Derek Dooley-Volunteers: Pros and Cons in Picking Dooley

With the hectic week of hiring a coach finally over, questions have been circling Vol nation about if the decision was right. So far I've only come to one definite conclusion: Mike Hamilton needs to be replaced. However, as for Derek Dooley, it seems like a huge risk hiring someone with so few credentials.

Don't get me wrong, I want it to work out more than anything. However, I can't find myself excited for a guy who had a .444 winning percentage, which was the worst out of any coach at LA Tech since 1987.

I don't call being the worst coach at LA Tech in two decades good credentials. I know Lane is a snake with similar credentials, but I actually felt like he was building something and, as soon as he left, it was all crushed.

So I've decided to make a list of pros and cons to give myself a better idea of what Tennessee has gotten itself into.

Pros

—Father was Vince Dooley, who led Georgia to a National Championship in 1980.

—Coached underneath Nick Saban at LSU and in the NFL.

—Was the tight ends coach at the Dolphins when Randy McMichael had a career year. (He was on my fantasy team, I remember it well.)

—Was the recruiting coordinator at LSU when they had their top classes in '01 and '03.

—Led LA Tech to an 8-5 season and a victory in the Independence Bowl.

—Despite his record, he had to play against SEC teams, as well as recruit against SEC teams, and still faired pretty well.

Cons

—.444 winning percentage in three years in a week percentage.

—12-12 in conference play in the WAC.

—Unproven

—Will probably take three to four years to do something with this team.

I may have missed a few points, but I believe this covers the main ones. And after this, I think only time will tell if Dooley becomes the next great head coach at Tennessee.

One thing I'm worried about is if in two years Dooley hasn't done very well, will they just fire him and move on or will they give him the three to four years most believe it will take for him to be great?