'89-'06 Similarities

#26
#26
hatvol96 said:
That doesn't mean they aren't wildly overrated. In the SEC or Big 10 they would be a 5 to 7 win team. As an aside, I missed the score Saturday, how bad did Washington beat Oklahoma?
Click to expand...
If Cal were in the Big 10, they would beat:
Minnesota, Indiana, NW, Illinois, Purdue, Wisconsin, and Michigan State. They would most likely schedule 3 non conference patsies, and finish the year with 9 wins.
 
#27
#27
therealUT said:
If Cal were in the Big 10, they would beat:
Minnesota, Indiana, NW, Illinois, Purdue, Wisconsin, and Michigan State. They would most likely schedule 3 non conference patsies, and finish the year with 9 wins.
Click to expand...
I'll give you IU, NW,and Illinois. They beat Minnesota at home, so I have no problem with that one. However, the team I saw in Knoxville wouldn't be a sure thing against even average competition. That was a bad team. No matter how much our fans want to will it to be otherwise, the real tests begin Saturday.
 
#29
#29
hatvol96 said:
I'll give you IU, NW,and Illinois. They beat Minnesota at home, so I have no problem with that one. However, the team I saw in Knoxville wouldn't be a sure thing against even average competition. That was a bad team. No matter how much our fans want to will it to be otherwise, the real tests begin Saturday.
Click to expand...
Of course, if we take beat Florida by more than 10 points, then all we have done is expose Florida. We still have not beaten any good teams, and the next test will be UGA...I see you doing this all year, Hat, until we lose, probably to LSU, in which case you will grab the bull horn and begin shouting for Fulmer's removal since we cannot compete with any good teams.
 
#31
#31
therealUT said:
Of course, if we take beat Florida by more than 10 points, then all we have done is expose Florida. We still have not beaten any good teams, and the next test will be UGA...I see you doing this all year, Hat, until we lose, probably to LSU, in which case you will grab the bull horn and begin shouting for Fulmer's removal since we cannot compete with any good teams.
Click to expand...
Not true. I have stated on a number of occasions that a 9 win regular season would be a good accomplishment for this team and, at least in my case, would quell the criticism of the coaching staff. If they beat Florida, Tennessee will have placed themselves in the SEC East driver's seat. However, if Florida comes out, as Cal did, and looks as if they had never played the game before, I 'm not going to act like UT has defeated a combination of the '85 Bears, the '89 49ers, '01 Miami, and the X-Men.
 
#32
#32
hatvol96 said:
How many games does Foster have to miss or be limited in before our genius fans begin to call him a malingerer? If it's good enough for Jamal Lewis and Kelly Washington, this youngster certainly shouldn't be immune to it.
Click to expand...

:eek: Please clarify, is this your position or one you expect from other fans soon?

I'll say this. He is mucking up my college fantasy team. :jpshakehead:
 
#33
#33
hatvol96 said:
Not true. I have stated on a number of occasions that a 9 win regular season would be a good accomplishment for this team and, at least in my case, would quell the criticism of the coaching staff. If they beat Florida, Tennessee will have placed themselves in the SEC East driver's seat. However, if Florida comes out, as Cal did, and looks as if they had never played the game before, I 'm not going to act like UT has defeated a combination of the '85 Bears, the '89 49ers, '01 Miami, and the X-Men.
Click to expand...
Right, because the way that Cal played had absolutely nothing to do with the way UT prepared for them and executed the gameplan...

I am going to go ahead and run with that logic Hat, and state that it wasn't Butch Davis's recruiting that turned out good teams at Miami, but since they beat most teams they played by about 20 or more points on their way to the championship, they just never played anyone.

Wonderful logic and reason once again from Hatvol...AND, HE KNOWS PEOPLE
 
#35
#35
therealUT said:
Right, because the way that Cal played had absolutely nothing to do with the way UT prepared for them and executed the gameplan...

I am going to go ahead and run with that logic Hat, and state that it wasn't Butch Davis's recruiting that turned out good teams at Miami, but since they beat most teams they played by about 20 or more points on their way to the championship, they just never played anyone.

Wonderful logic and reason once again from Hatvol...AND, HE KNOWS PEOPLE
Click to expand...
If our gameplan is the reason Ayoob and Longshore aren't competent D-I QBs, then almost everyone that has played Cal the last two years has had a great gameplan. I know it eats at you that you and your cohorts who tried to sell Cal as being something other than an Emerald Bowl quality team over the offseason look silly, but let it go. You'll feel better.
 
#36
#36
vader said:
:eek: Please clarify, is this your position or one you expect from other fans soon?

I'll say this. He is mucking up my college fantasy team. :jpshakehead:
Click to expand...
I simply would like to see our fan base exercise consistency.
 
#37
#37
Don't hold your breath expecting logic and reason amongst college football fans.
 
#38
#38
hatvol96 said:
If our gameplan is the reason Ayoob and Longshore aren't competent D-I QBs, then almost everyone that has played Cal the last two years has had a great gameplan. I know it eats at you that you and your cohorts who tried to sell Cal as being something other than an Emerald Bowl quality team over the offseason look silly, but let it go. You'll feel better.
Click to expand...
Yes, me and my cohorts (Cal came in the game with a #9 Ranking, and was picked by more qualified football viewers than yourself to compete for a National Championship) built Cal up.

I know it eats you that the Vols might actually have considerable success this year, and you will have to 'suffer' through more years of seeing Fulmer at the helm. Fulmer, a man that you don't like regardless of whether he wins or loses, because to you he is just a little too sanctimonious...I believe that is what you referred to him as, which, by the way has little to do with coaching ability. So, you can try to mask your disdain for him by stating that it is all about the team, and that you think Fulmer should stay on if he can compete for and win SEC Championships on a yearly basis, however, your hatred for him is personal, Hat. Therefore, whatever he does on the field will never be good enough for you. Hey, thats ironic, just like my hatred for you is also personal. At least I can understand where you are coming from, luckily for me, you are not a coach and I do not need a criminal lawyer.
 
#39
#39
therealUT said:
Yes, me and my cohorts (Cal came in the game with a #9 Ranking, and was picked by more qualified football viewers than yourself to compete for a National Championship) built Cal up.

I know it eats you that the Vols might actually have considerable success this year, and you will have to 'suffer' through more years of seeing Fulmer at the helm. Fulmer, a man that you don't like regardless of whether he wins or loses, because to you he is just a little too sanctimonious...I believe that is what you referred to him as, which, by the way has little to do with coaching ability. So, you can try to mask your disdain for him by stating that it is all about the team, and that you think Fulmer should stay on if he can compete for and win SEC Championships on a yearly basis, however, your hatred for him is personal, Hat. Therefore, whatever he does on the field will never be good enough for you. Hey, thats ironic, just like my hatred for you is also personal. At least I can understand where you are coming from, luckily for me, you are not a coach and I do not need a criminal lawyer.
Click to expand...
If you're going to attempt to put together these patchwork attacks, at least get the underlying facts correct. TCHFCATUTK is far too sanctimonious for my taste, not just a little. My stance has always been that UT should be in a position to compete for the SEC title every year. I didn't realize that was such a difficult bar to reach. However, those of you who bow to the Big Orange Buddah obviously feel that is too much to ask. I'm rather disturbed that you are concerned enough about someone on a message board to build up hatred. I hear the military has fine mental health facilities. You might want to stop in. I like knowing my considerable tax dollars are being well spent.
 
#41
#41
hatvol96 said:
If you're going to attempt to put together these patchwork attacks, at least get the underlying facts correct. TCHFCATUTK is far too sanctimonious for my taste, not just a little. My stance has always been that UT should be in a position to compete for the SEC title every year. I didn't realize that was such a difficult bar to reach. However, those of you who bow to the Big Orange Buddah obviously feel that is too much to ask. I'm rather disturbed that you are concerned enough about someone on a message board to build up hatred. I hear the military has fine mental health facilities. You might want to stop in. I like knowing my considerable tax dollars are being well spent.
Click to expand...
UT could lose just one game every year and not be "competing" for the SEC championship. I would like to see UT win a national championship every year, and I believe that is the focus of the current coaching staff at UT. Failing to win championships every year, other year, five years, does not constitute failure to perform the job well.

Also, I believe you called made personal attacks towards me about a month ago. So, you can make personal attacks against someone you have only encountered through a message board, yet, when I do it, I need to seek mental health? Again, reason and logic by Hatvol.
 
#42
#42
therealUT said:
UT could lose just one game every year and not be "competing" for the SEC championship. I would like to see UT win a national championship every year, and I believe that is the focus of the current coaching staff at UT. Failing to win championships every year, other year, five years, does not constitute failure to perform the job well.

Also, I believe you called made personal attacks towards me about a month ago. So, you can make personal attacks against someone you have only encountered through a message board, yet, when I do it, I need to seek mental health? Again, reason and logic by Hatvol.
Click to expand...
I don't remember personal hatred being a topic of any of my posts. If I'm mistaken, please provide me with said post.
 
#43
#43
hatvol96 said:
I don't remember personal hatred being a topic of any of my posts. If I'm mistaken, please provide me with said post.
Click to expand...
Calling me a sanctimonious twit suffices. If you want to cow away from that, feel free. I would rather be upfront.
 
#46
#46
therealUT said:
Because personally attacking someone, not in jest, really says, "Hey, I like you..." It is no different.
Click to expand...

I disagree, you have taken personal jabs at me as I have at you before. I am not even close enough to hating you though, I doubt I care enough about anyone on this board to hate them.
 
#47
#47
therealUT said:
UT could lose just one game every year and not be "competing" for the SEC championship. I would like to see UT win a national championship every year, and I believe that is the focus of the current coaching staff at UT. Failing to win championships every year, other year, five years, does not constitute failure to perform the job well.

Also, I believe you called made personal attacks towards me about a month ago. So, you can make personal attacks against someone you have only encountered through a message board, yet, when I do it, I need to seek mental health? Again, reason and logic by Hatvol.
Click to expand...
1. If you only lose one game, the worst you will finish is one game behind a division winner. I would call that being competitive in almost all situations.
2. Why even talk about championships? According to you, failure to win them is no problem. TCHFCATUTK has the best job in the world. He's given all the resources a coach could dream of, but his sycophants don't think it's incumbent upon him to produce excellence. It's great to be the Big Orange Buddah.
 
#49
#49
hatvol96 said:
1. If you only lose one game, the worst you will finish is one game behind a division winner. I would call that being competitive in almost all situations.
2. Why even talk about championships? According to you, failure to win them is no problem. TCHFCATUTK has the best job in the world. He's given all the resources a coach could dream of, but his sycophants don't think it's incumbent upon him to produce excellence. It's great to be the Big Orange Buddah.
Click to expand...
So, finishing one came behind the division winner is now competitive for you?

You do know that UT is only behind Florida in appearances in the SECCG, right? That has pretty much encompassed the Fulmer Era. Also, Spurrier was arguably the best coach in the nation while he was at Florida. So, even if Fulmer was the second best coach in the nation, he probably would not have appeared more than Spurrier.

We missed the SECCG in 2003 because of SEC Rules regarding a 3-way division tie. I would say that is competing. In 2004, we played in the SECCG, and almost beat Auburn. In 2002 and 2005, we were not competitive, however, we might have been had Clausen been healthy for the UGA game in '02. C.J. Leak and James Banks were really not at all capable of leading an offense. In 2001, lost to LSU in the SECCG (I would say that is competing.)
 
#50
#50
therealUT said:
So, finishing one came behind the division winner is now competitive for you?

You do know that UT is only behind Florida in appearances in the SECCG, right? That has pretty much encompassed the Fulmer Era. Also, Spurrier was arguably the best coach in the nation while he was at Florida. So, even if Fulmer was the second best coach in the nation, he probably would not have appeared more than Spurrier.

We missed the SECCG in 2003 because of SEC Rules regarding a 3-way division tie. I would say that is competing. In 2004, we played in the SECCG, and almost beat Auburn. In 2002 and 2005, we were not competitive, however, we might have been had Clausen been healthy for the UGA game in '02. C.J. Leak and James Banks were really not at all capable of leading an offense. In 2001, lost to LSU in the SECCG (I would say that is competing.)
Click to expand...
1. We didn't make the championship game in '03 because Georgia beat us senseless in Knoxville.
2. I don't think I've ever said '01 wasn't a good season.
3. We weren't good enough to think about winning an SEC Championship in '02.
4. We didn't almost beat Auburn in '04. When it came down to winning time, they dominated the fourth quarter.
It frustrates me to have to make this point over and over, but I will make it one more time: My problem with TCHFCATUTK's performance is almost strictly post-2002. In the years leading up to '02, it would be difficult to find fault with much. The '93 and '97 losses to Florida were bad, because UT was better than the Gators in both those season. The '96 loss to Memphis was embarassing, but not ultimately damaging to the program. As I pointed out in a post a couple of months ago, my definition of being competitive in the SEC is greatly dependent on the idea that you can reasonably expect to play the rest of the conference heads up on a neutral field. There's no way we would have beaten UGA on a neutral field in '03. We could have played Auburn 100 times in '04 and we would never have beaten them. The '04 Auburn team was exceptional, so that's not that bad. However, the '03 season was decided by UGA coming into Knoxville and hammering the Vols. I don't consider a team totally unable to compete on its home field to be a championship contender.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top