If you look no deeper than the Tennessee depth chart, the possible loss of tailback LaMarcus Coker hardly seems devastating. After all, he’s only second team.
But Coker’s value to the UT football team is best measured in his stats, rather than his status on the depth chart. He’s second to no UT tailback in speed, and that’s a valued commodity in this offense.
An offense that’s seemingly short on playmakers can ill afford to lose a tailback who made more plays than any other UT running back last season. Of course, maybe Coker, isn’t lost. Or, if he is, maybe he will be rediscovered before the season opener against Cal.
Indefinite suspensions are like that. You just don’t know. A week, a month, who knows?
Coach Phillip Fulmer’s decision Tuesday to suspend Coker was as vague as most suspensions in some regards, but when he alluded to a “medical situation” that has been ongoing, it gets more complicated.
In the past, Coker’s name often has appeared in the same sentence with “coach’s doghouse,” which implies a multitude of shortcomings but provides little clarity. Is it a matter of academics, or did he fail another test outside the classroom?
The potential impact of losing Coker is not so vague. It’s painfully apparent to a team which looks capable of winning the SEC East in a best-case scenario but has enough vulnerabilities to finish fourth in a worst-case scenario.
The suspension on the first day of contact drills also reminds you how quickly and drastically a team’s depth can change in a day or two. In fact, a position of strength can become one of weakness almost overnight.
UT began preseason drills last week with more experienced depth at running back than any other team in its division. In less than a week, one of its top three tailbacks has been indefinitely suspended and another, Montario Hardesty, already has been slowed by a hamstring injury. Since Hardesty missed all but two games of his freshman season because of a severe knee injury, any other injury is magnified and the question of durability is raised.
You often need three running backs to withstand an SEC season. Suddenly, UT has Arian Foster backed up by one question mark after another. Then you wonder if true-freshman Lennon Creer — a prize recruit from Tatum, Texas — is ready for SEC football.
But a position that appears to be unraveling one day can quickly come together, too. Fulmer said he expects Hardesty to be fine by Saturday. And who’s to say Coker’s absence will extend into the season?
Academics and drugs most often come to mind when you hear “indefinite suspension.” There’s nothing vague about either one. For example, the punishment for failed drug tests depends on the number of occurrences as well as the perceived potency of the drug. When a student-athlete fails a second drug test for marijuana, he is suspended until he completes a counseling program under UT’s revised program.
A quick return for Coker won’t alleviate all the concerns. You can’t help but wonder about the “medical situation.” There’s also the track record to consider. He was held out of practices leading up to the Outback Bowl for disciplinary reasons.
As you weigh those concerns, you also should remember how quickly Coker can change the course of a game. Last year, his first college pass reception turned into a 48-yard touchdown against Florida. He had an 89-yard touchdown run against Marshall and an 87-yard touchdown run against Alabama. His first carry against Penn State in the Outback Bowl was a 42-yard touchdown. He also had a 40-yard kickoff return, the longest of the season for UT.
Foster, who runs with more power, might have established himself as a superior — and certainly more dependable — all-around tailback. But Coker offers a faster change of pace.
Remember how speed from other sources impacted UT’s 2006 season opener against Cal. Hardesty scored on a 43-yard run, and Meachem converted two short passes into 42- and 80-yard touchdown plays.
The Vols lost Meachem early to the NFL. They don’t need to lose Coker early to something else.
Sports editor John Adams may be reached at 865-342-6284 or adamsj@knews.com.
Tennessee's signing class for 2012
Tennessee 60, Connecticut 57 men's…
Tennessee 69, South Carolina 57 men's…
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
Comments » 19
Colliervol writes:
Well, I do recall Urban Meyer re-instating his "suspended" starting DT right before our game last year. And I think he was the one who wreaked havoc with our line all night. So it wouldn't be the first time a good player was miraculously cured of all his ills right before a big game. Amazing what happens when a coach needs a player. This would be known as the John Calipari/Houston Nutt School of Selective Discipline.
calivol writes:
Coker had an 87-yard TD run against Alabama? Quite a remarkable accomplishment considering he rushed for 12 yards on 5 carries that game. I do seem to recall a TD of that length against the mighty Commodores, though. But don't worry, John...we won't hold it against you. We all know it's pretty tough to distinguish between 'Bama and Vandy these days.
GreerVol22 writes:
If mary jane was involved, 2 week rehab, Cal thinks he's not coming back, Fulmer reinstates with a couple of days practice left(if that), Cal coaches can't reach and walla, we pop about 180 yards rushing. By the way, i also have some beach front property for sale in west knox county.
spikevol writes:
Fulmer isn't Meyer. Coker will probably get another chance, but this was already his second chance, (he missed the bowl game).
I would expect the next time you see Coker he'll be a Louisville Cardinal or Oregon Duck.
osunut2#223683 writes:
We all know that Fulmer won't keep one of his best players out of action for long, no matter what Coker did. If this was 4th-stringer Lennon Creer, I'd believe the indefinite suspension, but I don't see this lasting very long, knowing Fulmer's track record with "suspending" standout players.
wkjq#213863 writes:
It's amazing how soon some of you haters forget. Was Banks not our top playmaker when he was dismissed? Was Daniel Brooks not a top young prospect at linebacker? It's funny how some who think they know all, really know so little.
CoverOrange writes:
If it is testing positive for drugs, Fulmer doesn't have much say in how it will be handled. Rules, regulations and policies are pretty explicit in regard to drugs. OSUnut, there is only one case that I know ofwhere I would agree Fulmer was lenient, that being he DT that caved in the face of another student. Otherwise, I think Fulmer's track record is reasonable given what we, the public, actually know about each case and compared to other major college coaches.
bsvolfan#325031 writes:
It's really quite simple folks. The athletic department lays out the guidelines for how situations for positive marijuana tests are handled.
On both the 2nd and 3rd offense, the player is suspended indefinitely pending the completion of outpatient counseling.
Fulmer, based on that policy, can't dismiss him from the team for good based on either 2 or 3 failed tests.
4th offense- Gone for good.
So basically if he wants to be reinstated before the Cal game, all he has to do is go sit through some counseling and he is reinstated.
Now...whether Fulmer puts him on the field in the game...is a different story all together.
kevinlimbo#326134 writes:
Well, Well, Well, John Adams writes a column about a star player being suspended indefinitely, but doesn't come down one way or the other on whether Fulmer was right on wrong. Isn't this the same sportswriter that just last year penned an article about how light Fulmer is in punishing star players? Shouldn't John be lauding Fulmer's actions suspending the star, and congratulating Fulmer on making the tough decision?
The tenor of John's article sounded more like Coker was too valuable to the team to be punished too harshly. So what would you like Fulmer to do now John? Remember these little articles aren't published in a vacuum, we read and remember what you have written in the past.
spikevol writes:
What's sad is how fast the Vol fans turn on Coker and Fulmer, and don't trust either to do the right thing.
Look at what Coker's gone through in the past 3 weeks and tell me you wouldn't understand him taking a little puff.
He has to be punished, but can't be unfairly punished just to make the press release look good.
michael.poole#598106 writes:
WJKQ - perfectly said. Fulmore may not be the best 'on the field' coach during a game, but you can always bet he'll put the program first and do what he believes is correct. In that I do trust.
inquiry writes:
I think most football jocks can count to 4, so perhaps he'll get this suspension this time, otherwise, he's down the Mary Jane Highway
spikevol writes:
no, i'm not kidding. What other football player's dad just went away and left him to raise his little brother alone?
At Clemson a kid went through that and they made him a celebrity, gave him a ton of money and had the two of them travelling around in the offseason on vacation. At Tennessee, it's just tough luck Coker.
spikevol writes:
btw.. i wasn't saying that made it right, just saying that would make a kid do something dumb. it's understandable under that kind of pressure.
That's all.
londonvol writes:
stupid is as stupid does
Don
Colliervol writes:
Marc_ash, to follow up on what you just said, I'll leave it at a quote in USA Today on this very subject. From Boise State running back Ian Johnson on responsibility: "We are on a level where we are kid's heroes. People pay a lot of money to come see us play. And to go out in public and make a fool of yourself is embarrassing. We have been given a great gift, and it's a lack of respect for what we've been given if we go out there and get a DUI or get hooked on marijuana. We've been given a lot and it can very easily be taken away." I don't think I can add anything to that comment.
Colliervol writes:
On a separate note, I was traveling through Alabama today on business and, lo and behold, I'm surfing through the radio stations and what do I get? A riveting conversation between Paul Finebaum and John Adams on the state of UT football and Phil Fulmer. (Dear God, I thought my head was going to explode listening to that twosome.) Surprisingly though, I agreed with some of the BS. Both of them agreed that Phil needs to win an SEC title in the next two years or the drumbeat will get louder for a new coach. Adams was pretty sane about the whole thing saying a lot of what we've discussed. On one hand, it would be difficult to dismiss a coach with Fulmer's resume. But, if he doesn't get one in the next 2 seasons, it will be a 10 year drought between SEC titles and there will be folks in power that won't put up with that. He also said Hamilton now has some position of power in the decision because of his success in hiring an unknown in Bruce Pearl.
Colliervol writes:
Agreed sjt. If it's going to happen, it probably better be this year with Florida and Georgia both being a little down.
leedsvol2007 writes:
Looking at the upcoming season I don't think on paper you can look at this particular team and see either an SEC or National Championship contender. There are just too many question marks.
If all the pieces fall in place it could happen because there is outstanding talent. The fact that there are no established receivers, young unproven defensive tackles, and other than Jonathan Hefney no established secondary people is going to make it tough in SEC competition.
Not to mention that we have no established place kicker.
The program though I believe is back on track in that recruiting was outstanding last year and we have major talent waiting in the quarterback wings that should minimize the loss of Eric Ainge next year.
Naturally like all Vol fans I'm hoping everything comes together to make for a championship season. If we can't have that I'll settle for a team that gets better every week and by the end of the year establishes itself as a championship contender for years to come.
If we don't get at least the latter I then think you have to look at Fulmer and potentially finding a replacement.
GoVols!
Share your thoughts
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.