Started By
Message
re: Better Coach: Mark Richt or Phil Fulmer
Posted on 6/10/14 at 3:15 pm to WG_Dawg
Posted on 6/10/14 at 3:15 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
Bama had 2 very good years in the 90s and then had a lot of average.
that's a huge stretch. Bama went to the SEC championship game 92-96 and 99. They won 10 games in 91, 92, 94, 96, and 99. You're basically saying Bama is only better than average when the win a conference title.
quote:
The caliber of competition faced by richt and fulmer isn't even remotely comparable.
very debatable. Tennessee went out and played Miami in the regular season a couple times. Syracuse with Donovan McNab, UCLA with Cade McNown twice, Notre Dame several times, etc. You can make an argument that Richt has had a harder path overall, but you're trying to embellish far too much to make your point. You basically are acting like only UT and Florida had good teams the entirety of the 90s and Bama only fielded a competitive team twice. I doubt you spent the time to look into who UT played each season under Fulmer and how good teams were that particular season. You're looking at the SEC in a giant vacuum and how good programs were over a 15 year span rather than looking at each individual season.
This post was edited on 6/10/14 at 3:16 pm
4
Posted on 6/10/14 at 3:16 pm to lsufball19
Very good post.
Posted on 6/10/14 at 3:20 pm to lsufball19
quote:
very debatable. Tennessee went out and played Miami in the regular season a couple times. Syracuse with Donovan McNab, UCLA with Cade McNown twice, Notre Dame several times, etc. You can make an argument that Richt has had a harder path overall, but you're trying to embellish far too much to make your point. You basically are acting like only UT and Florida had good teams the entirety of the 90s and Bama only fielded a competitive team twice. I doubt you spent the time to look into who UT played each season under Fulmer and how good teams were that particular season. You're looking at the SEC in a giant vacuum and how good programs were over a 15 year span rather than looking at each individual season. This post was edited on 6/10 at 3:16 pm
See my earlier post
Posted on 6/10/14 at 3:26 pm to lsufball19
Amazing what research and logic can accomplish. But hey it's WC dawg's world that we are living in apparently.
Posted on 6/10/14 at 3:34 pm to lsufball19
quote:
lsufball19
My mistake, I apologize. I knew they won the west a bunch, but didn't realize they won that many games as well.
quote:
Syracuse with Donovan McNab, UCLA with Cade McNown twice, Notre Dame several times, etc
How was ND at the time? And naming average teams with one good player doesn't mean anything.
quote:
You basically are acting like only UT and Florida had good teams the entirety of the 90s and Bama only fielded a competitive team twice.
I already admitted I was incorrect about bama. But the rest is fact. Look at the 90s for the east:
UT and UF: elite
UGA: won 10 games twice. The rest of the time hovered around averaging 7ish games, had a few years of 4,5, or 6 wins
UK/SC/VU: horrendous programs
Compare that to the east richt has faced:
-UF: had a few down seasons, especially recently, but also won 2 national titles.
-UT: very down of late, but from 01-09 flipped between very very good to pretty good.
-SC: best era in school history. 3 straight 11 win seasons
-Vandy: likely the best era in school history. Ranked.
-UK: made some noise a year or two. Was ranked in the top 15 at one point
-missouri: won the east already
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News