sidedoretoo wrote: Needless to say, I love where Vanderbilt football stands today.  In addition, my black-and-gold colored glasses (even though I have never been a Vanderbilt student or employee) see a bright future.  I'm basing that on these things:

1.  Realistically, Coach James Franklin among the least experienced head coach in the SEC.  I see him maturing and learning in a way that just doesn't happen with a more experienced coach.  In other words, his upside through experience is greater than most any other coach in the SEC.  (I believe this to be true of his staff, as a whole, too.)

2.  Did any other SEC school have less turnover in its staff?  Would it have been possible to have had less turnover?  That means you have lots of believers in what is going on.

3.  Speaking of believers, CJF has even me, a diehard Vandy fan of almost five decades, believing in Vandy even greater than I ever have before.  Vandy DOES have something to sell that should be attractive to ANY young man who is approached.  There is not a better combination of academic competition, athletic competition, physical location, and school size in the country.  I believe we have things to offer that Duke, Northwestern, Stanford, etc. cannot duplicate.  If you have the opportunity to go to Vanderbilt, you would be foolish to pass it up.

4.  As I see Butch Jones, Hugh Freeze, etc., pursure their careers at cookie-cutter, state schools, I wonder what do they have to offer that someone else can't offer.  Therefore, they are more likely to jump to another school similar to the one they are at if they have any kind of success.  On the other hand,  Vanderbilt is unique.  You can't go anywhere else and create the type of atmosphere you can at Vanderbilt (and CJF has seized that opportunity).

5.  At this point, Vanderbilt probably ranks 14th in athletic amenities.  That is going to change quickly and dramatically.  Again, why not come to Vanderbilt and enjoy the new things as the arrive.

6.  In this world, an international fan base can be developed.  That may sound odd, but I remember feeling as if, as a Vanderbilt fan, I was on another planet in East Tennessee.  At one time, I was so isolated from Vanderbilt news, I thought I was the only Vanderbilt fan in the world.  In this day and age, you can feel a part of any athletic family, regardless of where you live.  I now know I am one of many and that the base is growing.  That is due to the growth of the internet, improved tv packages, and CJF's branding.  It is much more significant to be unique and universal than it is to be the best in Tennessee.  We are unique and universal.  Our brand goes way beyond the confines of the state of Tennessee.

7.  Vanderbilt has people all over the world who are successful, demonstrating you can do it, too.  It doesn't hurt that some of those people are very visible (Snedekar, Price, Cutler, etc.).

So, while the present is great, the potential for the future is even greater.  Thanks for proving that, CJF and staff.

sidedoretoo wrote:

1.  Realistically, Coach James Franklin among the least experienced head coach in the SEC.  I see him maturing and learning in a way that just doesn't happen with a more experienced coach.  In other words, his upside through experience is greater than most any other coach in the SEC.  (I believe this to be true of his staff, as a whole, too.)

From 1979-1982, Tulane beat LSU 3 times in 4 seasons, including a memorable 48-7 thrashing in 1981.  It looked for all the world like LSU's dominance of Louisiana was at an end and that Tulane was not only at parity, but had surpassed LSU as the top program in the state.

Same thing happened with Southern Miss in Mississippi at about the same time--they won 4 out of 5 against Ole Miss and were dominating MSU and were the only school in the state that legend Marcus Dupree (there is a 30-for-30 doc on his recruitment on ESPN recently) considered when he was being recruited.

The thing is, the flagship state university in a state always has a huge built-in advantage against either a "directional" school or a private school.

Now, that said, UT has some unique disadvantages that may hold it back for a long time.  East Tennessee and adjacent regions of Appalachia produce very little D-1A football talent, so UT has always been heavily dependent on out-of-state recruiting.  That was not a problem as long as they were a top program, but now that they have fallen off the wagon, it is going to be much harder for them to get back on track than it was for LSU and Alabama when they fell on hard times, because the latter two have strong in-state recruiting bases.  And most of the talent that the state of Tennessee does produce comes out of Memphis, where loyalty to UT is not strong among the locals.

I have always thought that UT was like Nebraska in that regard--and you see how hard it has been for Nebraska to try to claw back to national stature without a strong natural recruiting base.

So without a really charismatic coach (and I don't think the current hire is one), they are going to struggle.

Vanderbilt does have an opportunity under Franklin to differentiate itself and he is doing a good job of that with recruits regionally and nationally--so I don't think you are really recruiting directly against UT in most cases outside of the state of Tennessee, itself.  And Vandy probably suffers somewhat in-state from the "snob factor", just as Tulane always has in Louisiana, which will give UT an advantage with many prospects.

I wish you well, despite the hostility I (and Ole Miss) sometimes get on this board--I like seeing the underdog succeed and like seeing schools succeed even as they keep their academic standards in place (as Stanford has done in football and Duke in basketball).

Just don't get too over-confident--ask Tulane.

4.  As I see Butch Jones, Hugh Freeze, etc., pursure their careers at cookie-cutter, state schools, I wonder what do they have to offer that someone else can't offer.  Therefore, they are more likely to jump to another school similar to the one they are at if they have any kind of success.  On the other hand,  Vanderbilt is unique.  You can't go anywhere else and create the type of atmosphere you can at Vanderbilt (and CJF has seized that opportunity).

NJReb wrote:

From 1979-1982, Tulane beat LSU 3 times in 4 seasons, including a memorable 48-7 thrashing in 1981.  It looked for all the world like LSU's dominance of Louisiana was at an end and that Tulane was not only at parity, but had surpassed LSU as the top program in the state.

Same thing happened with Southern Miss in Mississippi at about the same time--they won 4 out of 5 against Ole Miss and were dominating MSU and were the only school in the state that legend Marcus Dupree (there is a 30-for-30 doc on his recruitment on ESPN recently) considered when he was being recruited.

The thing is, the flagship state university in a state always has a huge built-in advantage against either a "directional" school or a private school.

Now, that said, UT has some unique disadvantages that may hold it back for a long time.  East Tennessee and adjacent regions of Appalachia produce very little D-1A football talent, so UT has always been heavily dependent on out-of-state recruiting.  That was not a problem as long as they were a top program, but now that they have fallen off the wagon, it is going to be much harder for them to get back on track than it was for LSU and Alabama when they fell on hard times, because the latter two have strong in-state recruiting bases.  And most of the talent that the state of Tennessee does produce comes out of Memphis, where loyalty to UT is not strong among the locals.

I have always thought that UT was like Nebraska in that regard--and you see how hard it has been for Nebraska to try to claw back to national stature without a strong natural recruiting base.

So without a really charismatic coach (and I don't think the current hire is one), they are going to struggle.

Vanderbilt does have an opportunity under Franklin to differentiate itself and he is doing a good job of that with recruits regionally and nationally--so I don't think you are really recruiting directly against UT in most cases outside of the state of Tennessee, itself.  And Vandy probably suffers somewhat in-state from the "snob factor", just as Tulane always has in Louisiana, which will give UT an advantage with many prospects.

I wish you well, despite the hostility I (and Ole Miss) sometimes get on this board--I like seeing the underdog succeed and like seeing schools succeed even as they keep their academic standards in place (as Stanford has done in football and Duke in basketball).

Just don't get too over-confident--ask Tulane.

NJReb wrote:

From 1979-1982, Tulane beat LSU 3 times in 4 seasons, including a memorable 48-7 thrashing in 1981.  It looked for all the world like LSU's dominance of Louisiana was at an end and that Tulane was not only at parity, but had surpassed LSU as the top program in the state.

Same thing happened with Southern Miss in Mississippi at about the same time--they won 4 out of 5 against Ole Miss and were dominating MSU and were the only school in the state that legend Marcus Dupree (there is a 30-for-30 doc on his recruitment on ESPN recently) considered when he was being recruited.

The thing is, the flagship state university in a state always has a huge built-in advantage against either a "directional" school or a private school.

Now, that said, UT has some unique disadvantages that may hold it back for a long time.  East Tennessee and adjacent regions of Appalachia produce very little D-1A football talent, so UT has always been heavily dependent on out-of-state recruiting.  That was not a problem as long as they were a top program, but now that they have fallen off the wagon, it is going to be much harder for them to get back on track than it was for LSU and Alabama when they fell on hard times, because the latter two have strong in-state recruiting bases.  And most of the talent that the state of Tennessee does produce comes out of Memphis, where loyalty to UT is not strong among the locals.

I have always thought that UT was like Nebraska in that regard--and you see how hard it has been for Nebraska to try to claw back to national stature without a strong natural recruiting base.

So without a really charismatic coach (and I don't think the current hire is one), they are going to struggle.

Vanderbilt does have an opportunity under Franklin to differentiate itself and he is doing a good job of that with recruits regionally and nationally--so I don't think you are really recruiting directly against UT in most cases outside of the state of Tennessee, itself.  And Vandy probably suffers somewhat in-state from the "snob factor", just as Tulane always has in Louisiana, which will give UT an advantage with many prospects.

I wish you well, despite the hostility I (and Ole Miss) sometimes get on this board--I like seeing the underdog succeed and like seeing schools succeed even as they keep their academic standards in place (as Stanford has done in football and Duke in basketball).

Just don't get too over-confident--ask Tulane.

I really have a hard time understanding the argument "James Franklin will bail when the big boys call".

Vanderbilt has rolled out the red carpet for him.  While his salary is not disclosed, it's been speculated to be around 3-3.5 million a year.  CJF is passionate about Vanderbilt, he has a fantastic relationship with David Williams (who almost provides a fatherly role that CJF didn't feel he got growing up) and the school has met every one of his requests.  In turn, CJF has definitely held up his end of the contract.

He gets it.

Why go be part of someone's long line of coaches in a traditional powerhouse where he'll always be in the Bear's shadow (or similar coaching legend) when you can build your own legacy at Vanderbilt, where they'll right songs about his glory.

NJReb wrote: You are right that having SEC membership is a key differentiating factor for Vanderbilt (being able to offer the uniques combination of elite academics and a chance to play in the nation's premiere football conference).

A couple of points about the Tulane analogy.  1) Back then (late 70's, early 80's), the SEC was by no means the undisputed premier football conference in the country--in fact, for several decades after Bear Bryant retired, it was rare for an SEC team to even be in serious contention for the national championship, much less win it....point being that playing in the SEC was not the differentiating factor for a school recruiting nationally then that it is now....that is a fairly recent phenomenon and 2) Tulane was an independent back then and its situation is similar to Vanderbilt's in that it is a private, academically-focused school that draws most of its student body from outside the state it is located in and was competing directly with an SEC school in the same state that had the loyalty of most of the state's population....as opposed to Memphis or Southern Miss, which are commuter schools that are not academically elite.

It was not a perfect analogy, but still an apt one, I think.  But you correctly pointed out how Vanderbilt's situation now is still different from what Tulane's was then.

NJReb wrote: "If your goal is not to win a national championship, then you are in the wrong profession."

Franklin can be successful at Vanderbilt, but is it realistic to think he could win a national championship there?

I kind of doubt it.

I heard a radio show on New Year's Day in which a Northwestern alum who was a reporter for ESPN was interviewing the Chicago Tribune reporter who covered Northwestern and when he was asked whether Northwestern could ever get to the level of Ohio State or Michigan, he noted that it was pretty unlikely because of the constraints, academic and otherwise (development of a fan base, for example) the school faced, all of which are similar to the problems Vanderbilt faces.

If Franklin has a burning ambition to succeed at the highest level, he will most likely leave at some point, no matter how much he loves Vanderbilt (which I think he does love).

But only he knows what is in his own heart.

Dore2004 wrote:

NJReb wrote: You are right that having SEC membership is a key differentiating factor for Vanderbilt (being able to offer the uniques combination of elite academics and a chance to play in the nation's premiere football conference).

A couple of points about the Tulane analogy.  1) Back then (late 70's, early 80's), the SEC was by no means the undisputed premier football conference in the country--in fact, for several decades after Bear Bryant retired, it was rare for an SEC team to even be in serious contention for the national championship, much less win it....point being that playing in the SEC was not the differentiating factor for a school recruiting nationally then that it is now....that is a fairly recent phenomenon and 2) Tulane was an independent back then and its situation is similar to Vanderbilt's in that it is a private, academically-focused school that draws most of its student body from outside the state it is located in and was competing directly with an SEC school in the same state that had the loyalty of most of the state's population....as opposed to Memphis or Southern Miss, which are commuter schools that are not academically elite.

It was not a perfect analogy, but still an apt one, I think.  But you correctly pointed out how Vanderbilt's situation now is still different from what Tulane's was then.

On a related note, I tend to think of Ole Miss as a commuter school with mediocre academics too.  Likewise, Ole Miss has enjoyed rare periods of success against the SEC football powerhouses in recent years, only to return to its regular place near the bottom of the conference.  It's not a perfect analogy, but still an apt one.