Thoughts on these comments?
"For anyone who cares-- Pruitt was hired with the implicit agreement that he would be given five years. There was consensus that UT couldn’t afford to make another coaching change in less than five years and that the new HC needed five years to rebuild a badly damaged program. Pruitt was Fulmer’s guy, and his hiring came with the expectation-- and assurance-- that Fulmer would use his experience to help Pruitt scale the learning curve, and together they could return UT to respectability within five years. If not, then UT would be recruiting well and be in a good position to make the necessary changes.
Pruitt wasn’t ready for a job as big, difficult and demanding as UT’s. Being a great DC doesn't make him good enough at the many facets of the HC job and he won’t be good enough for a while, if ever. Many donors and board members felt that UT should hire an experienced HC for a massive rebuild with high expectations and an impatient fanbase. Fulmer went way out on a limb for Pruitt, and UT unified behind him. Pruitt has been a disappointment and he’s a divisive personality. He’s pissed off a lot of people, so UT is no longer unified.
The easy solution is what needs to be done eventually is best done immediately. But Sexton negotiated a sweetheart deal for Pruitt, and Fulmer doubled down. Fulmer is tied to Pruitt, so don’t expect him to do anything except publicly stand behind this coaching staff. And don't expect a lot of donors to be okay with that.
Buying out assistants with longer-term contracts would be throwing money at the wrong solution. Either fix the problem or ride it out another year or two. "
"For anyone who cares-- Pruitt was hired with the implicit agreement that he would be given five years. There was consensus that UT couldn’t afford to make another coaching change in less than five years and that the new HC needed five years to rebuild a badly damaged program. Pruitt was Fulmer’s guy, and his hiring came with the expectation-- and assurance-- that Fulmer would use his experience to help Pruitt scale the learning curve, and together they could return UT to respectability within five years. If not, then UT would be recruiting well and be in a good position to make the necessary changes.
Pruitt wasn’t ready for a job as big, difficult and demanding as UT’s. Being a great DC doesn't make him good enough at the many facets of the HC job and he won’t be good enough for a while, if ever. Many donors and board members felt that UT should hire an experienced HC for a massive rebuild with high expectations and an impatient fanbase. Fulmer went way out on a limb for Pruitt, and UT unified behind him. Pruitt has been a disappointment and he’s a divisive personality. He’s pissed off a lot of people, so UT is no longer unified.
The easy solution is what needs to be done eventually is best done immediately. But Sexton negotiated a sweetheart deal for Pruitt, and Fulmer doubled down. Fulmer is tied to Pruitt, so don’t expect him to do anything except publicly stand behind this coaching staff. And don't expect a lot of donors to be okay with that.
Buying out assistants with longer-term contracts would be throwing money at the wrong solution. Either fix the problem or ride it out another year or two. "
