Greatest Athlete to never win highest Championship of their Sport

[Jaytrain5]

Saptarshi Chaudhuri comes to mind. He finished in a tie for 17th at the Scripps National Spelling Bee. He misspelled soogee.

Guy's a trooper.

Outstanding...get Mike Hamilton on the phone with this guy

 

[jakez4ut]

Florida had a great run that ended about 10 years ago, but there hasn't been anybody pull off anything close to that since.

yep, and as long as the SEC stays like it is now, i doubt you will see another 6 year run of SEC titles like he got....

i've been reading all these posts, and i think everyone is really on the same page, well for the most part....

it's just the delivery that gets some....anyways.....

TN as a program is one of the top 15 programs in the country over the past 20 years or so, i don't think anyone would argue that? but even if you did, it would be based on the last 7 years worth of work. and to that end, i don't think anyone could really disagree, i dont, i know that.

w/out putting a bunch of if's and but's in to this, in all fairness, IF we had won the SEC CG in 01 or 04, the perception might be a bit more positive. the good news for us is that we have been competitive in the league since 98, the bad news is, that's all we've been, competitive. And in a league that boasts the likes of UF, Bama, AUB, Florida, LSU, Georgia, TN...being competetive with them each year ain't all bad...but it puts you in the category of teams that are always, man, what a great year, if we had just beaten (fill in the blan here with BAma in the 80's and early 90's, Florida throughout the mid 90's, and UGA of late) we'd of won this or that.

But last year, competitive....is not the word i would use to describe TN football. words like apathetic, lack luster, complacent etc...come to mind.

No one gets excited about 8-4 or 8-3. And unless you at least got to the SEC CG, there's no real reason to get super excited about 9 or 10 win seasons either. I'm not saying that 9 and 10 win seasons aren't good, they are, but that can't be the only thing your known for as a program. And sadly, prior to last year, that's all we have had the past 7 years.

Milo, i believe said it earlier, and i agree with him, we have never been THE dominant team in the SEC, we've been ONE of the dominant teams in the SEC at times, with flashes of greatness.

for me, i don't have to win it every year to be happy. But i like many others, are tired of could of, would of, should of year after year. That would all be erased had we won it in 01 or 04, and not sucked out loud last year.

I don't expect CPF, or TCHCAUTK as Hat calls him, and TN to have great years every year....it's not realistic. someone else said it earlier, every coach, no matter how good goes thru a slump at some point or another.

The difference though is, good coaches don't stay in slumps long, and also as Hat pointed out, they usually have a little more on the resume than 2 conf. titles in 14 years. the NT that CPF has does, forgive me here, add some luster to his resume, and right or wrong, buys him some lee way. It won't guarantee that 06 or 07 are going to be any good. These next two years will ultimately define CPF, uh, excuse me, TCHCAUTK, as a HC. Because these two years will answer the question: Can he bring UT back? He's never had to do it before. He didn't exactly inherit a project program when he got here. He unfortunately is the guy that has taken them to the top of the mountain, only to quickly see the bottom on the other side. Can he make it back up?

If he can, and wins an SEC Title in the next two years, he'll be praised for a wonderful turnaround and making the right decisions in the hires he made this year. If he can't, well, the answer the is pretty obvious.

I know there's nothing new in any of my ramblings, but it truly is a wait and see thing at this point.....

 

[rockydoc]

I''m sure there might be a reason a guy who coached 60 years ago is relevant to the state of the program today, but I'm not sure what it would be.

Put down your Maxxim Magazine and read "the Art of War" by Sun Tzu. the principles are still the same as they were when it was written 2400 years ago.

 

[Ohio Vol]

Hang on a sec here...

I'm not sure where the idea of Richt being FSU football and turning the same stuff at Georgia as FSU came from. FSU was helped immensely by the fact that they agreed to get railed in basketball in-conference in exchange for the opposite in football. FSU simply had to breeze through the behemoths that are Wake Forest, Duke, North Carolina, etc plus the annual non-conference giants of Alabama School for the Deaf and Blind in order to fast-track their way to conference and national titles.

Georgia in the SEC East alone will always have to contend with UT, Florida, and now South Carolina...that's to say nothing of the non-Mississippi schools in the West. I don't think Georgia will be able to go 8-0 in the SEC under Richt at any point, let alone do it multiple times. I don't believe it's really possible to be an SEC juggernaut. Heck, the glorious Steve Superior won one national championship and how they ended up with that still boggles the mind.

UT in 2001 would've gotten smoked by Miami even if they'd beaten LSU. I hate to say it, but there is no way anyone was going to beat Miami that year...I think they had one close game and they just destroyed everyone else.

 

[milohimself]

It doesn't take 8-0 to win the SEC East, though.

 

[rockydoc]

Pam Shirver (women's tennis)
Todd Martin (men's tennis)

 

[cotton]

Colin Montgomerie, much as I dislike the guy, has ben one of the handful of top players in Europe for almost 20 years, winning the Order of Merit 7 times, but never winning a major. He gets my vote.

 

[hatvol96]

Put down your Maxxim Magazine and read "the Art of War" by Sun Tzu. the principles are still the same as they were when it was written 2400 years ago.

You're right. A game played by only white players, with little use of the forward pass, is perfectly comparable to modern college football. I apologize.

 

[hatvol96]

Put down your Maxxim Magazine and read "the Art of War" by Sun Tzu. the principles are still the same as they were when it was written 2400 years ago.

Also, since the old ways are the best, we should begin arming our troops in Iraq with muskets.

 

[Jaytrain5]

UT in 2001 would've gotten smoked by Miami even if they'd beaten LSU. I hate to say it, but there is no way anyone was going to beat Miami that year...I think they had one close game and they just destroyed everyone else.

This is all hypothetical, but I'm not so sure it would have been that easy for Miami. My shades have a bit of an orange tint to them, I'll admit, but we had all the necessary tools to compete with the Canes in '01.
For starters, Miami's strength that year was its offensive line. Nobody could get to Dorsey...the combination of Henderson and Haynesworth would have made things interesting in the trenches. Miami's receivers would have had the advantage on our secondary, but our playmakers (Stallworth, Washington, Witten, Parker) would have still had their moments against the Miami D. Travis Stephens had an All-American year, and if you think the Miami D would have shut him down, just refer back to his performance in the swamp. And, lastly, the Rose Bowl would have been homecoming for Casey Clausen...I know a lot of members on this board don't like Casey, but he was an absolute stud on the road (wins in Gainesville, Tuscaloosa, South Bend, and Miami). I wouldn't have bet against him in Pasadena.

 

[volinbham]

If Fulmer had 5 other national titles, we'd be hailing him as an all-time great.

Some would...

 

[volinbham]

The program has been at a high and pretty consistently high level under Fulmer. 97 and 98 were a peak. 2001 and 2004 were good years. Last year was a freakin' disaster. The data doesn't suggest a consistent downward trend (or any real trend from a predictive perspective). I'll make my decision about Fulmer after this year. The record will be important but also the attitude and discipline of the team.

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

CPF's title droughts just happen to come when UT was on the cusp of becoming an elite program (an opportunity that UT has never been afforded). Instead of taking the bull by the horns you can look at UT's current draft results to see that a bit of laziness crept into the coaching staff. I am unable to dismiss the fact that when invited to play among the elites, UT missed their golden opportunity. My primary complaint with the winning percentage crowd is their unwillingness to look at the context. If UT had won a conference championship since 98 then the argument MIGHT have a little more validity.

I agree completely. We had that stretch in the mid 90s where we were one of the elite programs in the country. Since then, we've fallen right back to where we were in the 80s, when we would have a good year followed by a bad year, followed by a good year, followed by a bad year. The talent has been there, but the motivation is not. there have been way too many lackluster performances over the last few years. Aside from the stretch from 95-98, can anyone really say that the program is better off now than it was during the Majors era?

Having said that though, I do think that the 95-98 stretch bought him another chance to turn it around. If this year is anything close to last year though, I'll be asking Hat for an application to join his lynchmob.

 

[volinbham]

Just a note about the parity in the SEC - over the time period since UT won it's last championship a total of:

7 out of 12 teams have appeared in the SEC championship game.

5 out of 12 have won the SEC championship.



Including 1998, the totals rise to:

8 of 12 teams have appeared in the SECCG (66.7%)

6 of 12 teams have won the SECCG (50%)

 

[OrangeEmpire]

Nanu

 

[milohimself]

Some would...

Even hat would be singing Fulmer's praises if he was winning a national championship at the rate of nearly every other year for more than a decade...

 

[hatvol96]

The program has been at a high and pretty consistently high level under Fulmer. 97 and 98 were a peak. 2001 and 2004 were good years. Last year was a freakin' disaster. The data doesn't suggest a consistent downward trend (or any real trend from a predictive perspective). I'll make my decision about Fulmer after this year. The record will be important but also the attitude and discipline of the team.

What data are you looking at? Look at Fulmer's first six years, then compare that to the last six years. I'd call that a downward trend.

 

[volinbham]

If you reread my post you'll see I indicated that 97 and 98 were a peak meaning I'm comparing years prior and years after and there is not a CONSISTENT downward trend. In fact there is too much variability in the data to suggest any real trend (other than last year looking like an outlier).

Years prior - 10-2, 8-4, 11-1, 10-2

Years after - 9-3, 8-4, 11-2, 8-5, 10-3, 10-3, 5-6

Perhaps if the years after looked like this: 11-2, 10-3, 10-3, 9-3, 8-4, 8-5, 5-6 we could conclude there was a consistent downward trend.

 

[volinbham]

Charting the Vols.

Attached are two charts comparing Fulmer prior to the SEC champs and after the SEC champs.

First is one based on number of wins alone.

Second is one based on winning percentage.

[attachmentid=5476]

A few notes:
1. 97 and 98 are excluded since the analysis is prior to and after the "glory years".
2. The four years (93-96) prior are shown in orange and the 7 after are shown in white.

 

[OrangeSquare]

Oklahoma-Excellent.
USC-Excellent.
Miami-Excellent.
Ohio State-Excellent.
There are some others, for example Texas, who are on the cusp. I don't see where expecting a program to consistently be one of the top 3-4 teams in their league, win a conference title every 4 years, and contend nationally in their best years is unrealistic. Your expectations are far too low. Were this Oklahoma, SC, or Texas, we wouldn't be having a discussion on Fulmer because he would no longer be the coach. If the fan base doesn't demand results, they don't get them. You get the program you deserve. Given the attitudes of our fan base, 5-6 is exactly what we deserve.

OK, not to try and change your mind, but I was looking at something interesting today. The Top 25 Teams according to record since the BCS began. 1998 thru 2005. Eight Years. We have all bantered about several time periods, but I think it's fair to say that with the BCS begining, a new era began in College Football so I think it's fair to count from there. I'm sure you will pull stats from that time frame to fit your arguement. But here goes mine.

Tennessee has contended nationally during those eight years, half of the time (98,99,01,04). They did not win the SEC, "every four years" I'll give you that. But as you will see here, I think that Tennessee has VERY much remained "one of the top 3-4 teams in thier league". I will also show you that Tennessee has been more successful than two of your four "excellent" teams, and that Texas, a team you mentioned as "on the cusp" is actually the cream of the crop.

79-16 Texas 05 Natl Champs
77-15 Miami 01 Natl Champs
76-19 Oklahoma 00 Natl Champs
75-19 Boise St. and Virginia Tech
75-20 Florida St. 99 Natl Champs
72-22 TENNESSEE 98 Natl Champs and Georgia
71-22 Ohio St. 02 Natl Champs
70-22 Michigan
70-26 Southern Cal 04 Natl Champs
69-24 Florida
69-26 Marshall
68-24 Louisville
68-27 Nebraska
67-29 Kansas St.
66-27 Toledo
65-25 TCU
65-26 Oregon
65-30 Wisconsin
64-29 Miami Ohio
63-33 Fresno St.
62-31 LSU 03 Natl Champs
60-32 Auburn
58-35 Texas Tech

There you go, the top 25. Interesting trend that LSU broke. All of the National Champs came from the top 11 until LSU did it from the 23rd possition. Be it ever so close, Tennessee has been better than two of your "excellent" programs and mere games away from the others. I know you will say that the "downward trend" has happend the last ___ years (using anything less than 8), but that to me isn't fair, since we have established 98 as the date for change in College Football per the BCS.

I will agree with you that there have been less Championships for the Tennessee program since our last. But where I disagree with you, is that Tennessee is not one of the "elite" programs in the country. I think it's fair to call any of the top 11 (except for Boise St.) an "elite" team in this BCS World. There have been teams (FSU) that have made it to BCS games more frequently, however at the time they were in a conference without very much competition. I'm not gonna make excuses for Tennessee. I don't feel I need to. I feel that they are STILL one of the elite teams in College Football, and that they will continue on at a pace that as a fan, I feel comfortable with. (Last season, and Peach Bowl losses to Maryland and Clemson, did NOT make me feel comfortable, but also didn't make me want to fire Fulmer.) I know that you won't agree, and that is fine. I'm cool with that. Just know, that I'm not simply sitting around with a Phil Fulmer blow up doll, worshiping every move he makes. There is actual logic to my views, logic that I believe explains my possition. Thanks Hat (and others) for reading.

 

[rockydoc]

Good points OS. I personally like Phil (was in my graduating class at UT and hails from Middle Tenn) and want him to turn things around. I think this year is pivotal as another bad year things will get ugly.

Some on this board I fear would not be satisfied unless he wins back to back nation championships.

 

[hatvol96]

OK, not to try and change your mind, but I was looking at something interesting today. The Top 25 Teams according to record since the BCS began. 1998 thru 2005. Eight Years. We have all bantered about several time periods, but I think it's fair to say that with the BCS begining, a new era began in College Football so I think it's fair to count from there. I'm sure you will pull stats from that time frame to fit your arguement. But here goes mine.

Tennessee has contended nationally during those eight years, half of the time (98,99,01,04). They did not win the SEC, "every four years" I'll give you that. But as you will see here, I think that Tennessee has VERY much remained "one of the top 3-4 teams in thier league". I will also show you that Tennessee has been more successful than two of your four "excellent" teams, and that Texas, a team you mentioned as "on the cusp" is actually the cream of the crop.

79-16 Texas 05 Natl Champs
77-15 Miami 01 Natl Champs
76-19 Oklahoma 00 Natl Champs
75-19 Boise St. and Virginia Tech
75-20 Florida St. 99 Natl Champs
72-22 TENNESSEE 98 Natl Champs and Georgia
71-22 Ohio St. 02 Natl Champs
70-22 Michigan
70-26 Southern Cal 04 Natl Champs
69-24 Florida
69-26 Marshall
68-24 Louisville
68-27 Nebraska
67-29 Kansas St.
66-27 Toledo
65-25 TCU
65-26 Oregon
65-30 Wisconsin
64-29 Miami Ohio
63-33 Fresno St.
62-31 LSU 03 Natl Champs
60-32 Auburn
58-35 Texas Tech

There you go, the top 25. Interesting trend that LSU broke. All of the National Champs came from the top 11 until LSU did it from the 23rd possition. Be it ever so close, Tennessee has been better than two of your "excellent" programs and mere games away from the others. I know you will say that the "downward trend" has happend the last ___ years (using anything less than 8), but that to me isn't fair, since we have established 98 as the date for change in College Football per the BCS.

I will agree with you that there have been less Championships for the Tennessee program since our last. But where I disagree with you, is that Tennessee is not one of the "elite" programs in the country. I think it's fair to call any of the top 11 (except for Boise St.) an "elite" team in this BCS World. There have been teams (FSU) that have made it to BCS games more frequently, however at the time they were in a conference without very much competition. I'm not gonna make excuses for Tennessee. I don't feel I need to. I feel that they are STILL one of the elite teams in College Football, and that they will continue on at a pace that as a fan, I feel comfortable with. (Last season, and Peach Bowl losses to Maryland and Clemson, did NOT make me feel comfortable, but also didn't make me want to fire Fulmer.) I know that you won't agree, and that is fine. I'm cool with that. Just know, that I'm not simply sitting around with a Phil Fulmer blow up doll, worshiping every move he makes. There is actual logic to my views, logic that I believe explains my possition. Thanks Hat (and others) for reading.

A reasonable position. However, taking an eight year view distorts the numbers for Oklahoma, SC, and Ohio State. I'm pretty sure John Blake, Paul Hackett, and John Cooper aren't coaching at those schools anymore. Using an eight year timeline doesn't bother me. What bothers me is that next year, supporters of TCHFCATUTK will want to extend the timeline to nine years and so on and so on.

 

[hatvol96]

OK, not to try and change your mind, but I was looking at something interesting today. The Top 25 Teams according to record since the BCS began. 1998 thru 2005. Eight Years. We have all bantered about several time periods, but I think it's fair to say that with the BCS begining, a new era began in College Football so I think it's fair to count from there. I'm sure you will pull stats from that time frame to fit your arguement. But here goes mine.

Tennessee has contended nationally during those eight years, half of the time (98,99,01,04). They did not win the SEC, "every four years" I'll give you that. But as you will see here, I think that Tennessee has VERY much remained "one of the top 3-4 teams in thier league". I will also show you that Tennessee has been more successful than two of your four "excellent" teams, and that Texas, a team you mentioned as "on the cusp" is actually the cream of the crop.

79-16 Texas 05 Natl Champs
77-15 Miami 01 Natl Champs
76-19 Oklahoma 00 Natl Champs
75-19 Boise St. and Virginia Tech
75-20 Florida St. 99 Natl Champs
72-22 TENNESSEE 98 Natl Champs and Georgia
71-22 Ohio St. 02 Natl Champs
70-22 Michigan
70-26 Southern Cal 04 Natl Champs
69-24 Florida
69-26 Marshall
68-24 Louisville
68-27 Nebraska
67-29 Kansas St.
66-27 Toledo
65-25 TCU
65-26 Oregon
65-30 Wisconsin
64-29 Miami Ohio
63-33 Fresno St.
62-31 LSU 03 Natl Champs
60-32 Auburn
58-35 Texas Tech

There you go, the top 25. Interesting trend that LSU broke. All of the National Champs came from the top 11 until LSU did it from the 23rd possition. Be it ever so close, Tennessee has been better than two of your "excellent" programs and mere games away from the others. I know you will say that the "downward trend" has happend the last ___ years (using anything less than 8), but that to me isn't fair, since we have established 98 as the date for change in College Football per the BCS.

I will agree with you that there have been less Championships for the Tennessee program since our last. But where I disagree with you, is that Tennessee is not one of the "elite" programs in the country. I think it's fair to call any of the top 11 (except for Boise St.) an "elite" team in this BCS World. There have been teams (FSU) that have made it to BCS games more frequently, however at the time they were in a conference without very much competition. I'm not gonna make excuses for Tennessee. I don't feel I need to. I feel that they are STILL one of the elite teams in College Football, and that they will continue on at a pace that as a fan, I feel comfortable with. (Last season, and Peach Bowl losses to Maryland and Clemson, did NOT make me feel comfortable, but also didn't make me want to fire Fulmer.) I know that you won't agree, and that is fine. I'm cool with that. Just know, that I'm not simply sitting around with a Phil Fulmer blow up doll, worshiping every move he makes. There is actual logic to my views, logic that I believe explains my possition. Thanks Hat (and others) for reading.

Also, one other observation. If Virginia Tech is an elite program, N SYNC is an elite rock band.

 

[Jasongivm6]

What does TCHFCATUTK mean?

 

[OrangeSquare]

I am for extending to nine next season, because I think we should continue to judge these programs since the BCS began, until there is another option. (College Playoff, we can only hope.)

Virginia Tech hasn't won a championship, and they have benifitted from being in a conference that was weaker until more recently, but in 99 they played in the title game and went 22-2 over two seasons. They have 13 straight Bowls. They are as elite as Georgia I would argue.