Razorback football

As Moderator

Okay guys...enough about UT vs. Arkansas. We know the game is Nov 11. I'm going to be tempted to start editing or deleting posts.

 

It would be a waste of time...because earlier on in the thread, Arkansas was being penciled into the BCS title game solely based on the win over Auburn and their assumed running the table. Y'all were wondering aloud who the Hogs would get the privilige of dismantling in Glendale. So I doubt the Vols will make it there since the Hogs are already there in your minds :thumbs:

 

I don't have to. I think that the Hogs will win on November 11. That's really all that matters to me. You can quote stats from now until doomsday and it won't matter a bit on the field on November 11.

 

I agree that the MIGHTY TENNESSEE VOLUNTEERS should be rated above California in the BCS. This writer also agrees:

http://cfn.scout.com/2/579727.html

Don't worry, Tom, this will be my last post in this thread. I've had my say and I thank you for your indulgence.

The supporters of the MIGHTY TENNESSEE VOLUNTEERS will just have to learn their lesson on November 11. :smilewinkgrin:

 

Moderator Message

Ken, feel free to post...we just beat the whole "Tennessee plays at Arkansas on Nov 11" thing to death. I don't object to talking about the ins and outs of Ark football, but we've done some tail chasing and now that we're nearing 10 pages, I have to issue some sort of call for clarity per BB administrative practice

 

I think the whole notion that just because you beat a team you should be ranked higher than them is a notion that can be overly emphasized. Indiana beat Iowa. Does anyone on here honestly think IU is better than the Hawkeyes overall? Does UT's blowout of Cal mean that Cal is inferior to the Vols? It could, but we have to look at the whole body of evidence. Is Arkansas really that much better than Auburn, and by extension are the Hogs a better team than Florida? A week ago, Tennessee's win over Georgia looked huge. Now that Vandy has beaten GA, a little luster has been lost.

Remember: the BCS is a formula of fomulas. It's crazy. For instance (Not to pick on the Razorbacks), the Harris poll points had Arkansas much lower, and supposedly the BCS relies heavily on Harris Poll data. What gives?

Anyone else think it odd that the BCS formula and source code are kept secret?

 

It can be overly emphasized but in this case I don't think it is. UT didn't just win over Cal. They "beat" them in every phase of the game.

That said, Cal has played one more game at this point than UT. They have beaten a 3-3 1AA team, 3 D1 teams with a winning record, and 2 with a losing record. By season's end, they'll have between 4-6 teams that they've beaten with a losing record- roughly the same as UT. At that point, UT should get the lead over them in the computers especially since the SEC-Pac10 head to head went overwhelmingly in favor of the SEC.

I kinda got perturbed when I first saw this but the additional win over a team with a winning record probably helped Cal in the computer rankings.

Oddly, Sagarin has the Pac10 as the highest rated conference. Other than the harm done by the likes of Mississippi St that seems completely unreasonable considering the head to head results.

 

Though the local media is lamenting Fulmer's usual bland but classy attitude towards the BCS, I think it's the only way to answer it officially. My guess is it's being used as motivation behind the scenes. The Vols always do better when they are under-respected.

Did you listen to or watch the press conference today? Some idiot asked why the Bama game was so important to UT and why was it such a big rivalry. I was only listening, but I wish I could've seen Fulmer's expression. He exhaled as if to say "Did you just get here from Mars?" :laugh:

I'm just realistic and know that if we'd played a better team a week and a half ago, we'd probably be 4-2 and staring the Hall of Fame Bowl right in the face, at best. Cut is a perfectionist. He said in a recent interview that he doesn't coach because of games - he coaches because of practice. He also said something a while back that I agree with completely. Referencing Randy Sanders (though not by name), he said that Randy liked to out-scheme another team and win that way. Cut says he'll tell you what play they're going to run and doesn't care - if our guys out execute your guys, there's not a darn thing you can do about it. Fulmer speaks as if he's more of a perfectionist than anyone and that he let himself loose of some of that last year. Oh well, 2005 is a memory.

I don't remember seeing that in the stats they published over the weekend at the KNS, so I'd like to see you post those. My copy is already in the recycling bin.

No, but until last year, locally the talk has always centered around our lack of tackling fundamentals. That talk has resurfaced. It was still there last year, but people had a much bigger scape-goat. Perfection is not the goal, but having what Fulmer calls a "whole-team effort" is the goal, and UT hasn't had that yet for four quarters. I'll cede to his judgement. As for FLA, I still think they'd stop us. Their front seven is the best in America. Remember that Auburn scored no offensive touchdowns. Florida beat Florida. We need to be asking why we didn't get more pressure on Leak and stop the run the way Auburn did...and yes, why our secondary folded.

Yes, but helped by Richt's panic and abandonment of GA's game plan. I've said it before...Richt is praised, but he's a choker in big games. He has beaten a top 15 team only once in the past two seasons (maybe three) and has only beaten FLA once on his watch.

I think our Offense is more fundamentally sound than a Spurrier offense. FLA and SC are not fundamentally sound, but FLA used to put up enough points to overcome the penalties and so forth.

I think just because I see our flaws, you think I'm pessimistic. Maybe I should do what the ARK fans have done and talk about how we can beat the '78 Steelers or the '95 Cornhuskers or beat any NFL team. Would that make you think I'm optimistic, even though I'd be delusional? :laugh:

 

Now come on, everyone knows this years Arkansas team could easily handle the 95 huskers :smilewinkgrin:

 

If not, I'd be sorely disappointed.

Unfortunately it is difficult to get those sometimes in MO. I have to hope it is linked on UTSports or something.

I don't think UGA is as bad as you do... nor did I think Cal was as bad as you thought either. Cal was unproven. To their credit, they took lessons from the UT game and have gotten much better. Richt after suffering another week of brain cramps seems to have finally figured out that Joe T (as great a story as he is) is not an SEC caliber QB. Stafford will start against Miss St and I suspect will give UF more headaches than Joe T ever could. If he stretches them vertically, the running lanes should open. up.

I kind of noticed the execution thing early on... even before spring ball. He sounded alot like my HS coach... almost a flashback lots of times.

There were times where my coach would just shout the play in from the sideline knowing full well that the other team used the exact same numbering system. Execution was everything. He won 6 state titles in about 15 years. A good portion of the time the school was playing a class up from its enrollment.

Fulmer is more of a schemer too... another part of why his partnership with Sanders was doomed to fail.

UT scored just over 200 points all year last year. I think they've already eclipsed that this year in half the season. They averaged about 18 ppg last year and ranked near the bottom of the SEC and NCAA. This year they are averaging about 37 ppg. They are currently 2nd in SEC scoring and top 30 I think in the NCAA.

I don't know if they are associated problems but I would like to see UT tackle better in general and get more interceptions. Exactly what Auburn and LSU do differently I don't know but they seem to get INT's year in, year out.

OTOH, UT's defense hasn't been bad against anyone except AFA. They are allowing somewhere around 19 ppg which is good enough to win when you are scoring double that.

I think UT was close the first time. The changes made in the o-line would be the difference. Ainge with time has been deadly. The only game he really didn't have time was UF. The UGA front 4 are probably on par talent wise with UF. Both secondaries are vulnerable if you get time. UF's LB's are better but they didn't really have to use them in the UT game to get pressure. Ainge has hurt teams that tried to blitz their LB's. It is academic though the rest of the season will favor one of our opinions.

Auburn hasn't shown offensive life in weeks. They couldn't move the ball against Ark either. I don't know exactly what their problem is but I heard that they lost their AA center to injury- compare Frogg/McNeil in reverse for the Vols. You have to win the middle. The center can't be pushed back or nothing else will work.

LSU beat LSU... and I would argue that UT beat UT in large measure by having Frogg at center and not giving the ball to Coker.

I'd say the Harrell injury was pretty critical. The rest have continued to develop but they didn't have anyone else really playing at that level then. You can't blitz so much against the UF spread but a good d-line has opportunities... which is why I think UGA has more of a shot than most people give them.

Trust me. I see flaws. But I also consider the upside and am very encouraged by the way Cut is eliminating flaws week over week.

I hated the UF loss... they are one of my 3 most despised teams. Nonetheless, the changes made out of that game IMO were directly responsible for the offensive explosion against a UGA defense that is on par talent wise with UF though admittedly their chemistry and scheme didn't look good against UT.

The next two weeks constitute the season for UGA... so we'll see just how good they are.