PhoenixAZVol
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2017
- Messages
- 1,087
- Likes
- 1,327
I had successfully blocked that game from my memory, so thanks for that. Last year was one of the most disappointing losses we've had in recent years to y'all. We were not good last year, and probably still would have lost with a good effort but we weren't as bad as we looked, we just totally crapped the bed and looked like a bunch of guys who just met for a pick up game and decided to throw on pads and play the Florida Gators.
I would venture to say the culture of the athletic department for the last 30 years has been not to hire a coach with stones. That’s why we seem snakebit. Yes, Fulmer won a natty, but that largely came from UF uncharacteristicly giving that game away, the Stoener fumble, and UCLA (who would’ve drilled us) inexplicably losing to Miami in a make up game at the end of the year to knock themselves out of the natty game and giving it to a Chris Weinke-less FSU team who was playing with “the rooster” at QB. We were gifted that natty and anyone who argues otherwise is in denial. Spurrier had stones of titanium and he’s got the rings and wins over his rivals to prove it
I know right.I really don't know why some of you don't just go ahead and convert over to Florida fans.
You all disgust me.
UCLA wouldn’t have drilled us. When the real pressure hit with a chance at the title game they wilted. We didn’t. Kansas St wilted. We’d didnt. FSU earned their spot by beating that same Florida team that you say gave us the game. We took it. They didn’t give it. Yes we did have some breaks but almost every single National Champion, particularly those that went undefeated, had some breaks along with way. Yes the Stoerner fumble had some luck to it but we put ourselves in that position by coming back from a 21-3 deficit against an undefeated top 10 team in November. When the lights came in we rose up and other teams didn’t. That’s why we won the title.I would venture to say the culture of the athletic department for the last 30 years has been not to hire a coach with stones. That’s why we seem snakebit. Yes, Fulmer won a natty, but that largely came from UF uncharacteristicly giving that game away, the Stoener fumble, and UCLA (who would’ve drilled us) inexplicably losing to Miami in a make up game at the end of the year to knock themselves out of the natty game and giving it to a Chris Weinke-less FSU team who was playing with “the rooster” at QB. We were gifted that natty and anyone who argues otherwise is in denial. Spurrier had stones of titanium and he’s got the rings and wins over his rivals to prove it
Bama is the GAME for us older fans, but I think the future will see Florida become more heated for Vol fans. I'll also say that in football Kentucky hates us more than Vandy.
If you did watch it, it would make you angry at the current state of the program.
IDK, UT won 15 of the first 22, UF has won 21 of the last 26. That's kinda ebby flowy. When I was a kid Georgia used to beat Florida every year almost, and even though Florida would usually be ranked higher, then Spurrier came and flipped the script. Now that rivalry has evened up more in the last dozen years or so. The wheel will turn in this one eventually as well.
Nah, that's just going back to 1993. It's okay though, if I was a Gator fan I wouldn't be much of a history major either since you guys were in the SEC for about 60 years before you ever won it.If you have to go back to the 1950’s to get to a time when a rivalry went in the other direction, there’s not a lot of “ebb and flow”.
Nah, that's just going back to 1993. It's okay though, if I was a Gator fan I wouldn't be much of a history major either since you guys were in the SEC for about 60 years before you ever won it.
There are definitely rivals who have not won in a long while. Michigan has been whipped and humiliated by Ohio State. Georgia gets mentioned for taking talented teams into Jacksonville and getting hammered for the longest. The Dawgs should have left that place years ago.
Then comes Bama vs Tennessee. Battle and Major's weren't going to best coach Bryant in the greatest decade of his dynasty and Bama went 9-1 in the 70s. The 80s saw 4 different HCs for Bama and Major was dug in deep. Bama still managed to go 6-4. The 90s saw Tennessee go 5-4-1 against the Tide, with both teams winning a national title that decade. The first decade of the new century Bama went through 4 more HCs and probation and Tennessee had Fulmer and one year of Kiffin and both programs went 5-5. You guys know how the next decade has been going so far.
All in all, Bama has managed to hold their own when coaching has been shaky at best. Tennessee after Fulmer has been nothing short of a natural disaster. In reality, the dynasty of the 70s and coach Saban this century has been the biggest dramatic difference between the 2 programs in wins and championships in the modern era. But you knew that.
You're not really refuting his point. The "first 22" spanned from 1916 to 1992. And Tennessee won the first 10 meetings from 1916 to 1953. There has been no ebb and flow in most of everyone here's lifetime, it's been one sided.
You're not really refuting his point. The "first 22" spanned from 1916 to 1992. And Tennessee won the first 10 meetings from 1916 to 1953. There has been no ebb and flow in most of everyone here's lifetime, it's been one sided.
I was 15 in 1992, and at that point we had an 8 game, 15-7 lead in the series, and had just won 2 out 3 games played in 3 consecutive years. Since 1992 Florida has shifted the series to an equal 8 game lead for them. I'm 41 now, I don't remember the last time I got carded but I ain't quite AARP age yet either. I've seen this shift occur in my lifetime and I am enough of a college football historian generally to know that swings like this one are hardly unique, even in the context of great rivalries, and that's what I said "ebbed and flowed", i.e. many of the great historic rivalries.You're not really refuting his point. The "first 22" spanned from 1916 to 1992. And Tennessee won the first 10 meetings from 1916 to 1953. There has been no ebb and flow in most of everyone here's lifetime, it's been one sided.
I was 15 in 1992, and at that point we had an 8 game, 15-7 lead in the series, and had just won 2 out 3 games played in 3 consecutive years. Since 1992 Florida has shifted the series to an equal 8 game lead for them. I'm 41 now, I don't remember the last time I got carded but I ain't quite AARP age yet either.I 've seen this shift occur in my lifetime and I am enough of a college football historian generally to know that swings like this one are hardly unique, even in the context of great rivalries, and that's what I said "ebbed and flowed", i.e. many of the great historic rivalries.
Michigan, for example has beaten Ohio State 8 times since 1992 (whereas we have beaten Florida 5). Most of our wins against Florida are more recent than Michigan's wins against Ohio State. Tennessee has beaten Florida 4 times since 2000, whereas Michigan has only beaten Ohio State on 2 occasions since 2000 and yet I don't think anyone would dispute that Michigan and Ohio State is a great rivalry. Yeah, Florida has gotten the better of us for a while, no one has denied that, but it is not some foregone conclusion that the tide will not and cannot turn back in our favor.
Florida is not some unbeatable behemoth, they've had a good run since they hired Spurrier (not so much the last 10 years though), however as I pointed out, they were once perennial cellar dwellers for about 6 decades, and they can return to the depths from whence they came.