Historic Rivalry and GT

L

lonestarjacket

Dodd-Like
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
10,278
I read through a couple of the new threads but didn't really read any new positions. At the crux of this matter seems to be a disagreement over the importance of a rivalry and whether those who still think that rivalry is important are misguided.

You can't propose false choices that either the rivalry is important or the overall performance is important because the two are inextricably linked. Do well in the rivalry and I would wager we will also do VERY well overall.

I am fired up because I just watched the HBO documentary on the Ohio State - Michigan rivalry over the years (give me a break, I am stuck in a hotel room with only my Slingbox for company.) It gave me a little bit of jealousy but also a LOT of hope.

I didn't know how futile Michigan record against OSU was before Schembechler. Schembechler turned the rivalry around and the Michigan team's performance came along with it. Hayes and Schembechler understood the importance of the rivalry.

The show also covered the coaches after Hayes. Earl Bruce did well for a time but was fired after a couple of mediocre seasons. Even then, he kept the rivalry even. John Cooper did VERY well at OSU but is only remembered by the fans for his 2-10 record against Michigan. He treated it "just like any other game" the OSU fans sneered, and his results showed that.

I brought all that up to bring up the latest coach, Jim Tressel. He won over the OSU fans immediately with this introductory statement:

"I can assure you that you will be proud of your young people in the classroom, in the community and most especially in 310 days in Ann Arbor, Michigan."

That indicated to the OSU fans that he "got it." He has a 5-1 record against his rival. And the team has done pretty well against the rest of the competition as well.

Talk of moving our rivalry game so it would be less meaningful and therefore less damaging when we lose is a defeatist attitude. And trying to make the program a contender overall without being successful against our rival is avoiding the key issue.

Woody Hayes, Bo Schembechler, and Tressel all understood the importance of beating your rival and how that success in the rivalry was a key component in overall success.
 
Well done LSJ.

For me, you hit the nail on the head. Whether anyone likes it or not, the Tech-georgia rivalry is of most critical importance. It is for both programs.

They get to say it's not because they expect to beat us. They also know it burns us up to claim it means little.
Yeah, Right! When they don't for 3 straight they fire their coach, period.

The game has to stay at Thanksgiving, AND we must hire a coach that understands the rivalry's importance. That was one of the traits of O'Leary so many loved. He hated uga. Probably still does.
 
Did O'Leary the Ol Liar hate UGA before or after he was caught lying on his coaching resume??
 
The OSU-Michigan analogy seems to more closely match the UGA-UF rivalry than our own. Michigan-Michigan State is more like ours. MSU tends to get their butt kicked and the Wolverines consider OSU their immediate rival.

I can't see our game getting moved to the front end of the schedule. Despite what UGA thinks about us, there's no way they put a potential loss on the front end of their schedule when they don't even know what kind of team they have for the season.
 
Clapper, Vince Dooley Proposed moving it the beginning. We turned it down at the time. Personally I think we should give it a six year run and see how it works.

Remember that OSU and UM are both in the same conference. That makes a big difference in my eyes.
 
Lonestar, you get IT, some seem to try to sugarcoat the most important game on our schedule
 
Not sure but, his resume included 3iar against the pups
 
When coach started with the team, he gave us his goals. Win the ACC, Beat UGA. That was the rhetoric of the day. It was positively received.

Fast forward to now, and we don't hear any talk of these goals. Why? Because we obviously aren't winning the ACC this year and beause a coach can't talk about any game other than the next game once the season starts.

He's got to be hurting for losing all of them to UGA and losing in the ACC Championship last year off a terrible offensive performance.

If he beats UGA, the rhetoric will change once again. He'll talk about that being our goal and how we accomplished it. I won't fault him for the way he's handled it in the media. I don't get too worked up about how media savvy our coach is.

I will fault him for losing though all these times and so many lackluster performances which I can't seem to forget.

He simply must beat UGA. I think he knows that.
 
lonestarjacket said:
You can't propose false choices that either the rivalry is important or the overall performance is important because the two are inextricably linked. Do well in the rivalry and I would wager we will also do VERY well overall.
Click to expand...

Right lonestar. In reviewing GT's overall record during the years the Jackets have defeated UGA --GT has had fairly successful seasons.

One could argue, "Well of course, the better your team, the better your chance of defeating your rival." But that's the point, at least I think it is. There is a correlation:
"Do well in the rivalry and I would wager we will also do VERY well overall."
Click to expand...
Yes --chances are that if GT is holding it's own against UGA, GT is probably doing fairly well against everyone else.

Stats:
note: wins represented are wins in consecutive years only

W's vs. UGA ... overall W-L ....yearly wins
'98-'00 ............... 27-9 ......... 10, 8, 9
'89-'90 ............... 18-4-1 ....... 7, 11
'84-'85 ............... 15-6-2 ....... 6, 9
'69-'70 ............... 13-9 .......... 4, 9
'61-'63 ............... 21-10-1 ..... 7, 7, 7
'49-'56 ............... 71-16-3 ..... 7, 5, 11, 12, 9, 8, 9, 10

20 seasons are represented in these numbers:

12 seasons of 8+ wins
17 seasons of 7+ wins
19 seasons > .500
only 1 season < .500
 
clapper said:
The OSU-Michigan analogy seems to more closely match the UGA-UF rivalry than our own. Michigan-Michigan State is more like ours. MSU tends to get their butt kicked and the Wolverines consider OSU their immediate rival.
Click to expand...

You seem to have bought into the UGA version of the rivalry where it really isn't much of a rivalry.

But that is the point people don't get when they only consider recent history and believe there is nothing that can be done to ever change it.

OSU - Michigan was not always a balanced rivalry. Michigan had a LONG, long drought before Scembechler culminating in a 50 - 14 embarrassment where Woody went for two in the LAST touchdown. Schembechler put the number 50 on every player's helmet to remind them of the embarrassment.

Lesson learned, long trends can be reversed but you need a good coach who "Gets It".

P.S.
There are other parallels that came out in the movie. Michigan people tend to look down their noses at OSU because of superior academics. OSU people long used the success in the rivalry as a release of the frustration they had with Michigan superiority. Michigan had horrible support with empty stadiums during the dark times (like us in the eighties.)

The funniest story of the depth of the rivalry was of Woody Hayes running out of gas in Michigan when recruiting there. They said he pushed his car over the state line rather than buy gas in "that place." He wouldn't even use the word "Michigan" until Schembechler forced him to take notice.
 
clapper said:
The OSU-Michigan analogy seems to more closely match the UGA-UF rivalry than our own. Michigan-Michigan State is more like ours. MSU tends to get their butt kicked and the Wolverines consider OSU their immediate rival.
Click to expand...

So 3-16 is a bigger rivalry than 4-15 on our side? I just don't really buy that argument, do UF say "Oh the muts aren't our real rival, Tenn is", etc etc. It just bothers us when we get told we're not their big rival so they keep doing it. Don't drink the koolaid, they care just as much as we do, they can just play it a lot lower key since they've had the upper hand for a while.
 
bHaverchuck said:
But there were ineligible players?
Click to expand...

We've played against many teams that used ineligible players, but their wins weren't vacated. The NCAA followed established precedence and dropped that recommendation from the SEC committee.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top