History question?

[Tennesseefan2019]

Dewey Warren picking up yards against Vanderbilt in Tennessee's 28-0 win at Dudley Field in 1966

 

[Rifleman]

At least 8, huh? 12 of 17 are conensus titles, so that seems a little odd. But maybe my TN public education let me down when it comes to math.

You guys are all alike and so predictable in your delusions. I'm not sure what "conensus" means. Must be a Bama word for lies we make up to make ourselves look better.

Easily disputed and laughable Bama titles listed in the schools own record books without any sort of qualifier:

1926: Michigan, Navy, Stanford, and Lafayette also claim this one. Pathetic.
1930: Notre Dame is generally recognized as the champ outside Alabama, including by the NCAA.
1934: Minnesota is generally recognized as the champ outside Alabama, including by the NCAA.
1941: Bama claims a title in this year when they lost twice and there were likely 3 to 5 better teams. The NCAA recognizes the unbeaten Minnesota team.
1964: Co-NCAA champ Arkansas was undefeated, while Bama got whipped by Texas in the Orange Bowl. Notre Dame also recognized by NCAA.
1965: Michigan State recognized by 75% of awarding entities as champs. Bama still enough money to get a few less reputable ones to go along with their claim.
1973: Lost to undefeated Notre Dame in the Sugar Bowl . . . claims title anyway. Ah yeah, that Bama math must be nice to have in your back pocket.
1978: Notoriously puddle-stomped by USC at Legion Field. Claims title over USC anyway.

There's 8. I won't dispute 1925, 1961, or 1979. Congrats on those. Clap. Clap. Good effort.

The BCS and playoffs would open a whole other can of worms. I don't understand how you guys lose your own SEC division and still get to play for championship now and again, but we'll save those asterisks for another day.

 

[SaintLouisVol]

Also I'd like the endzones to be entirely checkered like they were in the early 90's

You won;t see that. NCAA caused that change. They want all fields to have clear and uniform boundary lines in the end zones.

 

[bamawriter]

You guys are all alike and so predictable in your delusions. I'm not sure what "conensus" means. Must be a Bama word for lies we make up to make ourselves look better.

You don't know how to figure out what I meant by my typo, or you don't know what the word "consensus" means?

Easily disputed and laughable Bama titles listed in the schools own record books without any sort of qualifier:

1926: Michigan, Navy, Stanford, and Lafayette also claim this one. Pathetic.

Pre-consensus. Michigan does not claim it. Bama and Stanford went unbeaten and tied in the Rose Bowl. The NCAA's recognized selectors split it between Bama and Stanford.

1930: Notre Dame is generally recognized as the champ outside Alabama, including by the NCAA.

Pre-consensus, and you're wrong: the NCAA has it split between Bama and Notre Dame.

1934: Minnesota is generally recognized as the champ outside Alabama, including by the NCAA.

Pre-consensus. Bama won some contemporary math systems. I'm not a huge fan of claiming purely math titles, so there's 1 for you.

1941: Bama claims a title in this year when they lost twice and there were likely 3 to 5 better teams. The NCAA recognizes the unbeaten Minnesota team.

Terrible Claim. There's 2.

1964: Co-NCAA champ Arkansas was undefeated, while Bama got whipped by Texas in the Orange Bowl. Notre Dame also recognized by NCAA.

Bama won both the AP and the Coaches, which were awarded before the bowls

1965: Michigan State recognized by 75% of awarding entities as champs. Bama still enough money to get a few less reputable ones to go along with their claim.

MSU won the coaches poll before the bowls were played. The AP did a test run of waiting until after the bowls and awarded it to Bama after they won and MSU lost.

1973: Lost to undefeated Notre Dame in the Sugar Bowl . . . claims title anyway. Ah yeah, that Bama math must be nice to have in your back pocket.

Coaches awarded the title before the bowl.

1978: Notoriously puddle-stomped by USC at Legion Field. Claims title over USC anyway.

Bama went into the bowls ranked 2 in both polls and beat #1 Penn State. AP awarded it to Bama. Coaches awarded it to USC.

There's 8.

There's 2 good cases. The rest is simply you not liking the results.

 

[griffdog14]

Here's another, Which mascot do you prefer, Davy or Smokey?

View attachment 208485View attachment 208486 Smokey for me.

No joke there's not a lot in this world i hate more than that smokey logo. it looked cheesy and dated the day it came out and i can't believe i still see it around. The Volunteer Traditions walking smokey logo is AWESOME though, wish i saw it from official UT stuff

 

[lukeneyland]

You won;t see that. NCAA caused that change. They want all fields to have clear and uniform boundary lines in the end zones.

Of course another thing for the NCAA to ruin

 

[bamawriter]

Of course another thing for the NCAA to ruin

Having white-on-white makes it hard to see where the boundary is.

 

[82_VOL_83]

First of all, I love the joke in your user name. I always enjoy word play, and the odd oxymoron can be especially humorous.

Further, I will readily admit that pattern isn't as bad as what I see most fans wear. Maybe because it leans more to plaid? He does look pretty unhappy, though, and I can tell from the photo that he is clearly thinking to himself, "Good Lord strike me dead if I have to wear this stupid hat or live in this godforsaken state another second!"

So, clearly, you are the one who is mistaken.

I grew up in Bama watching the Tide on Saturdays. I can honestly tell you he is smiling in that photo.

 

[82_VOL_83]

I like the UT "definition" from the urban dictionary

UT is the University of Tennessee (est 1794), not the University of Texas (est 1883). UT was a school before Texas was a state...a state in whice Tennessee founded I might add. The University of Texas was refered to as 'TU' (and still is by UT and Texas A&M)until they decided how much cooler UT sounded and decided that is what they wanted their school to be called. TU has attempted to steal UT's logos (the interlocked UT symbol and the Power T),and colors (TU is burnt orange and white while UT is hunting orange and white. UT was also orange and white first), and traditions even though Tennessee was voted #1 football weekend by Sports Illistrated in 2005, and UT's sporting facilities seat more people and sell more tickets annually than any TU sport. I'm surprised they haven't changed their school fight song to Rocky Top. UT is the University of Tennessee. Get your facts right bitches. Don't believe me...go to UTsports.com

I would have to agree with Mr. Parks, UT is the University of Tennessee. Tennessee did everything before Texas did. Texas has been following in Tennessee's footsteps for years. The University of Tennessee existed first, was orange and white first, and went undefeated and won a national championship with a black quarterback first. Considering the history of the University of Texas we can predict the future. The Longhorns will start two freshman quarterbacks this coming season, and go 5-6 the following season. They will then hire a Jewish basketball coach from the north and he will be very succuessful. And another note, the Vols are 3-1 all time versus Texas. Two of those wins occuring in the Lone Star State, one being the Cotton Bowl. Tennessee's men's and women's basketball teams both beat Texas in 2005. God Bless the Vols Tennessee can mess with Texas, because we founded the state. UT is in one place and one place only, Knoxville, Tennessee.

TU claims their band used the interlocking UT in 1905 ... but doesn't show any evidence ... Longhorn Logo Turns 50. A Tennessee source says we used it beginning in 1967, but I really think it was earlier. I left UT to enlist in the Army during my junior year in the spring of 1967 (at the end of the winter quarter), and I'm pretty sure I remember the interlocking UT being common then. I agree 1905 (if true) beats 1967, but I defy anyone to show that TU was using the interlocking UT regularly before Tennessee made it popular. And, yeah, if not for Tennesseans, Texas would still be part of Mexico.

I'm definitely partial to the interlocking UT and think it should be resurrected; however, the power T on the helmet and uniforms does work better.

They tried TU but Temple sued them.

 

[82_VOL_83]

It shouldn't be depressing to anyone. Both schools are iconic and a national brand. From a business standpoint the decision was a equal defeat to both universities on the marketing and financial side. Meaning that both schools could only market and sell merchandise with the hooked UT in their half of the country and losing national merchandising presence. From a business viewpoint by changing the logo, both universities are unrestricted and free to market their merchandise nationally. Texas switched to the longhorn bull head as their new logo as we did with the "Power T". I guarantee you Texas did it for the same reason, money.

I still say we expand the territory to include any game involving Texas A&M and MO (we got a west of the Mississippi relief for LSU). That way we can use the interlocking Logo in Texas and MO.

 

[AM64]

They tried TU but Temple sued them.

So that went Tango Uniform. I guess when you are a newbie as a school (like Texas), it's hard to be a legend with a history ... except in your own mind. USC ... the one out west basically has the same problem. SC was a state with the university way before CA even became a state and certainly well before that school out there.

 

[Tennesseefan2019]

So that went Tango Uniform. I guess when you are a newbie as a school (like Texas), it's hard to be a legend with a history ... except in your own mind. USC ... the one out west basically has the same problem. SC was a state with the university way before CA even became a state and certainly well before that school out there.

Bring this back

 

[82_VOL_83]

Bring this back

View attachment 209299

I think you deserve some time off sir.

 

[AM64]

Having white-on-white makes it hard to see where the boundary is.

On second thought, I'm not sure I do agree. If the goal line is where the green on the field side meets the white line, then even white endzone paint touching the goal side of the goal line makes absolutely no difference.

 

[bamawriter]

On second thought, I'm not sure I do agree. If the goal line is where the green on the field side meets the white line, then even white endzone paint touching the goal side of the goal line makes absolutely no difference.

The goal line isn't the issue, it's the boundary. The ref has to be able to tell if someone steps out of bounds.

 

[AM64]

The goal line isn't the issue, it's the boundary. The ref has to be able to tell if someone steps out of bounds.

I didn't even think about the back and sides of the endzone. Makes sense again.

 

[midtnvol2]

I still say we expand the territory to include any game involving Texas A&M and MO (we got a west of the Mississippi relief for LSU). That way we can use the interlocking Logo in Texas and MO.

I hear ya 82_VOL_83, but we need to leave it buried in the past just like the old artificial turf monster of the 70's & 80's. Come on and embrace the power of the "Power T"!

 

[82_VOL_83]

I hear ya 82_VOL_83, but we need to leave it buried in the past just like the old artificial turf monster of the 70's & 80's. Come on and embrace the power of the "Power T"!

Oh no, Power T is my favorite of all of them. I don't care for the Davy logo and the Smoky logos are terrible. I just wanna piss TUjr off.

 

[lukeneyland]

Bring this back

View attachment 209299

That's borderline demonic

 

[AM64]

I hear ya 82_VOL_83, but we need to leave it buried in the past just like the old artificial turf monster of the 70's & 80's. Come on and embrace the power of the "Power T"!

I like the hooked UT on the field and more or less as the official Tennessee logo, BUT the power T belongs on uniforms and helmets.