Am I the only one who wont kiss South Carolinas

[allvol]

Originally posted by Liper@Nov 18, 2005 12:10 PM
1. Spurrier's style of offense preyed on TN and FSU, neither of which were slow or weak.  Those defenses were already fast and good in the mid to late 90s.  Ditto for GA.

2. They scored 26 on us in 97.  They dominated us in 1998, even though we won the game because of all the fumbles and a leaping INT by D Grant.  They beat us with an inferior team in 1999.  He dominated in 2001, even though we outscored them.  That team wasn't slowed down by anyone.  I'm not buying it.

3. I mention Duke because he took a program that couldn't - and cannot now - tie their shoes and won a conference championship.  Clemson was a good team in the 80's, and that conference was better tha the WAC.  Regardless, no one before or since in the modern era has been able to get Duke to winning records, much less championships.

My impression is that you don't like Spurrier.  When he loses two games it sounds like a collapse.  When Fulmer takes an NFL team and loses 4 or 5, we need to take into account the totality of his consistency - if not championships.

[snapback]194900[/snapback]​

1. :boredom: Fulmer and Co. finally figured out how to compete with Spurrier starting in 1998. Spurrier had a losing record against FSU. Georgia was not very good defensivley throughout the '90s.

2. :banghead: Don't remember the UF domination in 1998? All I remember is Al Wilson knocking heads off and Florida's awesome offense only scoring 17 points. I agree in 1999... that 2 yards that Jamal Lewis could not get still haunts me. Chalk up the 2000 game to the refs. And 200+ yards rushing looks more like UT domination. Thats how I remember those 4 seasons.

3. I Did not say that Spurrier was not a good coach, but the ACC after Clemson was on probation and before FSU was no better than the WAC. Even BYU won a national championship, if your saying that ACC was better due to Clemson's national championship. :disappointed:

4. :crazy: My liking or not liking Spurrier has nothing to do with me worshipping him because he can win 7 games at South Carolina. None of the 7 wins came against a top tier opponent. Beating Tennessee and Florida when they are down is no more impressive than when Holtz beat Georgia (2000 & 2001), Alabama (2001 & 2004), Clemson (2001), and Ohio State (2000 & 2001). And that was with players that were 0-11 in 1999. Holtz was 5-7 (after starting 5-2), 5-7 (after starting 5-3), and 6-5 (after starting 6-3) the past 3 seasons. Those were not ball teams. Last year's team lost to Georgia 16-20. Holtz typically played Georgia and Tennessee close, beating Georgia twice.

5. :devilsmoke: Spurrier losing 2 games regularly and not winning championships..... that is the same argument that some are stating for the decline of the UT program under Fulmer. Remember, Spurrier had 3-loss and 4-loss seasons mixed in with the 2-loss seasons too. Maybe Spurrier quite because he knew his personal record would take 5-losses in 2002? He is quite vain.

6. :ill_h4h: This year's Tennessee team, at least offensively, is not an NFL caliber team. We'll see in a couple of season which UT upperclassmen off of the offense are NFL caliber. Now if you blame Fulmer for the offense, then give him credit for one of the top defenses in the country. Those guys will play in the NFL. :superman:

7. :question: Sometimes you make very valid arguments Liper. However, I get the feeling that have personal negative feeling towards Fulmer. Your posts sometimes are written on emotion instead of looking at things from an objective standpoint with a historical perspective.

Just my :twocents:

 

[Liper]

Originally posted by allvol@Nov 18, 2005 12:53 PM
1.  :boredom: Fulmer and Co. finally figured out how to compete with Spurrier starting in 1998.

2.  :banghead: Don't remember the UF domination in 1998?  All I remember is Al Wilson knocking heads off and Florida's awesome offense only scoring 17 points.

3. I Did not say that Spurrier was not a good coach, but the ACC after Clemson was on probation and before FSU was no better than the WAC.

4.  :crazy: My liking or not liking Spurrier has nothing to do with me worshipping him because he can win 7 games at South Carolina.

5.  :devilsmoke: Spurrier losing 2 games regularly and not winning championships..... that is the same argument that some are stating for the decline of the UT program under Fulmer.  Maybe Spurrier quite because he knew his personal record would take 5-losses in 2002?  He is quite vain.

6.  :ill_h4h: This year's Tennessee team, at least offensively, is not an NFL caliber team.

7.  :question: Sometimes you make very valid arguments Liper.  However, I get the feeling that have personal negative feeling towards Fulmer.

[snapback]194926[/snapback]​

The Rebuttal

1. Fulmer did get better against Spurrier. FSU was able to use their talent to play well against FL. They are the example of what we should have been doing to FL, but because of coaching deficiencies could not. GA is an example of classic underachievement with good talent.

2. Huh? 1998 they threw the ball up and down the field on us for over 400 yards. The five turnovers killed them. Our offense was non-existent. That is not a formula for success, that is happenstance and good breaks (created or not, not a repeatable process for winning). I did not mention 2000, but rather 2001. They scored 30-something on our NFL defense.

3. With Duke it is all relative. If they were playing in the WAC - literally - it is an accomplishment.

4. I'm just saying you seem to be using a different standard to measure Spurrier than coaches you like to defend. Maybe I'm wrong (see #5).

5. Spurrier losing two games regularly is better than Fulmer. Those were his down years. 1999 they lost to BAMA twice. Spurrier won 6 SECC, 1 NC, and set a record for SEC winning percentage at a school that had never won an SEC title. He also played for 2 SECCG in which they lost to go with this 6 SEC titles. Never out of the top 25 in 10 seasons. Record against Fulmer is 8-3 (under the best era of TN football as you point out).

Fulmer's best year since '98 was a two loss season with no championships (2001). Since 2000 he has lost 4, 5, and 5 games in a season. 1 top 10 finish in 7 years. 3 years unranked. Below .500 against ranked teams. Below .400 against top 10. Below .500 in bowl games.

How can compare Fulmer to him I'll leave for you to defend.

6. We may not have a lot of NFL talent on this team. It's so hard to tell because the coaching is so bad they'd make anyone look average. See Notre Dame in 2004 for an example of this might happen.

7. My negative feeling toward Foulmer are not to be hidden. I'm stating it; but they are not personal. His delusional, stubborn, arrogant, close-minded, stagnated attitude that grates on me.

 

[orangetd88]

One thing I'd like to add...Spurrier's offense didn't do much preying on FSU. That's the only school he has a losing record against, and could never beat them in Tallahassee.

 

[volinbham]

I still believe TOBC (the old ball coach) is the best coach in the SEC.

His "drop-off" coincided with losing one of the best defensive coaches in the country (Stoops).

Spurrier has a knack for being able to scheme an opponent.

His weakness IMHO is that he is stubborn during the game and sometimes will not adapt even if his scheme for that game is not working.

Oh yeah, on the 1998 game - I agree mostly with Liper. I watched the replay about 2 months ago. UF did move the ball all over the place on us. We caused the 5 turnovers but I don't consider that a game where Fulmer had figured out Spurrier - more one where we made the big play at the right moment. About 60-70 (or more) of our rushing yards came on that one big play where we popped right up the middle and took it to the house. We earned the win no doubt but they helped.

 

[allvol]

Liper, the 200+ yards rushing was in 2001..... Travis Stephens rushed for 226 yards. UF was held to only 36 yards rushing. "Tennessee deserved to win the game," Florida's Steve Spurrier said. "They ran it down our throats pretty good. They were a little stronger, I think, around the line of scrimmage, and that was teh difference in the game. One team ran it; the other one didn't."

In 1998, UF had only (-13) yards rushing on 30 attempts. The turnovers were caused by the UT defense, not mistakes by the UF offense. Watch the game tape. Al Wilson played awesome in that game. Offensively, the Vols rushed for 171 rushing yards. Much better than the negative yards by UF.

The team that owns the line of scrimmage usually wins the UT-UF game. In my opinion, the Vols dominated the Gators in both '98 and '01.... even though the score was close. Both times, Florida was playing from behind. They tied the game in '98 and missed the 2-point conversion in '01.

General Neyland said only 3 things can happen when a team passes... and 2 of them are bad.

Funny how the year's that you list that Fulmer is down directly correlate to when Sanders was the OC. The Vols will have a new OC next season, so let's wait until next year to judge Fulmer again. This is a thread about Spurrier anyway.

I think Spurrier's past his prime and his offense is just normal in today's game with the faster defenses. His teams will compete, but he'll never be dominant like he was up until 1997. However, I think Spurrier's style works much better than Urban Meyer's.

You won't find many old-school coaches that aren't stubborn. However, I think this season is the kick in the pants to get Fulmer to adjust things and get the Vols back to winning championships.... starting in 2006.

 

[Liper]

Originally posted by orangetd88@Nov 18, 2005 1:29 PM
One thing I'd like to add...Spurrier's offense didn't do much preying on FSU.  That's the only school he has a losing record against, and could never beat them in Tallahassee.

[snapback]194942[/snapback]​

Disagree. FSU won because of team play. But they never stymied Spurrier's offense. If I remember, he got beat or tied at FSU when they scored more than 28 points against those stout FSU defenses.

 

[volinbham]

I agree that Spurrier will not dominate at SC the way he did at UF - he won't be able to get the same depth of talent.

I think offensively though, he is still as potent as ever. The talent gap (primarily depth) will be the equalizer.

He schemes the game - matches his offense to opposing defense. While he does have a system, it is very adaptable. Against us, he eventually found the soft spot was the quick slant. UF took that away and he went with a deeper slant and more focus on the running game. Against another team, it will be the fade or the post. This is what makes him dangerous. I still believe he is the one coach in the league that you never feel you have beat until the clock runs out.

No coach dominates by himself. When Spurrier had Stoops, he was virtually unstoppable. Without Stoops, the offense was about as potent as ever but the D wasn't. It's the same for any coach - you need the parts to take it to the very top. However, I think TOBC is among the best individual coaches out there.

 

[Liper]

Originally posted by allvol@Nov 18, 2005 1:52 PM
Liper, the 200+ yards rushing was in 2001..... Travis Stephens rushed for 226 yards.  UF was held to only 36 yards rushing.  "Tennessee deserved to win the game," Florida's Steve Spurrier said.

In 1998, UF had only (-13) yards rushing on 30 attempts.  The turnovers were caused by the UT defense, not mistakes by the UF offense.  Watch the game tape.  Al Wilson played awesome in that game.  Offensively, the Vols rushed for 171 rushing yards.  Much better than the negative yards by UF.

The team that owns the line of scrimmage usually wins the UT-UF game.  In my opinion, the Vols dominated the Gators in both '98 and '01....

General Neyland said only 3 things can happen when a team passes... and 2 of them are bad.

Funny how the year's that you list that Fulmer is down directly correlate to when Sanders was the OC.

I think Spurrier's past his prime and his offense is just normal in today's game with the faster defenses.

You won't find many old-school coaches that aren't stubborn. 

[snapback]194961[/snapback]​

1. Yeah, we outplayed them in 2001. I never denied that. That was the one year where we came out played loose and out executed them. And we should have done that a lot because we had more talent more times than the opposite. We were better; we should have won - but they were good on offense that year. Spurrier said it was the hardest loss of his career.

2. 80 of TN's rush yards were on one busted play. Tee completed 1 pass in the 2nd half. They held us under 300 yards while they threw for about 450. Are you suggesting that Al Wilson's caused fumbles are evidence that Spurrier's offense was either figured out or not working?

3. General Neyland was speaking under the conditions he was operating in. As a military man (see Sun Tzu) he would have evolved his offenses in directions necessary to win and establish superiority over defenses.

4. Yes, our offensive staff is worse now than it was pre-98. That's obvious I think. However, our problems with FL and some other games pre-98 were coaching problems, nonetheless.

5. Spurrier has taken Blake Mitchell and Sydney Rice to the top SEC QB-WR combo. Funny how he always seems to find these talented WRs. Fulmer would be 1-7 with that team right now. If Spurrier had our team this year we could have won the SEC in my opinion. But I guess we'll see.

6. Many old school coaches are stubborn. Whatever - irrelevant labels. Good coaches and leaders are proactive. Fulmer is not only reactive but he is delusional about his own levels of success (he tries to remind us a lot) and the causes thereof. We are a 5 loss team precisely because of this.

Fulmer is a good recruiter. He's not much after that (see Mack Brown, John Cooper, and Lloyd Carr). Pete Carrol is a good recruiter with a good staff.

 

[Liper]

Originally posted by volinbham@Nov 18, 2005 2:25 PM
I agree that Spurrier will not dominate at SC the way he did at UF - he won't be able to get the same depth of talent.

I think offensively though, he is still as potent as ever.  The talent gap (primarily depth) will be the equalizer.

He schemes the game - matches his offense to opposing defense.  While he does have a system, it is very adaptable.  Against us, he eventually found the soft spot was the quick slant.  UF took that away and he went with a deeper slant and more focus on the running game.  Against another team, it will be the fade or the post.  This is what makes him dangerous.  I still believe he is the one coach in the league that  you never feel you have beat until the clock runs out.

No coach dominates by himself.  When Spurrier had Stoops, he was virtually unstoppable.  Without Stoops, the offense was about as potent as ever but the D wasn't.  It's the same for any coach - you need the parts to take it to the very top.  However, I think TOBC is among the best individual coaches out there.

[snapback]194973[/snapback]​

Well said.

 

[orangetd88]

Originally posted by Liper@Nov 18, 2005 1:13 PM
Disagree.  FSU won because of team play.  But they never stymied Spurrier's offense.  If I remember, he got beat or tied at FSU when they scored more than 28 points against those stout FSU defenses.

[snapback]194969[/snapback]​

There were more than a few times they stymied his offense in those games. 1996, 1998, and 2000 come to mind.

Sure, spurrier had some success scoring against them. He scored points on everybody UF played for the most part, but FSU had his number.

 

[Liper]

Originally posted by orangetd88@Nov 18, 2005 2:43 PM
There were more than a few times they stymied his offense in those games.  1996, 1998, and 2000 come to mind.

Sure, spurrier had some success scoring against them.  He scored points on everybody UF played for the most part, but FSU had his number.

[snapback]194984[/snapback]​

Yeah, FSU had the edge on Spurrier. FSU had better talent than FL most of the time as well. Conversely, TN was not able to duplicate this same feat with a comparable aggregate talent advantage.

But when Spurrier had his good teams, he got after them pretty good. I remeber he hung up half-a-hundred on them in the Sugar Bowl.

 

[orangetd88]

Yep.

One thing about Spurrier is that he seemd to get frustrated if things didn't go his way during the course of a game, and didn't make great game adjustments (see '96 Fiesta and '96 FSU), but he sure knew how to come up with a good gameplan. FSU paid dearly for laying Wuerffel out time and again the first '96 game.

 

[Liper]

Originally posted by orangetd88@Nov 18, 2005 2:57 PM
Yep.

One thing about Spurrier is that he seemd to get frustrated if things didn't go his way during the course of a game, and didn't make great game adjustments (see '96 Fiesta and '96 FSU), but he sure knew how to come up with a good gameplan.  FSU paid dearly for laying Wuerffel out time and again the first '96 game.

[snapback]194995[/snapback]​

Yeah, and people forget that in '96 FL was playing with 3 OL backups in the first game against that great FSU DL.

When they were full force, FL ripped 'em.

He does get a little "pouty" over there. He kind of has an idea of how he enjoys playing. Of course, I think he exhibits a lot of perfectionist qualities - good and bad.

 

[U-T]

Like I said, when South Carolina actually wins something, I will respect them.

They come across to me as the UGA in the 90's.

All talk....I want to see some Championships before I start calling USC a soon-to-be powerhouse and many in the media state