What's your take on Tennessee this season?

crimson fan man

Hall of Fame
Aug 12, 2002
5,441
344
202
Athens Al
I agree with the one guy saying if they go 8-4 Pruitt should be the Coach of the year. Tennessee has some talent but trying the change the culture will be the biggest roadblock.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
Agreed on Frost. Nebraska is a very tough place to recruit to. Not sure what the formula that Tom Osborne used when he was the coach but that will be hard to duplicate that nowadays. Nebraska is a tradition rich program but they have no natural in state recruiting base and they have a harder time recruiting Texas now because they are no longer in the Big 12. I hope their fanbase gives him some time because it will be a long road to recovery. As for Tennessee, it's no question that they are rebuilding but they will have an easier time doing it because they are in the South. Easier to go into much more populated states surrounding them and get players. Nebraska is just out in the middle of nowhere with lousy weather and not much to do.
81 and I have touched on this a few times, but to try and keep it short.....Nebraska will NEVER again be anything resembling a dynasty. I think it's possible they could win a national title, yes - they have enough cache still to pull that off - but they'll never be what they were during the glory days.


1) Nebraska once had this scholarship program for each county.

I mean the state did, and what they could do is give ONE scholarship per year to a person that did NOT count against the NCAA total.......so since Nebraska has 93 counties and they could justify sending a talented football player to Lincoln, do the math.

My understanding is that this has been finished off by the NCAA awhile back.

2) Back in the heyday you could only play on TV three times per year.

Nebraska was on the maximum amount. Nowadays, N Dakota St and Kansas St play on TV more in one season than Nebraska did in the entire 1960s or 1/2 of the 1970s. You can stay home and not go to the corn fields.

3) Nebraska pre-1994 was never as big a deal as even they like to pretend they were.

They don't like it when I say that Tom Osborne was, quite frankly, an average football coach.

Go look at Nebraska from 1976, the first year the team was ALL Osborne's players, to 1992, seventeen seasons.

They would clobber the Big Eight minus Oklahoma every single year.

Do you know what their record against WINNING out of conference teams was, Power Five level? 29-21-1, and MOST of those 29 wins were against 6-5 teams, so they were barely decent foes. The rest of their OOC schedule consisted of cupcakes or mediocre Power Five teams like Oregon State (4-7-1 in 1989 and 1-10 in 1990 when they played a two-game series....keep in mind Oregon St didn't have a single winning season from 1971 through 1998 and only topped two wins 12 times in those 28 years and only topped three wins six times.....yet Nebraska decided they were a worthy opponent).

Simply look at his actual record against DECENT foes.

4) The Big Eight was monumentally awful.

From 1978-1991, Nebraska never lost to Iowa State, Kansas State, Kansas, or Oklahoma State. They lost ONCE to Missouri (1978).
During that time frame, Iowa State had only four winning seasons and only ONE of more than 6 wins.
K State had TWO winning seasons.
Kansas had four.
Okie State had eight.
Missouri had five.

Against those five teams, Nebraska was 69-1.

Even Colorado - who was #1 entering the bowl games in 1989 and won the 1990 title - was not that good and had only a 3-10-1 record against Nebraska. And Colorado only had 7 winning seasons and one 6-6 year in fourteen years.

So now against SIX of their seven annual foes, Nebraska played teams with losing records FIFTY-FOUR times in 84 games and ran up a staggering 79-4-1 record against that bakery of creampuffs.

But proof they weren't that good came when they wound up in bowl games. Do you know what their bowl record was during 1978-1991?

Try 4-10, and all four wins came against the SEC, THREE against LSU of all teams.

That's the MEAT of Tom Osborne's time at Nebraska.

Make no mistake, they were a VERY good team 1994-1997. And also 1970-1971.


But.....during most of Osborne's tenure.....they.....weren't......really....that......good.......


Nowadays, a Tommie Frazier isn't going to leave Bradenton, Florida to go play for Nebraska for four years.
Turner Gill isn't leaving Fort Worth, Texas when he would get offers from TCU, Houston, or other places.
Mike Rozier isn't leaving Camden, NJ for Nebraska nowadays. He no longer "has" to.
Irving Fryar isn't leaving NJ, either.


And that's both the answer to your question and why Nebraska will never be the big deal they used to be. Again, they MIGHT field a team capable of winning a national title someday. But we won't ever have to worry about them putting on a four-year challenge to Saban or even Urban Meyer's 2006-2009 Florida team for that matter.
 

Bazza

TideFans Legend
Oct 1, 2011
35,577
21,205
187
New Smyrna Beach, Florida
2
AlabamaSEC44127.0
5AuburnSEC116622.4
6GeorgiaSEC252822.1
14Mississippi StateSEC26152115.7
16LSUSEC728514.0
24Texas A&MSEC14361911.0
25Ole MissSEC30261410.9
30MissouriSEC4424478.9
32FloridaSEC1362178.2
35South CarolinaSEC2056567.2
52ArkansasSEC4172323.7
64KentuckySEC2980751.8
75VanderbiltSEC528786-1.0
79TennesseeSEC2111525-1.6

Preseason projections for 2018.

The 5 values in the chart represent: National Rank/Recruiting/Returning players/5 year weight/projected S&P

According to this piece on SB Nation
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
81 and I have touched on this a few times, but to try and keep it short.....Nebraska will NEVER again be anything resembling a dynasty. I think it's possible they could win a national title, yes - they have enough cache still to pull that off - but they'll never be what they were during the glory days.

.
It will take a very lucky bounce for that to happen. With Arkansas, Oklahoma, Colorado, and Missouri all having better ups than them in terms of exposure, teams they play, and the conferences they play in I see Nebraska as a 10 win at the most for the next 10 years. It is simply too hard to recruit there with them being a BIG 10 west team.


1) Nebraska once had this scholarship program for each county.

I mean the state did, and what they could do is give ONE scholarship per year to a person that did NOT count against the NCAA total.......so since Nebraska has 93 counties and they could justify sending a talented football player to Lincoln, do the math.

My understanding is that this has been finished off by the NCAA awhile back.




.
How I understood it was it was sorta like the lottery scholarships in baseball in which they gave the instate kids the extra scholarships and gave the scholarships specifically tied to the sport to out of state kids. I'm willing to bet that 90% of those state scholarships went to kids in the eastern most tip of Nebraska where 80% of the state's population lives in a 45 minute radius of each other. I highly doubt many west Nebraskians got many of those scholarships.

Point is Nebraska had to play with loopholes involved to assemble that run, and they cant replicate them in this day in age. I think Tennessee is a little better off than Nebraska, but neither is going to have any substantial runs in the forseeable future. I think the only nationally recruiting team with poor state recruits that can make a run is Notre Dame, but they have yet to make one.
 

Redwood Forrest

Hall of Fame
Sep 19, 2003
11,042
907
237
76
Boaz, AL USA
Their decision to join the Big Ten was stupid. They'd been better off going to the PAC 12. I remember their rivalries with Colorado and Oklahoma was fun to watch. The Nebraska of today is not what it was in the 80's and 90's.
Why? Is the Pac 12 weaker than the Big Ten West? I think they would be worse off in the Pac because who in the world would want to leave sunny California and go to Nebraska? I can see leaving Illinois, Minnesota and Wisconsin for Lincoln.
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
Why? Is the Pac 12 weaker than the Big Ten West? I think they would be worse off in the Pac because who in the world would want to leave sunny California and go to Nebraska? I can see leaving Illinois, Minnesota and Wisconsin for Lincoln.
It would be weird to see them in the PAC 12. But they instantly have an improved yearly schedule with the division that they would be in compared to the BIG 10. I think excitement and exposure would be better for them in the PAC 12, but they should've waited on the SEC because recruiting pipelines were destroyed when they abandoned Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas.
 

BamaInBham

All-American
Feb 14, 2007
4,465
2,110
187
Back to UTe. Even though I have a dim view of their current state, IMO, their instate recruiting is improving rapidly. The Nashville area is exploding with D1 football players, along with population. It's not Atlanta, but it is yielding a better crop of athletes each year. The one caveat, just like any major metro area with transients, the kids are not as loyal to the state school as they are otherwise.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
Their decision to join the Big Ten was stupid. They'd been better off going to the PAC 12. I remember their rivalries with Colorado and Oklahoma was fun to watch. The Nebraska of today is not what it was in the 80's and 90's.
Not really.

Nebraska hated Texas throwing its weight around from day one. Once Texas got good, it only got worse.

And long-term they'll make more money, especially when you consider that the Big 12 is about as stable as a Liz Taylor marriage.

Because of the TV deals with the Big Ten and waiting, Nebraska pocketed $51 million last year.

That's SIX TIMES the peak income from the Big 12. So they didn't by any stretch make a mistake.

And I don't recall Nebraska being a Pac 10 desire anyway. Nebraska wasn't even sure that the Big 12 would be around six years later, which was the commitment Texas was demanding.


Unlike Iowa State or Kansas, Nebraska didn't need the Big 12 conference to remain viable.
 

GrayTide

Hall of Fame
Nov 15, 2005
18,810
6,245
187
Greenbow, Alabama
Sept. 1 West Virginia Charlotte, N.C. Toss Up
Sept. 8 ETSU Knoxville, Tenn. Win
Sept. 15 UTEP. Knoxville, Tenn. Win
Sept. 22 Florida Knoxville, Tenn. Loss
Sept. 29 Georgia Athens, Ga. Loss
Oct. 13 Auburn Auburn, Ala. Loss
Oct. 20 Alabama Knoxville, Tenn. Loss
Oct. 27 South Carolina Columbia, S.C. Loss
Nov. 3 Charlotte Knoxville, Tenn Win
Nov. 10 Kentucky Knoxville, Tenn. Win
Nov. 17 Missouri Knoxville, Tenn. Toss Up
Nov. 24 at Vanderbilt Nashville, Tenn. Win

Likely 5-7
Worst 3-9
Best. 7-5
 

BamaMan09

All-SEC
Feb 26, 2009
1,852
0
0
Not really.

Nebraska hated Texas throwing its weight around from day one. Once Texas got good, it only got worse.

And long-term they'll make more money, especially when you consider that the Big 12 is about as stable as a Liz Taylor marriage.

Because of the TV deals with the Big Ten and waiting, Nebraska pocketed $51 million last year.

That's SIX TIMES the peak income from the Big 12. So they didn't by any stretch make a mistake.

And I don't recall Nebraska being a Pac 10 desire anyway. Nebraska wasn't even sure that the Big 12 would be around six years later, which was the commitment Texas was demanding.


Unlike Iowa State or Kansas, Nebraska didn't need the Big 12 conference to remain viable.
Those are some valid points. I will say this: Nebraska is in a much easier division of the Big Ten. Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin are its main competition. Northwestern is also very underrated. It would have been impossible to contend had they been put in the same division as Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State and Michigan State. Although I know they played Ohio State last year in Lincoln and got utterly destroyed. But it will still take a small miracle for them to reach and actually win the Big Ten in the next three to four years. The money pocketed may be great but they aren't contenders in football right now and won't be for a while. If they like getting tons of money and not winning anything of significance they picked the right conference.
 

BamaMan09

All-SEC
Feb 26, 2009
1,852
0
0
It would be weird to see them in the PAC 12. But they instantly have an improved yearly schedule with the division that they would be in compared to the BIG 10. I think excitement and exposure would be better for them in the PAC 12, but they should've waited on the SEC because recruiting pipelines were destroyed when they abandoned Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas.
This was my line of thinking. The PAC 12 is just a more exciting brand of football than the Big Ten but geography favored the Big Ten more for them. Then again, West Virginia was somehow mapped into the Big 12 conference even though they're no where close to Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas. It would have been incredibly interesting to see Nebraska in the SEC. But the fact is, Missouri and Nebraska both are in no man's land when it comes to conferences. I think Missouri is a better fit geographically for the Big Ten but they ended up in the SEC.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
Those are some valid points. I will say this: Nebraska is in a much easier division of the Big Ten. Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin are its main competition. Northwestern is also very underrated. It would have been impossible to contend had they been put in the same division as Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State and Michigan State. Although I know they played Ohio State last year in Lincoln and got utterly destroyed. But it will still take a small miracle for them to reach and actually win the Big Ten in the next three to four years. The money pocketed may be great but they aren't contenders in football right now and won't be for a while. If they like getting tons of money and not winning anything of significance they picked the right conference.
Btw - and then I'll drop this since this thread is about Orange Disintegration.......

too many folks on this board THINK like Alabama football fans.....they don't think from any other viewpoint.

The PTB at UA - whether us fans want to admit this or not - have a long-term obligation (and even stake in the outcome) for UA to stay around, be relevant, and make money. Football makes money at UA and Dr Witt noted Saban is the best investment UA has ever made. But that is NOT true of other schools, some of whom have to surrender football to survive (Wichita St for example).

Think like an administrator - and not a Tide fan - and it all makes sense.

Th President of Nebraska will get fired if they win 3 consecutive titles but they lose enough money to cut teachers; if they have several 4-loss seasons but the school is running in the black, the President keeps his job and goes to an Ivy League school to make more money.......oh, and the football coach gets canned.

You know, like Botch Jones, the Archbishop of Talentbury.
 

Mystical

All-American
Sep 28, 2009
4,052
458
107
Fairhope, Alabama
Their decision to join the Big Ten was stupid. They'd been better off going to the PAC 12. I remember their rivalries with Colorado and Oklahoma was fun to watch. The Nebraska of today is not what it was in the 80's and 90's.
They really need to get a string of home and homes with OK.
 

Ole Man Dan

Hall of Fame
Apr 21, 2008
8,982
3,421
187
Gadsden, Al.
Anything better than 8-5 and Pruitt is up for coach of the year.
Tennessee is down in talent. They have the numbers, but the numbers aren't true 4-5 star talent. If I were Tennessee Fans, I would be satisfied it Pruitt makes Tennessee a tougher team, and gives their Defense some attitude. That's gonna take some work.
Tennessee has labored under the impression that they were tough and well trained... They aren't.
WHILE I HATE TENNESSEE, I DO LIKE PRUITT. I THINK HE MAY BE A UP AND COMING STAR.
THOSE DON'T COME AROUND EVERY DAY. TIME WILL TELL.
 

gtowntide

All-American
Mar 1, 2011
4,288
1,092
187
Memphis,TN.
I think they'll struggle to make a bowl. I read where Pruitt has commented that they are too small and soft to play in the SEC. I'm sure some of that is motivation but it will take some time before they are back.I always think back to the nineties when we were loosing to them regularly, but these orange clad pukes have been down 20 years! Time will tell if Pruitt can bring them back.
 

Redwood Forrest

Hall of Fame
Sep 19, 2003
11,042
907
237
76
Boaz, AL USA
Btw - and then I'll drop this since this thread is about Orange Disintegration.......

too many folks on this board THINK like Alabama football fans.....they don't think from any other viewpoint.

The PTB at UA - whether us fans want to admit this or not - have a long-term obligation (and even stake in the outcome) for UA to stay around, be relevant, and make money. Football makes money at UA and Dr Witt noted Saban is the best investment UA has ever made. But that is NOT true of other schools, some of whom have to surrender football to survive (Wichita St for example).

Think like an administrator - and not a Tide fan - and it all makes sense.

Th President of Nebraska will get fired if they win 3 consecutive titles but they lose enough money to cut teachers; if they have several 4-loss seasons but the school is running in the black, the President keeps his job and goes to an Ivy League school to make more money.......oh, and the football coach gets canned.

You know, like Botch Jones, the Archbishop of Talentbury.
As the OP I say don't drop the other school angles. We have covered the Viles pretty good and the Nebraska outlook is intriguing not that Frost has got them pumped up.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
I should let this go, but I won't.

Part of my Nebraska grudge (and for those who don't know, I actually ATTENDED UNMC through the military program at Fort Sam Houston and have 95 credit hours from the University of Nebraska) goes back to an Internet post from 2006 by a Nebraska schmo.

I'm thinking it was on HuskerMax and trust me - I've looked for it.

But in 2006.....right as they thought they were about to become a big deal again......one of their vocal bozos made a comment about how he didn't want Nebraska to become irrelevant or a "has been" like Alabama, who did nothing but live on glory days that ended long ago.

It was very shortly after this post we fired the head coach and hired the right one.......but the utter audacity of the comment has stuck with me for years.

I mean, was Nebraska "really" relevant after Tom Osborne left? Yeah, they had a few good teams, but they were worse for REAL than our REPUTATION is.

They fired a homegrown product who had given his blood and everything for that program because a 9-3 season was unacceptable.

I realize 9-3 would be a bad year for us, but we've never fired a coach after a 9-win season that I'm aware of.

Bill Curry left after a ten-win season on his own accord. So did Dennis Franchione. While I'll grant there may have been some back door politics
to dispose of Ray Perkins, he left for the NFL, where he had been both a player and a coach.

In fact, the only head coaches we've actually FIRED in my lifetime are Shula and Price, the former because he had no plan for improvement and the latter
because he.....had no plan for personal improvement.

Yes, Dubious would have been fired but.....3-9........and two losing seasons in four years when you inherited a 10-win division champion......

Nebraska fired Solich after a 9-3 season because it wasn't good enough, and I don't think they've had a season that good since then.

So....WHO is irrelevant again?

(I'm sorry, but it was in what seemed a rather thoughtful - not snide - post, so it didn't set well with me at all).
 

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.