Adams: Can UT survive with old system?

Cutcliffe already had proved himself as UT's offensive coordinator, a position he held before taking the head-coaching job at Ole Miss in 1998. He wasn't just proven. He was available.

So when Randy Sanders departed as offensive coordinator, Fulmer made a predictable call. He hired his good friend and former offensive coordinator.

Cal coach Jeff Tedford, whose Golden Bears will open their season at UT on Sept. 2, also made a significant off-season hire. But there was nothing predictable about it. He hired Northwestern offensive coordinator Mike Dunbar.

You would think the last thing Tedford needed was an offensive coordinator. After all, he has long been regarded as one of the best offensive coaches in college football.

And even if he needed an offensive assistant, why would he hire one with an affinity for the spread option? Tedford has made a nice living with the West Coast offense.

His four Cal teams have averaged almost 35 points per game. Last year, Cal ranked 26th in the country in total offense.

And he's tinkering with the offense.

He has a proven offense, and a veteran team perhaps capable of challenging Southern Cal for the Pac-10 championship. He also has a tough opener in Neyland Stadium.

And he's tinkering with the offense.

Tedford doesn't intend to replace one offense with another. He plans to incorporate elements of the spread option with what the Golden Bears already do offensively.

Still, it could be considered a risky move, much like a successful golfer tweaking his swing before a major tournament. But it shows Tedford isn't content to stand pat, even with an offense averaging 35 points per game.

Contrast that with Fulmer's approach.

After last year's 5-6 season, Fulmer decided to do something about an offense that ranked 90th in the country. He hired three new offensive coaches, including Cutcliffe.

This just in: Cutcliffe won't be running the spread offense.

Sure, Cutcliffe is a proven offensive coach. So the hire makes sense. It also shows how committed Fulmer is to his offensive system. He's obviously convinced that players and coaches -- not the system -- are the problem. And not even a 5-6 season can change his mind.

Offensive coordinators come and go and come back. The system remains.

I can understand Fulmer's reluctance to change. He remembers how productive the offense was in the 1990s. He also knows the system has been attractive to high school All-American quarterbacks, running backs and receivers.

But it's neither as attractive nor as productive as it once was.

The five highest-scoring teams of the Fulmer era came in his first six years as UT's head coach. His first team scored the most points, 484.

Since 1998, UT's highest scoring team had 400 points in 2001. Two of its last four teams fell short of 300 points, and the Vols managed only 205 points last year.

You can't blame the drop-off solely on coordinators. The Vols haven't had as much offensive talent this decade as last; their offense has become as familiar as a longtime friend to most SEC defenses.

Familiarity didn't matter as much when Peyton Manning was handing the ball to Jamal Lewis. It matters now.

The offense can't help but be better than in 2005 when almost everything went wrong, but will it be good enough to outscore Cal in the season opener? That's Cutcliffe's challenge.

Whether he succeeds will have nothing to do with what he did in his last stint as UT's offensive coordinator. Instead, his success will depend on what he can do differently with the same old system and without the same old players.

In fact, change might be the decisive factor in that season opener.

Did Cal change too much? Or did UT change enough?