Started By
Message
re: Is Ohio State the most underachieving program of all time?
Posted on 10/21/21 at 12:03 pm to themetalreb
Posted on 10/21/21 at 12:03 pm to themetalreb
quote:
With all their built in advantages, why don’t they win more? It’s puzzling really.
Win more?????? Are you nuts.
Urban Meyer 83-9
Ryan Day 31-3 so far with 2 CFP appearances in both years
Jim Tressell 106-22
John Cooper 111-43-4
Earle Bruce 81-26-1
Woody Hayes 205-61-10
Not winning enough????? that's truly laughable..... They are the only school to not really having a "drop off" period and have only had those 6 coaches in the last 70+ years except for the interim Luke Fickell 2010 season. It's laughable because 4 coaches were fired, 2 (Cooper and Bruce) for apparently not winning enough. I'd say that is just about as good as it gets.
This post was edited on 10/21/21 at 12:05 pm
2
Posted on 10/21/21 at 12:17 pm to bayou prince
Alabama has really skewered the perception of success. 
If you aren't winning 5 titles every 10 years you are underachieving.
If you aren't winning 5 titles every 10 years you are underachieving.
Posted on 10/21/21 at 12:30 pm to The Spleen
quote:
No, Texas is.
Let's debate Aggy in there. Boast the largest alumni and student base. Big cigar money. Yiu name it.
Those frickers won a first NC in school history 12 years ago. In golf. There's never been a bigger loud mouth athletic Runt than these Big Smiths. Ever.
Posted on 10/21/21 at 12:33 pm to tgdawg68
quote:
We've only had the institutional support since KS has been here. Richt did not have it.
The potential for top tier, well funded institutional support has always been there as a potential program changer for UGA, even if it wasn't acted on (arguably) until Smart.
Nonetheless, the point stands. If former ADs and HCs failed to influence that support and take advantage, then it was an asset wasted and still falls in the underachieving bin from a program perspective
This post was edited on 10/21/21 at 12:34 pm
Posted on 10/21/21 at 12:37 pm to bayou prince
quote:
bayou prince
Calm down sir…I’m speaking in terms of championships…I’m an old man (49) and I’ve only seen 2 OSU Championships…with all the gaudy stats you graciously posted for us you would think they would have won more…you actually made my point a bit more solid.
This post was edited on 10/21/21 at 12:38 pm
Posted on 10/21/21 at 12:37 pm to RedDirtSooner
quote:
They still have 8 national titles. There are not many Universities a head of them. I know you're a Bama fan and your view is skewed but, It's not easy winning the title and lot of things have to go your way. That's what makes what Saban has done so remarkable.
I understand, and a few posts ago I stated I did not think OSU underachieved, but someone brought up the fact that OSU had the record for number of weeks at #1 in the AP poll. That they were only able to parley that into 8 NC (2 since 1970) does say something about them.
Posted on 10/21/21 at 1:03 pm to themetalreb
quote:
Calm down sir…I’m speaking in terms of championships…I’m an old man (49) and I’ve only seen 2 OSU Championships…with all the gaudy stats you graciously posted for us you would think they would have won more…you actually made my point a bit more solid.
Well, when you make a blanket statement like that then I feel you have to be clear..... As for "underachieving" any time you win a national title that's just a feather in your cap..... Do you think that Georgia is underachieving since they haven't won a national championship in a long time... I don't...They are good just about every single year and play competitively for SEC championships. I consider them elite because they are consistently good, consistent being the key word. It's when excellent programs zigzig from very good to average, and even worse, then that's what I consider underachieving
Posted on 10/21/21 at 1:19 pm to Che Boludo
quote:
The potential for top tier, well funded institutional support has always been there as a potential program changer for UGA, even if it wasn't acted on (arguably) until Smart.
I mean the "potential" is there for every school to have top tier institutional support but it wasn't reality in Athens.Sorry,just a different culture.The HC was never the most powerful person at the institution like Bear or Nick and the BOR had their own agenda.
We had to rid ourselves of the "win the Georgia way" guys plus the inherent penny pinching from Athletic Director that had been entrenched since Vince Dooley held the title.
It took a while but we finally have an administration and athletic director that's "all in" with CFB but unfortunately not other sports.
Posted on 10/21/21 at 1:24 pm to RD Dawg
quote:
the "potential" is there for every school to have top tier institutional support
Respectfully, disagree. UGAs alumni, booster support and overall reputation give it marked advantages over MANY other programs.
quote:
took a while but we finally have an administration and athletic director that's "all in" with CFB but unfortunately not other sports.
That is a much tougher nut to Crack.
In any case, it is good to see it turnaround. Uga is a great school with a lot of truly dedicated fans.
This post was edited on 10/21/21 at 1:25 pm
Posted on 10/21/21 at 1:25 pm to themetalreb
quote:
Is Ohio State the most underachieving program of all time?
With all their built in advantages, why don’t they win more? It’s puzzling really.
quote:Ohio State is one of the few bluebloods that has consistently remained elite.
8 national championships, 41 B1G titles
Like others have stated, a better answer is UGA. 2 claimed national championships, 1942 and 1980. This, despite being one of the most respected SEC programs. And it's not like UGA was down during the SEC's emergence in the BCS years, they were an annual contender.
Posted on 10/21/21 at 1:29 pm to themetalreb
Ohio State
Texas
Georgia
In no particular order.
Texas
Georgia
In no particular order.
Posted on 10/21/21 at 2:03 pm to Che Boludo
quote:
UGAs alumni, booster support and overall reputation give it marked advantages over MANY other programs
We're talking institutional change not money or a recruiting base.
Having a cheap athletic director and a indifferent administration isn't any enough of an "advantage" to overcome our other obvious advantages.
Anywho,glad we're finally up to snuff with big boys.
Posted on 10/21/21 at 2:09 pm to halfadolla50
quote:
Again, they had the most weeks at #1 in the AP poll (until Bama topped it), and yet had trouble closing the deal. That is the very definition of underachieving.
God Bama fans are just the worst.
Lord Child, I did not bring up the numbers, but just responded to the AP #1 stat. Stop being so sensitive.
OSU has trouble finishing
Posted on 10/21/21 at 2:12 pm to oracle of joemaha
quote:
And Alabama had to get pretty creative to get to 18.
Maybe, but even with the standardized polls, Alabama still has more. The fact is that every Alabama team that won the NC played in a bowl game, and not many teams with multiple NCs before 1975 can say that.
Posted on 10/21/21 at 2:15 pm to RD Dawg
quote:
You are clueless. Ohio State has been a juggernaut through the decades with multiple head coaches. 41 B1G titles, what's wrong with you?
Per this board NCs are all that matters and OSU was unbelievably fortunate to win in 2002 and prior to that they last won one in 68.
Conference title really do not matter in the stats. They are nice, but do not tell the real story. Say Alabama played in the Sun Belt, started in 1976. If Alabama won all the titles, would that be impressive?
Posted on 10/21/21 at 2:17 pm to TideFaninFl
It’s nice to know that it’s pretty much been established in this thread that you don’t have to win Championships to be a blue blood….I never knew that.
Posted on 10/21/21 at 2:23 pm to themetalreb
No.
Posted on 10/21/21 at 2:25 pm to TideFaninFl
quote:
Conference title really do not matter in the stats.
Sure they do but obviously depends on the conference and the BIG was a 2 team conference for decades.
quote:
Say Alabama played in the Sun Belt, started in 1976. If Alabama won all the titles, would that be impressive?
WTF?
Nobody from the sunbelt is competing for or winning NC's anytime soon.
Posted on 10/21/21 at 2:34 pm to themetalreb
quote:You say that with some sarcasm, but I'd say the point is correct. Titles, until relatively recently, have been political affairs. The best Alabama team didn't get to play the best Ohio State, USC, or Oklahoma in the bowls. Notre Dame could cherry-pick outside of the Rose matchup, which kept them prominent.
It’s nice to know that it’s pretty much been established in this thread that you don’t have to win Championships to be a blue blood….I never knew that.
I'd say a blueblood is a program that has owned a traditional major conference for the bulk of their existence; or in the cases of Notre Dame and Penn State, was a longtime elite independent capable of beating anyone.
Posted on 10/21/21 at 3:16 pm to RD Dawg
quote:
WTF?
Nobody from the sunbelt is competing for or winning NC's anytime soon.
Really the Big 10 isn't either
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News