Tenn is a bunch of Pussies

BZ770 · « **on:** July 08, 2010, 06:35:56 AM »

http://blog.al.com/press-register-sports/2010/07/tennessee_turns_down_chance_to.html

Quote

KNOXVILLE, Tenn. -- Tennessee athletic director Mike Hamilton says the Volunteers have turned down a
Hamilton says he's been approached several times by Chick-fil-A Bowl president Gary Stokan about the potential 2011 matchup.

He says he has told Stokan no each time because the Vols' schedule can't accommodate another tough opponent during a year that will be part of the team's rebuilding efforts.

Hamilton says the decision wasn't related to any bad blood between the programs after Kiffin left Tennessee in January and that the Vols would have turned down the chance to face any big opponent in the Chick-fil-A game played in Atlanta.

What a great hyped up matchup this would be. If I was UT fans I'd be pissed, I'd love to kick that punk's Ass.

Tiger Wench · « **Reply #1 on:** July 08, 2010, 09:18:41 AM »

Your quote skillz are a bit lacking... here's the whole article with the most impt stuff included...

Quote

KNOXVILLE, Tenn. -- Tennessee athletic director Mike Hamilton says the Volunteers have turned down a chance to play Southern California and coach Lane Kiffin in the 2011 Chick-fil-A Kickoff Game.

Hamilton says he's been approached several times by Chick-fil-A Bowl president Gary Stokan about the potential 2011 matchup.

He says he has told Stokan no each time because the Vols' schedule can't accommodate another tough opponent during a year that will be part of the team's rebuilding efforts.

Hamilton says the decision wasn't related to any bad blood between the programs after Kiffin left Tennessee in January and that the Vols would have turned down the chance to face any big opponent in the Chick-fil-A game played in Atlanta.

AUChizad · « **Reply #2 on:** July 08, 2010, 09:39:11 AM »

On the one hand, as a college football fan, I want to see this matchup.

However, as Tennessee's AD, I see his point.

They already play Cincinatti that year, who just came off a great season. They also play North Carolina, who while not a real threat, they're no complete slouch.

It doesn't make sense for them to play Cincinatti and USCw along with a full SEC schedule, when that program is clearly in a rebuilding state.

boartitz · « **Reply #3 on:** July 08, 2010, 10:02:01 AM »

GH2001 · « **Reply #4 on:** July 08, 2010, 10:07:09 AM »

Quote from: AUChizad on July 08, 2010, 09:39:11 AM

On the one hand, as a college football fan, I want to see this matchup.

However, as Tennessee's AD, I see his point.

They already play Cincinatti that year, who just came off a great season. They also play North Carolina, who while not a real threat, they're no complete slouch.

It doesn't make sense for them to play Cincinatti and USCw along with a full SEC schedule, when that program is clearly in a rebuilding state.

Agree with you here. Except I think UNC is very formidable and aside from the occasional hiccup, Butch Davis' defense will always be there to keep them in most games. This just solidifies your point even more really.

Snaggletiger · « **Reply #5 on:** July 08, 2010, 10:39:43 AM »

Wasn't Auburn offered the same Chicky Bowl game with UCLA?

GH2001 · « **Reply #6 on:** July 08, 2010, 10:48:12 AM »

Quote from: Snaggletiger on July 08, 2010, 10:39:43 AM

Wasn't Auburn offered the same Chicky Bowl game with UCLA?

Yes - wish we had taken it. However, the FSU cop out in 99 was a little different. Circumstantial really.

Snaggletiger · « **Reply #7 on:** July 08, 2010, 11:00:14 AM »

Quote from: GH2001 on July 08, 2010, 10:48:12 AM

Yes - wish we had taken it. However, the FSU cop out in 99 was a little different. Circumstantial really.

I would have loved to see us play the Bruins too but I have no problem with turning down a proposed game....as opposed to a game already set like FSU was.

JR4AU · « **Reply #8 on:** July 08, 2010, 11:08:03 AM »

Quote from: BZ770 on July 08, 2010, 06:35:56 AM

http://blog.al.com/press-register-sports/2010/07/tennessee_turns_down_chance_to.html

What a great hyped up matchup this would be. If I was UT fans I'd be pissed, I'd love to kick that punk's Ass.

Good out of conference match ups are nice. There's several every year. Not every team can play one, and frankly, not every team needs one. A "great hyped match up" of "storied programs" is nice until one of them gets throttled on national TV because they weren't in a position to compete, AND knew they likely wouldn't be. Call them pussies if you want, but college football is business, and it's a business decision. Personally I think the hit you take from a few locals calling you pussies is far less than the hit UT would take getting smoked by a USC team on probation. People will discount USC immediately because they're on probation, and forget they'll field a team stoked with 5 top recruiting classes this season. Despite a defection or two, they'll be strong on talent, if not on the field, for the next couple of years. The effect of sanctions on the overall talent won't be felt hard for a couple of years. UT is as down as a program can be without being on probation. I was at least proud to see that the AD admitted that the decision was based in part on where the two programs are likely to be at the start of the 2011 season. I'd be much more critical if he'd have made up some bullshit excuse. Finally, as stated, their schedule that year isn't exactly loaded with the Sister's of the Poor.

Godfather · « **Reply #9 on:** July 08, 2010, 11:23:26 AM »

Quote from: Snaggletiger on July 08, 2010, 11:00:14 AM

I would have loved to see us play the Bruins too but I have no problem with turning down a proposed game....as opposed to a game already set like FSU was.

It really didn't matter we would have had our asses handed to us.

JR4AU · « **Reply #10 on:** July 08, 2010, 11:30:52 AM »

Quote from: Godfather on July 08, 2010, 11:23:26 AM

It really didn't matter we would have had our asses handed to us.

I assume you mean the FSU game?

Snaggletiger · « **Reply #11 on:** July 08, 2010, 11:40:48 AM »

Okay, this brings up a question I've had and maybe some of you insiders can shed some light. It's my understanding that the proposed AU/UCLA matchup would have replaced the first game on our schedule. ASU I believe? Let's say AU went ahead and agreed to go to Atlanta and play the game. The exposure and hype generated by playing a big name BCS conference school would go without saying. But, my question is whether taking a game out of Auburn had any effect on the decision not to play the game.

Without the University, the City of Auburn is a blip on the radar. It's a little country town in east Alabama. The benefits of having 25,000 students there is vital to the economy but I imagine the city itself banks on those 7 or 8 football weekends a year when 80,000 or more people come in for a couple of days and spend mucho $$$. If AU ditches a home game and takes it on the road to Atlanta, it's a windfall for the University but I would imagine that's a pretty big hit for the town. Even an Arky State game is going to bring a minimum of 80K people into town. Ultimately, does the University have any kind of relationship with the City whereby they would be hesitant to send all that revenue into Atlanta as opposed to keeping it at home? Could that have been as big a factor as anything in turning down the UCLA game. UCLA is a big name school, but football wise, not exactly a program to fear.

Godfather · « **Reply #12 on:** July 08, 2010, 11:46:08 AM »

Quote from: JR4AU on July 08, 2010, 11:30:52 AM

I assume you mean the FSU game?

Yes

JR4AU · « **Reply #13 on:** July 08, 2010, 11:52:02 AM »

Quote from: Godfather on July 08, 2010, 11:46:08 AM

Yes

Agree, it would have been an asswhippin'. And, IMHO, the asswhippin' would have been far more embarassing than backing out was. YMMV.

Godfather · « **Reply #14 on:** July 08, 2010, 11:55:56 AM »

Quote from: Snaggletiger on July 08, 2010, 11:40:48 AM

Okay, this brings up a question I've had and maybe some of you insiders can shed some light. It's my understanding that the proposed AU/UCLA matchup would have replaced the first game on our schedule. ASU I believe? Let's say AU went ahead and agreed to go to Atlanta and play the game. The exposure and hype generated by playing a big name BCS conference school would go without saying. But, my question is whether taking a game out of Auburn had any effect on the decision not to play the game.

Without the University, the City of Auburn is a blip on the radar. It's a little country town in east Alabama. The benefits of having 25,000 students there is vital to the economy but I imagine the city itself banks on those 7 or 8 football weekends a year when 80,000 or more people come in for a couple of days and spend mucho $$$. If AU ditches a home game and takes it on the road to Atlanta, it's a windfall for the University but I would imagine that's a pretty big hit for the town. Even an Arky State game is going to bring a minimum of 80K people into town. Ultimately, does the University have any kind of relationship with the City whereby they would be hesitant to send all that revenue into Atlanta as opposed to keeping it at home? Could that have been as big a factor as anything in turning down the UCLA game. UCLA is a big name school, but football wise, not exactly a program to fear.

Oh, shut up! Stop acting like some fag choir boy!