2006 Football

[hatvol96]

me too...and unfortunately that's the state of affairs these days in college football.

Yeah, we wouldn't want college kids to learn about pressure. None of that in the real world.

 

[Crakaveli]

not the pressure

too much negativity.

it's a new season. everybody is 0-0.

 

[RealVol]

Like someone else stated, all that "pressure" is in directing all that talent to win.

If that affects the player solely, most will just go out and get another tattoo.

C'mon man be real!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[milohimself]

A loss to Cal would be indicative of the depths to which Fulmer has allowed the program to fall. When Tennessee is losing in Knoxville to any Pac-10 team whose initials aren't USC, it is time to clean house.

No, a loss to a scrub from C-USA would be indicitave of this.

If UT has fallen to simply being a "solid" program, I can't think of a better reason to make a change at the top.

Solid? News buddy... This is a sentiment I carry that I know most Tennessee fans do not, but it's just the way I feel. It doesn't make me any less of a fan, I just believe I have a reasonable viewpoint on the situation, and that is, that for the most part under Fulmer's tenure, Tennessee has not really but a "national power" program, along the likes of a Florida State, a Miami or a USC. Part of this is being a member of the highly competitive SEC East in which it is hard to break through and make a major bowl. Spurrier being in the same division caused many of these problems. But aside from the middle three years of Fulmer's tenure at Tennessee, I just don't see the program as one of those absolute top level programs. Very, very good but not quite there.

they are respectable, and i don't think anyone would compare present day Cal with a team from the MAC or CUSA...that said, it's in our house, and a team like TN, who's supposedly, repeat supposedly, a top tier SEC program (at least that's what we're supposed to think of ourselves, regardless if it's true or not....) is not supposed to lose to a west coast team that has to travel down here....

Even as good as Cal is supposed to be this year, losing that game does set a tone for the season. It'd be different if we were coming off a good year and this was a clash of two really good teams...but this year, for us, we need a big dose of confidence and we need it early. Cal presents the perfect opportunity for that. If we lose it could send the wrong message to the team confidence wise. the idea being "if we can't beat cal, how are we going to beat UF, LSU, UGA, Bama etc....?)

I understand what you're saying, that it would set a bad tone. But I don't think that is necesarily the case. If we lose to California then turn around and lose another game we shouldn't along at some point in the season (Air Force, Marshall, Kentucky, Vanderbilt, any Mississippi teams if we play them) that we shouldn't then we have a problem. But if we lose to Cal then turn around and clean up our act, maybe pull out a big win (Florida, LSU, Georgia especially) then we are in good shape.

 

[milohimself]

I know I'm going to get flamed for the middle part of the above post, but once again I will reiterate, I believe all of that happened due to the tough nature of the SEC East, and Spurrier's run in the 90's in particular that held us back.

 

[sbt567]

7-5

 

[newjersey4vols]

Just heard the rumor that Walter Fisher will be out next year for surgery. Can anyone confirm this...not sure if this is old news or new????

 

[OWB]

Just heard the rumor that Walter Fisher will be out next year for surgery. Can anyone confirm this...not sure if this is old news or new????

I read that he hurt his shoulder, but I haven't read anything else about it. I hope not.

 

[newjersey4vols]

I read that he hurt his shoulder, but I haven't read anything else about it. I hope not.

It was on the board over at rivals. That would not be good

 

[Vol67]

UT will be lucky to finish 4th in the East.

Check out the OL for UT. It's not good.
Ainge still looks like a Million bucks in practice but like a 10 dollar bill when the pressure to perform is on.
The WR's still don't have a clue

 

[jakez4ut]

I know I'm going to get flamed for the middle part of the above post, but once again I will reiterate, I believe all of that happened due to the tough nature of the SEC East, and Spurrier's run in the 90's in particular that held us back.

last year not withstanding, i understand why you say this.....but there's one thing you have to remember when you start talking about PROGRAMS vs. seasons or even groups of seasons.

Yes, FL had a hell of a run in the 90's and dominated the SEC, no argument there, but one thing to consider when comparing our two PRGRAMS. That was virtually the only period in FL football history that they were relavent, not only nationally, but in the SEC. TN has been a relavent factor in the SEC for many, many years prior to the 90's.

Our problem is that as good as we've been, and this is where i will agree with you, we've always had someone else ahead of us in each period.....whether it be Bama or Fl depending on how far back you go. But to say that TN is not a national "power" program, well, that's not exactly true.

TN is in the top 5 all time in several categories in all of college football...from UTsports.com: TN ranks 2nd in all time bowl appearances, not in the SEC, but nationally. TN ranks 3rd in all time Bowl wins, not in the SEC, but Nationally....From an SEC standpoint, TN ranks 2nd in all time wins behind Bama, and we have 13 SEC championships, which i believe is second to Bama with 18 or 20 or so....

and finally TN ranks 9th all time in total wins....Bama is 6th. National championships may be debatble because of all the different polls used in different time periods, and i'm sure UTsports.com is being kind in reporting this, but they show us as having 6 national titles....

now, i'll agree that right now, as i type this obviously, we aren't in a position to compete with some other programs. BUt to say our program as whole is not a national program? i do disagree.

hope the flaming you prepared for wasn't too bad.....just fulfiling your prediction.....have a nice day. :biggrin2:

 

[WA_Vol]

UT will be lucky to finish 4th in the East.

Check out the OL for UT. It's not good.
Ainge still looks like a Million bucks in practice but like a 10 dollar bill when the pressure to perform is on.
The WR's still don't have a clue

you are 100% correct I think.

I think offense should focus next year on handing the ball off to Foster. Ainge and the wr's it appears are playing the same as last year.

 

[hatvol96]

No, a loss to a scrub from C-USA would be indicitave of this.
Solid? News buddy... This is a sentiment I carry that I know most Tennessee fans do not, but it's just the way I feel. It doesn't make me any less of a fan, I just believe I have a reasonable viewpoint on the situation, and that is, that for the most part under Fulmer's tenure, Tennessee has not really but a "national power" program, along the likes of a Florida State, a Miami or a USC. Part of this is being a member of the highly competitive SEC East in which it is hard to break through and make a major bowl. Spurrier being in the same division caused many of these problems. But aside from the middle three years of Fulmer's tenure at Tennessee, I just don't see the program as one of those absolute top level programs. Very, very good but not quite there.
I understand what you're saying, that it would set a bad tone. But I don't think that is necesarily the case. If we lose to California then turn around and lose another game we shouldn't along at some point in the season (Air Force, Marshall, Kentucky, Vanderbilt, any Mississippi teams if we play them) that we shouldn't then we have a problem. But if we lose to Cal then turn around and clean up our act, maybe pull out a big win (Florida, LSU, Georgia especially) then we are in good shape.

USC hasn't been a national player for most of Fulmer's tenure. They've been good under Carroll. They ranged from good to completely mediocre under John Robinson and Paul Hackett.

 

[Vol67]

Check out UT's record over the last 10yrs, 20yrs and 30 yrs in the month of September. UT historically starts slow

 

[hatvol96]

Check out UT's record over the last 10yrs, 20yrs and 30 yrs in the month of September. UT historically starts slow

That's because they don't play Vandy, Kentucky, etc. in September.

 

[holdemvol]

USC hasn't been a national player for most of Fulmer's tenure. They've been good under Carroll. They ranged from good to completely mediocre under John Robinson and Paul Hackett.

Exactly. In fact, how many "National Powers" have not gone through spans of being just decent or even mediocre? Oklahoma? Nebraska? Michigan? Ohio State? All of them have, including Miami and Folrida State

 

[hatvol96]

Exactly. In fact, how many "National Powers" have not gone through spans of being just decent or even mediocre? Oklahoma? Nebraska? Michigan? Ohio State? All of them have, including Miami and Folrida State

Florida State ceratinly hasn't set the world on fire since 2000.

 

[jakez4ut]

That's because they don't play Vandy, Kentucky, etc. in September.

yep....i sure wish we could get that changed.....i used to wonder what it would be like if we could play Florida in October or November.

Of course, in the 80's, it didn't alwasy help us with alabama....oh well.

I do like the fact with the new 12 game schedule we have two games and no off week before the Florida game.

 

[VolunteerHillbilly]

I do like the fact with the new 12 game schedule we have two games and no off week before the Florida game.

I agree 100%.

 

[milohimself]

last year not withstanding, i understand why you say this.....but there's one thing you have to remember when you start talking about PROGRAMS vs. seasons or even groups of seasons.

Yes, FL had a hell of a run in the 90's and dominated the SEC, no argument there, but one thing to consider when comparing our two PRGRAMS. That was virtually the only period in FL football history that they were relavent, not only nationally, but in the SEC. TN has been a relavent factor in the SEC for many, many years prior to the 90's.

Our problem is that as good as we've been, and this is where i will agree with you, we've always had someone else ahead of us in each period.....whether it be Bama or Fl depending on how far back you go. But to say that TN is not a national "power" program, well, that's not exactly true.

TN is in the top 5 all time in several categories in all of college football...from UTsports.com: TN ranks 2nd in all time bowl appearances, not in the SEC, but nationally. TN ranks 3rd in all time Bowl wins, not in the SEC, but Nationally....From an SEC standpoint, TN ranks 2nd in all time wins behind Bama, and we have 13 SEC championships, which i believe is second to Bama with 18 or 20 or so....

and finally TN ranks 9th all time in total wins....Bama is 6th. National championships may be debatble because of all the different polls used in different time periods, and i'm sure UTsports.com is being kind in reporting this, but they show us as having 6 national titles....

now, i'll agree that right now, as i type this obviously, we aren't in a position to compete with some other programs. BUt to say our program as whole is not a national program? i do disagree.

hope the flaming you prepared for wasn't too bad.....just fulfiling your prediction.....have a nice day. :biggrin2:

No, that's pretty much what I meant to say. The program during Fulmer's tenure that's usually been the case. I know that we did get a national championship in the window between Spurrier and Richt... Either way I would like to see Fulmer overcome that obstacle so that Tennessee could dominate the SEC East for a nice stretch, 4 or 5 years. This is the kind of thing I was talking about in particular (hatvol and holdemvol). When I mentioned USC and Miami it's because USC flat-out rose to the top of the Pac-10 and Miami rose to the top of the ACC of their own doing, and overcame all (most) opponnents.

 

[holdemvol]

No, that's pretty much what I meant to say. The program during Fulmer's tenure that's usually been the case. I know that we did get a national championship in the window between Spurrier and Richt... Either way I would like to see Fulmer overcome that obstacle so that Tennessee could dominate the SEC East for a nice stretch, 4 or 5 years. This is the kind of thing I was talking about in particular (hatvol and holdemvol). When I mentioned USC and Miami it's because USC flat-out rose to the top of the Pac-10 and Miami rose to the top of the ACC of their own doing, and overcame all (most) opponnents.

I just don't think anyone will dominate the SEC for any long stretch again. When you have GA, FLA and Spurrier all in your division (GA and FLA having butt loads of talent in thier backyards) I just cant envision any school dominating for 4-5 years. It will not happen in the Big 10 and it will not happen in the NEW ACC.

 

[hatvol96]

No, that's pretty much what I meant to say. The program during Fulmer's tenure that's usually been the case. I know that we did get a national championship in the window between Spurrier and Richt... Either way I would like to see Fulmer overcome that obstacle so that Tennessee could dominate the SEC East for a nice stretch, 4 or 5 years. This is the kind of thing I was talking about in particular (hatvol and holdemvol). When I mentioned USC and Miami it's because USC flat-out rose to the top of the Pac-10 and Miami rose to the top of the ACC of their own doing, and overcame all (most) opponnents.

Rising to the top of the Pac-10 requires considerably less than dominating the SEC. Exactly which national power did USC supplant? Oregon?

 

[milohimself]

I just don't think anyone will dominate the SEC for any long stretch again. When you have GA, FLA and Spurrier all in your division (GA and FLA having butt loads of talent in thier backyards) I just cant envision any school dominating for 4-5 years. It will not happen in the Big 10 and it will not happen in the NEW ACC.

Hmm. I can easily picture Mark Richt pulling off the feat. He's had our number (we've lost 5 of the last 6 to UGA, right?) and still, IMO, has the coaching prowess and consistent talent to avoid losing to South Carolina, as they are. Beyond that you have Kentucky and Vandy in the cellar of the SEC (and probably the cellar of all major conferences, along with Duke), and not much truly formidable competition coming this way out of the SEC West.

So yep, I think UGA is poised to pull of a nice run.

 

[milohimself]

Rising to the top of the Pac-10 requires considerably less than dominating the SEC. Exactly which national power did USC supplant? Oregon?

My point stands

 

[hatvol96]

My point stands

USC gets national respect for what it has done against nonconference opponenets and in bowl games. Rising to the top of the Pac-10 doesn't provide you with national bona fides.