The Majors tradition

Johnny Majors is the John McCain of Tennessee football – a largely irrelevant, bitter crank who can’t get past what he perceives as shabby treatment.  I mean, I understand that he’s royally pissed off about how he was replaced by Fulmer and that’s why he’s more than happy to give his opinion of every new football coach garbed in orange and white, but frankly, why should we give a rat’s ass at this point about that?

I guess that’s part of what passes for “legacy” at UT these days.


Filed under Because Nothing Sucks Like A Big Orange

92 responses to “The Majors tradition

  1. gilzmo

    Sen. Blutarsky is the John McCain of SEC football blogging– a largely irrelevant, bitter crank who can’t get past an innocuous Knoxville newspaper blurb that he perceives as a shabby story treatment. I mean, I can’t understand why he’s royally pissed off that local Vols fans would be interested in what their legendary former coach would say about a head coaching change at Tennesseee, but frankly, why should we give a rat’s ass at this point?

    I guess that’s part of what passes for “off-season insight” at Get The Picture these days.

    • “We”? I do not think that word means what you think it means, local Vol fan.😉

    • Dog in Fla

      “a largely irrelevant, bitter crank who can’t get past an innocuous Knoxville newspaper”

      gilzmo, i have found that flattery will get you nowhere around here.

      Besides that, I thought that all wrongs rendered unto Johnny by UT were righted when Mike paid Phil $5 M to retire. Not so much the money but making Phil go away. Sure Johnny thought he should have received more money when UT traded him in for Phil but with now, with Mike in charge, timing is everything. Just ask Lane and Derek.

    • Ben

      Says the guy who’s reading the blog on a Saturday afternoon. Way to take a legitimate stance there, guy.

  2. Senator, you know those Vol fans are sensitive. It’s not nice of you to hurt their feelings. Or use pronouns with subtle meanings that will confuse them.

    So if Majors is McCain, does that make Kiffykins Sarah Palin, the up-and-comer whose time was over before it ever really got there?

    • Silver Creek Dawg


    • Brandon

      Boy the little ole hockey mom must really scare you leftist types something fierce, you just can’t help yourselves from randomly bashing her on a college football blog can you? Palin Derangement Syndrome, some things never change. If the Laner is anyone he is Obama, some naive political neophyte who really had never run anything to speak of (at least Palin had been a Mayor and a Governor and had actually had to balance a budget before). Like Obama the Kiffster’s time in Knoxville came in such a hopey changey kind of way but in the end the Big Urnge nation was much worse off once he left than before he came. Liberal or not though I still love all the Dawg fans, at least you’ve got that going for you and I hope therefore one day you will see the light, maybe even that Doug Gillet guy will, probably not but at least he is funny.

  3. Left to Right

    “A largely irrelevant, bitter crank who can’t get past what he perceives as shabby treatment.”

    I think that’s also a good description of Fulmer today.

  4. Section Z alum

    me giggle, chuckle. you make fun of mccain, ut, one time.

  5. Macallanlover

    While I thought McCain ran a horrible campaign in 2008, I resent having a war hero who is basically a fine man characterized as “a largely irrelevant, bitter crank”. But then, given the naive, political drivel that comes from left field these days who should be surprised? A very serious wake-up call is coming for the stupidity of elections since 2006, and I am afraid there is no way to avoid it. I am only sorry for the generations that come after mine; we have squandered what we were handed and there is just no excuse for that.

    • … for the stupidity of elections since 2006…

      Just since then?

      • Phocion

        The Senator is right…this nation did elect Jimmy Carter and significant portions still treat him as if he is sentient.

    • Dog in Fla

      Controversy, valid or not, has always dogged McCain since he skated through the Academy and, even with that, almost finished as anchorman.

      From what I remember, in the active duty Navy, he was called a lot of things and ‘hero’ or ‘fine man’ were never among them.

      The 2006 mid-terms and the 2008 elections were the start of a correction for the stupidity of the 2000 and 2004 elections.

      • Macallanlover

        Good Lord, your inability to comprehend is pathetic, but you are in good company…..numerically if not intellectually. A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

        Enough of the political jabber on a sports blog. Even if it were the appropriate forum, I don’t engage in arguments with people who are smart enough to get it, but for whatever reason choose the other path. And I have seen enough of your statements to know you aren’t worth my time. I accept there are people like you among us and that our country, at least in the past, has given you the right to feel and express anything you wish. I hold out hope only for those who simply don’t know getting enlightened in time.

        That last statement may be naive of me, but it is the only hope for optimism I have. Sadly, as an odds player I feel a catastrophe is unavoidable. Enjoy your “correction”, you certainly are in a great position to recognize stupidity.

        • Seriously

          I don’t engage in arguments with people who are smart enough to get it

          Wow, how remarkably honest of you to admit this.

        • Jeff Sanchez

          “Enough of the political jabber on a sports blog”

          …says the dude who started the political jabber

      • ChicagoDawg

        Good grief

      • Chris

        10% unemployment, unsustainable government growth, healthcare take over, 47% approval for the President, and 18% approval for Congress. Yep voting out stupid Republicans really worked.

        • Seriously

          10% unemployment

          Does Bush deserve any blame for handing Obama the worst economy since the great depression?

          unsustainable government growth

          Agreed, but this has been going on for 34 years – hard for me to ignore Obama’s predecessors and blame him for everything.

          healthcare take over

          Healthcare is – and will continue to be – run by private companies and charitable groups (i.e. there is no “take over”).

          47% approval for the President

          …and climbing.

          18% approval for Congress

          …and descending.

          Yep voting out stupid Republicans really worked.

          As the Senator is fond of stating, it’s in the eye of the beholder, but I honestly believe we are better off than we would have been with John “bomb-bomb-bomb, bomb-bomb-Iran” McCain and Caribou Barbie running the country.

          Now, back to college football…

          • JaxDawg

            I cannot take you seriously when the Democrats have controlled Congress since November of 2006.

            I think you need to recall Jimmy Carter to understand what initiated the housing crisis (CRA). All George Bush did was lower rates to avert a recession left to him by Bill Clinton. How myopic of you.

            Regardless of anyone’s opinion, November will remind leftists like yourself that this country is of a center/right mindset. This radical administration will be rendered impotent soon enough.

            Now, back to football.

            • Seriously

              “Deficits don’t matter.”

              –George W. Bush (and every other republican in “leadership” [sic] from 2000 to 2008)

              How conveniently myopic of YOU to ignore one party’s contribution to the current mess we’re in and blame the other party for EVERYTHING. How biased of you to recognize that while democrats controlled congress since 2006, Bush vetoed or promised to veto any legislation they passed. How arrogant of you to proclaim you know the results of the November elections months in advance. What a pity it is that you cannot take me seriously – I’m deeply saddened by this.

            • I think you need to recall Jimmy Carter to understand what initiated the housing crisis (CRA). All George Bush did was lower rates to avert a recession left to him by Bill Clinton.

              Oy. I’ve been in the business for thirty years and for you to reduce the current debacle to those two sentences is ridiculous. Both parties bear an equal amount of blame for the mess. The mortgage market is a perfect example of what happens when politicians play sides. All sides, including Wall Street’s (which, by the way, had nothing to do with the CRA).

              • JaxDawg

                There isn’t enough oxygen on this planet to allow us to debate this here, but it all started with the CRA. And remind me whose administration was in control when the bubble burst in march, 2000?

                And to suggest that supply-side economics doesn’t work is absolutely foolish. Reagan already fought, and won, this argument. But go ahead and support demand-side and higher taxes, Senator.

                • You think the housing bubble burst in 2000? Funny, I missed that.

                  Supply side economics failed miserably this past decade. That’s the real reason Bush pushed down interest rates – to replace the middle class income growth that was supposed to be stimulated by the tax cuts, his administration handed out cheap credit to keep retail consumption going.

                  It’s not all Bush’s fault. The Clintonistas pushed Fannie and Freddie into some outrageously stupid behavior. Majorities in both parties thought it was a swell idea to remove the regulatory framework from the banks that had been put in place in the wake of the last round of bank failures. And everyone turned a blind eye to what was going on on Wall Street.

                  You keep kidding yourself with that CRA stuff, though.

                  • ChicagoDawg

                    Not speaking for him, but I understood him to mean the bubble, which burst in 2000. I don’t think this observation is in much dispute.

                    • If that’s the case, it’s irrelevant at best and silly at worst. It’s not like what happened there was the result of government interference in the market.

                    • JaxDawg

                      Allow me to respond since there is no reply below – Fiscal and Monetary policy are equally powerful govt economic policy tools (as you know). Both parties are responsible for the crashes that occurred DURING their Presidential terms. That means both Clinton and Bush – not just Bush as so many darn democrats suggest.

                      You can’t have it both ways.

              • Hogbody Spradlin

                I thought interest rates were more a function of monetary (money supply) policy than fiscal (taxation) policy. In that vein we’ve been letting the Federal Reserve off pretty easy here. All the fed seemed to want to do in the 1990’s up to 2007 was avoid a repeat of the 1970’s. Innovative lenders and their investment bank backers came up with incredible new mortgage products because they could make their fees and spreads. And voila!

      • Seriously

        McCain is now claiming he never considered himself a “maverick”. I wonder if he considers himself a hypocrite.

        • Turd Ferguson

          Will Obama consider himself a hypocrite when middle class citizens have to start footing the bill for this ridiculous health care reform, as economists on all points of the political spectrum almost universally agree will be the case, contrary to the Messiah’s promises? (Not to mention all the other promises that I’d be willing to bet go unfulfilled before he’s voted out of office in a couple years.)

          And I give you three guesses as to how much I’ll care about McCain’s “maverick” talk at that point …

          And by the way, popular support for his health care reform is waning, his approval rating is falling (contrary to whatever leftist blog you’re apparently getting your information from), and I’m sorry, but the “blame it one Bush” meme is far too old for anyone to take seriously. No, the economy was not ideal at the end of Bush’s term. But so far, all Obama’s done is to take steps to make it exponentially worse. Bush may have handed Obama a Yugo, but Obama’s the one driving it off a cliff. (And for the record, this is all to ignore the fact that Democrats played a rather significant role in the decline of the economy starting in 2006-2007.)

          • Hey, what do you think those “economists on all points” have to say about the obscene costs of Medicare Plan D (far, far greater over the long term than Obamacare) or supply side economic theory in general?

            This is what I love about what passes for Republican perspective these days. Basically, every thing bad today can be traced back to when the Democrats regained control of Congress in 2006. Where were the tea parties when the Republicans were pissing all over federalism, keeping government out of our lives, etc.? Where were the howls of protest when Cheney famously declared that deficits don’t matter?

            The sad thing is that you guys think the Republican leadership – the same people that helped get us in the ditch with two wars and two massive tax cuts that are being paid for with borrowed money – are going to do so much better when they get back in power this time around. Suckers.

            • JaxDawg

              I would say conservative leadership, not necessarily Republican.

              • I’m sure you would, but it’s a meaningless distinction.

                • Phocion

                  No more or less than the difference between Democrat leadership and Socialist leadership.

                  (IF you want to blur lines, we can all do that!)

                  • Ah, the “S” word. Two questions: when did “liberal” lose its cachet and when can we expect you to go all in and call the Dems commies?🙂

                    • Phocion

                      To answer your question: When Liberals start remembering what those words actally mean.

                      Saw a bumper sticker not long ago on a car that also carried an Obama/Biden sticker. This sticker had a picture of George Washington and stated that “in his time he was a Liberal too.”

                      While the sentiment may be true, it was far from the justifiction and desired lineage that the driver was intending. Today, GeorgeWashington (and his views) would no doubt be categorized as a Far Right Wingnut.

                      When the Left learns to properly delineate between democratic, liberal, progressive, and socialist then, perhaps, we’ll hold out hope that they can tell the difference between a Republican, a conservative, and someone with far right views.

                      So long as ‘you’, the Democratic leadership, and the mainstream media refuse to recognize the difference between these categories ‘I’ and many other will feel no need to distinguish between the many school of belief on the Left in the country.

                      It’s ‘your’ ball, Senator. Why not start by getting your ‘friends’ to stop refering to GWB as ‘conservative’? Plain and simple, he wasn’t.🙂

                    • Why not start by getting your ‘friends’ to stop refering to GWB as ‘conservative’? Plain and simple, he wasn’t.

                      I agree with you.

                      The difference between us, I suspect, is that I didn’t think he was one when he was the President. 😉

                    • Hogbody Spradlin

                      George W. Bush is an ordinary man who rose to the occasion on one issue, and fumbled most of the others. Signing the Medicare drug benefit and the campaign finance regulation act were, among others, acts of mediocrity.

                      FDR was an ordinary mediocre man similar to Bush. He prolonged the depression, but rose to the occasion when real danger presented itself. The speech asking Congress to declare war may go down in greatness beside the Gettysburg address and Washington’s resignation speech.

                      Most of the people who run for president these days are ordinary people lacking in tempered judgment, whose one driving motivation is simply to be something. Obama may have honors degrees and been Harvard Law Review editor. Heaven forbid I imply he got a pass or a boost on anything because of race. However, I don’t think Obama fundamentally understands the US Constutition, federalism, or private property rights.

                      Obama also suffers from the main fault of modern liberals: moral hubris and the notion that they can avoid repeating history.

                      Sorry for the vent.

                    • Phocion

                      Well put, Hogbody. Today we are voting for ordinary men with extraordinary vices in some case. Rare is the occasion that it is otherwise.

                      Unless the country is willing to do something(s) ‘radical’ it is unlikely that the path back to ‘normalcy’ in our politics will be anything but a long, tedious one…one that we may never complete.

                    • Phocion

                      Nope…I didn’t think he was a ‘conservative’ either. But he sure as hell was far less liberal than Al Gore, Jr. or John Kerry.

                      Every time I go into the voting booth I know that I am voting for the lesser of two evils/bad choices/whatever. Until it is my name on the ballot I will never be voting for some one that I agree 100% with their politics. I accept that and thus vote for the person that is closer to my political beliefs. C’est la vie.

                • Mayor of Dawgtown

                  JD is right. There is no major conservative party right now. Both major parties are tax and spend parties with their only differences being budget priorities. It does not appear likely that a fiscally conservative group is in a position to take over either at present. Likewise it does not appear that a third party built on true conservative principles is in the offing. However JD’s point is a valid one if a viable conservative party were to be formed. The history of this country suggests that it can happen. The Federalists disappeared and the Whigs took their place. Likewise, the Whigs were replaced by the Republicans. I do think for this to happen it will have to be a new party. It does not appear that an already existing party, such as the Libertarians, has the traction necessary to become that major conservative party. When it has happened in the past it has been sudden, however.

                • JaxDawg

                  I know you’re a bright guy but I notice a pattern on your related posts – you want to have it both ways.

                  But you can’t. None of us can.

                  Take a stand and stick to it. You’ll garner more respect.


            • ChicagoDawg

              Republicans richly deserve and earned their place in the penalty box. They wandered off the fiscally conservative reservation and rightfully got their noses bloodied at the polls. My ideal is split government ala 1990s, where very few large activist policies, which results in reduced spending or significant changes in tax policy (specifically increases). Neither party seems particularly equipped with the maturity, skill or vision to lead. However, I will close with the fact that there is the mother of all spending bow waves coming in the next 3 decades. The entitlement outlays that were are facing will flatten this country if allowed to proceed without being cut.

              • ChicagoDawg

                Intended to say…..
                “My ideal is split government ala 1990s, where very few large activist policies are enacted, which results in reduced spending or significant changes in tax policy (specifically increases).”

    • Hogbody Spradlin

      Can we just stop this now. Here’s a distraction.

      • Macallanlover

        LOL, that again. On a more related topic, Bama looked pretty good today in their Spring Game. If we meet them in Atlanta, and I think we will, they will be a load. McElroy looked confident and sharp to me while the running game is deep. We can only hope our defensive players understand the new scheme well enough to keep our offense in the game. They lost some key players on defense.

        • Sparrow

          Yeah, but if we get there (and that’s a big if; I’m not irrationally exuberant about the coming season), Bama is going to be the one team, offensively, that is most familiar/comfortable going up against a 3-4. I know their scheme is different, but it won’t be as foreign to them as it will be to the other teams we face. I suppose the converse is just as true, we will be more at ease against their 3-4/4-4, but they’ve had years to put their D in place and we will be relative novices. Plus, McElroy maturing, us with a first year starter, Ingram being a beast… ugh.

          Let’s just hope we get there.

          • Macallanlover

            Agreed, I certainly don’t feel it is a given that we make the SECCG but feel we are at least equal to the other two viable contenders in 2010. There is reason to be cautiously optimistic about us making it due to competitive analysis and schedules of the other Eastern teams.

            A potential matchup with Alabama is interesting although it heavily favors the Tide with an experienced QB, a returning Heisman winner at RB, and continuity of defensive scheme. Just want to be there and get a shot at the upset. Our questions marks at QB and defense will have been answered positively by then, or we wouldn’t be there. I like that Alabama has both SC and UF on their regular season schedule this fall.

    • ChicagoDawg

      Well stated…perhaps “bitter crank” can be used by some to describe Sen. McCain, but I am of the belief that anyone who spent a few Christmas Eve’s in the luxurious Hanoi Hilton is anything but “irrelevant”….but maybe that is just me.

      • Turd Ferguson

        It’s definitely not just you.

      • No disrespect intended to McCain’s military service, but perhaps you can explain to me what his political legacy is today. From my perspective, for a man who’s spent more than three decades in Washington, it’s threadbare at best.

        • ChicagoDawg

          Not a huge McCain advocate, politically. My point was that, his political views notwithstanding, he will never be “irrelevant.” I think he, and his fellow POWs (and all other VietNam Vets for that matter), have secured their place of relevance in American history.

          • Well, like I said, I respect that part of his resume. I, however, was referring to his public career.

            • Mayor of Dawgtown

              A guy can be a war hero and still be a lousy leader in politics. You can respect the hero part while still disagreeing (and even despising) their politics. I respect John Kerry’s service, too. But I think he and McCain both suck as national leaders. This is why the nation is in the mess it’s in. We have guys like them (and W and Obama) in leadership positions instead of people like George Washington, Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson.

    • NRBQ


      Upon whom we can always depend for the knee-jerk.

      You really needn’t “correct” everything you read on the internet with which you disagree. You’re squandering your talents.

      C’mon, let’s talk football.

  6. Villified Republican Minority

    Senator, after much consultation with our counsel, we are informing you that you may only refer to conservative politicians by the following terms: “cute,” “hot”, “hott,” “OMG hott,” “cuddly,” and, if necessary, “the shit.” Except when talking about Sarah Palin, of course; then you may never say anything inappropriate, just as we never have of Hilary Clinton. Also, you may never may disparaging remarks about our war heroes whose politics and manner you don’t care for. Unless they’re running against George W. Bush; then you can say whatever you want.

    • Seriously

      Why is it the leading women of the right wing are such hotties? Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Katherine Harris… all very doable MILFs. Of course, I would have to stuff a sock in their mouths in the vain hope they would STFU.

    • JaxDawg

      ….soon to be majority.

  7. gilzmo

    Senator, Not a Vol fan and don’t live in Tennessee. Luv me some Dawgs, man, and I ‘m a big fan of your site. Just thought you could have used one more pot of coffee before you fired off this post, that’s all. I guess I could have said that, but it seemed more effective to use your own words. Seems real pissy and a lot petty, don’t it? Sure stirred up your homies. I was most impressed with MaconDawg. When a Macongonite flashes a “subtle” knowledge of pronoun useage–golly–he surely must have graduated at the top of his GED class. A real dangling participle…Anyhow, thanks for all the good posts.

    • Ben in Georgia

      “Seems real pissy and a lot petty, don’t it?”

      Careful! Wouldn’t want to confuse us Maconites with such brilliantly crafted sentences that clearly demonstrate your educational superiority.

  8. NRBQ

    And Senator, I’ve said it before.

    Bless your heart for weekend blog fun. You are the Walmart of Dawg sites (open every day).

  9. Johnny was always good for stirring the pot. Looks like he’s still at it.
    Senator, your readers sure covered a lot of ground on this post. Entertaining bunch.

  10. Dog in Fla

    All of this non-football stuff makes me think about the hundreds of teabaggers, militia members and hardcore Republicans across this great country of ours and just how tough things are for them…

    • Phocion

      …just love how homosexual slurs are okay if they come from Anderson Cooper and the rest of the pillowbitters* on the Left. But let someone of the Right utter such a epithet… Oh, there is no end to the crying and villification!

      *See what I did there? Go ahead, prove me wrong.

      • Bill Maher, Keith Olbermann, & Rachel Maddow

        You, sir, are a racist, homophobic, teabagger who traffics in panda meat and doesn’t recycle.

      • ChicagoDawg

        Indeed, I actually find the teaparty movement, like most populist movements, fairly banal and not all that inspiring. Long on emotion, over simplified conclusions and hyperbolic rhetoric. I also think that Sarah Palin is a bag of hammers. However, the Left can freely use “teabagging/teabagger” in an effort to demean these people and their movement. In any other context, should someone use those terms in a way that is meant to be derisive, they would be shouted down as a homophobic.

      • Mayor of Dawgtown

        What’s a “pillowbitter?”

      • Dog in Fla

        *See what I did there? Go ahead, prove me wrong.”

        Will do.

        “The term’s growth in the political arena earned attention by the Oxford American Dictionary, and the word “teabagger” achieved finalist status for the OAD Word of the Year, with final judgment rendered thus:[15]

        As a reference to members of the currently active Tea Party, the word has been used in speech and print by both liberals and conservatives. In this context, the term “teabagger” is a reasonably conceived informal name for an affiliate of the Tea Party, and as a word in the news, it earned a mention for the year 2009.”

        • Walker07

          The point isn’t that the right doesn’t use the term, it’s just that when a liberal says something like “teabagger” its swept under the rug and goes unnoticed, but yet when conservatives/republicans/”tea partiers” use the same phraseology they’re labeled as homophobic and racist and the left tries to leverage those labels to advocate not taking the movement seriously.

          For instance, that whole wise Latina making better decisions than a white man thing is not a racist phrase, but yet a non-democrat questioning the president’s agenda is by default racially motivated.

          • … yet when conservatives/republicans/”tea partiers” use the same phraseology they’re labeled as homophobic…

            Riiight. Because they’re clearly not.

            I’m a tolerant person. I don’t care about your private life, Lindsey, but as our U.S. Senator I need to figure out why you’re trying to sell out your own countrymen, and I need to make sure you being gay isn’t it.

            No doubt the rhetoric from some on the left is over the top. But there’s little doubt that the motives of many in the tea party movement deserve reproach.

            • Dog in Fla

              First, they came for Lindsey. Then they came for that South Carolina Lieutenant Governor.

              (Are there no hot chicks in Columbia who will go out on a safety date?)

              Then they came for Southern Baptist preachers who were not hardshell enough like this bad-ass “Pastor Stan Craig, of the Choice Hills Baptist Church, [who] was particularly angry about the state of Washington, saying he “was trained to defend the liberties of this nation.” He declared that he was prepared to “suit up, get my gun, go to Washington, and do what they trained me to do.”

              Which means take an offering, hold a Wednesday night prayer meeting and get the church to give him an all expense paid vacation to the Holy Land.

              Why do they want to make Lindsey change teams? Leave Lindsey alone!

              The ‘serious movement’ hasn’t figured out yet that if they make Lindsey change teams, they’ll be on the wrong side of the super-majority in the Senate again.

              Then another terrible assault on America like delicate and mild healthcare reform could occur.

  11. Russ

    I was wondering how a little jab at the Vols could generate 68 (now 69) comments. Sadly, now I know.

  12. Dog in Fla

    A 420 “Note to Republicans: when even Mark Halperin is calling you out for lying, the conventional wisdom is turning against you.”