2006 Football

[UTyoulose]

7-5

 

[holdemvol]

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.

Yes, Richt has owned UT and yes Richt has made a nice run, but by no means has he dominated the SEC. I do not believe Richt will continue his dominance over UT because either Fulmer turns it around or someone else comes in and rights the ship. You also seem to have left out Florida......do you really see GA dominating UT AND Florida for a 4-5 year stretch? SC is SC for now, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were a major player in the east within the next 3-4 years. With the powerhouses in the SEC no 1 team will dominate the conference for a 4-5 stretch. Hell, Southern Cal would not have made the run they did had they played in the SEC.

 

[utvolpj]

Yes, Richt has owned UT and yes Richt has made a nice run, but by no means has he dominated the SEC. I do not believe Richt will continue his dominance over UT because either Fulmer turns it around or someone else comes in and rights the ship. You also seem to have left out Florida......do you really see GA dominating UT AND Florida for a 4-5 year stretch? SC is SC for now, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were a major player in the east within the next 3-4 years. With the powerhouses in the SEC no 1 team will dominate the conference for a 4-5 stretch. Hell, Southern Cal would not have made the run they did had they played in the SEC.

First, I believe USC would have won at least 1 NC if in the SEC, they were that good.

While Richt has had our number in the past, he has in no way seperated himself from the other coaches in the SEC. 2 conf champ, an .800 winning % and has played for zero NC's. Don't forget that he's been UF's boy toy for the last few years. I see it still being a 3-horse race in the east.

 

[therealUT]

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.

USC also dodged having to compete against one of the top 2 teams in the nation in 2 of their 3 championship games. I also haven't been all that impressed with what USC did against non conference opponents during their span.

They beat highly overrated Michigan and Oklahoma teams, they backed their way into a win at South Bend this year, and they beat a mediocre Va Tech team.

Just check out USC's schedule over the past 3 years. In 2003, they played 1 ranked team in the regular season; 2004, 2 ranked teams; only in 2005 did they finally face a handful of ranked opponents, squeaking by 3 of them, and they lost the championship game.

USC might get national respect, but they get no respect from me.

 

[hatvol96]

USC also dodged having to compete against one of the top 2 teams in the nation in 2 of their 3 championship games. I also haven't been all that impressed with what USC did against non conference opponents during their span.

They beat highly overrated Michigan and Oklahoma teams, they backed their way into a win at South Bend this year, and they beat a mediocre Va Tech team.

Just check out USC's schedule over the past 3 years. In 2003, they played 1 ranked team in the regular season; 2004, 2 ranked teams; only in 2005 did they finally face a handful of ranked opponents, squeaking by 3 of them, and they lost the championship game.

USC might get national respect, but they get no respect from me.

That's ridiculous. Oklahoma was "highly overrated" two years ago? Please. I guess you're one of these brainwashed SECophiles who think Auburn should have played in the Orange Bowl that year. SC would have drubbed them, much as they did the previous year AT Auburn. OU and SC were easily the two best teams. You want to talk about joke schedules, check out Auburn's '04 schedule as Exhibit 1.

 

[holdemvol]

First, I believe USC would have won at least 1 NC if in the SEC, they were that good.

I believe they would have probably won a NC also, but they would not have dominated the way they did. No way they make a run like they did with zero losses playing in the SEC.

 

[utvolpj]

That's ridiculous. Oklahoma was "highly overrated" two years ago? Please. I guess you're one of these brainwashed SECophiles who think Auburn should have played in the Orange Bowl that year. SC would have drubbed them, much as they did the previous year AT Auburn. OU and SC were easily the two best teams. You want to talk about joke schedules, check out Auburn's '04 schedule as Exhibit 1.

Also take a look at UGA's OOC schedule. I don't think they've left the south in 20+ years.

 

[hatvol96]

I believe they would have probably won a NC also, but they would not have dominated the way they did. No way they make a run like they did with zero losses playing in the SEC.

The '04 SC team would have gone 12-0 if their schedule would have consisted of the entire SEC. They were that good.

 

[therealUT]

That's ridiculous. Oklahoma was "highly overrated" two years ago? Please. I guess you're one of these brainwashed SECophiles who think Auburn should have played in the Orange Bowl that year. SC would have drubbed them, much as they did the previous year AT Auburn. OU and SC were easily the two best teams. You want to talk about joke schedules, check out Auburn's '04 schedule as Exhibit 1.

Would you like to compare OU, USC, and Auburns 2004 schedules???

OU:
September 4 Bowling Green W 40-24 1-0 (0-0)
September 11 Houston W 63-13 2-0 (0-0) TBS
September 18 Oregon W 31-7 3-0 (0-0)
October 2 Texas Tech W 28-13 4-0 (1-0)
October 9 No. 5 Texas W 12-0 5-0 (2-0)
October 16 at Kansas State W 31-21 6-0 (3-0)
October 23 Kansas W 41-10 7-0 (4-0)
October 30 at No. 20 Oklahoma State W 38-35 8-0 (5-0)
November 6 at No. 22 Texas A&M W 42-35 9-0 (6-0)
November 13 Nebraska W 30-3 10-0 (7-0)
November 20 at Baylor W 35-0 11-0 (8-0)
December 4 Colorado W 42-3 12-0 (8-0)

USC:
August 28 at Virginia Tech W 24-13 1-0 (0-0)
September 11 Colorado State W 49-0 2-0 (0-0)
September 18 at BYU W 42-10 3-0 (0-0)
September 25 at Stanford W 31-28 4-0 (1-0)
October 9 No. 7 California W 23-17 5-0 (2-0)
October 16 No. 19 Arizona State W 45-7 6-0 (3-0)
October 23 Washington W 38-0 7-0 (4-0)
October 30 at Washington State W 42-12 8-0 (5-0)
November 6 at Oregon State W 28-20 9-0 (6-0)
November 13 Arizona W 49-9 10-0 (7-0)
November 27 Notre Dame W 41-10 11-0 (7-0)
December 4 at UCLA W 29-24 12-0 (8-0)

AU:
September 4 Louisiana Monroe W 31-0 1-0 (0-0)
September 11 at Mississippi St. W 43-14 2-0 (1-0)
September 18 No. 4 LSU W 10-9 3-0 (2-0) CBS
September 25 The Citadel W 33-3 4-0 (2-0)
October 2 at No. 8 Tennessee W 34-10 5-0 (3-0)
October 9 Louisiana Tech W 52-7 6-0 (3-0)
October 16 Arkansas W 38-20 7-0 (4-0) CBS
October 23 Kentucky W 42-10 8-0 (5-0)
October 30 at Mississippi W 35-14 9-0 (6-0)
November 13 No. 5 Georgia W 24-6 10-0 (7-0) CBS
November 20 at Alabama W 21-13 11-0 (8-0) CBS
December 4 at No. 15 Tennessee W 38-28 12-0 (8-0) CBS

Yes, Auburn played the Citadel, they also played 3 top ten teams that year. USC played 1 top ten team, and barely escaped, OU played 1 top ten team and their offense was basically non existent. Auburn blew out both us and UGA, then came back to beat us again in the SEC CG.

 

[utvolpj]

I believe they would have probably won a NC also, but they would not have dominated the way they did. No way they make a run like they did with zero losses playing in the SEC.

I don't think they make that run but you never know. I used to be the type that thought only east coast fball was any good but even I can change. I do believe that overall is it better but that should never take away from appreciating a great team.

 

[hatvol96]

Would you like to compare OU, USC, and Auburns 2004 schedules???

OU:
September 4 Bowling Green W 40-24 1-0 (0-0)
September 11 Houston W 63-13 2-0 (0-0) TBS
September 18 Oregon W 31-7 3-0 (0-0)
October 2 Texas Tech W 28-13 4-0 (1-0)
October 9 No. 5 Texas W 12-0 5-0 (2-0)
October 16 at Kansas State W 31-21 6-0 (3-0)
October 23 Kansas W 41-10 7-0 (4-0)
October 30 at No. 20 Oklahoma State W 38-35 8-0 (5-0)
November 6 at No. 22 Texas A&M W 42-35 9-0 (6-0)
November 13 Nebraska W 30-3 10-0 (7-0)
November 20 at Baylor W 35-0 11-0 (8-0)
December 4 Colorado W 42-3 12-0 (8-0)

USC:
August 28 at Virginia Tech W 24-13 1-0 (0-0)
September 11 Colorado State W 49-0 2-0 (0-0)
September 18 at BYU W 42-10 3-0 (0-0)
September 25 at Stanford W 31-28 4-0 (1-0)
October 9 No. 7 California W 23-17 5-0 (2-0)
October 16 No. 19 Arizona State W 45-7 6-0 (3-0)
October 23 Washington W 38-0 7-0 (4-0)
October 30 at Washington State W 42-12 8-0 (5-0)
November 6 at Oregon State W 28-20 9-0 (6-0)
November 13 Arizona W 49-9 10-0 (7-0)
November 27 Notre Dame W 41-10 11-0 (7-0)
December 4 at UCLA W 29-24 12-0 (8-0)

AU:
September 4 Louisiana Monroe W 31-0 1-0 (0-0)
September 11 at Mississippi St. W 43-14 2-0 (1-0)
September 18 No. 4 LSU W 10-9 3-0 (2-0) CBS
September 25 The Citadel W 33-3 4-0 (2-0)
October 2 at No. 8 Tennessee W 34-10 5-0 (3-0)
October 9 Louisiana Tech W 52-7 6-0 (3-0)
October 16 Arkansas W 38-20 7-0 (4-0) CBS
October 23 Kentucky W 42-10 8-0 (5-0)
October 30 at Mississippi W 35-14 9-0 (6-0)
November 13 No. 5 Georgia W 24-6 10-0 (7-0) CBS
November 20 at Alabama W 21-13 11-0 (8-0) CBS
December 4 at No. 15 Tennessee W 38-28 12-0 (8-0) CBS

Yes, Auburn played the Citadel, they also played 3 top ten teams that year. USC played 1 top ten team, and barely escaped, OU played 1 top ten team and their offense was basically non existent. Auburn blew out both us and UGA, then came back to beat us again in the SEC CG.

SC or OU would have beaten Tennessee by four touchdowns. You fail to tell the full story of that OU/Texas game. I was there. OU raced up and down the field, two unbelievable plays by DJ Williams are the only reasons it wasn't a complete rout. OU shut out Vince Young and Cedric Benson. Texas was two touchdowns better than anyone Auburn played.

 

[therealUT]

SC or OU would have beaten Tennessee by four touchdowns. You fail to tell the full story of that OU/Texas game. I was there. OU raced up and down the field, two unbelievable plays by DJ Williams are the only reasons it wasn't a complete rout. OU shut out Vince Young and Cedric Benson. Texas was two touchdowns better than anyone Auburn played.

Just as you fail to tell the whole story about USC beating Auburn the year before. Jason Campbell and Ronnie Brown were two completely different players the following season.

 

[hatvol96]

Just as you fail to tell the whole story about USC beating Auburn the year before. Jason Campbell and Ronnie Brown were two completely different players the following season.

The way SC dominated them, Pat Sullivan and Bo Jackson could have played QB and RB and it would not have mattered.

 

[holdemvol]

I don't think they make that run but you never know. I used to be the type that thought only east coast fball was any good but even I can change. I do believe that overall is it better but that should never take away from appreciating a great team.

I agree that they were a great team and I give west coast Football a great deal of respect, I just don't see ANY team running through the SEC and a conference championship game the way they ran through the Pac-10.

 

[jakez4ut]

Mercy....west coast/East coast....

USC was very, very good. I'll say this about the Auburn, OU, USC thing...i think USC would have beat Auburn too. Maybe not by much, and there may be some moral victory in thinking that, but no one was going to beat them that night. That team that beat OU was one of the best college football teams i've ever seen. USC's biggest problem during thier run was they looked to me they tended to play to the level of thier competition. so in some games you'd think thye should throttle someone, it wound up close. on the same token, in most cases, thier big games, they DID throttle them, case in point, OU.

Now as to if USC could do that in the SEC over the same time span? I'm inclined to say no, but of course i'm biased. I do think generally speaking playing in the SEC week in and week out is tougher than playing in the Pac 10 week in and week out, simply because the defenses in the SEC are much better generally speaking. but they were GOOOOD, and even with the level of D we play down here, i don't know that there was an offense in the SEC that was capable of keeping pace.

In fact the only team in recent history that i think would have beaten them possibly was that 95 Nebraska team. now that would be a good game.

Oh, and Hat, Bo Jackson....hm...that'd be interesting....he was pretty good you know....lol

 

[hatvol96]

Mercy....west coast/East coast....

USC was very, very good. I'll say this about the Auburn, OU, USC thing...i think USC would have beat Auburn too. Maybe not by much, and there may be some moral victory in thinking that, but no one was going to beat them that night. That team that beat OU was one of the best college football teams i've ever seen. USC's biggest problem during thier run was they looked to me they tended to play to the level of thier competition. so in some games you'd think thye should throttle someone, it wound up close. on the same token, in most cases, thier big games, they DID throttle them, case in point, OU.

Now as to if USC could do that in the SEC over the same time span? I'm inclined to say no, but of course i'm biased. I do think generally speaking playing in the SEC week in and week out is tougher than playing in the Pac 10 week in and week out, simply because the defenses in the SEC are much better generally speaking. but they were GOOOOD, and even with the level of D we play down here, i don't know that there was an offense in the SEC that was capable of keeping pace.

In fact the only team in recent history that i think would have beaten them possibly was that 95 Nebraska team. now that would be a good game.

Oh, and Hat, Bo Jackson....hm...that'd be interesting....he was pretty good you know....lol

1. Bo Jackson was as good a college running back as there ever was.
2. The 2001 Miami team would beat both the '95 Nebraska and '04 SC team. In my humble opinion, that is the single best team in the history of College Football.

 

[jakez4ut]

1. Bo Jackson was as good a college running back as there ever was.
2. The 2001 Miami team would beat both the '95 Nebraska and '04 SC team. In my humble opinion, that is the single best team in the history of College Football.

yeah, that 01 miami team....forgot about that one...but put all three in a hat, pull two out.....i don't think anyone would be disappointed.

 

[hatvol96]

yeah, that 01 miami team....forgot about that one...but put all three in a hat, pull two out.....i don't think anyone would be disappointed.

Depending on how far back you want to go, the '87 Miami and Oklahoma teams were very good. That was argueably Switzer's best team until Jamelle Holieway got hurt. Miami was loaded.

 

[therealUT]

1. Bo Jackson was as good a college running back as there ever was.
2. The 2001 Miami team would beat both the '95 Nebraska and '04 SC team. In my humble opinion, that is the single best team in the history of College Football.

I am going to have to agree to disagree. There is no way the best team in the history of college football has Ken Dorsey as their field general.

Also, you bring up Auburn's weak schedule earlier in the discussion, yet you name the 2001 Hurricanes as history's best team. That schedule was chalk full of patsies. When UW is the best team on your square off against in the regular season, that says something about your schedule.

I agree that Miami team had a ton of talent, but, they scheduled their way right out of any talk of best team in history. You might accuse me of being an SECophile, but I'll take that anyday over a Butchophile (he recruited that team and paved that road for them with that weak schedule.)

NEXT!

 

[hatvol96]

I am going to have to agree to disagree. There is no way the best team in the history of college football has Ken Dorsey as their field general.

Also, you bring up Auburn's weak schedule earlier in the discussion, yet you name the 2001 Hurricanes as history's best team. That schedule was chalk full of patsies. When UW is the best team on your square off against in the regular season, that says something about your schedule.

I agree that Miami team had a ton of talent, but, they scheduled their way right out of any talk of best team in history. You might accuse me of being an SECophile, but I'll take that anyday over a Butchophile (he recruited that team and paved that road for them with that weak schedule.)

NEXT!

How many games did Tommie Frazier play in the NFL? That Miami team beat everybody in front of them. They annihilated FSU and Nebraska. You don't get to create your conference schedule. You do control your nonconference portion. Washington and FSU is considerably tougher than the Citadel and Louisiana Monroe. The NFL rosters bear out the talent of that Miami team. Willis McGahee rode the bench on that team. You've got to come stronger than that.

 

[hatvol96]

I am going to have to agree to disagree. There is no way the best team in the history of college football has Ken Dorsey as their field general.

Also, you bring up Auburn's weak schedule earlier in the discussion, yet you name the 2001 Hurricanes as history's best team. That schedule was chalk full of patsies. When UW is the best team on your square off against in the regular season, that says something about your schedule.

I agree that Miami team had a ton of talent, but, they scheduled their way right out of any talk of best team in history. You might accuse me of being an SECophile, but I'll take that anyday over a Butchophile (he recruited that team and paved that road for them with that weak schedule.)

NEXT!

Yeah, you need a great "field general" like Peyton Manning. Look at all the times he beat Danny Wuerffel.

 

[jakez4ut]

Yeah, you need a great "field general" like Peyton Manning. Look at all the times he beat Danny Wuerffel.

Oh, hat..... :bad: i'm sitting here reading this with a huge smile on my face......loaded post if ever saw it. :bump3:

 

[hatvol96]

I am going to have to agree to disagree. There is no way the best team in the history of college football has Ken Dorsey as their field general.

Also, you bring up Auburn's weak schedule earlier in the discussion, yet you name the 2001 Hurricanes as history's best team. That schedule was chalk full of patsies. When UW is the best team on your square off against in the regular season, that says something about your schedule.

I agree that Miami team had a ton of talent, but, they scheduled their way right out of any talk of best team in history. You might accuse me of being an SECophile, but I'll take that anyday over a Butchophile (he recruited that team and paved that road for them with that weak schedule.)

NEXT!

2001 Scores:
Miami 59 #14 Syracuse 0
Miami 65 #12 Washington 7
Miami 49 FSU 27
Miami 37 #2 Nebraska 14

 

[hatvol96]

Oh, hat..... :bad: i'm sitting here reading this with a huge smile on my face......loaded post if ever saw it. :bump3:

You had to see that coming.

 

[jakez4ut]

i didn't but that hasn't stopped you before...instigator....that's what you should change your name too on here. :angel: