Could this be Phillip Fulmer’s last season as the University of Tennessee’s head football coach?

It’s an obvious question. But it’s also striking, because it’s not the kind of question usually hanging over a UT season opener. In an unstable sport, Tennessee football has been all about stability for most of the last 29 years.

Fulmer has been UT’s head coach for 13 full seasons. His predecessor, Johnny Majors, was UT’s head coach for 16 years. Imagine that: two coaches in 29 years in a conference as volatile as the SEC.

Since Majors was hired, LSU has had 10 coaches; Alabama and Florida, eight; Ole Miss, Vanderbilt and South Carolina, seven; Kentucky and Arkansas, six; Auburn and Mississippi State, five; and Georgia, four.

Those numbers include several interim coaches.

But the most stable program in an unstable conference suddenly looks shaky. And it’s not just because the Vols went 5-6 last year. They haven’t won an SEC championship since 1998.

I’m sure some UT fans, even a few who consider themselves insiders, believe Fulmer will be coaching UT next season no matter what happens in 2006. They’re in fantasyland.

If you asked, "But what about the money?" you haven’t been paying attention.

When UT needs money, it finds money. For example, take former university president John Shumaker. When he needed a gas grill, he didn’t go to Wal-Mart. He spent $4,800 for one.

And if UT needs to pay a few million to lose one coach and a few more million to hire another one, it will find the money.

The only thing the school can’t afford is to keep a coach after back-to-back losing seasons. Check the history. In more than 100 years of UT football, no coach has held his job after consecutive losing seasons.

Based on history, a 6-6 season wouldn’t save Fulmer’s job, either. Nor would 7-5.

Majors is the only UT football coach to lose as many as 11 games in two years and keep his job. That was in the first four years of his tenure when he was rebuilding the program.

Bill Battle, Majors’ predecessor, was fired after back-to-back 7-5, 6-5 seasons, even though he never had a losing record in seven years. Majors was fired after winning 38 games in his last four years.

With that in mind, you could argue that Fulmer’s job would be in jeopardy even if the Vols go 8-4 this season.

It wouldn’t be if Doug Dickey, who hired Fulmer, were still the athletic director. But athletic director Mike Hamilton will be loyal to the program, not the coach whom was hired by his predecessor.

And I think he would take a long, analytical look at an 8-4 season. So would the big-money boosters with clout in these matters.

If the four losses are close, that’s a plus. If the Vols finish strong against a November schedule that includes Arkansas and LSU, that’s another plus. If young players show both potential and improvement over the season, that’s a plus, too.

But suppose UT finishes the regular season 8-4, with all four losses coming in the SEC, and three of them coming against East Division rivals Florida, Georgia and South Carolina. Suppose those losses leave the Vols fourth in the division, a year after they finished fifth.

You then could argue that the Vols had become the fourth-best program in the East, behind Florida, Georgia and improving South Carolina under Steve Spurrier. This just in: When you’re one of the top six programs in the SEC and below third in your division, your coach is in big trouble.

The top six football programs in the SEC have been UT, Georgia, Florida, LSU, Auburn and Alabama.

Since the SEC began divisional play in 1992, Florida has never finished in the bottom half of its division. Georgia finished in the bottom half of the East twice (1993-94) under coach Ray Goff, who was fired a year later. Alabama did it twice (1997 and 2000) under Mike DuBose, who was fired after the 2000 season.

Two LSU coaches were fired after back-to-back finishes in the bottom half of the West. Just one finish in the bottom half of the division got Pat Dye and Terry Bowden fired at Auburn.

None of those coaches had Fulmer’s longtime record for success. Shouldn’t that count for something? Of course, it should. But it shouldn’t be the overriding factor for an athletic director who should be looking ahead, rather than behind.

Never mind what Fulmer’s winning percentage is. Hamilton has to base his decision on who’s the best coach to return this program to prominence, and 8-4 isn’t prominence.

Obviously, Hamilton won’t have the only say in this. But what he says should matter more after his basketball hire.

Hamilton wouldn’t have taken much heat if he had allowed basketball coach Buzz Peterson to return for another season after finishing with a losing record in 2004-05. Instead, Hamilton fired Peterson and hired Bruce Pearl, who turned the Vols into an overnight success.

Pearl didn’t just win; he won over fans. Now, Knoxville is suddenly a basketball town, and its coach is the toast of the town.

And Hamilton is the man who hired him.

Someone in Hamilton’s position only has a few opportunities to make a name for himself. Fans don’t remember athletic directors for improving facilities or raising money. They remember them for whom they hire.

It’s not just that Hamilton hired Pearl. It’s that so many other athletic directors didn’t.

Imagine what that did for Hamilton’s confidence. And imagine how that could affect him if he feels compelled to make a change in football.

He won’t view it as a chore, but as an opportunity.

Sports editor John Adams may be reached at 865-342-6284 or adamsj@knews.com.