Well, he didn't inherit Jones. Currie fired Jones and had an agreement in place to get Leach, but Phil worked back channels with the BoT to basically cockblock Currie and Leach (not important whether that was "right" or not, he went backdoor to get his way which hints to how he would be if he was your boss). Currie was then fired and Phil stepped in and botched the entire process, finally getting someone to agree to be coach. The rumors have been consistent for some time that Phil is very "hands on" and has an omnipresence around the football office. Not in a good way I should add. For Phil, it's about UT and Phil, not just UT. All AD's have ego's, but this is on another level.
Leach said himself the meeting with Currie really didn't go anywhere. IIRC, Currie went off the reservation even flying out to meet with Leach and didn't have approval from the Chancellor or anyone else. That's on top of the Schiano scandal. I don't have an issue with either Leach or Schiano to be honest, but Currie seemed to invite his demise.
As far as Phil being hands on, I don't see that as an excuse for poor performance. I agree though if he's heavy handed, it's not a good look for incoming coaches. At the same time, UT hasn't won 10 games in a season since Phil was coach, so I can understand a bit of micro management.
BTW, when I said inherited Jones, I meant the general situation, and meant he wasn't a Fulmer hire.
Meanwhile, you have a fanbase that is passionate, but irrational. If Lea would go 8-4 (similar to ole Butch), they will run him out of town (and that is likely given the schedule they would have, so long as Saban is around). The school has finished in the top 10 one time this millennium. The run in the mid-late 90's was fantastic, but the SEC was a 2 team league at that point. It was UF/UT. Bama was at the end of the Stallings era before they went to the abyss, UGA was languishing under Goff and Jimmy D, LSU was untapped potential and Auburn was cheating but still losing 4+ a year. The SEC is just so much different now and while there is obviously a significant amount of talent in the SE, UT doesn't have "home state" advantage like LSU / UF / UGA does. It's an uphill climb thru and thru.
There's some great talent in TN, and they've been doing pretty darn good recruiting.
And all fanbases are irrational. If they weren't, they wouldn't be trying to get back to the 90s form. Do you expect them to say "hey, we shouldn't try to win because GA and FL are in our division"? FL just started coming on. UGA is looking all that great, and has never been able to get over the hump. They've ruled over a lot of mediocrity, and lost to FL who really didn't have a good D.
I would much rather be at a school that a) doesn't have to play a guaranteed 3 games against the top 15 b) will pay me well (all the schools I mentioned would be over $3M per year) c) appreciate, but not demand, 9 wins annually
Plus, if you win 8-9 games a year, you will have your pick of top 10-15 jobs when they open. If your goal is to win a championship in your next spot, UT would have the best chance. But if your goal is to win a championship at some point, I would use some of the other schools as a stepping stone to something more. Matt Campbell isn't winning a championship at ISU. But Pruitt (or Butch or Dooley or Lane Train) isn't winning one at UT either. But Campbell at Texas would have a much better chance of a title than Campbell at Tennessee.
I agree if he's playing the long game, there might be other lesser schools to go to that might be a better, but weaker stepping stone.
If he's confident though, and a good coach, he'll have every resource at his disposal at TN.
BTW, Lane had TN going in the right direction. He's a bag of dicks, but the team was recruiting well, and playing well under him. I had season tix that year. Most losses were very close, even against Florida (who I think was #1 when they played) and Bama (who was #1 at that point). They also smoked UGA.
