Photo by Submitted
Doug Dickey, left, former UT football coach and athletic director, meets with then athletic director Bob Woodruff in this 1963 photograph.
In November 1963, the times were a-changing where University of Tennessee football was concerned. Bob Dylan, author of that famous song a month or so earlier, had it exactly right.
Another Bob, interim AD Bob Woodruff, was ready to make a move, ready to bring Arkansas offensive coordinator Doug Dickey to Knoxville as head coach. The single-wing was on its way to being consigned to history.
However, Woodruff needed a second opinion to sell Dickey's appointment to the other powers-that-be. That resulted in a phone call to Union City, and the law offices of Col. Tom Elam, an influential trustee and athletics board member. It came the week before the Kentucky game.
Woodruff asked Elam to meet with Dickey late that Saturday, size up the youthful Arkansas assistant, and report his findings. History does not record the exact day of the call, but plenty of history exists about the context of that weekend.
The game was played Nov. 23, 1963, at Stoll Field in Lexington, the day after President John F. Kennedy had been assassinated in Dallas.
The request did not sit well with Col. Elam.
"I was mad to begin with, because I had never heard of Dickey," Elam said. "Woodruff said this guy is another Darrell Royal or Frank Broyles. I said I didn't care if he were another Knute Rockne. We're playing at Kentucky and I haven't missed a Kentucky game. He said go see him anyway."
Each man had a differing recollection of that weekend. Elam maintained that he and Kathleen had driven to Memphis and met Dickey at an airport near downtown, then drove him through Bluff City streets for an hour or so. Dickey recalled that he flew to an airfield near Union City, with the Elams driving him around the environs of Obion and Weakley counties.
However it happened, Dickey had the right answers to the two major questions Elam posed, i.e., how to make the transition from the single-wing to the "T" ("Get a quarterback") and about recruiting across the state of Tennessee ("If you can't recruit your home state football players, you're in trouble. That would be a major objective with me.").
A Knoxville News-Sentinel story the day before the Kentucky game listed Dickey as a candidate, albeit a secondary one, for the job. By the next Sunday, however, sports editor Tom Siler did not mention Dickey among his final four possibilities.
There was a "rash of rumors," Siler wrote, ranging from retaining 1963 head coach Jim McDonald, to a deal being worked out for a "name coach."
The "name coaches" were Murray Warmath (Minnesota), Paul Davis (Mississippi State), Jim Owens (Washington), and Clay Stapleton (Iowa State). Warmath and Stapleton had played at Tennessee. Davis was from Knoxville, and Owens did not fit either category.
There was a voice from an unnamed trustee offering an alternative direction.
"I think we ought to be thinking of a bright, young man who can do the job," the source, probably Col. Elam, said. "It's awfully hard to hire away an established coach these days. We need to get one of the young ones ourselves, pay him well, and let him do the job."
There was a contentious meeting the day of the Vanderbilt game, continuing into the night after the game. The result was that McDonald was out as head coach to become assistant athletic director. Woodruff, named athletic director that day, had his marching orders to hire a new coach. Two histories of Tennessee football indicate that Breezy Wynn left the meeting and later resigned from the athletics board when the proposal to hire Warmath was rejected.
Ever the cautious type, Woodruff told Dickey to fly to Memphis, and catch the all-night train to Knoxville ("Coach Woodruff wanted me there in the morning," Dickey said). The secrecy didn't work. As normally happens, word got out, a Sunday night call to Dickey's home yielding the news he was on his way to Knoxville.
Marvin West was there to witness Dickey's 6 a.m. Monday, Dec. 2, arrival for the News-Sentinel. The Knoxville Journal was on the streets with a front-page headline announcing Dickey's hiring, with a stock photo. West got the first photo of the new coach as Dickey came off the train and was greeted by Woodruff.
There was a quick confab with Andy Holt at the president's residence and a media conference later that morning.
Dickey was the new head coach, but not without a little intrigue and a memorable moment or two.
The Vols may have defeated Kentucky 19-0 Nov. 23 and Vanderbilt 14-0 a week later, but the big news was happening elsewhere, as the seeds for the resurgence of Tennessee football were sown during that time, first in West Tennessee, then in Knoxville.
Tom Mattingly is the author of "The Tennessee Football Vault: The Story of the Tennessee Volunteers, 1891-2006" (2006), to be published in second edition in 2008, and "Tennessee Football: The Peyton Manning Years" (1998). He may be reached at >tjmshm@comcast.net. His News Sentinel blog is called "The Vol Historian."
Memorable moments in Pat Summitt's…
Tennessee's signing class for 2012
Phillip Fulmer through the years
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
Comments » 23
volthrunthru#658770 writes:
There is an error in the time line. Dylan's "The Times They Are A-Changing" is a product of 1964, not 1963.
Hope the book is more accurate than this column.
CoverOrange writes:
Soooo, what's the intrigue?
Oenoboy writes:
Does anyone else find the timing of this story being the only thing that is intriguing? This is a story that would normally be run in the off season when fans are desperate to read anything they can get their hands on about football. Running a story about switching coaches the day after we have our second biggest fourth-quarter comeback in our history stinks of trying to keep the Fulmer debate alive during a time when the fans are becoming more united behind giving him a couple of years to bring the program back.
It’s is not the debate that annoys me. It is the fact that the KNS is doing its best to stir the pot to sell papers at the expense of other’s careers and lifetime commitments. It is just as bad as ESPN leading an investigation against us and/or making a story of the threats they received after calling the UT fans trailer trash. I miss the days when the White family owned this paper. They had ethics and knew the difference between reporting news and making news. Obviously the powers that be do not.
Those of you who want to boycott the football program would be better served boycotting this paper. IMO
GO VOLS!!!!
Oenoboy writes:
I meant the Miller family not the White family. I was friends with one of the family who became a White after she was married and typed the wrong name. Sorry.
mattingly writes:
To volthrunthru: Here's the record of history. The song was written and was under copyright in 1963. See http://www.bobdylan.com/songs/times.html for the copyright information. According to "The Bob Dylan Scrapbook: 1956-1966," Columbia Records held the release until January 1964 (p. 35). It was recorded Oct. 24, 1963, at Columbia Studios in New York City. Viewed from the perspective of history, the title of the song well reflects what was going not only in society, but in the UT football program of that day as well. To say it was a "product of 1964" misses the mark.
To oenoboy: Again, from the perspective of history, this series of events took place in the weeks before and after the Kentucky and Vanderbilt games in 1963. The story in today's KNS was written several days before the victory over Vanderbilt. I don't have the ability to write a story about the implications of a contest that hadn't yet been played.
Oenoboy writes:
Please don’t take my accusations personal Tom but it just seemed very odd and somewhat inappropriate to me. I appreciate you taking the time to answer my conspiracy theory directly but my problem isn’t with your story as much as it is the choice of subject matter and the timing.
Considering the time of year, I’m sure there are plenty of more historically significant Vol football happenings that you could have written about. Whether you wrote the story before the game is less important as to why you chose the subject at hand knowing the debate within the Vol faithful over the future of Fulmer and the football program was somewhat subsiding with the team’s recent successes.
If you say you didn’t give the Fulmer debate a second thought when writing this article, I will take you at face value and apologize again for my accusation. It would force me to ask however, why this story? I just don’t see much historical significance of these events other than the current circumstances that makes it appealing to your editors.
mattingly writes:
I looked over my file of Sunday stories and the only ones that even touched on something that was happening currently were what I wrote about "Fort Neyland" and the "Big Orange Army" and the naming of TBA.
Th first one came about because I had seen the big sign near Alcoa Highway and I-40 and had looked at their website. The TBA story was curiousity about how it all came about. Someone asked me about it and I went after the story. I think I was the only writer who went to see Dr. Boling to talk about the naming of TBA. Otherwise, it has been history-type pieces based on research, observations and experience.
Sometimes stories just "happen." Something clicks and here it comes. I was fascinated by what happened in 1963. Coach Woodruff kept the story under wraps longer than it could have been today. All of the supposed "candidates" didn't get the job. It's says something about the times in 1963 that coach Dickey came to Knoxville by train. It is equally compelling that Marvin West was there to meet the train that morning.
There is nothing wrong with this story, historically. I was called to task more by the readers for the story about Vol coaches have fared under the presidents.
These columns are fun to write, especially given the responses I get from the readers. By the way, I never took your comment as an "accusation." It was more civil than a lot of the stuff I see.
LongtimeVol writes:
I thoroughly enjoyed the story as Doug Dickey was the coach when I became a Volunteer fan while in high school. I did not attach any significance to the current Fulmer debate, though I am one who is patiently awaiting but definitely wanting the next coaching change. It sure was a different time, with so much less information about the program available to the public.
Oenoboy writes:
Thanks for taking the time for the clarification Tom. Not many would do that. I do apologize for jumping to the wrong conclusion and retract my previous statement. You do good work. and it's nice to know you go about it with good intention.
Thanks again.
Ralph_Crampton writes:
THANKS TOM, THE HIRING OF COACH DICKEY WAS ONE OF THE GREATEST HIRES EVER MADE BY THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE....WE MUST ALWAYS REMEMBER THAT DICKEY AND GEN. NEYLAND WERE THE ONLY TWO COACHES TO BEAT EVER DEFEAT " BEAR BRYANT" THREE CONSECUTIVE YEARS IN A ROW.
CoverOrange writes:
Mr. Mattingly, I apologize for the somewhat flippant remark earlier. At the time of these events, I was barely 5 months old, so my memory is a little foggy.
What I didn't get from the article was why McDonald was out and why the secrecy (indeed the train ride from Memphis was a bit intriguing)? Also, what was the Dickey tie-in to UT that three of the other four candidates had and seemed crucial?
mattingly writes:
To wd40plusvol: Jim McDonald was the interim coach in 1963. He had been on the Tennessee staff since 1955 when Bowden Wyatt came home after stints at Wyoming and Arkansas. When Wyatt was let go after spring practice in 1963, McDonald was tabbed take over. There was great discussion about what to do about the Tennessee coaching situation. Some wanted McDonald, others wanted to take different course.
It was almost an article of faith that Woodruff, given the chance, would go after Doug Dickey, his quarterback at Florida in the early 1950s. Dickey was on staff at Arkansas learning his trade under Frank Broyles, who had played for fromer Vol Bobby Dodd at Georgia Tech. There was a movement to hire Murray Warmath, head coach at Minnesota, and a former Vol player in the 1930s. There was intense discussion about the choice during the latter part of November. There were names leaked, including Dickey's.
News Sentinel sports editor Tom Siler believed one of the four coaches mentioned in the story had the inside track. Woodruff believed otherwise. For his part, McDonald was named an assistant AD Sunday, Dec. 1.
Woodruff got the nod to find his head coach the last Saturday night in November and immediately called Dickey. Siler called it a "secret meeting."
Things were a lot different back then. The Journal, then a morning paper, got the announcement in its Monday morning edition.
The Sentinel got the first picture of Dickey in Knoxville for its Monday afternoon edition, as mentioned in the story. The contrast to today is overwhelming.
He probably wanted to keep Dickey away from those pesky reporters as long as possible, although one (Marvin West) was waiting for him at the train station. Dickey recalled that he was approached by a reporter or two in Memphis before he got on the train. It's a fascinating story.
TommyJack writes:
Tom: Great article. Not everyone out here believes that life itself began in '98.
Colliervol writes:
What? Nobody had the time to go out and interview Majors for the monthly column. I am stunned but grateful.
orange71 writes:
this story is chock-full of intrigue and raises questions that need answers. first, woodruff lacked the power to choose the new coach. how did he get there to begin with? second, prior to the vandy game, the decision-makers evidently lacked consensus. who were the powers and what was the percentage split between them? third, this is the real point of the story: the true driver was tom elam. this most respected of vols held court for 50 years. what about him invested such control over ut football? fourth, did elam use money as an excuse for finding a young gun because he had doubts about the abilities of the others? fifth, the connect with arkansas: wyatt, dickey, majors all coached there. was majors there when dickey was chosen? sixth, was the reason/excuse for not including majors in the mix (dickey only 2 years older) because elam thought majors had acquired wyatt's traits, woodruff's desire to avoid a power struggle with the favorite son, or another reason?
twin942 writes:
Tom -
Good article, good responses and good interplay/banter with the readers. I enjoyed this far more than most articles precisely because you took the time to respond, set the record straight, and conduct a thoughtful discussion with your readers. Well done.
volthrunthru#658770 writes:
Mr. Mattingly...
Your back and fill effort is precisely what it appears to be. You wrote Dylan, "author of that famous song a month or so earlier." The "earlier" to which you refer is apparently somewhere in late 1963, but not much else can be deduced from your narrative.
Your response, when questioned, was to cover your tracks, because you had written a vague sentence initially, in the article.
Now, you reference "history," as if you had written or read some of it; if you did, perhaps you could have told us what it is.
Your original sentence implies that Bob Dylan wrote the song you referenced---you used the word "author"---a couple of months earlier. Does history say that? "Earlier" than what, sir?
This is the real point, all three parts of it:
a. The book is already in print, and you are trying to sell it.
b. You wrote a piece to promote it, with vague sentence structure in the piece. Your piece brings into question a date you use in the first two sentences. As such, your article undercuts the book's potential dependability, and thus its value, for real historians, or for people with good memories.
c. Apparently you think, having written the article that begins vaguely, that you can throw up smoke screens by vaguely referring to "history," to draw attention away from your unclear references to Dylan's song.
Perhaps you are misinformed in thinking you are above being questioned.
Regarding history: above all, it must be accurate. Otherwise, it is fiction.
Vague references have one foot in both worlds. They are the mark of poor history and poorer journalism.
Frankly, sir, while history is frequently constructed from journalists' writings; those journalists are the ones who write cogently, clearly and accurately.
Your article misses that standard.
Potential historicity is obscured by vague shuttling back and forth to cover your butt, insofar as dates you referenced in the article are concerned.
So please do not stand on Mount Rocky Top and condescend to hand down edicts; i.e., you may, perhaps, want to quote "history" only if that history is written by someone more reliable.
Covering one's tu-tu and writing clearly are usually two very different endeavors. Certainly you have done both poorly, on the same page; and the victim of it all is accuracy. Accuracy's blood brother, clarity, is hamstrung, by it.
Best to you and your writing career.
TommyJack writes:
volthrunthru: What a ball-breaker you are.
hueypilot writes:
Gee, Mr. Mattingly. Some think you got an f on your term paper. (volthrunthru, without question the most pompous blather I have read since Boswell's Life of Johnson) I give you an A. I liked it. Nuff said.
TommyJack writes:
ditto
mattingly writes:
This is all very interesting and some enjoyable back-and-forth.
In November 1963, the times were a-changin in the Tennessee football program. There were those who wanted Murray Warmath and those who wanted to go in another direction. The Dylan reference to all that was merely illustrative of the debate going on.
I've never been on "Mount Rocky Top," never been above being questioned. I also take every comment seriously.
Thanks to all who responded.
fjenk1302#219360 writes:
volthunthru, I think it is your reading comprehension that's in question rather then Mr. Mattingly's writing.
mattingly writes:
Speaking factually, the Journal actually got the "break" on the story, given they were the morning paper. The Sentinel got the first picture and the highlights of the media conference. It was a much different day back in 1963. West's role in all this was old-fashioned legwork, including showing up to meet the train, Rollicord camera in hand.
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.