Started By
Message
I really hate it when an analyst says "College football needs (historically good team) to
Posted on 7/18/23 at 7:51 am
Posted on 7/18/23 at 7:51 am
be good. Just heard Doering say it about Tennessee and Auburn. Why? We can't all be good. If all of the historically good/great teams are good/great, then doesn't that mean we need all the teams who are historically bad or average to continue to be bad or average?
Makes no sense.
Makes no sense.
This post was edited on 7/18/23 at 7:53 am
21
Posted on 7/18/23 at 8:02 am to koreandawg
This is why no one likes UGA fans
This post was edited on 7/18/23 at 8:03 am
Posted on 7/18/23 at 8:10 am to VFL1800FPD
quote:
This is why no one likes UGA fans
why? its true. As a gamecock fan it is annoying to hear that college football needs program X to make a comeback. Screw UT and Auburn, id rather see SC get their chance
Posted on 7/18/23 at 8:17 am to koreandawg
quote:
be good. Just heard Doering say it about Tennessee and Auburn. Why? We can't all be good. If all of the historically good/great teams are good/great, then doesn't that mean we need all the teams who are historically bad or average to continue to be bad or average?
Makes no sense.
They do it to sell whatever it is they hawk on the television and radio channels they say it on. There is not an ounce of logic in it...for example why does CFB need Nebraska to be good???? Nebraska as been middling to really bad for a long time....CFB has been better than ever in the same period of time. The same is true of USC, Texas, all of the used to bes. It will be the same for UGA when UGA is in the inevitable doldrums. It is true to say that the fanbase of team X needs team X to be good, to be in the mix, to be competitive....but CFB could give a tinkers damn...it will still go one, will be discussed and argued over, 90L people will travlel to tiny college towns on Saturdays in the fall and it won't matter what Notre Dame has or has not done of late...
Posted on 7/18/23 at 8:18 am to VFL1800FPD
quote:
This is why no one likes UGA fans
Tennessee is the proof in the pudding...when Tennessee is bad CFB is great...when they are good CFB is worse than cricket.
Posted on 7/18/23 at 8:18 am to VFL1800FPD
quote:
This is why no one likes UGA fans
I'd say the same thing if they said it about us.
When we were down with Goff, college football didn't suffer.
When Notre Dame was crap between Holtz and Kelly, college football was fine.
Seems to be doing okay without Nebraska being good.
The sport is bigger than the teams. It's a great game and will be whether the historically good teams are great or not. Will it be fun for me as a Georgia fan? No. But I'll still enjoy the sport overall.
This post was edited on 7/18/23 at 8:19 am
Posted on 7/18/23 at 8:22 am to GamecockUltimate
Y’all maybe stop to ever think that Bamas compete domination of the entire conference for 15 years might have been a little more difficult if their permanent rival had a pulse? And auburn was off/on during that period. CFB needs balance. UGA plays auburn and UT every year, probably be better for everyone else if they were solid solid challenges instead of cakewalks.
This post was edited on 7/18/23 at 8:25 am
Posted on 7/18/23 at 8:24 am to AwgustaDawg
quote:
Tennessee is the proof in the pudding...when Tennessee is bad CFB is great.
When Tennessee is bad, Bama dominates everyone for 15 years
Posted on 7/18/23 at 8:26 am to VFL1800FPD
It was 11 years...2009-2020
Posted on 7/18/23 at 8:29 am to koreandawg
quote:
I really hate it when an analyst says "College football needs (historically good team) to
be good
I totally agree and have made this same argument before. It doesn't make any sense, other than from the perspective of wnating to generate more money and TV revenue by seeing the big boys.
Posted on 7/18/23 at 8:30 am to Dawg4Life47
You last beat Bama in 2007 and you beat them most recently in 2022 (not sure where you are getting 2020 - you lost 41-24)
2022- 2007 = 15yrs
2022- 2007 = 15yrs
Posted on 7/18/23 at 8:30 am to VFL1800FPD
It doesn't have to be those teams though. Others can rise up.
Posted on 7/18/23 at 8:32 am to VFL1800FPD
quote:
You last beat Bama in 2007 and you beat them most recently in 2022 (not sure where you are getting 2020 - you lost 41-24)
2022- 2007 = 15yrs
Are we everyone hoss? Cause you said everyone. Saban's Bama teams were better than any you had during that 11 year stretch. You would've needed to be better than you've ever been before. You weren't ready, son.
This post was edited on 7/18/23 at 8:34 am
Posted on 7/18/23 at 8:34 am to VFL1800FPD
quote:
Y’all maybe stop to ever think that Bamas compete domination of the entire conference for 15 years might have been a little more difficult if their permanent rival had a pulse? And auburn was off/on during that period. CFB needs balance. UGA plays auburn and UT every year, probably be better for everyone else if they were solid solid challenges instead of cakewalks.
Ole Miss gets Vandy every year, it hasnt helped. I don't need to see UT get back just for the purpose of keeping Bama in check. CFB is more fun when new teams pop up and form dynasties.
UF was trash before Spurrier, it was fun watching them in the 90's. I still want to see my team have that rise. UT fans had their fun, and maybe they will get that back, but CFB doesnt NEED it
Posted on 7/18/23 at 8:36 am to koreandawg
Yes but most of those other teams capable of stepping up don’t play Bama/UGA every year, and/or don’t have quite the same resources/potential for success. There is a reason 6 teams have won the conference in 60 years or whatever. Barring fundamental changes in the way things work, teams like SC, Missouri, state, vandy, Arkansas, etc will never pose the same long-term threat as any big six team.
Posted on 7/18/23 at 8:40 am to VFL1800FPD
quote:
Yes but most of those other teams capable of stepping up don’t play Bama/UGA every year, and/or don’t have quite the same resources/potential for success. There is a reason 6 teams have won the conference in 60 years or whatever. Barring fundamental changes in the way things work, teams like SC, Missouri, state, vandy, Arkansas, etc will never pose the same long-term threat as any big six team.
Going back 18 years (average age of a college freshman, or your recruits) SC has been better than UT. We both have one division title (ours more recent), we have 11 win seasons, you don't. You have 1 10 win season. you also have 8 losing seasons in the past 18 years with a record of 121-110 (forfeited wins still included)..
SC is 141-98.
you may have had the better resources in the past, but not anymore
This post was edited on 7/18/23 at 8:51 am
Posted on 7/18/23 at 8:42 am to koreandawg
I think cfb needs more parity. I’m tired of seeing OSU each year play cupcakes
Posted on 7/18/23 at 8:47 am to GamecockUltimate
quote:
you may have had the better resources in the past, but not anymore
An 80k capacity off-campus stadium, a 30th ranked revenue production, and the 10th best NIL fund in the conference beg to differ.
Even during the worst 15 years of UT football in history, you managed a .50 record against us. Congratulations.
Resources =/= wins
This post was edited on 7/18/23 at 8:52 am
Posted on 7/18/23 at 8:47 am to koreandawg
Agreed. Every year the MSM tries to build up the likes of ND, Michigan, Ohio State and SoCal. They're back , we need them to be good and so on. BS! With the exception of Ohio State the other three have had entire decades that they sucked compared to their history. College football has been just fine without them being on top. As another said ND sucked for 30+ years and yet every year the media and the poll built them up and when they laid an egg, "we don't understand why they're not better"! Just give it a rest. More than any other college football program, these 4 trade on their history for preferential treatment by the media and yet most continue to underperform and it really gets old.
Posted on 7/18/23 at 8:47 am to GamecockUltimate
quote:
quote:
Yes but most of those other teams capable of stepping up don’t play Bama/UGA every year, and/or don’t have quite the same resources/potential for success. There is a reason 6 teams have won the conference in 60 years or whatever. Barring fundamental changes in the way things work, teams like SC, Missouri, state, vandy, Arkansas, etc will never pose the same long-term threat as any big six team.
Going back 18 years (average age of a college freshman, or your recruits) SC has been better than UT. We both have one division title (ours more recent), we have 11 win seasons, you don't. You have 1 10 win season. you also have 8 losing seasons in the past 18 years..
you may have had the better resources in the past, but not anymore
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News