Sorry Vandy

[Kaos]

If Vandy were in the PAC 10 or ACC I might give some credence to the "it can be built" theory.

Vandy isn't.  There are three levels in the SEC. Auburn, UGA, UA, LSU and sometimes UT and UF make up one level. Then there is a second tier that consists of AR, SC, and now Mizzou and A&M.  Those programs can occasionally challenge the top tier but only in the short term (season or two). And finally there is the bottom rung that contains MSU, Ole Miss, UK and Vandy. Completely delusional. Have a good season or two and start barking about challenging the true powers. But it will never happen.

This isn't new. It's been going on for over a hundred years.  It's not going to change now.

Programs like Vandy and MSU may have a short run with a coach that gives them hope -- as Sherrill did for the Dogs -- but in the end they are what they always were and will be. 

It's not going to change in your lifetime.

[ssgaufan]

However, as pointed out Nashville should be a lot easier to sell than Starkville.

[Kaos]

However, as pointed out Nashville should be a lot easier to sell than Starkville.

By that line of thinking Nashville should be easier to sell than Tuscsloosa or Athens or Columbia or ....

Irrelevant.

[Snaggletiger]

Georgia Tech should be da' bomb.

[WiregrassTiger]

However, as pointed out Nashville should be a lot easier to sell than Starkville.

These kids are crazy about the Opry.

[The Prowler]

Vandy might some money, but when you put facility upgrades into the HC's contract as part of his buyout...that tells me that the money isn't that much and that the money people don't really care about football and it shows on Saturdays.

[Vandy Vol]

If Vandy were in the PAC 10 or ACC I might give some credence to the "it can be built" theory.

Vandy isn't.  There are three levels in the SEC. Auburn, UGA, UA, LSU and sometimes UT and UF make up one level. Then there is a second tier that consists of AR, SC, and now Mizzou and A&M.  Those programs can occasionally challenge the top tier but only in the short term (season or two). And finally there is the bottom rung that contains MSU, Ole Miss, UK and Vandy. Completely delusional. Have a good season or two and start barking about challenging the true powers. But it will never happen.

Funny that you should mention Florida as being one of those schools who make it into the top tier, considering that they don't have a historically strong football record as recent as pre-1990.  Yet change occurred.

Again, I'm not saying that the change has already occurred for Vandy.  I'm not saying it will be next year, the year after that, or the year after that.  And I'm not saying that it's inevitable.

But to completely dismiss it as impossible is unreasonable.  The money's there, so the facilities can be built and a good coach can be hired.  Recruiting quality players has been shown to be possible even with the current facilities.  Yes, improvement in a lot of areas will be required before success can consistently be maintained, but all of the requisite pieces for that improvement are already there.  They just need to be utilized correctly, like Franklin showed they could be.

[Vandy Vol]

Vandy might some money, but when you put facility upgrades into the HC's contract as part of his buyout...that tells me that the money isn't that much and that the money people don't really care about football and it shows on Saturdays.

One of our biggest donors met with Franklin and David Williams last week in an attempt to get him to stay.  There are donors that care about building the football program for a variety of reasons, and the money to do so is there.  The manner in which they constructed Franklin's contractual buyout has nothing to do with their available funds.

The biggest problem Vandy had in the past was not having administrators that cared about football.  Chancellor Gee dismantled the athletic department, which resulted in academics and athletics being grouped together and effectively sharing the same budget, and no donors were being persuaded to invest in athletics.  Less focus was on athletics, and so less happened.

Gee is gone, and David Williams has shown that he has a vested interest in this program.  He has shown that he can get the school to take its money and put it toward the athletic program, whether that be in the form of the head coach's salary or new athletic facilities.  The school is behind him and the football program, and that's something that was not previously seen at Vandy.

[Kaos]

Funny that you should mention Florida as being one of those schools who make it into the top tier, considering that they don't have a historically strong football record as recent as pre-1990.  Yet change occurred.

Again, I'm not saying that the change has already occurred for Vandy.  I'm not saying it will be next year, the year after that, or the year after that.  And I'm not saying that it's inevitable.

But to completely dismiss it as impossible is unreasonable.  The money's there, so the facilities can be built and a good coach can be hired.  Recruiting quality players has been shown to be possible even with the current facilities.  Yes, improvement in a lot of areas will be required before success can consistently be maintained, but all of the requisite pieces for that improvement are already there.  They just need to be utilized correctly, like Franklin showed they could be.

Delusional defined.

It is impossible. History proves it.  Long term -- more than a couple of years -- success isn't in the Vandy cards.

Out of curiosity, didn't the dores have trouble getting 50k to show up even when winning?

[The Six]

Out of curiosity, didn't the dores have trouble getting 50k to show up even when winning?

Smart kids got to study and go create jobs for the rest of us.

[Vandy Vol]

Delusional defined.

It is impossible. History proves it.  Long term -- more than a couple of years -- success isn't in the Vandy cards.

Yes, you're absolutely correct.  History proves it...Florida is still a shithole of a program that can't even make it into Kaos' top tier of SEC football scho-...oh, wait...

Again, you're focusing on what Vandy is currently, and not how they could improve.  Based on your reasoning, Florida should have thrown in the towel three decades ago and gave up on ever being a truly competitive football program simply because they had decades of previous mediocrity.

Out of curiosity, didn't the dores have trouble getting 50k to show up even when winning?

Considering that their stadium has a capacity of 40,000, they'd have a problem getting 50,000 to show up even if they were playing like the 1972 Miami Dolphins.

Aside from that, fan attendance is going to be one of the bigger problems to tackle, I agree with that.  Vandy doesn't have 30,000+ students on campus to fill the stadium, and due to being one of the best academic schools in the country, its alumni base winds up getting spread across the nation (not to mention that a high percentage of alumni came from outside of Tennessee to begin with).

However, fan attendance will improve to some degree as the football program continues to improve and facilities improve.  Due to its shitty football history, Vandy has very few fans who didn't attend the school.  I grew up in Tennessee and I still frequently visit family in Tennessee, and I can tell you that this has been changing in the past couple of years.  This isn't to say that attendance will magically fix itself, but as long as steps are being taken to improve it, then improvement is never out of the question.

[Kaos]

Florida is a poor example. They were mediocre, yes. But had a history of being competitive.  Spurrier and Heisman?

Vandy has never been anything but a punching bag. Has as much a chance of becoming a legit SEC challenger in the long term as Jenna Jameson winning three consecutive Best Actress Oscars.

[GH2001]

Florida is a poor example. They were mediocre, yes. But had a history of being competitive.  Spurrier and Heisman?

Vandy has never been anything but a punching bag. Has as much a chance of becoming a legit SEC challenger in the long term as Jenna Jameson winning three consecutive Best Actress Oscars.

Agree.

Consistent 1-5 win seasons at vandy. Florida's "mediocrity" consisted of 5-9 win seasons. Huge difference. Plus they are Florida. And have never been known as a doormat like Vandy. Mediocre at times, yes. But not a bottom dweller.

[The Six]

Ta

Jenna Jameson winning three consecutive Best Actress Oscars.

And the Oscar goes to...Jenna Jamison for "Not Without My Meat." This is Jenna's third award. She won previously for "Ace In My Hole" and "Hang My Legs High"

[Saniflush]

Vandy has never been anything but a punching bag. Has as much a chance of becoming a legit SEC challenger in the long term as Jenna Jameson winning three consecutive Best Actress Oscars.

Whatever man. 
You obviously don't remember the 30's, 40's, 50's, 60's. 
Shit.  Just realized they have never won the conference in it's 81 year existence.

[Vandy Vol]

Florida is a poor example. They were mediocre, yes. But had a history of being competitive.  Spurrier and Heisman?

Like I said, Florida pre-1990.  Clearly the program had a turning around point, which is the entire topic of this discussion.  Changing the course of a program is not impossible.  Saying that it's impossible for Vandy because "they're still Vandy" means that Florida should have never improved because "they're still Florida."

Consistent 1-5 win seasons at vandy. Florida's "mediocrity" consisted of 5-9 win seasons. Huge difference. Plus they are Florida. And have never been known as a doormat like Vandy. Mediocre at times, yes. But not a bottom dweller.

Florida did not consistently reach 5 wins prior to 1990.  Yes, many of their seasons did reach 5 or more wins, but they also had 4, 3, and 0 win seasons as well.  There was not much consistency, and they were certainly not a "top tier" program like they're being referred to now.

Additionally, the point here is not to determine who has a shittier history.  The point is that football programs can be changed so as to improve over time.  To deny this, yet claim that Florida is a now "top tier" program, is contradictory.

[Snaggletiger]

Vandy is 2-0 against Auburn.

[WiregrassTiger]

Considering that their stadium has a capacity of 40,000, they'd have a problem getting 50,000 to show up even if they were playing like the 1972 Miami Dolphins.

One relatively easy solution to this would be to target the potential ticket holders that are really skinny and sit two to a seat.

[Kaos]

Like I said, Florida pre-1990.  Clearly the program had a turning around point, which is the entire topic of this discussion.  Changing the course of a program is not impossible.  Saying that it's impossible for Vandy because "they're still Vandy" means that Florida should have never improved because "they're still Florida."

Florida did not consistently reach 5 wins prior to 1990.  Yes, many of their seasons did reach 5 or more wins, but they also had 4, 3, and 0 win seasons as well.  There was not much consistency, and they were certainly not a "top tier" program like they're being referred to now.

Additionally, the point here is not to determine who has a shoottier history.  The point is that football programs can be changed so as to improve over time.  To deny this, yet claim that Florida is a now "top tier" program, is contradictory.

Spurrier looks really old to have won the heisman in 1990. I figured him for much older than 40.

[Snaggletiger]

One relatively easy solution to this would be to target the potential ticket holders that are really skinny and sit two to a seat.

Thinking outside the box.  A real go-getter.