BigPapaVol
Wave yo hands in the aiya
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2005
- Messages
- 63,225
- Likes
- 14
I posted this a few times within threads but it keeps coming up.
I can't imagine how many times I've read that it's been 10 years since Fulmer won an SEC Championship. That's referring to the 1998 season. But, since the Vols have only played 9 seasons, it would be fair if you critics would stick to the facts.
There's no need to give up on the 2008 Vols before the season ever starts. And, if for some reason, we don't win the SEC this season, are you going to say it's been 11 years next year... and just keep being wrong until we win it again?
Please kindly adhere to the facts. Just to help with the math, here's how to count them.
1) 2007 (that's the last season played)
2) 2006
3) 2005
4) 2004
5) 2003
6) 2002
7) 2001
8) 2000
9) 1999 (this was the 1st season after the Vols won the national championship)
Fire away... 3 embarassing loses in 2007; can't forget 2005; and so on.
The 2008 team is about to reset the clock, so remember to tell your grandkids, there were only 9 years between championships and not 10... and it was not 41 years.. that was basketball.
Get ready to update this photo in 2008! Go Vols!
but any rational opinion of how a coach is performing has to have some context besides simply outcomes. Surely you can see that the expectation levels of fans drives their (dis)satisfaction levels wrt the coaching.We've talked about this. I'm comparing outcomes (results), not expectations. You guys can expect as little as you want from UT bball.
thus proving why your opinion is held with regard around here.That's been my point in every single CPF thread ever started.
every season, there seems to be reasons to point for or against......in the same breath that we rattle off 59-20, someone else is showing you an SEC East title.If we'd won one 5 years ago, and still been disassembled like we were at Florida... I think I'd still be looking for a change....
That is a logical argument to make.I can't help but feel if we had won one 5 years ago that we wouldn't be sitting here worrying about reloading certain key positions.
thus proving why your opinion is held with regard around here.
every season, there seems to be reasons to point for or against......in the same breath that we rattle off 59-20, someone else is showing you an SEC East title.
it's in the eye of the beholder. and i'm like you....59-20 and 41-17 are just extremely difficult to disassociate from SEC E champs....last year was like a really cool magic trick.
we would likely be unhappy with a season like last and the drubbings we took. However, we would not have the ammunition that 9 seasons without a title provides. The fact that those 9 seasons fly in the face of Mike Hamilton's comments wrt winning titles scares me badly about who's at the helm.That is a logical argument to make.
While I really don't want to get mired too deeply in this subject matter, I have to say that I don't think having won the SEC in this mythical five years ago, would change Phillip's stripes with regard to getting the most out of what he has.
So, I don't think the recruiting boost that would have resulted from that title would have altered the success level that followed in any great measure.
But this is all conjecture about something that never did happen.
It wasn't so much the score of that game as it was the fact that we absolutely quit in the 3rd quarter, after having similarly quit a couple weeks prior in Berkeley. The foul stench of quitting was rough enough, but was absolutely overwhelmed by the disaster in Tuscaloosa, which also involved a capitulation late.As you know, 59-20 was the tipping point for me.
Nice points BPV.we would likely be unhappy with a season like last and the drubbings we took. However, we would not have the ammunition that 9 seasons without a title provides. The fact that those 9 seasons fly in the face of Mike Hamilton's comments wrt winning titles scares me badly about who's at the helm.
The mythical title would have cut the knees from under the main argument for CPF's ousterand would have kept him in line with MHs stated goals for the program. I fully believe that said title would have quelled much of the outcry that we hear today.
We'd probably be even more dissatisified with last year's slackings. Expectations only increase with success.
It wasn't so much the score of that game as it was the fact that we absolutely quit in the 3rd quarter, after having similarly quit a couple weeks prior in Berkeley. The foul stench of quitting was rough enough, but was absolutely overwhelmed by the disaster in Tuscaloosa, which also involved a capitulation late.