We finished with a better record than Florida.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to make it out to be a murderer's row, but I think everybody would agree though that we are not dealing with your typical Kentucky and South Carolina anymore. Both of them beat top 5 teams this year.
One got routed at home by Mississippi State and the other got dusted at home by Vanderbilt, as well.
 
How dare you minimize an Outhouse Bowl trophy? Future generations will genuflect and be moved to tears when they see that glorious piece of hardware in the trophy case.

I haven't seen anybody claim it was the Lombardi Trophy. Some just aren't as apt to want to take a dump in it as you are.
 
One got routed at home by Mississippi State and the other got dusted at home by Vanderbilt, as well.


For the most part, you can do this who's the worst team who beat another team thing forever with no logical explanation. It's been an odd year.
 
They are not the same teams they once were. Surely, you recognize the difference. KY won its bowl game and Spurrier coaches SC. Times... they are changing...

Kentucky won three SEC games. The FSU team they beat basically had half its players sitting at home. Times are not really changing that much. South Carolina didn't go to a bowl. Sounds pretty familiar. Vanderbilt will always be Vanderbilt.
 
The same can be said of Colorado and Stanford. Are they good?
Nice spin . . . but you know as well as I do that Kentucky/SC of 2007 is light years ahead of Kentuck/SC of years past. I never said they were good, just that they aren't teams that can be as easily dismissed as cup cakes.
 
Nice spin . . . but you know as well as I do that Kentucky/SC of 2007 is light years ahead of Kentuck/SC of years past.

Are these UK teams really that much better than the teams Jared Lorenzen led? The coaching at SC may have gotten better, but the talent I think has diminished.
 
Are these UK teams really that much better than the teams Jared Lorenzen led?

Yes by leaps and bounds. I think Lorenzen only played on one team in 4 years that one more than about 4 or 5 games.
 
The Holtz era was an improvement for them, but still that's not everything.

yeah, that 0-11 season along with two 5-7 seasons and a 6-5 were real improvements.

I am still convinced that they won 17 games in 2000-2001 with nothing but luck.

You guys remember the brawl in his last game with SC?
 
yeah, that 0-11 season along with two 5-7 seasons and a 6-5 were real improvements.

i am still convinced that they won 17 games in 2000-2001 with nothing but luck.

Program improvements. We're talking about the Gamecocks here.
 
yeah, that 0-11 season along with two 5-7 seasons and a 6-5 were real improvements.

I am still convinced that they won 17 games in 2000-2001 with nothing but luck.

You guys remember the brawl in his last game with SC?

Didn't he refuse to play in a bowl game because of that?

What a sendoff for a 'motivational speaker.'
 
UF folded against michigan like a house of cards. There brief run is over. UGA and UT will rule the conference in the next few years.
 
UF folded against michigan like a house of cards. There brief run is over. UGA and UT will rule the conference in the next few years.

:eek:lol:

If Florida's defense improves under Charlie Strong like I think they will, Florida will be really, really good next year.
 
UF folded against michigan like a house of cards. There brief run is over. UGA and UT will rule the conference in the next few years.

If Florida "folded" then what would describe our play against Alabama and Florida. Surrendering?
 
If Florida "folded" then what would describe our play against Alabama and Florida. Surrendering?

Look at the stats. They gave up 524 yards to UM. That's mediocre, below average, and all those other bogus descriptions you apply to UT's team.

UF looked pathetic. There's no denying that.

We ended strong, they started strong. The former is better than the latter. Sorry your team lost yesterday.
 

VN Store



Back
Top