resides with each and every person who follows college football.  In much the same vein, I think it is reasonable for many (note, I did not say “all”) long-term fans of the sport to comment on what a given team does, or in most cases, did.

Beyond that, however, it seems to me that trying to profess what the best way to coach a football team—a team to which most have no access except through their televisions—is an endeavor which necessarily makes the speaker feel smart and important, while simultaneously making them look foolish and arrogant.

I have absolutely no idea about what it takes to coach a major college football team.  I’m completely clueless.  Furthermore, I have no idea what it is like to play on such a team.  Again, clueless.  I am also willing to bet that most who are attacking Phil Fulmer and the Tennessee coaching staff at present share my level of experience and insight.  So, at a minimum, I guess I am among equally-ignorant equals when it comes to assessing the coaches.

Unlike many others, however, I am not going to attack the Great Punkin, Dave Clawson, John Chavis, or any of the other coaches.  I am simply going to speak about what I do know and speak from the heart:

Though I first watched Tennessee under Coach Majors, most of my life as a Tennessee fan, student, and alum has been during the tenure of Coach Fulmer.  I think he is a man of integrity, a man of honor, a skilled and adept football coach, and a great leader and teacher for the young men he coaches.  I have such deep respect for what he has done.  In his 17-year career as Tennessee’s head coach, Fulmer is 148-47-1 (.759), he has won 10 or more games in a season nine times, he has won or tied for the SEC East title seven times, he has won 2 SEC Championships, and the 1998 National Championship.  I remember all of these “good old days” like they were yesterday.

Coach Fulmer has done a lot, a whole lot…

By the same token, things simply have not been good for the Vols for some time now.  Here are a few statistics:

Last SEC Championship: 1998 (No Coach in UT history had a longer drought and retained their job)

Last BCS Game Appearance: 1999

Only one Top-10 finish this decade (2001)

Last 50 Games 32-18 (.648) [Johnny Majors was 39-9-2 (.780 wins only / .820 wins & ties) over his final 50 games]

Failed to finish in the Top-25 twice this decade in any poll and finished 25th in the AP in 2000 (unranked in Coaches Poll)

Signed a recruiting class outside the Top-20 in two of the past three seasons

5-12 versus Florida all-time

14-13 in the last 27 SEC Games

28-27 (.509) versus Current SEC Coaches

• 0-4 versus Urban Meyer (Florida)
• 1-2 versus Les Miles (LSU)
• 3-4 versus Mark Richt (Georgia)
• 1-3 versus Nick Saban (LSU & Alabama)
• 5-8 versus Steve Spurrier (Florida & South Carolina)
• 3-3 versus Tommy Tuberville (Ole Miss & Auburn)

Coach Fulmer has a winning record of 15-3 against Rich Brooks (Kentucky), Sylvester Croom (Mississippi State), Bobby Johnson (Vanderbilt), and Houston Nutt (Arkansas only)

Over the last decade (since 1998) the Tennessee Volunteers under Fulmer are:

1-8 (.111) at home versus Top-10 Teams

17-23 (.425) versus ranked teams

13-21 (.382) versus Florida, Georgia, Auburn, LSU, and Alabama

Statistical Analysis Courtesy of: Tony Basilio.com

These numbers speak volumes…

Of course, I am enough of a realist to understand that no team—whether Tennessee, Southern Cal, or the Green Bay Packers—can have a championship year every year.  Every great team has bad years.  It just seems that it has been a long time since Tennessee has had a truly good year.  I freely acknowledge that in 2007 Tennessee had what, on paper, looks like a good year.  In 2007, the Vols went 10-4 and won the SEC East.  That said, even the most stalwart Vol fan would have to admit that Tennessee won the SEC East in a highly unorthodox manner.  Tennessee was beaten in the 2007 season opener versus California 45-31.  Two weeks later the Vols were annihilated by the Florida Gators 59-20 and were subsequently thumped by the Alabama Crimson Tide 41-17.  The only reason that the Vols made the trip to the  SEC Championship Game was that—under league rules—the tie went to Tennessee since the Vols defeated the Georgia Bulldogs in head-to-head competition.  In other words, the Orange and White backed into the Eastern Division title.

Prior to that, really since the 2001 season, the Vols have underperformed versus SEC and national rivals, and have—at best—been a mediocre team from a statistical perspective.  During that time, I cannot recount the number of times that the Vols have barely beaten teams that were wholly inferior in terms of talent.  What’s more, the Volunteers have regularly failed to meet the expectations of fans and analysts when considered against teams with similar recruiting classes and resources.  Then of course there was the 2005 season, or—as Joel at RTT describes it—“The Season of Which We do not Speak” in which Tennessee recorded a 5-6 record.

It seems that Tennessee has struggled at every turn since winning the 1998 Championship…

Jump forward to this year and the UCLA game, in which Tennessee loses to a UCLA team which the Vols were projected to beat handily.  As I and others have said, there is absolutely no reason that the Vols should have lost that game.  To make bad matters worse, since defeating the Vols, the Bruins have gone on to lose two more games in which they failed to score a single touchdown for the first time in 44 years. (HT Get the Picture)  Tennessee then managed a lackluster win over a clearly out-matched UAB team before playing the Florida Gators.  As I said in my “Marching Orders” piece earlier this week, that game was one of the poorest displays I’ve ever seen from a Vols squad.

Although I cannot really recall when it all started, the Tennessee fanbase began growing restless as early as 2002.  Even then, there was a small but vocal minority of fans that felt it was time for Fulmer to go.  Those voices of criticism were largely ignored by the masses until now.  After the Florida defeat, those voices have swelled to the point that they can no longer be ignored.  Just looking at the Vol-blogosphere, there are fewer and fewer that support Fulmer and even more voices criticizing than ever before—including 3SIB’s Ghost of Neyland, SouthEastern Sports Blog, YMSWWC, Curveballs for Jesus, Basilio,  MoonDog, the absurd Coacho Ocho, and Gate 21’s own HSH.

So here I am…

Read the rest of this entry »

Well, it has become abundantly clear that the Tennessee Volunteers are not as good as many hoped.  Given the inherently unpredictable nature of the game of college football, I really suppose that we shouldn’t be all that surprised — in all honesty, I am not.

I offered a few thoughts immediately after the game which began to discuss a few of the problems as I saw them.  As is usually the case with my brand of half-baked analysis, I didn’t want to rush into criticisms based wholly upon my knee-jerk reaction to losing a game that I had down as a “W” in my preseason predictions.

All this goes to show is that I have no business making predictions…

Having now had a more than a week to ruminate on the realities of the game, I feel a little more prepared (and yet equally unqualified) to offer a few more observations and thoughts which have emerged from my slightly out-of-sync head.

Offense

Running Game:

I have to say that I was pretty impressed with Tennessee’s 5.2 yard per carry average (especially considering all of the yards lost due to sacks). What bothers me is that the team essentially gave up on the ground game in favor of throwing the ball away. Obviously, Arian Foster has got to hang on to the ball — just like his mother needs to stay off message boards. Still, the fumble aside, both Hardesty and Foster looked good with their somewhat limited carries (Hardesty: 12 att. / 70 yds., Foster: 13 att. / 100 yds.).

Passing Game:

Can Crompton turn it around?

I knew Jonathan Crompton was not going to put up gaudy numbers in his first game as the regular starting quarterback at Tennessee.  I also expected a few bad decisions — making throws into coverage, etc.  I did not expect him to go 19-42-1 or for the passing game to pretty much collapse.

At times, Crompton seemed utterly bewildered and lost.  At other times, he had open men which — given the altitude of his passes — appeared to Crompton to be 15 feet tall.  Finally, any defensive pass rush at all seemed to get him completely rattled.

I also found his unwillingness to run or roll out when pressured a bit unusual based upon what we saw from him in 2006.  That makes me think either:

1. he is still trying to shake-off the ankle problems he had earlier this year;
2. he is being over-coached into being a pocket-passer; or
3. he is thinking entirely too much.

My guess — which is worth nothing — is that it’s a little bit of all of these.

In the end, Crompton looked extremely uncomfortable in the pocket all night, but by the same token unwilling to leave the pocket.  Thus, the passing game was essentially dead…

In Crompton’s defense, he did do a fine job of managing the final drive of regulation to get the Vols into position to play for overtime.  More importantly, I can completely understand why he seemed uncomfortable in the pocket, because the offensive line’s pass protection just plain sucked.

Offensive Line:

Crompton spent the better part of the night watching Bruin linebackers blitz at him, and right past the offensive line.  Last year, the Vols set an NCAA record by allowing a meager 4 sacks.  A lot of that was due to Erik Ainge’s willingness to heave the ball into the cheerleaders if pressured (although Tee Martin still takes the prize in that regard for actually managing to hit a cheerleader in the side of the head while in a pyramid formation — he must have really not care for the spirit squads).  Still, as one of the more veteran units on this year’s team, with five starting upperclassmen, their hapless play was as uncharacteristic as it was unacceptable — especially considering they were fully aware that the signal-caller was just getting his legs under him.

Simply put, the O-Line must improve…

Offensive Play Calling:

The play calling on offense was unimpressive, but I’m not so sure I’d call bad.  True, it was hardly what I expected as the debut of Dave Clawson and his “Clawfense,” but the reality is that it was pretty much the same sort of white-bread scheming Tennessee had run for over a decade, albeit favoring the pass a bit more than in the past.  The second-half calls were essentially the same as the first — which surprised me a bit since I was led to believe that Clawson excelled as a second-half coach.

Dave Clawson

I will give the Clawfense some credit for using the G-Gun set (I believe) 5 times with some success.  On the flip-side — as much as I have longed for a more wide-open passing game — I cannot understand why the Vols seemed to completely abandon the run despite the relative success it had shown.

All that said — and style points aside — I cannot criticize the offensive play calling too much.  Why, you ask?  The main reason for my reluctance to attack the offensive calls is due to the fact that the gameplan, though unremarkable, was sound.  It was based upon fairly basic fundamental football conventions.

The problem with the offense lay in the execution…

Had Tennessee made the plays as called, then the Vols walk out of the Rose Bowl with a double-digit victory.  I won’t attack an offensive call when the players completely fail to carry it out properly.

Of course, the issue of preparation is a different matter, which I touch on below.

Defense

In my post-game thoughts I suggested that, defensively, the game was a tale of two halves.  That, however, isn’t really accurate.  With the exception of the final two defensive series’, the defense really looked top notch.

The defensive line and secondary were as aggressive and as physical as I’ve seen in years.  Furthermore, the “missed-tackle-itis” which Tennessee defenses have traditionally shown — especially in early season games — never reared its ugly head.  Despite those last two UCLA possessions, I believe the Vols’ secondary may be one of the best in school history.  The blitz schemes were great and the coverage like glue.

This defense did everything it could to win the game — from the four first-half interceptions, the safety that the referees refused to call, the pressure on the quarterback, and the 0 yard net gain by UCLA in overtime — the effort and playmaking ability was outstanding.

This unit could be really special — which is a damn good thing given the offensive woes…

Defensive Play Calling:

The play calling — just like the performance — was strong early and weak late in the game.  I question why during UCLA’s final two drives in regulation, the Chief refused to change up the defense to try and put the Bruins’ second-wind on ice.  UCLA Kevin Craft put on a short-pass exhibition late in the game — using screens as artfully as I’ve seen in a while.  Tennessee, however, stayed with four and five linemen sets and soft over-top zone coverage, rather than switching to a 3-4 (or similar package) with either man or underneath coverage to kill the momentum.

That said, the defense spent entirely too much time on the field  in the second-half due to the anemic performance by the offense.  I suppose it is possible that the coaches did not feel that the defense had enough left in the tank to successfully execute man coverage at that late point in the game.  There is no question that fatigue was working against the defense.  To me, however, it seemed like the defense still had hustle left in them, and I question the refusal to change.

Nonetheless, had the offense taken care of business it wouldn’t have mattered…

Special Teams

Press the kicking game.  Here is where the breaks are made.

Game Maxim Number 6

– Gen. Robert R. Neyland

Well, UCLA made General Neyland look prescient…

Punting:

First, the blocked punt — leading to an immediate touchdown — was simply unacceptable.  Chad Cunningham, in his first start as a Volunteer (courtesy of Britton Colquitt who was probably passed-out in the parking lot) should never have been put in that position.  The block was all the fault of the line, not Cunningham.  In my opinion, that single play decided the game. The punt team must protect the punter better than that — there’s nothing more to say.

Field Goal Unit:

I feel sorry for Daniel Lincoln.  While it is true that either of his first two missed field goals would have won the game, and his third miss handed the victory to UCLA, Daniel Lincoln did not cause the loss.  I question the decision to even attempt two 50+-yard field goals which were both beyond his effective range.  Given the often fragile psyche of kickers, I would not have set Lincoln up to miss two early — I would have punted.  The final miss in overtime was — by all appearances — all Lincoln, but had he not hit an attempt with only seconds in regulation, overtime never even comes into play. Finally, in what is becoming a common theme, had the offense done their job then we would not be talking about this.

Kick Returns:

This was the bright spot of the special teams unit.  This squad actually looked improved and seems primed to add a bit of excitement to things this year.  I look forward to watching Dennis Rogan, Gerald Jones, and Brandon Warren on returns this year.

Coaching (Preparation)

In the interest of full disclosure, I feel it is only fair to first go on the record as being a “Homer” when it comes to Coach Fulmer and the Tennessee staff.  Actually, I would say that I am more appropriately a Homer for all coaches across the landscape of college football who are constantly questioned, rebuked, and derided by tens of thousands of come-lately armchair geniuses.

It is a peculiar characteristic of so many fans that they believe that simply being a follower of a team for a given length of time makes them an expert in how things should be done.  Make no mistake, as a sports blogger, I am as guilty of this offense as anyone — at least to some extent.  There are things that anyone with a brain can assess and analyze based purely upon common sense, life experience, and the fluff that resides between our ears. (Upon further review, considering I do this sort of thing all the time, we’ll lower the standard to “half a brain” and remove the “common sense” requirement.)

Even the dullest of individuals realizes that “scoring more points” is always the key to winning a game — Lou Holtz included.

These sorts of basic truths are fairly and frankly within the grasp of us all, and thus the rightful ability to comment on such profundities resides with each and every person who follows college football.  In much the same vein, I think it is reasonable for many (note, I did not say “all”) long-term fans of the sport to comment on what a given team does, or in most cases, did.

Beyond that, however, it seems to me that trying to profess what the best way to coach a football team — a team which most have no access to except through their televisions — is an endeavor which necessarily makes the speaker feel smart and important, while simultaneously making them look foolish and arrogant.

That said here are my thoughts on the coaching, I’ll start with the good news…

Defensive Unit:

This was the best I’ve seen a Tennessee defensive unit look in the first game of the season in as long as I can remember from the perspective of fundamentals.  Their tackling skills looked solid and their ball awareness outstanding.

Even when UCLA was driving on their final two possessions in regulation, the defense was executing — making hits as soon as the ball was caught.  The open-field tackling by the secondary never let up.  Any criticisms of the fourth-quarter play calling aside, Coach Chavis had the defense ready to play.

Offensive and Special Teams Units:

I don’t know what caused it, but these squads were simply not ready to play — not by a long shot — and at times looked completely clueless.  I don’t have the foggiest idea what went wrong, but if the coaches don’t get it fixed, then Tennessee is going to lose at least four or five more games — badly. .

Things must improve …

Final Thoughts

Tennessee showed their best and their worst against UCLA, and made Rick Neuheisel look like both a goat and a genius.

The offense had three interceptions handed to them in the first-half (Nevin McKenzie went ahead and ran the fourth interception in for a touchdown on his own) and did little with them.  Still, at times, it became apparent that the Vols have what it takes to be great.  Will they realize any of that potential?  I do not know, but I hope so.

Either way, this was but one game and a non-conference game at that.  What’s more, this team deserves a chance to redeem itself — which I imagine it will be dying to do.  It is far too early to write this season off.  Ignoring any issues those in the Orange Nation may have with the coaching staff, the players deserve this, they have earned it through all of the hard work they put in to get to this point, for all of the effort they put in to playing the game that all of us enjoy.

For that reason, I am concerned but remain hopeful — not just for the future of this team’s potential, but also for the Tennessee fanbase.  I hope they will get out and give this team their full support, come what may.

As for me, I’ll have my orange on and my backside will be planted firmly in Section Y7 of Neyland Stadium.  That is, until kickoff, when it’s time to stand and cheer.

View from Y7

Hopefully, I won’t be the only one…

– Go Figure …

Images Courtesy of: UT Sports.com • ESPN.com • Gridscape’s Virtual Neyland

Well, that is why they play them…

A heavily favored Tennessee squad walked into the Rose Bowl, and will be limping home trying to figure out what went wrong — and make no mistake, something went terribly wrong.

On the whole, it was a tale of two halves — the Vols owned the first-half, the Bruins the second.  Well, at least the Vols should have owned the first-half.  After grabbing 4 first-half interceptions, the Vols had a paltry 14 points at the end of the first half.

In the end, however, UCLA rallied the troops and fought down the stretch and managed to take the lead with only seconds left in the game.  The anemic Tennessee offense seemed down for the count, but Jonathan Crompton managed the team as well as he had all night, leading the Orange down the field for a Daniel Lincoln field goal to tie the game at 24 with 5 seconds on the clock.

Many in Big Orange Country felt they had just dodged a bullet — given Tennessee’s record in overtime games.  They were even more buoyed up with hope after the Tennessee defense — which had flailed about unsuccessfully in the fourth-quarter — allowed no yards in overtime.

But that is why they play them…

After gaining a net of 8 yards, Daniel Lincoln came on to attempt a 34-yard field goal attempt to send the game into a second overtime.  The kick sailed wide left, and with it went the Vols hopes of coming out strong to start the season.

Final Score:  UCLA 27  Tennessee 24

Obviously, once I’ve had a little time to think about the game, I am sure I’ll have more thoughts for everyone out there to ignore.  That said, here are my initial thoughts.

Defense

Until the fourth-quarter, I would have given the defense excellent marks.  They played with more aggressive tenacity than I have seen any Tennessee team play with in the first game of the season in at least a decade.  They looked well prepared and well coached — until late in the game I’d have given them an “A” for the game.

Four interceptions is always a nice statistic, but so was the 2 first downs that UCLA managed in the first-half.  The Vols were hard-hitting and focused.

Once UCLA managed to find its legs in the fourth-quarter, however, they started running roughshod over the Tennessee defense, with a workmanlike drive using short screen passes and a quick tempo.  At many times, the Vol defense seemed poorly schemed late in the game, rushing 4 and 5 on each play rather than trying to stop the screens.  That said, the biggest problem it appeared they were dealing with was fatigue due to the fact they had been on the field far longer than they should have been in the fourth.

Thus, I am not going to mark the squad down too much (since it was the first game and due to the offensive woes) — the fact is that they gave a great effort.  The defense showed that they have what it takes to be a really excellent squad this year — potentially one of the best in the SEC — once they get a chance to gel and play together a little more.

In the end, I’m giving them a C+ / B-.

Offense

I’m not even going to try to breakdown all of the problems that the Vols had on offense…

I realize that Tennessee has a new quarterback and a new offensive scheme.  I expected there to be some growing pains.  I did not expect the Vols to rely upon their defense to win games — by scoring all the points.

It was bad, it was very bad…

I am not ready to decide where I think the problem lies, but the Vols showed a real lack of ability to move the ball consistently.  Crompton had a horrible time throwing the ball when under pressure — to the point of being completely ineffective.  Both Arian Foster and Montario Hardesty showed flashes of brilliance at times in the running game, but at other times were unable to make real gains.

At this early point after the game, all I can say is that there is much work to be done on offense.

At this point, I’m giving the offense a D.

Special Teams

Daniel Lincoln missed three field goal attempts, but only one of which he really should have hit — unfortunately, that one was the one which really mattered.  The punt unit also gave up a block, which led to an immediate touchdown.  The kick return unit, however, showed some real fire and the potential for some big plays down the stretch.

This unit needs to work on some things, but they appear to, at least, be on the right track.

For now, I’m giving them a C-.

Final Thoughts

There is so much more to discuss and think about after this game — which is always the case with a loss.  I am not going to try to do it tonight.

I will however, say one thing:

This is only the first game of the season — don’t give up on the Vols yet.  Despite the problems they had tonight, they never gave up.  They have earned the chance to redeem themselves…

I, along with Home Sweet Home, will have more on this game in the coming days, but in the meantime — though I am disappointed — all I can say is Go Vols!

More tomorrow…

– Go Figure …

Given the events of the last 24 hours, I think it is fair to say that Phillip Fulmer  is tired of lawyers.  Despite the fact that I am a lawyer, I would oftentimes tend to agree with him.

Having now had a chance to look at the Complaint ( PDF) filed by Wendell Smith in his defamation lawsuit against the NCAA, it seems clear — as if it wasn’t already — that Smith’s claims are as ridiculous as they are inflammatory.  Joel over at RTT (who happens to be a fellow lawyer) did a fine job of walking through the allegations of the Complaint earlier today, and I’m not going to rehash what he has already said with great clarity.  If you haven’t read his analysis of the complaint, you really should give it a look.

I do, however, have a few observations and thoughts that I’d like to add to Joel’s impressions — if for no other reason than to establish that like all attorneys I like to hear myself talk and sound like I know what I am talking about (sigh).

Fulmer Did Not Have to be Served While in the State of Alabama

As I noted in a comment over at Rocky Top Talk, Fulmer never had to be served while in the state of Alabama — any claims otherwise are absolutely false.

Under the Full, Faith and Credit Clause of the US Constitution (a clause which contributed heavily to some annoyingly intractable disputes over states refusing to honor the laws of another state which ended in a small conflict known as the Civil War) along with the Comity doctrines, each state has to honor and enforce the subpoenas of other states, including having them served.

I have personally had out-of-state subpoenas commissioned on numerous occasions for deponents in other states. I will say this — it is a royal pain-in-the-butt to do, but any lawyer can do it if they take the time to consult the Rules of Civil Procedure for their state and the home state of a deponent (or just call the clerk of court in each location).

There is a very well established system for accomplishing this sort of thing, which any lawyer worth his or her salt is aware of (or could become aware of with little effort). So any claims by Smith’s attorneys that they had to serve Fulmer while he was in the state is an outright, baldface, lie. Period, it is not even open to discussion.

As an attorney who has represented a lot of healthcare providers, businesses, contractors, and so forth over the years in highly contentious cases, there is only one reason that a party pulls a stunt like what occurred yesterday — to prove a point or gain publicity. It is gamesmanship, it is unprofessional, and irrespective of Coach Fulmer’s involvement it is the sort of tactic a slimeball attorney (a/k/a the kind that generally gives the legal profession a bad name) pulls.

I honestly could care less whether the suit is about Alabama or whether Coach Fulmer was involved at all — it’s pure “Bush-League” lawyering, and it is reprehensible.

I’ve got no problem with Alabama or it’s fans – heck, I’ve been posting nice things about them for the last few weeks — but this isn’t about Alabama at all. For me this is about a rogue booster and his dirtball lawyers. It is also about the “rules of engagement” when it comes to legal disputes.

Personally, I know judges who would sanction the attorneys in this case at the drop of a hat—and not a minor sanction either. While I agree it can be tough to prove, I agree with Joel that this situation is terribly suspect and Coach Fulmer’s legal team should explore the possibility of pursuing an abuse of process claim against Smith’s attorneys.

Coach Fulmer was Right in Referring to the Suit as “Crap“

Proving defamation is a difficult task under the best of circumstances.  I cannot recount the number of times I have had a defendant I have represented ask whether they could file a counter-claim against a plaintiff for defamation due to allegations leveled against them.  The reason I have never personally filed a defamation suit is because they are nearly impossible to prove.  The reason for this is a little thing known as the First Amendment.

First of all, as Joel noted “truth” is a defense to a suit alleging defamation.  That said, in most cases, what is said about an individual need not even be true to be protected.  So long as the alleged defamer reasonably believed that what they were saying was true — even if it was not — then they are not liable for defamation.

Second, many types of statements are afforded complete protection depending upon the context in which they arise.  Good examples of this are: papers filed with a Court, statements made in Court while under oath, debates in legislative bodies, and so on.  One area where a healthy degree of protection is afforded is in the case of individuals speaking in a context where they themselves have a vested interest in the subject matter of the statements made.  For example, if a businessman tells a potential client that his services are better than his competitor because his competitor is a mouth-breathing imbecile, well — as a general rule — he is allowed to do so.  In this case, it seems likely that what the NCAA stated could potentially fall within these sorts of exceptions.

Third, as a general rule, opinion can not be the subject of a defamation action — only statements asserted as being “facts.“  Thus, if Ghost of Neyland writes an article stating “Lawvol is a complete and utter moron.  His mindless drivel is enough to make you want to bash your brains out…” ignoring the fact that this is, in fact true, it is simply an expression of opinion.  If, however, MoonDog writes an article stating that “Lawvol has a bad case of the piles, and is a card-carrying member of Al Queda.” well, he would have made a factual averment which could potentially be the subject of a defamation action.

In Smith’s case, the allegations are, in my opinion, pled “minimally” — in other words, I would have expected more.  It seems to me that, while some of the statements Smith takes issue with could be taken as fact (especially those relating to his actually paying Kenny Smith), and thus could potentially be the subject of a defamation action — but that only gets him to the courthouse door.  In other words, if the statements are in fact untrue, the NCAA knew they were untrue, and the statements didn’t fall into one of the exceptions discussed above (or one of a number of other exceptions) then Smith might have the right to try the case in front of a jury.

The public statement made by Smith’s attorneys to the Birmingham News was that he had evidence that “The NCAA violated its own policies not once, but twice.“  My thoughts on that are simple:

So what?

The question is not whether the NCAA violated its own policies, but whether they defamed Smith — the two are not the same.  Furthermore, who cares? Smith’s attorneys did not plead anything related to policy violations in their complaint so whether the NCAA violated it’s policies is irrelevant.

In the end, Fulmer was dead-on.  This case is about lawyer’s trying to grab as much publicity as they can.

Where Does it all go From Here?

In the end, were I a betting man, my money would be on Fulmer not appearing for a deposition on the 25th of September.  I am sure Fulmer’s lawyers will be filing a Motion to Quash the subpoena — as set forth in Rule 45 of the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure — in the coming days.  That will lead to more piles of paper being filed, hearings, and general delays of the lawyerly sort.  While he may end up giving a deposition in the case, I would be highly surprised if it occurs remotely close to the time set forth in the subpoena.  That’s the good news.

The bad news is that, regardless of what happens, Coach Fulmer will have to pay his lawyers to represent him in the matter, and probably pay them a considerable amount.  That is unfortunate because now, without even having the rights of a party in the suit, Fulmer is getting hit in the pocket book for Wendell Smith’s boneheaded desire to grind the axe.  While I am sure Coach Fulmer can afford his legal fees, the fact is that he shouldn’t have to have reason to call upon his attorneys in the first place.

Even more annoying, is the fact that despite the fact that it has been over six years since the NCAA handed down its infractions report against the Crimson Tide, here we are still being forced to rehash the whole thing again.  Thus, no matter what we try to do, both Tide fans and Vol fans alike will have to put up with more shenanigans, more distractions, and more side shows throughout this football season.

I miss the days when the Third Saturday in October simply meant football, and not Court Orders.  Hopefully, we will return to that sooner rather than later…

– Go Figure …

Disclaimer:  Though a practicing attorney, the author of this article is not licensed to practice before the Unified Courts of the State of Alabama.  The comments and observations offered in this post are intended as editorial commentary and are published solely for the sake of discussion.  This article is not intended to render any legal opinions and/or legal advice, and should not be relied upon in any matters concerning legal rights, responsibilities, or obligations.

Rivalries are the essence of college football.

Rivalries — and I mean “real” rivalries, not just the “Oh, I really hope we beat Team X” sort of competition — are what drives so much of the passion that comes with college football season and what compels so many of us to travel great distances, expend huge sums of money, lose sleep, risk personal injury, get arrested for disorderly conduct, and the like for the sole purpose of seeing our team play against our fiercest rival. It is the fire-in-the-belly that keeps us coming back for more. It is a question of pride, of respect, of tradition, and (sometimes) insanity.

The funny thing about rivalries is that they are not always two-way streets. That is, just because Kentucky Wildcats fans feel in their heart that the New England Patriots are their most intense and hated rival, it doesn’t necessarily follow that the Patriots care about Kentucky at all (except to the extent that Bill Bellichick is willing to rent a helicopter and hire some off-duty FBI agents to tape the Kentucky practices, but that’s really nothing the slightest bit out of the ordinary).

My point is this: rivalries are special and they require … the only word I can think of is “maintenance.” As the old axiom goes, “there is a thin line between love and hate” — they are opposite ends of the same consuming emotion. In our “real” lives — independent of the sports world – strong relationships or aversions require something to keep them going. Anyone who is married (or perhaps used to be) knows this is true. By the same token, for most people, the same is true for hateful relationships (the exception to this being people like Adolph Hitler, members of the KKK, and the like – they simply enjoy hatred too much, which is why they have special condos reserved for them at the warmer end of Hell). For most of us, however, it is hard to continue truly despising someone, unless they give us a reason to do so. The fundamental point here is that, over time, both good and bad emotions cool and fade.

The same is true for college football rivalries. The peculiar thing is that, unlike personal relationships, a heaping helping of animus and acid can be a good thing when it comes to football. Thus, keeping the flames of animosity burning is very important. Thus, I pose a simple question:

What is the “state” of football rivalry at Tennessee?

As a general rule, I think that the core rivalries between Tennessee and others are healthy and hateful. Then again, precisely who is Tennessee’s biggest rival?

Throughout the history of the Tennessee Football program, rivalries have often been heated, but not always lasting. For orange-blooded fans who came of age at any time during the period spanning from the late 1950s up until the early 1990s, there really was little question about who the Vols’ most despised rival is and always will be. Falling within this era, it is easy for me to give rivalry a face…

I know the true colors of mine enemy, and he is as crimson as blood in the vein.

Yes, for me Tennessee’s greatest rival will always be the Alabama Crimson Tide — there is no other rivalry in my mind which even comes close. It is a rivalry which spans decades — beginning in the late 1930s and the era of General Neyland, flowing into the late 1950s and 60s and the emergence of the man known as “Bear,” and continuing up to the present. To me, the truest rivalry for Tennessee is its blood-feud with the Tide. The Tennessee / Alabama series is Dixie’s great football war. To me, the most important game of the season will always be known not by its participants, but by its date…

…The Third Saturday in October.

This is what I have always known, this is what resonates with me. For some followers of the Big Orange, however, the face of rivalry takes on a decidedly different hue. Most notably, Vol fans who cemented their bonds in the 1990s — in many instances — consider not the Tide, but the Florida Gators to be the most fearsome rivalry for Tennessee. Given the course of SEC football history for the last 15 years or so, this is understandable.

Still others — due to location, personal experience, perceived slights, the balance of power, where their ex-spouses went to school, how much they’ve had to drink, or whether it is a Tuesday — consider other teams to be Tennessee’s greatest rival, such as the Georgia Bulldogs or the Memphis Tigers (which I simply don’t get).

Thus, I suppose it is fair to ask who is Tennessee’s greatest rival?

If you look at rivalries in terms of tradition and history, I really think it is hard to argue with the notion that Tennessee and Alabama have fought one another doggedly for a longer period of time than any of the other schools in the SEC. My blood still simmers at the thought that Alabama is one of only a handful of schools against whom Tennessee has an all-time losing record. In 89 contests since 1901, Tennessee is 38-44-7 all-time against the Tide. Even more bothersome for me were the two noteworthy streaks by Alabama during my lifetime: 1971-1981 and 1986-94. During those 20 seasons, Tennessee’s record against the Tide was an abysmal 0-19-1.

Statistics like that make you wake up at 3:00 am and retch your guts out — therein lies the birth of rivalry.

Then, of course there are the Florida Gators. Surprisingly to some, Tennessee and Florida have only played 36 times in the schools’ collective histories. Tennessee clings to a lead in the series at 19-17-0. That statistic, however, is really a tale of two different eras. From 1916 until 1990, Tennessee was 14-6-0 versus the Gators, but from 1991 to the present, Tennessee is only 5-11-0. Those numbers speak volumes about the way that series has changed since the day a guy named Steve Spurrier walked into Gainesville and — for the first time in the history of the University of Florida — made the Gators respectable. From there it was a short way to making them winners. It is easy to understand why many modern fans of the Vols seethe with venom at the mention of the U of F.

Of course mere competition and loathing is not the only thing that goes into a rivalry — there are a lot of  other elements to a rivalry, including that little thing called “respect.” Even though I consider Alabama and Florida to be Tennessee’s two main rivals in the modern era, the “faces” of those rivalries in my eyes are decidedly different.

I hate to lose to Alabama. Hate it, hate it, hate it with a passion — with all that I am,  I hate to lose to those people.  Man, do I hate it!  I do not, however, hate Alabama — I respect them.  No, that does not mean I want Phil Fulmer to start emulating Nick Saban, or anything like that, but as a program — taking all of the history, tradition, fans, and other intangibles into account — I do respect the Crimson Tide. I have often described Tennessee’s rivalry with the Tide as a “classic” or “gentlemen’s” rivalry (and, no, that doesn’t mean that there are pole dancers involved). Speaking from my own experience, I would sum it up like this:

When it comes to the Tennessee / Alabama game, you pull like hell for your team in the stadium, and then you drink a beer with one another after it is over…

My point is that while the Vols and the Tide may declare war on the field — for me — it stays on the field. I can honestly say that any time Alabama is playing a non-conference opponent I pull for the Tide without reservation. The rivalry is one grounded in mutual respect (after all, I think Johnny Majors in his prime could drink just as much bourbon as the Bear — which is pretty cool, if you ask me). I know there are those who will disagree with me on this, but that’s what the rivalry “feels” like to me.

When it comes to Florida, on the other hand, I cannot stand one single thing about that school, and having attended games in Gainesville on multiple occasions, I can honestly say that I’d rather have my intestines removed through my nose … with a spoon … than go back. That would be true regardless of whether Tennessee won the game or not. I am not going to use this article as a flame-fest and just talk about how much I hate Florida, and I’m trying very hard not to let my personal thoughts and bad experiences seep into this too much — there’s no point or value in that. Thus, in the interest of avoiding a slanging match, I will use an example.

As many Tennessee fans can doubtless recall, on several occasions there have been instances where, Florida winning against another team (most notably Georgia) would help Tennessee in terms of the Vols’ ranking in the SEC East.  I remember being asked at the time, whether I would pull for Florida if it would help the Vols. My response to that question is as simple as it is heartfelt:

I hate Florida more than I love the Vols…

I will never pull for Florida under any circumstance, no matter how much it might hurt the Vols. Suffice it to say, based on my personal experience I have no respect for the Gators. Not a drop.

That is but one more reason Alabama ranks first in my book…

Thus, the team which I rank as Tennessee’s greatest rival is not the team I hate most — which I suppose is inherently inconsistent. For me, however, a rivalry is something more than unabashed hatred — though it does go a long way toward starting a rivalry. Ultimately, I feel that a true rivalry requires more. For me, that will always mean Alabama. Quite frankly, I don’t think Florida is worth elevating to that status (yep, that one’s gonna get me some hate mail).

Of course, another thing that must be considered if assessing these rivalries is what the rival thinks of Tennessee. For any rivalry to be maintained, the feelings of animosity must be mutual. Let me give you an example.

The reality is that most fans of the Vanderbilt Commodores probably consider the Vols to be their biggest rival. Tennessee and Vanderbilt are only about 3 hours apart, and they both call the same state home. It is easy for Vanderbilt to hate Tennessee. If you ask the average Vol fan, however, it is doubtful that Vanderbilt is anywhere near the top of their list of Tennessee’s rivals in terms of significance. While Vol fans tend to take Vanderbilt more seriously than they used to since Vanderbilt’s 2005 victory against the Vols — snapping Tennessee’s 22-game win streak — with an overall series record of 68-27-5 in Tennessee’s favor, it is doubtful most orange-clad faithful truly despise Vanderbilt. Having been present at Vanderbilt’s 2005 win, there were more than a few Vol fans (already disgusted with Tennessee’s performance that year) who openly congratulated Vanderbilt, or — at a minimum — admitted that the ’Dores were due.

Still, it wasn’t always that way…

From 1892 until 1927, Vanderbilt dominated Tennessee, compiling a record of 18-2-3 against the hapless Vols. The rivalry between the two schools was so great that, in 1925, when it came time to hire a new football coach, Robert Neyland was told that the only requirement of his employment was that he beat Vanderbilt. Keen on maintaining his livelihood, Neyland completely reshaped the dynamic of the Tennessee / Vanderbilt rivalry. Under Neyland, Tennessee began establishing itself as a winning program and embarked on an 82 year stretch during which Vanderbilt would win a grand total of 9 games in 77 tries. With that change, the rivalry rapidly faded into memory — at least for Tennessee fans.

So do Alabama and Florida consider Tennessee to be a true rival?

While I am not going to purport to speak for the Tide or the Gators (and I freely invite any comments from those out there who might actually stumble upon this article) I would imagine that the Vols are definitely an “honorable mention” in terms of rivalry for each. Still, given the fact that both Alabama and Florida have fierce in-state rivalries with the Auburn Tigers and Florida State Seminoles respectively, I doubt that — if polled — a majority at either school would place Tennessee at the top of the heap in terms of rivalry. In fact, at some level, I question whether any school in the SEC other than Vanderbilt would dub Tennessee as their most hated rival. The one other possible candidate might be the Georgia Bulldogs who — for the better part of my lifetime — have seemed utterly unable to consistently find a way to beat Tennessee no matter how heavily skewed the odds are in the Bulldogs’ favor.

I suppose, in the end, Tennessee is everyone’s second most hated team…

Either way, however, I do hope that these rivalries continue to exist and grow in terms or their intensity and fervor. While “true” hatred (and by that I mean real hatred of real people along the lines of the whackos noted at the top of this article) is a terribly ugly and reprehensible thing, I believe that a little faux-hatred directed at another team (not its individual fans) can be a very healthy thing for the game of college football — if for no other reason than to drive those competitive instincts into a fury. While I feel Tennessee’s rivalries with Alabama and Florida are in good shape at present — at least in terms of their staying power — it is always possible that they could fizzle out.

Of course, each fan of each team has the ability to define rivalry in their own terms. So too, changes in the game constantly reshape the landscape of college football, creating new affection, enmity, and apathy. Thus, it is impossible for me to say who Tennessee’s biggest rival will be in 10 years, 20 years, or beyond. I will not try to tell anyone what team they should despise.

I just hope that they find that one team … and keep those fires stoked for years to come.

– Go Figure …

You hardly have to be a genius to realize that I am a college sports fan.

Whether I qualify as “die hard” is open to interpretation, I suppose. Still, as a VASF donor for more than a decade, season ticket holder for Tennessee Volunteers football, and as an individual who travels over six hours one-way to see each football game in Knoxville, I probably fall into the “dyed-in-the-wool” category placing me in the top tier of college fans when it comes to dedication (or lunacy depending on your perspective).

Either way, at various times in my life, I have contemplated becoming a more avid fan of professional sports. At times I have even been a “real” fan of certain teams by most standards. That being said, no matter what I do, I always seem to lose my interest in professional sports and return to my roots as a college football fan…

… or perhaps professional sports loses interest in me.

No, that last statement is not intended to be a wildly arrogant and self-centered declaration of my importance in the sports world. On the contrary, it is meant to show my complete insignificance — along with the millions of other sports fans out there.

In case you missed it, after forty-one years in the “City Which is Never Dry,” the Seattle Supersonics are pulling up stakes and heading to Oklahoma City to be known as the Oklahoma Clod-kickers, or something along those lines.

The era of the Supersonics is over…

Owing to the fact that I live on the Right-Coast and parted ways with the NBA in the mid-1990s, I was really not tuned into this story until after the final announcement was made. I make no claims to be a Supersonics fan, and can really only think of 2 Supersonics players ever: Shawn Kemp and Xavier McDaniel (mainly because he choked Wes Mathews in the middle of a game which is the sort of thing I tend not to forget). Still, I feel for the Supersonics’ fans, and I assume that there are a fair number of them, whether they be “die hard” or not. While I know that Seattle may potentially get another team some day, as a practical matter they now understand how SMU fans felt when their team got the death penalty for football. The only difference is that, unlike SMU who was finally able to resume play, Seattle’s program is gone for good — gonzo, outta here, dead, kaput, snuffed it …

If I am a Seattle Supersonics fan, that just plain sucks…

That got me to thinking (which is so rarely a good thing). The fact that the Supersonics could up and vanish like a fart in the wind, is the reason why I personally will never be anything more than an occasional fan of professional sports. At so many levels, that disturbs me. It also brings back a few memories.

Read the rest of this entry »

Well, the Tarheads of North Carolina were soundly defeated by the Kansas Jayhawks last night … so much for all the talking heads that were prepared to crown the “Fightin’ Smurfs” the national champions so prematurely.

Thus, we are left with the aforementioned Kansas Jayhawks, and the Memphis Tigers. This one should actually be quite interesting.

First, there is the run-and-gun style of Memphis. Obviously, Tennessee saw what Memphis brings to the Court back in February, and proved that the Tigers are beatable …

… but not easily.

The Tarheads made it clear on Saturday night that Kansas, in fact, is as good as everyone says when it comes to defense … or that the Tarheads were sorely overrated. I’m going with the first choice.

Thus, we have a potential collision of two great teams for a national championship — one which most people didn’t necessarily anticipate.

Once again, all of this goes to show what the talking heads actually know.

So who is going to win? Well, I know that statisticians believe that you can truly break a game like this down to a bunch of numbers, and those mythical tea leaves will tell you with a fair amount of certainty who is likely to win, in a given situation. I will be the first to admit that I most certainly do not have a mind for statistics. One of the primary reasons that I am a shyster (lawyer) is because I cannot reliably complete the most basic mathematical computations.

I am an utter moron when it comes to numbers…

That said, I do respect “the numbers” and their ability to help shape our predictions and perceptions of various teams. Though I am often at a loss to explain the methodology by which they are computed, I am sincerely in awe of the analyses that great statistics gurus can produce. A great example of that is pretty much anything you find over at the BruceBall Blog. With the game coming up between the Jayhawks and the Tigers, however, I am a little less convinced that any statistical analysis can truly predict what we will see when the teams actually meet. This is not because I doubt the statisticians, au contraire, I believe that this game will be as methodically and precisely broken down as probably any other game this season. All of the brains of the sports world will calculate and quantify every facet of the game that they possibly can.

The only problem with statistical analysis is that you cannot quantify heart …

By the time a team reaches the finals of the NCAA Tournament, there really can be little question that they are really good. It is true that a team can be lucky, but you cannot be that lucky for that long — at least I don’t believe you can. I am sure there are ways of calculating how likely every shot might fall, but the fact remains that both of these teams are fine basketball teams, and have successfully proven that they deserve to be in the championship game. They have proven that they both possess the ability to win in difficult situations, they have the ability to rise to the occasion under pressure, that they are focused enough to fight to the end…

Thus, in my non-statistical mind, the ultimate determining factor in a game such as this is which team has the most heart. Everyone know that Memphis is a lousy free-throw shooting team — no question about it. In the game versus the UCLA Bruins, however, Memphis hardly seemed to miss a free-throw, especially in the second-half. In the end, the Tigers simply played harder, and wanted it more badly than UCLA. They had more heart when it came down to the end.

The same is true of Kansas. When the Tarheads came roaring back in the second-half and cut the lead to 5, it looked like Kansas was going to flame-out. Instead, the Jayhawks looked inside themselves, dug deep, and managed to find a way to stretch it back out.

I think that sort of thing is precisely what will be the final deciding factor in the game between these two teams in San Antonio on Monday.

All season long, I wrote of the heart that the BasketVols showed. I wrote about that not just because I lack the ability to make any other cogent statements on the fortunes of my favorite team, but because I felt it was the most important asset that the Vols had as a team. I think that same is true for the teams that will battle for the championship on Monday night.

So, Memphis, Kansas, which one of you wants it more?

I have no idea what the answer to that question might actually be. Either way, it is guaranteed to be a great game, and whichever team wins, there is no question that they have earned it.

– Go Figure …