UGAUSFEngDawg wrote:
I want to have a rebirth of the Vince Dooley days where the #1 priority is a National Championship and the #2 priority is beating Florida.
Actually, CMR is following the Vince Dooley (and Georgia coaching model) to a T. He won two SEC Championships in his first five years, just like Vince did. Vince didn't win another SEC Championship for eight years after 1968. It took him 16 years and the greatest player in the history of college football to win himself a national title, and then he couldn't follow it up while fielding the best team in the nation for the next two years.
It is HARD to win the SEC and HARDER to win the National Championship. Hell, at this point I'd say it's harder to win the SEC than the national title. Give Richt credit; we're doing many things Dooley couldn't and didn't:
1) Winning bowl games. Dooley was notoriously bad in January. Richt has only lost two bowl games in nine years.
2) Beating Auburn. It's amazing how many SEC titles Vince lost because he couldn't beat Auburn. Off the top of my head I give you 1971, 1975, 1978, 1979 and 1983. He beats Auburn -- he wins ONE GAME in those years -- and he's looking at 11 SEC titles instead of 6. Say what you want about Richt, but he beats Auburn.
3) 10 win seasons. Even with all of Vince's wins he couldn't boast Richt's consistency. Vince Dooley had 201 wins in 25 seasons. In just nine years, Richt is halfway there.
I'm not saying any of this to denigrate Vince Dooley. I'm just saying that Vince had talent that was, by these definitions, \"squandered\" on no-championship teams just like the ones you accuse Richt of having. 2003, 2004, 2007 all should have been SEC Championship years, right? But that's the nature of the conference. It's a tough bear.
That said, there's no excuse for the way we played against Oklahoma State. But that one game is also not a referendum on Coach Richt. If it were, Vince Dooley would not have made it out of the 1969 or 1970 seasons with his job.