Greatest Athlete to never win highest Championship of their Sport

[jakez4ut]

oops. oh well....the rest of the list is good....

 

[hatvol96]

oops. oh well....the rest of the list is good....

Except that you included John Stockton, the most overrated player in NBA history.

 

[GVF]

Florida State, Nebraska, and USC have all won multiple National Championships since Fulmer became the head coach at UT. Ohio State, Michigan, Florida, Oklahoma, LSU and Texas have all won National Titles in that period. All but Texas and LSU have more conference titles in that period.

Now here's the scoop. According to alltime stats, all the biggies suck cause some Ivy Leaguers hold the all time NC title race. Now to put things in HAT's perspective. True we haven't won a NC in the last seven years. But that's not fair since the BCS title started in 1998. So, lets' do 8 years. SC wnet back to back with '03 bing a split w/LSU. All other NC's were by different teams who in that period have won only one NC in 8 years save for SC. And during our only one coaches tenure, we posted only one losing season, verses more than one dismal season for the other schools trying to rebuild. Explain to me why we constantly debate our sad program. According to the current BCS system, we are as equally good as everyone else.


Here's the National Champions since 1936:

9 Notre Dame
7 Alabama
7 Ohio State
7 Southern California
7 Oklahoma
5 Miami (Fla.)
5 Nebraska
4 Minnesota
4 Texas
3 Michigan State
2 Army
2 Florida State
2 Georgia Tech
2 LSU
2 Michigan
2 Penn State
2 Pittsburgh
2 Tennessee
1 Florida
1 Washington
1 Colorado
1 Brigham Young
1 Clemson
1 Arkansas
1 Mississippi
1 Syracuse
1 Iowa
1 Auburn
1 UCLA
1 Maryland
1 Texas Christian
1 Stanford


If you count every poll going back to 1869, here's the list:

18 Yale
17 Princeton
13 Notre Dame
10 Southern California (USC)
10 Michigan
10 Alabama
9 Harvard
7 Ohio State
7 Oklahoma
6 Minnesota
5 Miami (Fla.)
5 Nebraska
4 Georgia Tech
4 Penn State
4 Pittsburgh
4 Pennsylvania
4 Texas
3 Army
3 Illinois
3 California
3 Cornell
3 LSU
3 Michigan State
2 Florida State
2 Tennessee
2 Texas A&M
1 Florida
1 Washington
1 Colorado
1 Brigham Young
1 Clemson
1 Arkansas
1 Mississippi
1 Syracuse
1 Iowa
1 Auburn
1 UCLA
1 Maryland
1 Texas Christian
1 Stanford
1 Chicago
1 Lafayette
1 Dartmouth



Division I-A Football
Bowl Championship Series
Year School Selecting organization
2005 Texas BCS
2004 Southern California BCS
2003 Louisiana State BCS (AP chose USC)
2002 Ohio State BCS
2001 Miami (Fla.) BCS
2000 Oklahoma BCS
1999 Florida State BCS
1998 Tennessee BCS

 

[hatvol96]

The standard keeps moving. Is it Fulmer's entire tenure? The last ten years? Since the inception of the BCS? Pick a time frame and stick with it.

 

[milohimself]

I think it's a lot simpler than that and has nothing to do with schedule or conference strength . . . Auburn, due to preconceived notions about how good they were, started the season ranked somewhere around #20 and the top 2 teams didn't lose. Auburn actually probably blew their chance to play for the national title the year prior when they were preseason #3 and completely flopped coming out of the gate against Ga Tech and BYU. The pollsters didn't want to make the same mistake twice.

That reminded me of all the support for this idea of having no official rankings until about 4-6 weeks into the season. I think that's a good idea.

I would have preferred it more if a referee hadn't handed them that one.

Watch out, tidwell is coming your way for that one. Referees are never wrong.

All in all in this subject, there's truth in the middle ground. For Fulmer's entire tenure, has Tennessee been a good program? Yeah. They won a national title. They have a lot of ten-win seasons, good record. However, overall record is not the sole indicator of greatness. It is consistency combined with greatness, which Tennessee has not done very well in. Our football team should be out there to be no less than the very best. And with the exception of a couple of years in the middle, there's always been that inurmountable team in the SEC holding us back. Fulmer failed to dominate the SEC because he couldn't beat Spurrier, then after a two year success, Richt was the primary coach that Fulmer couldn't get around. Him and a combonation of good teams like Florida, Auburn, LSU, etc.

Don't believe me? During Fulmer's tenure, Tennessee has had four 10-win seasons without even an SEC East title to show for it. Those 10-win seasons are great, and I won't even dare say Tennessee has been a bad team over the last 13.5 seasons. But through it all, my goal would be to be the greatest. Consistently good is fine, but keep climbing the freakin' ladder. We look back on those Notre Dame teams of the 40',s Oklahoma teams of the 50's, Alabama teams of the 60's and 70',s Miami teams of the 80's, Nebraska teams of the 90's. And soon we'll look back on the USC teams of this decade, and all with great memories because they can say they were the best. They don't hang their hats on being just good, the BEST. That's what it's all about folks, greatness.

If Tennessee's goal isn't to build a program that's the very best in the SEC, then something's wrong. The program has been idling at the same state for too long. And I'll say it... If Fulmer is incapable of getting over the hump and beating all odds in the SEC, then he needs to go. I'm not part of any "fire Fulmer" crowd. We've seen that he is capable of some greatness, even if aided by the removal of serious competition. So if he can start beating those other teams, keep him around. If he can't take the program, he needs to go because we've hit a wall.

 

[GVF]

We'll take your time frame since you want to harp on 7 years. But, in order for your time frame to be valid you have to pick up 1998 and make it 8 years. You can't leave out the only other BCS title year. With that said. UT has won as many NC's as the other 8 title holders except for SC. And I say the other 8, since there was a spilt title in '03, there would be a total of 9 in the 8 year BCS title race. Only one has repeated, so I guess every one else sucks. And I don't accept mediocrity as an excuse. That is why I have fired good employees that have poor recent performance or violations. Yesterday is history. But, I did so objectively, and correctly. I'm not against a coaching change. I am against the prospect of how many years it will take to find the right replacement to get back to where we are right now. Where we are in our slump is far better than the slumps the others went through. If we see an opportunity to hire the right replacement, then pull the trigger. Don't fire the gun without bullets.

 

[milohimself]

Or, he could say seven years to illustrate what other teams have done since Tennessee last won the SEC.

 

[hatvol96]

We'll take your time frame since you want to harp on 7 years. But, in order for your time frame to be valid you have to pick up 1998 and make it 8 years. You can't leave out the only other BCS title year. With that said. UT has won as many NC's as the other 8 title holders except for SC. And I say the other 8, since there was a spilt title in '03, there would be a total of 9 in the 8 year BCS title race. Only one has repeated, so I guess every one else sucks. And I don't accept mediocrity as an excuse. That is why I have fired good employees that have poor recent performance or violations. Yesterday is history. But, I did so objectively, and correctly. I'm not against a coaching change. I am against the prospect of how many years it will take to find the right replacement to get back to where we are right now. Where we are in our slump is far better than the slumps the others went through. If we see an opportunity to hire the right replacement, then pull the trigger. Don't fire the gun without bullets.

I'm not sure who on here has ever said that National Titles are the only measure of the quality of a program.

 

[hatvol96]

Or, he could say seven years to illustrate what other teams have done since Tennessee last won the SEC.

Thank you. Glad to see someone gets the point as to why I use the title drought as a measure.

 

[therealUT]

Thank you. Glad to see someone gets the point as to why I use the title drought as a measure.

I got that point. However, if you use the title drought as a measure for any team, then that team is going to be less than stellar in the time frame you are observing.

 

[GVF]

Milo, your point is well taken, and I'm sure that is somewhere in there, that is what HAT is trying to say. I certainly agree that we cannot call ourselves the best during that era. For that matter, any era in UT history. We've just had our moments. But, for all those failures to dominate, the other SEC teams mentioned never dominated on a national scale either save for Bama during the Bear era, and Stallings to some degree. UF was not a dominate power in the 90's by those standards. They only won 1 NC during Spurriers tenure. They were just a good conference foe. True, with the talent w've supposedly had, the Fulmer era should have been our epic period in college football like the other you mention. So, by that measurement our coaching change should have happened years ago, before the NC. We have choked alot. We literally have been just a few plays, or gut checks, or coaching calls, or ref calls from being one of those epic legends.

 

[hatvol96]

I got that point. However, if you use the title drought as a measure for any team, then that team is going to be less than stellar in the time frame you are observing.

If a program avoids long title droughts, they don't have to worry about such comparisons.

 

[orangetd88]

To further hat's point (uggh, can't believe this) schools we were supposed to or at one point have dominated have won one or more SEC titles since 1998.

99-Bama, who has since gone through probation. The Fulmer hater in Bammer want to point this out because he "took them under" to get above them, but never did more than beat them a few times. No titles to show for it.

2000-Florida, Spurrier leaves a year later, and yet, they still have the last title between the two schools.

2001-LSU, would have been UT had we not choked away the second half. Some say it was 1999, but I think this began our true fall from grace, so to speak.

2002-UGA, a team we had dominated for most of a decade had, to this point, run up 3 in a row on us.

2003-LSU, another school we have mostly dominated on the field has 2 titles since our last one.

2004-Auburn, a once great rivalry, replaced by Florida and LSU, respectively, has become one-sided, and not on the right side.

2005-UGA again. Ohh, let us live in the past of the 1990's where we at least were only dominated by one school and coach, not several.

 

[therealUT]

Also, Hat, look at what Notre Dame did in pushing Holtz out. Holtz was having a couple less than outstanding seasons, so ND forced him out. Ask ND fans how happy they were with the next 10 seasons?

 

[hatvol96]

Also, Hat, look at what Notre Dame did in pushing Holtz out. Holtz was having a couple less than outstanding seasons, so ND forced him out. Ask ND fans how happy they were with the next 10 seasons?

Ask them how happy they are now. If you think Hamilton would hire a Bob Davie or Ty Willingham, you have very little faith in the AD.

 

[hatvol96]

To further hat's point (uggh, can't believe this) schools we were supposed to or at one point have dominated have won one or more SEC titles since 1998.

99-Bama, who has since gone through probation. The Fulmer hater in Bammer want to point this out because he "took them under" to get above them, but never did more than beat them a few times. No titles to show for it.

2000-Florida, Spurrier leaves a year later, and yet, they still have the last title between the two schools.

2001-LSU, would have been UT had we not choked away the second half. Some say it was 1999, but I think this began our true fall from grace, so to speak.

2002-UGA, a team we had dominated for most of a decade had, to this point, run up 3 in a row on us.

2003-LSU, another school we have mostly dominated on the field has 2 titles since our last one.

2004-Auburn, a once great rivalry, replaced by Florida and LSU, respectively, has become one-sided, and not on the right side.

2005-UGA again. Ohh, let us live in the past of the 1990's where we at least were only dominated by one school and coach, not several.

Orangetd88-the newest member of VX.

 

[orangetd88]

LOL...not quite. As you can see, I'm on middle ground, here.

I'm one of the guys who thinks changes should be made, but I'm not sure where they need to be made.

Do we need to replace Fulmer? Possibly, but with who?

 

[GVF]

I'm not sure who on here has ever said that National Titles are the only measure of the quality of a program.

I though it was you in a thread a couple of weeks ago. Cause I was in it with you. You said NC's are all that really counted. You shot down the importance, or lack thereof, for divisional and conference titles. Besides, the SEC has had a harder time giving a member team the opportunity to dominate an era. We've been running the SEC division set up with that extra game for the title far longer than anyone else. While everyone else was, and some still are, playing pansy schedules and claiming a title on less games in a softer environment. How many 10 win seasons did Spurrier have and only 1 NC. It is not inconceivable that a great team in th SEC can have multiple 10 win seasons and not win any titles at all. In the SEC you can lose one divisional game, be your only loss, and not even go to the title game. Matter of fact, that is not even all that hard to accomplish. Unless your an 8-3 team in the West ala Miss. State. If it had not been for the SEC structure and overall strength, UT and UF would be arguing over the greatest team in that national era.

 

[milohimself]

Milo, your point is well taken, and I'm sure that is somewhere in there, that is what HAT is trying to say. I certainly agree that we cannot call ourselves the best during that era. For that matter, any era in UT history. We've just had our moments. But, for all those failures to dominate, the other SEC teams mentioned never dominated on a national scale either save for Bama during the Bear era, and Stallings to some degree. UF was not a dominate power in the 90's by those standards. They only won 1 NC during Spurriers tenure. They were just a good conference foe. True, with the talent w've supposedly had, the Fulmer era should have been our epic period in college football like the other you mention. So, by that measurement our coaching change should have happened years ago, before the NC. We have choked alot. We literally have been just a few plays, or gut checks, or coaching calls, or ref calls from being one of those epic legends.

All I'm saying is that a coaching change needs to happen if and when it becomes apparent we have hit a wall, and that has yet to happen. Yeah, going 7 seasons without an SEC title makes the situation seem like we're a lot closer to hitting the ceiling with Fulmer, but I don't believe we're there yet. And I know achieving that level of greatness is difficult. But what else is one to do in college football? Reach the peak. That's all I want to do. That's what it's all about.

Once again, I reiterate that I am NOT advocating the removal of Fulmer at this point in time. But if it becomes apparent he's not the guy that will take us all the way even in the face of serious competition, then changes need to be made.

And I'm not gonna sit here and rip on people for not expecting that. It's just what I expect. I'm not gonna sit here, 2,000 miles away, and force my expectations of greatness on everyone else around here.

 

[orangetd88]

The problem here is this...

Yes, we have had some good years, even after 1998. As a school in the top ten in wins, percentage, etc., we expect more than just a couple of good years surrounded by really bad ones.

We are now celebrating seasons with dvds and posters remembring years in which we LOST championship games, not winning them.

 

[GVF]

Or we could say since USC last won it, then everyone but Texas now sucks.

 

[therealUT]

If a program avoids long title droughts, they don't have to worry about such comparisons.

General Neyland himself had droughts of 5 or more seasons, including having multiple losing seasons. Joe Paterno has too.

The only coaches who seem to have their programs always on top, also seem to be mired in very shady dealings.

 

[hatvol96]

I though it was you in a thread a couple of weeks ago. Cause I was in it with you. You said NC's are all that really counted. You shot down the importance, or lack thereof, for divisional and conference titles. Besides, the SEC has had a harder time giving a member team the opportunity to dominate an era. We've been running the SEC division set up with that extra game for the title far longer than anyone else. While everyone else was, and some still are, playing pansy schedules and claiming a title on less games in a softer environment. How many 10 win seasons did Spurrier have and only 1 NC. It is not inconceivable that a great team in th SEC can have multiple 10 win seasons and not win any titles at all. In the SEC you can lose one divisional game, be your only loss, and not even go to the title game. Matter of fact, that is not even all that hard to accomplish. Unless your an 8-3 team in the West ala Miss. State. If it had not been for the SEC structure and overall strength, UT and UF would be arguing over the greatest team in that national era.

I have certainly derided the concept of division championships. However, I think you would be hard pressed to find evidence that I have ever diminished the importance of a conference championship.

 

[orangetd88]

In a conference like the SEC, conference championships and championship game appearances are a very good barometer.

Since 1998, we have 2 appearances and 0 wins.

 

[hatvol96]

General Neyland himself had droughts of 5 or more seasons, including having multiple losing seasons. Joe Paterno has too.

The only coaches who seem to have their programs always on top, also seem to be mired in very shady dealings.

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.