Looking back, maybe we overreacted a good bit here. I know what the knee-jerk reaction will be, but it's worthy of the some thoughtful consideration.
If you look at his first 4 years, he was 22-22-1, which is pretty dadgum good around these parts. Of course, he notched our first ever bowl win in 1994, which, like it or lump it, he deserves credit for. He went 2-3 against Clemson, which is, again, pretty dadgum good around these parts and knocked them off at Clemson when they were ranked #22. He notched a few other decent wins, beating UGA and winning at LSU, then tying LSU. We were deserving of a bowl bid in the 1996 season with a 6-5 (4-4) record, but the bowl.
Yes, we had the 1-10 season, but it was something of a bad luck season. We lost a naibiter to Marshall, 24-21, but that Marshall team was pretty dadgum good, going 12-1 with a win over Louisville in their bowl game. Lost a squeaker to Ole Miss 30-28 and close ones to UK 33-28 and Vandy 17-14. If you look beneath the surface, we weren't all that far off from a 5-6 3-5) football season. Was a it a good team? No. But they weren't quite as bad as that 1-10 record would indicate.
As it is, fan sentiment had turned and soured on Scott, and the powers-that-be caved to that pressure. Would he have gone on to a long, successful career here? Probably not since nobody ever has, but I think if he had come back in 1999, we'd have seen a regression to normal level of mediocrity.
If you look at his first 4 years, he was 22-22-1, which is pretty dadgum good around these parts. Of course, he notched our first ever bowl win in 1994, which, like it or lump it, he deserves credit for. He went 2-3 against Clemson, which is, again, pretty dadgum good around these parts and knocked them off at Clemson when they were ranked #22. He notched a few other decent wins, beating UGA and winning at LSU, then tying LSU. We were deserving of a bowl bid in the 1996 season with a 6-5 (4-4) record, but the bowl.
Yes, we had the 1-10 season, but it was something of a bad luck season. We lost a naibiter to Marshall, 24-21, but that Marshall team was pretty dadgum good, going 12-1 with a win over Louisville in their bowl game. Lost a squeaker to Ole Miss 30-28 and close ones to UK 33-28 and Vandy 17-14. If you look beneath the surface, we weren't all that far off from a 5-6 3-5) football season. Was a it a good team? No. But they weren't quite as bad as that 1-10 record would indicate.
As it is, fan sentiment had turned and soured on Scott, and the powers-that-be caved to that pressure. Would he have gone on to a long, successful career here? Probably not since nobody ever has, but I think if he had come back in 1999, we'd have seen a regression to normal level of mediocrity.