Fulmer debate extravaganza (merged)

Status
Not open for further replies.
#1,151
#1,151
utmba93 said:
Apparently, that was way too sophisticated of an argument for a sports jock like Hat.
Click to expand...
There's nothing sophisticated about it. It's type of pseudointellectual piffle that people, like yourself, who have neither fact nor logic on their side try to engage in to muddle simple issues. The only relevant fact is that Tennessee hasn't won an SEC title since 1998. Everything else is just prattle designed to puff up a failing regime by its mouthbreathing, drooling sycophants.
 
#1,152
#1,152
jakez4ut said:
the narrative going on in my head as i sometimes read posts on this board is saying nothing but "this guy is an idiot" "he has no idea what he's talking about" "he can't be serious?"

is that wrong?
Click to expand...


I guess it depends on who you are talking about.
 
#1,155
#1,155
hatvol96 said:
There's nothing sophisticated about it. It's type of pseudointellectual piffle that people, like yourself, who have neither fact nor logic on their side try to engage in to muddle simple issues. The only relevant fact is that Tennessee hasn't won an SEC title since 1998. Everything else is just prattle designed to puff up a failing regime by its mouthbreathing, drooling sycophants.
Click to expand...

Oversimplification?
 
#1,159
#1,159
jakez4ut said:
didn't say there was, but in the interest of sophisticated arguments, and who was making them, i thought it releveant.
Click to expand...

I see, trying to confim that it wasn't you when you were using the inequalities based on one ranking from USA Today's pre-tournament poll and the other from their post-tournament poll.
 
#1,164
#1,164
hatvol96 said:
Not when the topic is accomplishments, or lack thereof, of the football program of late.
Click to expand...


Therein lies the rub. Some define that to be a function of poll ranking or winning percentage over time. Some to titles or certain bowl births, especially relative to your rivals.

Me personally, I place a much higher premium on the latter, but I can understand the former. That approach certainly has its virtues.

I guess what bothers me is when winning percentages and poll rankings seem to justify in the minds of some the lack of accumulating or appearing to be progressing rapidly towards titles. Then again, I imagine that for those that put more stock in what they might think is a longer term or more wholistic point of view, the lack of titles shouldn't necessarily distract from the bigger picture. I get that, too.
 
#1,165
#1,165
lawgator1 said:
Therein lies the rub. Some define that to be a function of poll ranking or winning percentage over time. Some to titles or certain bowl births, especially relative to your rivals.

Me personally, I place a much higher premium on the latter, but I can understand the former. That approach certainly has its virtues.

I guess what bothers me is when winning percentages and poll rankings seem to justify in the minds of some the lack of accumulating or appearing to be progressing rapidly towards titles. Then again, I imagine that for those that put more stock in what they might think is a longer term or more wholistic point of view, the lack of titles shouldn't necessarily distract from the bigger picture. I get that, too.
Click to expand...
i think most of us fall in to this category, understanding that a conf. title, at least one time in the last 10 years, would go a long way in our minds.
 
#1,166
#1,166
lawgator1 said:
Then again, I imagine that for those that put more stock in what they might think is a longer term or more wholistic point of view, the lack of titles shouldn't necessarily distract from the bigger picture. I get that, too.
Click to expand...
You play to win championships. Period. If UT's goals are simply to go 9-4/10-3 every year and spend New Year's in some backwater like Tampa or Orlando, I'd like Hamilton, Fulmer, and company to say so. If winning titles isn't the only focus, I'll find something else to do with my Saturdays.
 
#1,167
#1,167
hatvol96 said:
You play to win championships. Period. If UT's goals are simply to go 9-4/10-3 every year and spend New Year's in some backwater like Tampa or Orlando, I'd like Hamilton, Fulmer, and company to say so. If winning titles isn't the only focus, I'll find something else to do with my Saturdays.
Click to expand...
i took it to mean that you win a title or two every so often with the 9 and 10 win season mixed in between.....not a 10 win season/SEC CG appearance every so often surround by 8 and 9 win seasons....which is where we are now.

and i know you've said before, but you don't necessarily 'expect' a title every year, but that should always be the goal.....(which it is).....
 
#1,168
#1,168
I know I came into this late but do you all think that a title in 01' (which we absolutely should have had) and/or 07' (which we looked like we had) would have changed things drastically in this debate...

All things being exactly the same since 2001 except the fact that we won those games and I absolutely think it would...

There would still be a rumbling...from the lack of discipline and the perception that many rivals are evolving with the game while we are staying the same...but I do believe titles in those years would have Fulmer completely off the hotseat...

As a matter of fact I don't think he would have ever been on the hot seat at any point during that time frame...even after 2005...

Assuming I'm right is it safe to say that a SEC title every few years is the milestone for success or lack there of?
 
#1,171
#1,171
blamie said:
I know I came into this late but do you all think that a title in 01' (which we absolutely should have had) and/or 07' (which we looked like we had) would have changed things drastically in this debate...

All things being exactly the same since 2001 except the fact that we won those games and I absolutely think it would...

There would still be a rumbling...from the lack of discipline and the perception that many rivals are evolving with the game while we are staying the same...but I do believe titles in those years would have Fulmer completely off the hotseat...

As a matter of fact I don't think he would have ever been on the hot seat at any point during that time frame...even after 2005...

Assuming I'm right is it safe to say that a SEC title every few years is the milestone for success or lack there of?
Click to expand...
2 sec titles in the last 6 years would be wonderful.
 
#1,172
#1,172
blamie said:
I know I came into this late but do you all think that a title in 01' (which we absolutely should have had) and/or 07' (which we looked like we had) would have changed things drastically in this debate...
Click to expand...
There would be no debate.
 
#1,174
#1,174
Since we'll never get a do-over on those SEC CG's, what would it take for the debate to subside?

For example, IF the Vols do figure out a way to win it this year, what happens?

Please ignore the big 'IF' just for argument's sake.
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.

VN Store



Back
Top