Stat of the Day

[Freak]

VolNation's very own Vol-Star called me today on his way down to Alabama for the game and wanted me to post this stat. Interesting angle:

Fulmer's winning percentage .784
Fulmer's winning percentage since 98 .710
Fulmer's winning percentage with Peyton Manning .867
Fulmer's winning percentage WITHOUT Peyont Manning .688

 

[GAVol]

Fulmer may owe a lot of success to Peyton Manning, but David Cutcliffe should do the dishes at all Manning family reunions.

 

[Freak]

Speaking of Manning family reunions. You think they play a little touch football at those things? You gotta think they do. There can only be 2 QB's...wonder who gets left out?

As for the Fulmer stats, I thought it was interesing that Fulmer's percentage without Manning is only above average. Thinking about it, maybe I should check those stats. That .688 would have to include our 13-0 in 98. Wonder what the stat is if you throw out Manning and 1998?

 

[GAVol]

Manning was a special player, but I'm pretty sure that Fulmer has had 10 win seasons with every QB he's coached all the way back to Heath Shuler.

Not to be a blind loyalist...but as bad as things may seem, as soft as the schedule gets in November, even if we lose to Miami we have a great shot at 10 wins again this year if we can win a bowl game. And the way GA has looked the last two weeks - this season is a long way from over.

 

[Freak]

10 win seasons for QB's

Shuler=1
Manning=3
Martin=1
Clausen=1

I agree GAVol this season can still be a success. We could win the rest of our conference games, beat Duke, maybe catch Miami on a bad day and win that one, and play in a major bowl game. It sure would be nice though to erase one of those 2 losses. Regardless, that Bama win was a big one for this team. Let's hope they can gain some confidence and build off of it.

 

[Vol-Star]

Stat correction:

Heath Shuler never won 10 games.

92 - 9-3
93 - 9-2-1

The reason you may be coming up with a ten-win season for Shuler is the 93 BAMA game. Because they were put on probation for Langham, the "official" NCAA records now show that TIE as a WIN.

By the way, 93 was another great example of classic underachievement. We played 4 good teams that year: UGA, FL, BAMA, PENN ST. Our record against the only four teams that had a shot as us was 1-2-1.

We were clearly better than UGA and BAMA from a talent perspective. PENN ST blew us out as 9 point underdogs and FL jumped out (go figure) to a 21-O lead. We scored late to make it respectable but never really had much of a chance.

PITIFUL!!!!!!!

Vol-Star

 

[Freak]

Vol-Star, Vol-Star, Vol-Star.....don't you know that you NEVER, EVER, and I mean never correct the site Admin? That will get you banned faster that you can say "pitiful underachivers".

You know I am kidding. Seriously though, I will admit this team has underachieved at times and is in desperate need of some staff changes but you can't take part of Fulmer's success and use it against him. What I mean by that is you always talk about superior talent and you are correct in saying that, but who do you think got us that talent. Who is the one that gets top 5 talent in here every year in a state with little or no recruiting base? Can you name anyone in the nation who could do a better job of recruiting? I can't. Granted Fulmer may not be the best X and O guy and maybe some people would feel better about a less talented team that "overachieved" on the field. But end the end when you look at the stats (and I know you do) you really can't argue with the success we have had. That said, if we turn out many more 8-4 seasons and don't start winning some SEC Championships soon then I may be jumping on your bandwagon. Actually, if we had lost to BAMA I may be on the other side of the fence.