After catching the Tenn. NC game I wonder...........

#1
Fine Vol

Fine Vol

Go Vols
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
19,849
Likes
2
#1
How in the hell did we win a NC with TEE and not Peyton. I never thought Tee was a good passer but he could always scramble well enough to get out of trouble. I cant remember any major player changes we gained or lost between Peytons last year and Tees first year.Someone shed some light please.
 
#2
#2
I'll give you one.
Al Wilson stepping up to become the leader of the team in the spring prior, changed the entire chemistry of that ballclub.
 
#4
#4
D-Fense won. Offense played ok and didn't make big mistakes. Took advantage of the long ball 2x.
 
#5
#5
finevol said:
How in the hell did we win a NC with TEE and not Peyton. I never thought Tee was a good passer but he could always scramble well enough to get out of trouble. I cant remember any major player changes we gained or lost between Peytons last year and Tees first year.Someone shed some light please.
Click to expand...

We had a great defense, very good running game.

Without going back and looking back at every national champion (and not being personally familiar with any before, say the early '80s,) I'll bet you could take the words in that sentence, perhaps swap the "very good" and "great", and accurately describe just about every NC.

EDIT: We were also very good on special teams. I almost forgot that one.
 
#6
#6
we still should've won the title in 97 as well, but our team "leaders" didn't step up to the plate and lead the team.
 
#7
#7
also got some good bounces of the ball...the turnovers in the FL game, the missed FG by FL in OT, the Stoener fumble, the fumble returned for a TD against Auburn etc, etc, etc...

not saying it was all luck mind you, but we did get the breaks that year, as most NC teams do at least once or twice during a run like that.

For example:
Miami in 01 against BC....
NEb vs. Missouri in 97.....
those are two that stick out in my mind as clear as the Stoener Fumble against us...

when peyton was at the helm, we never got the breaks against FL...

Plus the D in 98 was just really, really good and we had a running game with a GREAT offensive line. Wasn't so much placed in the hands of the qb to go win the game as it had been the previous 2 years.
 
#8
#8
volfanbill said:
we still should've won the title in 97 as well, but our team "leaders" didn't step up to the plate and lead the team.
Click to expand...

If you watched Nebraska run the ball for approximately 12.3 miles against us in the Orange Bowl, you will see why I have doubts that we had a good enough defense in '97 to win the national title. I don't know what leadership had to do with getting blown off the line of scrimmage on both sides of the ball.

The offense was good enough to get us in a strange form of the Bowl Alliance title game. We were overmatched against our opponent there.
 
#9
#9
jakez4ut said:
also got some good bounces of the ball...the turnovers in the FL game, the missed FG by FL in OT, the Stoener fumble, the fumble returned for a TD against Auburn etc, etc, etc...
Click to expand...

Exactly . . . We were very good that year, but we were also charmed. Like you said, almost every undefeated team gets a win or two that they never should have gotten.
 
#10
#10
GAVol said:
Exactly . . . We were very good that year, but we were also charmed. Like you said, almost every undefeated team gets a win or two that they never should have gotten.
Click to expand...
even the moon in TEmpe that night was orange....eerie.....for FSU fans anyway:)
 
#11
#11
jakez4ut said:
also got some good bounces of the ball...the turnovers in the FL game, the missed FG by FL in OT, the Stoener fumble, the fumble returned for a TD against Auburn etc, etc, etc...

not saying it was all luck mind you, but we did get the breaks that year, as most NC teams do at least once or twice during a run like that.
Click to expand...
How about the pass interference call at the end of the Syracuse game (was legit but helpful nonetheless)
 
#14
#14
Peyton only wins when it doesn't matter. at least that's what i've concluded in his football career. He represents the university well and gives them a bunch of money but all the attention he gets from fans makes me sick.
 
#16
#16
Crakaveli said:
Peyton only wins when it doesn't matter. at least that's what i've concluded in his football career. He represents the university well and gives them a bunch of money but all the attention he gets from fans makes me sick.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of that has to do with somehow the games that he does win become meaningless. Why is it that all the regular season games against the Patriots were always so important when Manning lost them? When he did beat them, somehow that game was irrelevant. Also, the defense that Martin had for the '98 season was probably better than the one Peyton has now.
 
#17
#17
kptvol said:
I think a lot of that has to do with somehow the games that he does win become meaningless. Why is it that all the regular season games against the Patriots were always so important when Manning lost them? When he did beat them, somehow that game was irrelevant. Also, the defense that Martin had for the '98 season was probably better than the one Peyton has now.
Click to expand...
Most of the '98 defense, minus Leonard Little and Terry Fair, played with Manning in '97. That's two 1st round picks leaving the defense, yet Martin won and Captain Stats didn't. Interesting.
 
#18
#18
hatvol96 said:
Most of the '98 defense, minus Leonard Little, played with Manning in '97.
Click to expand...

I realize this. Peyton was on track to be NFL MVP again this year (although it would be tough not to give it to Tomlinson) before opposing teams figured out that running the ball against the Colts = automatic victory. Peyton sits on the sideline and watches the other team go on a nine minute scoring drive. The Colts will have to score practically every time they touch the ball from here on out in order to win. I think it's a little much to blame some of the Colts' losses this year solely on the QB.
 
#19
#19
hatvol96 said:
Most of the '98 defense, minus Leonard Little and Terry Fair, played with Manning in '97. That's two 1st round picks leaving the defense, yet Martin won and Captain Stats didn't. Interesting.
Click to expand...

Al Wilson and Travis Henry had just as much to do with that season's wins as Martin.
 
#20
#20
kptvol said:
Al Wilson and Travis Henry had just as much to do with that season's wins as Martin.
Click to expand...
Travis Henry did nothing against Syracuse or Florida. He's another guy, like Captain Stats, who fans love to prop up. He's about the tenth best running back in UT history.
 
#22
#22
hatvol96 said:
Travis Henry did nothing against Syracuse or Florida. He's another guy, like Captain Stats, who fans love to prop up. He's about the tenth best running back in UT history.
Click to expand...

Never said he was one of the best. He had a good year in '98. I think he was 100% of the game-winning drive against Arkansas. I'm not so sure we would have won the national championship without him, just like we wouldn't have won it without Al Wilson, or Tee.
 
#23
#23
kptvol said:
I realize this. Peyton was on track to be NFL MVP again this year (although it would be tough not to give it to Tomlinson) before opposing teams figured out that running the ball against the Colts = automatic victory. Peyton sits on the sideline and watches the other team go on a nine minute scoring drive. The Colts will have to score practically every time they touch the ball from here on out in order to win. I think it's a little much to blame some of the Colts' losses this year solely on the QB.
Click to expand...

Peyton hasn't exactly been putting up points in the past few games either. He's thrown more interceptions than touchdowns.
 
#25
#25
Another point to ponder. Jamal Lewis playing without Peyton Manning, won an SEC title, a National Title, and a Super Bowl. Manning, without Lewis, never won so much as a conference title.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top