Has Spurrier at South Carolina surpassed what Bryant did at UK?

Well, actually, no he hasn't. I read it wrong. I thought you meant his whole body of work

yes

No. Bryant's 8 years at UK were pretty amazing for the time period. Winning the Sugar and Cotton back to back and thumping the national title winner.

Kentucky won the SEC title, so they get the edge.

quote:

---

Give it some thought before you answer:

Paul "Bear" Bryant era (1946-1953)[edit]


Coach Bryant
Legendary coach Paul "Bear" Bryant was Kentucky's head football coach for eight seasons.[4]

Bear Bryant came to Kentucky from Maryland.[5] Under Bryant's tutelage, the Wildcats won the 1947 Great Lakes Bowl, lost the 1950 Orange Bowl, won the 1951 Sugar Bowl and the 1952 Cotton Bowl Classic.[4] In final AP polls, the Wildcats were ranked #11 in 1949, #7 in 1950, #15 in 1951, #20 in 1952 and #16 in 1953.[4] The final 1950 poll was taken prior to the bowl games; Kentucky then defeated undefeated and #1 ranked Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl,[4] ending the Sooners 31-game winning streak. Bryant won SEC Coach of the Year honors in 1950, the year some Wildcats fans claim the Wildcats won the national championship. Bryant left after eight seasons to accept the head football coach position at Texas A&M.

Assistant coaches at Kentucky under Bryant that went on to become head coaches include Paul Dietzel, Frank Moseley, Jim Owens and Phil Cutchin.[6] Notable players who played for Bryant at Kentucky include Howard Schnellenberger, Jim Mackenzie, Jerry Claiborne, Steve Meilinger, George Blanda, Vito Parilli, and Bob Gain.[7][8]

---

Well, first thing to look at are the bowl games: bowls such as the Orange, Cotton, Sugar, Rose are regarded as the great standards today, because once upon a time they were the ONLY bowls that teams could go play in, which meant only the best teams in the nation every year participated in bowls, right?

But then look at the final rankings for UK during those bowl years: unranked in '47; ranked 11th in '49-'50; ranked 7th in '50-'51 (their Okie-win year); ranked 15th and 17th in '51-'52.

So either those prestigious bowls weren't regarded in the 50s like they are today, or the UK teams weren't regarded as highly. USC hasn't played in ANY of those bowls the past 3 seasons, but have finished ranked in the top 10 of both polls each seasons. At least to the pollsters who vote their choices, USC in it's time under SOS has accomplished MORE than UK in it's time under Bryant...

Then look at the aspect regarding the Oklahoma win: as it's pointed out above, the final poll rankings took place BEFORE their bowl game. Oklahoma had ALREADY won the national title prior to playing UK. They obviously was very happy they'd won, and felt very little remained to be accomplished - with there still being another game of FB left to play. By winning the NC, the Sooner's surely had a target on their backs, and UK was wanting to make a name for themselves. It makes sense to me that this would be an upset special all set up for the Sooners....

Then look at USC beating then-#1 ranked and defending NC Alabama in 2010: Bama was riding a 19-game win streak into Williams-Brice, and were surely targeting the 2010 NC as their top goal of the season. They hadn't won anything yet that year, and had no reason to relax whatsoever. But we all know what happened that day.

I would submit that the win over Bama in 2010 - under Spurrier - was more momentous than the bowl win over Oklahoma was in 1950-51 for Bryant and UK....

Not even close. SEC of today is not the same one Bryant coached at UK. Spurrier hands down. How is this even debatable?