Notre Dame was in the National Title Game in the last 5-7 years and been in the hunt a few other years.
Texas always has the talent and resources ... when everything is working right with them they have as high of a ceiling as anybody.
Penn St has a very fertile recruiting ground and insane levels of support.
All 3 have had SIGNIFCANT periods of success throughout history ... their success is a question of not IF but WHEN ...
Miami had about a 20 year run from the early 80s through early 00s where they were at an elite level ... before that nothing and after that above average. I wouldn't claim that anybody that thinks Miami is a blue blood is insane ... but it's certainly very debatable.
You are grasping. These are the arguments offered by REALLY old men who don't really know what they're talking about, but want to convert their general impressions formed 3 decades earlier to axiomatic truth.
As I've said, and supported, "insane levels of support" means, really, nothing. Nobody gets more support than Michigan, and it doesn't translate. And nobody, not even USC or Texas, much less Penn State, has a better recruiting ground than Miami.
Miami's run may have begun relatively recently, but, as an intellectual matter, you've failed to make that relevant. Minnesota was a national power house once upon a time. The fact that a program won something in the 60s, 50s or earlier really has no bearing on anything. The game, society and demographics have changed.
Whenever it started, they've won 5, FIVE, titles, come within an eyelash of two more, played for an additional two more, knocked off some of the greatest teams in history, produced some of the greatest teams in history, produced unprecedented amounts of talent and been part of some of the biggest games in the sport's history. All of that, w/o "insane levels of support" and your other made up shit. Until you can write that off as not likely to return, you'll have to excuse me while I flush a turd that is more thought provoking than your post.
All that with four different coaches. I would think if there is such a thing as an "inevitable" program anywhere, it's Miami.
Penn State has won exactly two titles, both in the 80s, and disappears from dominance for extensive periods of time. Terrible example.
Your example of Texas, in particular, though, is horrible, and honestly, HH joking aside, rather pedestrian.
Programs that I view as having legitimate opportunities to win a National Championship by conference (blue bloods being bolded as they have the best shots when all things line up right for them:
It's possible for some other programs to jump in from time to time, but at this point, these are the programs that I see as having some combination of the requisite size, support, recruiting capabilities, etc. to be National Championship caliber programs on a consistent basis. Toughest calls for me were leaving Georgia and Clemson off of being blue bloods as they have a lot of things going for them but they need a good amount to go right for them to be legit national championship caliber programs.
I like to ignore the one school from the Pac-12 that has appeared in the national championship game twice this decade, I like to do that.
Programs that I view as having legitimate opportunities to win a National Championship by conference (blue bloods being bolded as they have the best shots when all things line up right for them:
It's possible for some other programs to jump in from time to time, but at this point, these are the programs that I see as having some combination of the requisite size, support, recruiting capabilities, etc. to be National Championship caliber programs on a consistent basis. Toughest calls for me were leaving Georgia and Clemson off of being blue bloods as they have a lot of things going for them but they need a good amount to go right for them to be legit national championship caliber programs.
I like to ignore the one school from the Pac-12 that has appeared in the national championship game twice this decade, I like to do that.
Programs that I view as having legitimate opportunities to win a National Championship by conference (blue bloods being bolded as they have the best shots when all things line up right for them:
It's possible for some other programs to jump in from time to time, but at this point, these are the programs that I see as having some combination of the requisite size, support, recruiting capabilities, etc. to be National Championship caliber programs on a consistent basis. Toughest calls for me were leaving Georgia and Clemson off of being blue bloods as they have a lot of things going for them but they need a good amount to go right for them to be legit national championship caliber programs.
I like to ignore the one school from the Pac-12 that has appeared in the national championship game twice this decade, I like to do that.
Programs that I view as having legitimate opportunities to win a National Championship by conference (blue bloods being bolded as they have the best shots when all things line up right for them:
It's possible for some other programs to jump in from time to time, but at this point, these are the programs that I see as having some combination of the requisite size, support, recruiting capabilities, etc. to be National Championship caliber programs on a consistent basis. Toughest calls for me were leaving Georgia and Clemson off of being blue bloods as they have a lot of things going for them but they need a good amount to go right for them to be legit national championship caliber programs.
I like to ignore the one school from the Pac-12 that has appeared in the national championship game twice this decade, I like to do that.
@Tequilla fully acknowledged that other programs apart from these can pop into the mix from time to time; and Oregon certainly did that with a truly innovative, elite coach, followed by having one of the all time great college QB's. Do you feel with Coach T driving the bus and getting everyone in the right seats on said bus, that Oregon can return to the 2009- 14 level of success?
Notre Dame was in the National Title Game in the last 5-7 years and been in the hunt a few other years.
Texas always has the talent and resources ... when everything is working right with them they have as high of a ceiling as anybody.
Penn St has a very fertile recruiting ground and insane levels of support.
All 3 have had SIGNIFCANT periods of success throughout history ... their success is a question of not IF but WHEN ...
Miami had about a 20 year run from the early 80s through early 00s where they were at an elite level ... before that nothing and after that above average. I wouldn't claim that anybody that thinks Miami is a blue blood is insane ... but it's certainly very debatable.
You are grasping. These are the arguments offered by REALLY old men who don't really know what they're talking about, but want to convert their general impressions formed 3 decades earlier to axiomatic truth.
As I've said, and supported, "insane levels of support" means, really, nothing. Nobody gets more support than Michigan, and it doesn't translate. And nobody, not even USC or Texas, much less Penn State, has a better recruiting ground than Miami.
Miami's run may have begun relatively recently, but, as an intellectual matter, you've failed to make that relevant. Minnesota was a national power house once upon a time. The fact that a program won something in the 60s, 50s or earlier really has no bearing on anything. The game, society and demographics have changed.
Whenever it started, they've won 5, FIVE, titles, come within an eyelash of two more, played for an additional two more, knocked off some of the greatest teams in history, produced some of the greatest teams in history, produced unprecedented amounts of talent and been part of some of the biggest games in the sport's history. All of that, w/o "insane levels of support" and your other made up shit. Until you can write that off as not likely to return, you'll have to excuse me while I flush a turd that is more thought provoking than your post.
All that with four different coaches. I would think if there is such a thing as an "inevitable" program anywhere, it's Miami.
Penn State has won exactly two titles, both in the 80s, and disappears from dominance for extensive periods of time. Terrible example.
Your example of Texas, in particular, though, is horrible, and honestly, HH joking aside, rather pedestrian.
first, topfag is, right. I'm a dick. And, water is wet.
second, I found some light reading for you:
College Football (FBS) Programs That Have Been on Probation the Most
Rk School Seasons Sanctioned 1 Southern Methodist (TX) 17 seasons7 times 2 Southern California 15 seasons 6 times 3 Auburn (AL) 11 seasons 4 times 4t Alabama 10 seasons3 times 4t Michigan St. 10 seasons 3 times 4t Oklahoma 10 seasons5 times 7t Colorado 9 seasons 5 times 7t Illinois 9 seasons 5 times 7t Texas A&M 9 seasons 4 times 7t Wisconsin 9 seasons 4 times 11t Arizona St. 8 seasons 4 times 11t Baylor (TX) 8 seasons 2 times 11t California 8 seasons 3 times 11t Cincinnati (OH) 8 seasons 4 times 11t Kansas 8 seasons 4 times 11t Kansas St. 8 seasons 4 times 11t Miami (FL) 8 seasons 3 times 11t Oklahoma St. 8 seasons 2 times 11t South Carolina 8 seasons 3 times 20t Central Florida 7 seasons 2 times 20t Florida Intl 7 seasons 2 times 20t Houston (TX) 7 seasons 3 times 20t Memphis (TN) 7 seasons 3 times 20t Mississippi 7 seasons 3 times 20t Mississippi St. 7 seasons 3 times 20t Ohio St. 7 seasons 3 times 20t Texas Tech 7 seasons 3 times
The very idea that Miami can only win when they're breaking the rules is ridiculous, but if you want to go there, then there are blue bloods that you'll need to remove from your list, namely USC, Oklahoma, and Alabama.
Also, in the category of, "something stinks in Eugene but we can't prove it," consider that Alabama, in all liklihood, is as dirty as SMU ever was, but hasn't been caught. In the Means case, where venerable Alabama came close to the death penalty, the kid was paid $200k by Bama boosters to sign (not loans like Billy Joe - cold hard cash). We're not talking about Pell grant fraud, phone cards, hookers and rappers paying bounties for big hits, partying on yahts and other favors. We're talking about the people in the stadium suites just buying recruits with money straight up - as bad as it gets - SMU bad (precisely what got them the death penalty). Consider, too, how bad of an actor Alabama's chief rival is, everyone's speculation about how they landed Cam Newton as a recent "no catch" example, and you get a sense for how unclean Alabama has been and what it takes to operate down there.
So don't be so fucking naive.
For the curious, the least penalized conference is the ACC with 18, the most is the SEC with 36, and second most is the Pac, with 31. We can thank ASU and USC for that.
Programs that I view as having legitimate opportunities to win a National Championship by conference (blue bloods being bolded as they have the best shots when all things line up right for them:
It's possible for some other programs to jump in from time to time, but at this point, these are the programs that I see as having some combination of the requisite size, support, recruiting capabilities, etc. to be National Championship caliber programs on a consistent basis. Toughest calls for me were leaving Georgia and Clemson off of being blue bloods as they have a lot of things going for them but they need a good amount to go right for them to be legit national championship caliber programs.
Look, I know you're fucking stupid. But all Cane joking aside, do you not realize that, even though they have been tripping over their lips for the last 14 years, Miami still has more impact players in the NFL than ANY OTHER PROGRAM IN THE COUNTRY? Yes, more than LSU, Ohio State, USC, Alabama, Florida State ... any of them. And most of the 2001 guys are out of the league now.
As shitty as they've been, and they have been butt stink shitty, they routinely throw first, second and third round guys into the NFL, and those guys blow the fuck up when they get there.
How is it that you can't perceive a scenario where THAT program, with all its history and accomplishment, can't consistently compete for a title, but Texas can???????? Texas has all the shit you listed, and has always had it, and look at them. Before 2005, nobody under the age of 40 knew that they had ever been good. And 2005 was 12 years ago and they haven't done shit since.
It ain't about the money dummy. Oregon has proven that. It ain't about the size of your stadium and how many asses are in the seats. Michigan has proven that. Nebraska has proven that.
It's about who you can recruit and who is coaching them. Alabama has proven that. USC has proven that. LSU has proven that. Florida State has proven that.
Speaking of stadiums not mattering, how is the Hard Rock Cafe thing working out? Has a team ever won a NT leasing out an NFL stadium? Coliseum and Orange Bowl don't count. Though not on campus facilities , nor owned by the respective universities, both were primarily college venues first, that NFL teams borrowed. Didn't the Canes used to have some kind of home field advantage? If the Dawgs had moved to Century Link we'd be fucking done forever.
I'd be more inclined to lean towards Miami still being Blue Blood because of the 80's through early 2000's and being in close proximity to so much HS football talent. But the stadium situation is fucking garbage.
The stadium situation is garbage, but your argument is a little off. The Orange Bowl does count because it's parallel in the way that matters: it's not an on-campus stadium and it belongs to someone else. If you're a renter, you're a renter. Doesn't matter who the landlord is. Most stadiums in that category over time were municipal anyway, so the question about every winning by leasing out an NFL stadium is a little premature. Also, the Orange Bowl was primarily an NFL stadium. That's where the Dolphins played, and they mattered a long time before the Hurricanes. The U was the "other" tenant.
The difference with the Orange Bowl and what they have now is that the O Bowl was in the city of Miami - you didn't have to drive to Broward to some out in the middle of nowhere location to get there like you do now.
But, yes, Miami's stadium situation is not exactly ideal. But as I've said, who cares? It clearly doesn't matter.
Notre Dame was in the National Title Game in the last 5-7 years and been in the hunt a few other years.
Texas always has the talent and resources ... when everything is working right with them they have as high of a ceiling as anybody.
Penn St has a very fertile recruiting ground and insane levels of support.
All 3 have had SIGNIFCANT periods of success throughout history ... their success is a question of not IF but WHEN ...
Miami had about a 20 year run from the early 80s through early 00s where they were at an elite level ... before that nothing and after that above average. I wouldn't claim that anybody that thinks Miami is a blue blood is insane ... but it's certainly very debatable.
You are grasping. These are the arguments offered by REALLY old men who don't really know what they're talking about, but want to convert their general impressions formed 3 decades earlier to axiomatic truth.
As I've said, and supported, "insane levels of support" means, really, nothing. Nobody gets more support than Michigan, and it doesn't translate. And nobody, not even USC or Texas, much less Penn State, has a better recruiting ground than Miami.
Miami's run may have begun relatively recently, but, as an intellectual matter, you've failed to make that relevant. Minnesota was a national power house once upon a time. The fact that a program won something in the 60s, 50s or earlier really has no bearing on anything. The game, society and demographics have changed.
Whenever it started, they've won 5, FIVE, titles, come within an eyelash of two more, played for an additional two more, knocked off some of the greatest teams in history, produced some of the greatest teams in history, produced unprecedented amounts of talent and been part of some of the biggest games in the sport's history. All of that, w/o "insane levels of support" and your other made up shit. Until you can write that off as not likely to return, you'll have to excuse me while I flush a turd that is more thought provoking than your post.
All that with four different coaches. I would think if there is such a thing as an "inevitable" program anywhere, it's Miami.
Penn State has won exactly two titles, both in the 80s, and disappears from dominance for extensive periods of time. Terrible example.
Your example of Texas, in particular, though, is horrible, and honestly, HH joking aside, rather pedestrian.
My money is that Miami would be a consistent national power before UW. And they could pass Texas quickly.
I'd agree that Miami's potential for a 20 year run is greater than UW's ...
Being able to sustain excellence over decades matters to me ... that's basically the primary measure that keeps Miami from being a blue blood IMO
Texas did not sustain over decades. You keep glossing over that point. Really, nobody has. Alabama disappeared for a while. SC has disappeared. ND was gone forever after Holtz. Ever run ends.
Miami came back after probation in the 90s and reeled off a very nice three year run. From 1999 to 2003 there wasn't a better program in the country, with the 2000, 2001 and 2002 teams winning or threatening to win it all. At the end of 2000, there wasn't a better team in the country, Oregon State included, 2001 they win it, and 2002 they were within an eyelash of winning it. This came after probation with yet another coach. It fits right into your narrative, but you can't seem to grasp it.
Then the reality that they whiffed on replacing Davis set in, and it went away ... POOF! Just like when Pete left SC. POOF! Gone.
But like SC, they kept producing very high level talent, it just didn't win.
So, like the other programs, Miami is always a coach away from being a bully again. It's really that simple. Stadiums, fuzzy concepts of "massive support" and all the rest is shit made up by old men thinking about the world they knew when they were young.
Programs that I view as having legitimate opportunities to win a National Championship by conference (blue bloods being bolded as they have the best shots when all things line up right for them:
It's possible for some other programs to jump in from time to time, but at this point, these are the programs that I see as having some combination of the requisite size, support, recruiting capabilities, etc. to be National Championship caliber programs on a consistent basis. Toughest calls for me were leaving Georgia and Clemson off of being blue bloods as they have a lot of things going for them but they need a good amount to go right for them to be legit national championship caliber programs.
Look, I know you're fucking stupid. But all Cane joking aside, do you not realize that, even though they have been tripping over their lips for the last 14 years, Miami still has more impact players in the NFL than ANY OTHER PROGRAM IN THE COUNTRY? Yes, more than LSU, Ohio State, USC, Alabama, Florida State ... any of them. And most of the 2001 guys are out of the league now.
As shitty as they've been, and they have been butt stink shitty, they routinely throw first, second and third round guys into the NFL, and those guys blow the fuck up when they get there.
How is it that you can't perceive a scenario where THAT program, with all its history and accomplishment, can't consistently compete for a title, but Texas can???????? Texas has all the shit you listed, and has always had it, and look at them. Before 2005, nobody under the age of 40 knew that they had ever been good. And 2005 was 12 years ago and they haven't done shit since.
It ain't about the money dummy. Oregon has proven that. It ain't about the size of your stadium and how many asses are in the seats. Michigan has proven that. Nebraska has proven that.
It's about who you can recruit and who is coaching them. Alabama has proven that. USC has proven that. LSU has proven that. Florida State has proven that.
Speaking of stadiums not mattering, how is the Hard Rock Cafe thing working out? Has a team ever won a NT leasing out an NFL stadium? Coliseum and Orange Bowl don't count. Though not on campus facilities , nor owned by the respective universities, both were primarily college venues first, that NFL teams borrowed. Didn't the Canes used to have some kind of home field advantage? If the Dawgs had moved to Century Link we'd be fucking done forever.
I'd be more inclined to lean towards Miami still being Blue Blood because of the 80's through early 2000's and being in close proximity to so much HS football talent. But the stadium situation is fucking garbage.
The stadium situation is garbage, but your argument is a little off. The Orange Bowl does count because it's parallel in the way that matters: it's not an on-campus stadium and it belongs to someone else. If you're a renter, you're a renter. Doesn't matter who the landlord is. Most stadiums in that category over time were municipal anyway, so the question about every winning by leasing out an NFL stadium is a little premature. Also, the Orange Bowl was primarily an NFL stadium. That's where the Dolphins played, and they mattered a long time before the Hurricanes. The U was the "other" tenant.
The difference with the Orange Bowl and what they have now is that the O Bowl was in the city of Miami - you didn't have to drive to Broward to some out in the middle of nowhere location to get there like you do now.
But, yes, Miami's stadium situation is not exactly ideal. But as I've said, who cares? It clearly doesn't matter.
Ok, I stand corrected on some of the finer points of the history of the Orange Bowl Stadium. I assumed that because the Canes stared playing there 30 years before the Dolphins that it was just a much their home as the NFL franchise throughout its entire history. In other words, more akin to USC "sharing" the Coliseum with the Rams and then Raiders, as opposed to, say, SDSU in Qualcomm, or Pitt in Heinz Field. Correct me if I am wrong here, but by the 80's was the U just as big a deal as the Dolphins in terms of calling the Orange Bowl their "home" and not being the "other" tenant. Also, even if it was old and decrepit, it was one of the "classic" college football venues with a rich history.
Can you say the U's stadium situation doesn't matter? It's an honest question and I don't know the answer. Clearly having a great on campus facility that is always packed - e.g., Nebraska, Georgia, Texas - etc. does not guarantee that you'll compete for NT's year in, year out, but it certainly doesn't hurt. In the case of Miami these days, does it impact recruiting at all, that Florida and Florida State have better college game day experiences?
Again, I contend that for the U of W, blowing up old Husky Stadium and moving to an NFL venue in perpetuity would have mattered and we'd be irrelevant forever. Husky Stadium is a major asset to the program and we need to look as rich and cool as we can - albeit in a non Oregon fashion - to compete.
1. Yes, technically, since the Dolphins didn't exist before 1966 and the stadium was built in the 30s. That said, nobody cared about the University of Miami then, and the stadium was never owned by the U, nor was it proximate to campus. It was a municipal stadium, and, yes, its most well known tenant for a good chunk of its history was an NFL franchise.
2. Yes, by the time the U started winning toward the end of the 70s, they became as big a deal in town as the Dolphins.
3. No, I cant' say that. It does matter insofar as it sucks that they play so far north now. But I can say it isn't preventing Miami from winning. It's not. When Miami was winning big, they had some of the worst on-campus facilities in D1. When they embarrassed Texas in the Cotton in 1990, Texas had THE best facilities. The Orange Bowl wasn't on or near campus and Miami has always had spotty attendance. You win with talent and coaching. Period. Not with "awesomeness". Has it hurt recruiting since the move? Look through the NFL rosters and you tell me.
4. I don't expect Washington would be ruined if they played downtown. Maybe it's different. I don't know. I know Miami's stadium and fan turn out have always been less than great, and it never mattered. They just need the right coach. Maybe they have him now.
Programs that I view as having legitimate opportunities to win a National Championship by conference (blue bloods being bolded as they have the best shots when all things line up right for them:
It's possible for some other programs to jump in from time to time, but at this point, these are the programs that I see as having some combination of the requisite size, support, recruiting capabilities, etc. to be National Championship caliber programs on a consistent basis. Toughest calls for me were leaving Georgia and Clemson off of being blue bloods as they have a lot of things going for them but they need a good amount to go right for them to be legit national championship caliber programs.
I like to ignore the one school from the Pac-12 that has appeared in the national championship game twice this decade, I like to do that.
@Tequilla fully acknowledged that other programs apart from these can pop into the mix from time to time; and Oregon certainly did that with a truly innovative, elite coach, followed by having one of the all time great college QB's. Do you feel with Coach T driving the bus and getting everyone in the right seats on said bus, that Oregon can return to the 2009- 14 level of success?
The staff Taggart just put together has been nothing short of spectacular. If he can save this recruiting class, which in some ways he already has by getting Freeman, and Carrington back.
LIFPO, but I'm actually a little bit optimistic.
This is what I've always said: Oregon is serious about football. If Helfraud flames out (which he did) the PKs would open their pocketbooks (which they did) and it should make a difference.
When they added Miami, VT, and BC to the ACC people thought it would be the new SEC much like when the diddlers joined the B1G Ten.
Florida State has remained Florida State, but Miami, VT, and BC didn't hold up their end of the bargain. FSU used to get ridiculed because they literally had no competition in conference for basically forever. I can remember the Tiki Barber game against FSU. Can you honestly remember any other meaningful FSU games that didn't involve Florida or Miami who were SEC and Big East?
Everything is cyclical but whoever wins the Clemson/FSU game is going to be either in the playoffs of damn close. Narduzzi seems like the real deal, but Dabo has a pretty easy road to glory.
So does Peterman right now, but to say Peterman has it harder than Dabo just isn't true. They both have it easy.
When they added Miami, VT, and BC to the ACC people thought it would be the new SEC much like when the diddlers joined the B1G Ten.
Florida State has remained Florida State, but Miami, VT, and BC didn't hold up their end of the bargain. FSU used to get ridiculed because they literally had no competition in conference for basically forever. I can remember the Tiki Barber game against FSU. Can you honestly remember any other meaningful FSU games that didn't involve Florida or Miami who were SEC and Big East?
Everything is cyclical but whoever wins the Clemson/FSU game is going to be either in the playoffs of damn close. Narduzzi seems like the real deal, but Dabo has a pretty easy road to glory.
So does Peterman right now, but to say Peterman has it harder than Dabo just isn't true. They both have it easy.
I think the ACC is now a little harder than you think. No conference is full of world beaters from top to bottom. Pac 12/10 has never been.
But, what makes a tough conference is when you have to show up pretty much every week or you can realistically lose. That is the case with much of the ACC now. Fuck, even Duke makes you work a little. There aren't many or any easy outs. It's the week in/week out part of conference play that makes it hard, unless the conference is full of patsies, which the ACC is not.
When they added Miami, VT, and BC to the ACC people thought it would be the new SEC much like when the diddlers joined the B1G Ten.
Florida State has remained Florida State, but Miami, VT, and BC didn't hold up their end of the bargain. FSU used to get ridiculed because they literally had no competition in conference for basically forever. I can remember the Tiki Barber game against FSU. Can you honestly remember any other meaningful FSU games that didn't involve Florida or Miami who were SEC and Big East?
Everything is cyclical but whoever wins the Clemson/FSU game is going to be either in the playoffs of damn close. Narduzzi seems like the real deal, but Dabo has a pretty easy road to glory.
So does Peterman right now, but to say Peterman has it harder than Dabo just isn't true. They both have it easy.
I think the ACC is now a little harder than you think. No conference is full of world beaters from top to bottom. Pac 12/10 has never been.
But, what makes a tough conference is when you have to show up pretty much every week or you can realistically lose. That is the case with much of the ACC now. Fuck, even Duke makes you work a little. There aren't many or any easy outs. It's the week in/week out part of conference play that makes it hard, unless the conference is full of patsies, which the ACC is not.
Duke, UNC, NC State, Virginia, Syracuse, and Wake Forest are shit.
The Pac-12 has one Arizona. The ACC has six. By that I mean teams with fan bases that stop caring after Midnight Madness.
1. Yes, technically, since the Dolphins didn't exist before 1966 and the stadium was built in the 30s. That said, nobody cared about the University of Miami then, and the stadium was never owned by the U, nor was it proximate to campus. It was a municipal stadium, and, yes, its most well known tenant for a good chunk of its history was an NFL franchise.
2. Yes, by the time the U started winning toward the end of the 70s, they became as big a deal in town as the Dolphins.
3. No, I cant' say that. It does matter insofar as it sucks that they play so far north now. But I can say it isn't preventing Miami from winning. It's not. When Miami was winning big, they had some of the worst on-campus facilities in D1. When they embarrassed Texas in the Cotton in 1990, Texas had THE best facilities. The Orange Bowl wasn't on or near campus and Miami has always had spotty attendance. You win with talent and coaching. Period. Not with "awesomeness". Has it hurt recruiting since the move? Look through the NFL rosters and you tell me.
4. I don't expect Washington would be ruined if they played downtown. Maybe it's different. I don't know. I know Miami's stadium and fan turn out have always been less than great, and it never mattered. They just need the right coach. Maybe they have him now.
Ok - I am satisfied with the logic here of points 1 through 3 - i.e., Miami stadium situation, whilst being shitty, is not preventing them from competing for a NT. There is an abundance of local talent in FL and this combined with good coaching does not ultimately require a kick-ass stadium to win. Schnellenberger was the first guy there to lock down all the local talent right? Re: #4, UW's model is completely different, however, in that *we* have to import so much talent from California. Having "The Greatest Setting in College Football" TM has to help in terms of selling the program.
When they added Miami, VT, and BC to the ACC people thought it would be the new SEC much like when the diddlers joined the B1G Ten.
Florida State has remained Florida State, but Miami, VT, and BC didn't hold up their end of the bargain. FSU used to get ridiculed because they literally had no competition in conference for basically forever. I can remember the Tiki Barber game against FSU. Can you honestly remember any other meaningful FSU games that didn't involve Florida or Miami who were SEC and Big East?
Everything is cyclical but whoever wins the Clemson/FSU game is going to be either in the playoffs of damn close. Narduzzi seems like the real deal, but Dabo has a pretty easy road to glory.
So does Peterman right now, but to say Peterman has it harder than Dabo just isn't true. They both have it easy.
I think the ACC is now a little harder than you think. No conference is full of world beaters from top to bottom. Pac 12/10 has never been.
But, what makes a tough conference is when you have to show up pretty much every week or you can realistically lose. That is the case with much of the ACC now. Fuck, even Duke makes you work a little. There aren't many or any easy outs. It's the week in/week out part of conference play that makes it hard, unless the conference is full of patsies, which the ACC is not.
Duke, UNC, NC State, Virginia, Syracuse, and Wake Forest are shit.
The Pac-12 has one Arizona. The ACC has six. By that I mean teams with fan bases that stop caring after Midnight Madness.
I'm not talking about the fucking fan bases and their quick departure to basketball dummy. Is this your high point today? Pointing out to me that the ACC is a basketball conference? Jesus.
I wouldn't call those schools "shit". NC State and UNC can typically play. I'm not saying they are power house programs, but you have to show up or you'll lose. Last few years Duke, amazingly, has joined them.
Comments
@creepycoug is a dick.
But he's got you on this one.
To say Miami was an elite program for 20 years.
20 fucking years Miami was in the discussion.
That is an eternity in college football.
My money is that Miami would be a consistent national power before UW. And they could pass Texas quickly.
EL OH EL!11!!11!!1!!11!1!1!!!!!1111111!
Being able to sustain excellence over decades matters to me ... that's basically the primary measure that keeps Miami from being a blue blood IMO
first, topfag is, right. I'm a dick. And, water is wet.
second, I found some light reading for you:
College Football (FBS) Programs That Have Been on Probation the Most
Rk School Seasons Sanctioned
1 Southern Methodist (TX) 17 seasons 7 times
2 Southern California 15 seasons 6 times
3 Auburn (AL) 11 seasons 4 times
4t Alabama 10 seasons 3 times
4t Michigan St. 10 seasons 3 times
4t Oklahoma 10 seasons 5 times
7t Colorado 9 seasons 5 times
7t Illinois 9 seasons 5 times
7t Texas A&M 9 seasons 4 times
7t Wisconsin 9 seasons 4 times
11t Arizona St. 8 seasons 4 times
11t Baylor (TX) 8 seasons 2 times
11t California 8 seasons 3 times
11t Cincinnati (OH) 8 seasons 4 times
11t Kansas 8 seasons 4 times
11t Kansas St. 8 seasons 4 times
11t Miami (FL) 8 seasons 3 times
11t Oklahoma St. 8 seasons 2 times
11t South Carolina 8 seasons 3 times
20t Central Florida 7 seasons 2 times
20t Florida Intl 7 seasons 2 times
20t Houston (TX) 7 seasons 3 times
20t Memphis (TN) 7 seasons 3 times
20t Mississippi 7 seasons 3 times
20t Mississippi St. 7 seasons 3 times
20t Ohio St. 7 seasons 3 times
20t Texas Tech 7 seasons 3 times
The very idea that Miami can only win when they're breaking the rules is ridiculous, but if you want to go there, then there are blue bloods that you'll need to remove from your list, namely USC, Oklahoma, and Alabama.
Also, in the category of, "something stinks in Eugene but we can't prove it," consider that Alabama, in all liklihood, is as dirty as SMU ever was, but hasn't been caught. In the Means case, where venerable Alabama came close to the death penalty, the kid was paid $200k by Bama boosters to sign (not loans like Billy Joe - cold hard cash). We're not talking about Pell grant fraud, phone cards, hookers and rappers paying bounties for big hits, partying on yahts and other favors. We're talking about the people in the stadium suites just buying recruits with money straight up - as bad as it gets - SMU bad (precisely what got them the death penalty). Consider, too, how bad of an actor Alabama's chief rival is, everyone's speculation about how they landed Cam Newton as a recent "no catch" example, and you get a sense for how unclean Alabama has been and what it takes to operate down there.
So don't be so fucking naive.
For the curious, the least penalized conference is the ACC with 18, the most is the SEC with 36, and second most is the Pac, with 31. We can thank ASU and USC for that.
The difference with the Orange Bowl and what they have now is that the O Bowl was in the city of Miami - you didn't have to drive to Broward to some out in the middle of nowhere location to get there like you do now.
But, yes, Miami's stadium situation is not exactly ideal. But as I've said, who cares? It clearly doesn't matter.
Miami came back after probation in the 90s and reeled off a very nice three year run. From 1999 to 2003 there wasn't a better program in the country, with the 2000, 2001 and 2002 teams winning or threatening to win it all. At the end of 2000, there wasn't a better team in the country, Oregon State included, 2001 they win it, and 2002 they were within an eyelash of winning it. This came after probation with yet another coach. It fits right into your narrative, but you can't seem to grasp it.
Then the reality that they whiffed on replacing Davis set in, and it went away ... POOF! Just like when Pete left SC. POOF! Gone.
But like SC, they kept producing very high level talent, it just didn't win.
So, like the other programs, Miami is always a coach away from being a bully again. It's really that simple. Stadiums, fuzzy concepts of "massive support" and all the rest is shit made up by old men thinking about the world they knew when they were young.
Can you say the U's stadium situation doesn't matter? It's an honest question and I don't know the answer. Clearly having a great on campus facility that is always packed - e.g., Nebraska, Georgia, Texas - etc. does not guarantee that you'll compete for NT's year in, year out, but it certainly doesn't hurt. In the case of Miami these days, does it impact recruiting at all, that Florida and Florida State have better college game day experiences?
Again, I contend that for the U of W, blowing up old Husky Stadium and moving to an NFL venue in perpetuity would have mattered and we'd be irrelevant forever. Husky Stadium is a major asset to the program and we need to look as rich and cool as we can - albeit in a non Oregon fashion - to compete.
2. Yes, by the time the U started winning toward the end of the 70s, they became as big a deal in town as the Dolphins.
3. No, I cant' say that. It does matter insofar as it sucks that they play so far north now. But I can say it isn't preventing Miami from winning. It's not. When Miami was winning big, they had some of the worst on-campus facilities in D1. When they embarrassed Texas in the Cotton in 1990, Texas had THE best facilities. The Orange Bowl wasn't on or near campus and Miami has always had spotty attendance. You win with talent and coaching. Period. Not with "awesomeness". Has it hurt recruiting since the move? Look through the NFL rosters and you tell me.
4. I don't expect Washington would be ruined if they played downtown. Maybe it's different. I don't know. I know Miami's stadium and fan turn out have always been less than great, and it never mattered. They just need the right coach. Maybe they have him now.
LIFPO, but I'm actually a little bit optimistic.
This is what I've always said: Oregon is serious about football. If Helfraud flames out (which he did) the PKs would open their pocketbooks (which they did) and it should make a difference.
Florida State has remained Florida State, but Miami, VT, and BC didn't hold up their end of the bargain. FSU used to get ridiculed because they literally had no competition in conference for basically forever. I can remember the Tiki Barber game against FSU. Can you honestly remember any other meaningful FSU games that didn't involve Florida or Miami who were SEC and Big East?
Everything is cyclical but whoever wins the Clemson/FSU game is going to be either in the playoffs of damn close. Narduzzi seems like the real deal, but Dabo has a pretty easy road to glory.
So does Peterman right now, but to say Peterman has it harder than Dabo just isn't true. They both have it easy.
But, what makes a tough conference is when you have to show up pretty much every week or you can realistically lose. That is the case with much of the ACC now. Fuck, even Duke makes you work a little. There aren't many or any easy outs. It's the week in/week out part of conference play that makes it hard, unless the conference is full of patsies, which the ACC is not.
The Pac-12 has one Arizona. The ACC has six. By that I mean teams with fan bases that stop caring after Midnight Madness.
I wouldn't call those schools "shit". NC State and UNC can typically play. I'm not saying they are power house programs, but you have to show up or you'll lose. Last few years Duke, amazingly, has joined them.
I would say for the first time ever ...
The power bottom @creepycoug is butt hurt.
Miami was a great program.
Because of location they could be great again.
They're not.