Early Pete > Early Dabo
- 10 & 4 overall; 6- 2 in ACC
- 2nd place in ACC
- plungered in Orange Bowl 33- 70 by WVU
- #22 final ranking
Pete Year 3
-12 & 2 overall; 8- 1 in PAC;
- win conference title
- lose CFP semi-final by 17 pts to (soon to be) #2 Alabama
- #4 Final AP rank
2016 Washington > 2011 Climpson
Dabo is obviously an elite coach and has a Natty (after only 8 seasons for trying for crying out loud) in the trophy case, but Pete's early returns are objectively better. And I would argue Pete stepped into a harder "return a program to dominance" job than Dabo.
Comments
-
Transitive property and all.
But still...
-
Pressing.
There are better comps for Pete than Dabo. -
What's the standard for an elite coach?
If it's a national championship, that's a slippery slope ... are we prepared to call coaches like Larry Coker or Gene Chizik elite because they won national championships? -
Fuck those weak "Doog It Up" bitchesGrundleStiltzkin said:Transitive property and all.
But still...
This is how it's done, full on Electric Hulk Mega Doog style -
@Tequilla well, of course, you can't just use a Natty as the only qualifier. Coker basically inherited on of the great college teams of all time. Chizik had Cam. Other key requirements would be:
1) Sustained Level of Success - e.g., Dabo's had 6 x 10 + win seasons in a row now and 5 straight bowl wins. 2 back to back title game appearances.
2) Raising a program of above its normal historical level of success - Dabo has done this at Clemson. Chip never won a NT but he took Oregon to a level they'd never dreamed of, and, I, for one don't seem them being able to return to.
3) Winning big time games against other "Elite" coaches and programs - Dabo took down Meyer and Saban in back to back games this year. Beat Stoops last year and almost knocked off Saban last year.
-
I'd say, in this day and age, building a program to the point where it is in the national title discussion most years and maintaining that status throughout their tenure makes a coach elite. I don't even know if winning a national title is a necessity. I would say Chip Kelly was an elite college coach.Tequilla said:What's the standard for an elite coach?
If it's a national championship, that's a slippery slope ... are we prepared to call coaches like Larry Coker or Gene Chizik elite because they won national championships? -
Thanks for the thoughtful responses ...
I think it's important to define what success looks like ...
Dabo's results speak for themselves ... for some reason I don't view him as elite (probably because he's got too much cheerleader in him) ... but again, hard to argue.
I do think Dabo benefits a lot from being in an area where there are a number of high end recruits ...
I do think Dabo benefits from South Carolina definitely being down, the SEC East generally being viewed as shit, the North Carolina schools not being in a spot where they lock down key recruits in the state, Virginia Tech in the last few years of Beamer struggling a bit creating some recruiting voids, Miami largely being down over the last 5-10 years opening up some areas of Florida, and Georgia Tech running an option program that targets a specific kind of player opening the door potentially to a handful of recruits out of Georgia that maybe they wouldn't have gotten 20 years ago. I definitely haven't studied it in full to determine how much of that is real or perception.
But in a lot of ways, Clemson has a lot of similar attributes to Washington from a football playing perspective. Usually when our high end has been achieved it has been due to having the right caliber coach in place with some kind of void being present in the PAC (right now the void is looking like UCLA). I think Clemson's in a similar position right now where they have the right coach for them and some significant voids around them allowing them to build themselves up.
One thing I think is also important to keep in mind is that the ACC as a whole is getting more and more competitive ... sneaky opinion alert is that I would say that the ACC may have been the best conference this year top to bottom. This will test Dabo going forward. -
Jesus dude. Every fucking time.
-
I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...Tequilla said:I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...I do think Dabo benefits... I do think Dabo benefits...
-
The Clemson story is obviously intriguing because they are the one non-traditional powerhouse program to win a NT in decades (BTW, I'm not sure how to classify Auburn - i.e., powerhouse or one-off with Cam Newton?) and they've done it without the top 10 recruiting classes you see year in, year from the big boys. Clemson's last 4 classes (according the bankrupt website) have been 16, 15, 28, and 12. And now we're starting to play in that top 15- 20 range recruiting-wise as well, combined with (mostly) great coaching, player development, etc. Petersen's system should get us to the point where we can be a legit national title contender.
-
Couldn't of used a cuter girl instead of this dyke?TTJ said:Pressing.
There are better comps for Pete than Dabo. -
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:
PAC12
USC
Washington
UCLA
Big 12
Oklahoma
Texas
Big 10
Ohio St
Michigan
Penn St
Michigan St
Wisconsin
SEC
Alabama
LSU
Florida
Georgia
Texas A&M
Auburn
Tennessee
ACC
Florida St
Notre Dame
Clemson
Miami
Virginia Tech
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. -
No ASU? Ha haTequilla said: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:
PAC12
USC
Washington
UCLA
Big 12
Oklahoma
Texas
Big 10
Ohio St
Michigan
Penn St
Michigan St
Wisconsin
SEC
Alabama
LSU
Florida
Georgia
Texas A&M
Auburn
Tennessee
ACC
Florida St
Notre Dame
Clemson
Miami
Virginia Tech
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. -
Did a little truth editing for you. No charge. You're welcome.YellowSnow said:Dabo Year 3.5 (2011)
- 10 & 4 overall; 6- 2 in ACC
- 2nd place in ACC
- plungered in Orange Bowl 33- 70 by WVU
- #22 final ranking
Pete Year 3
-12 & 2 overall; 8- 1 in weakest PAC in years;
- win conference title
- plungered, anal assaulted, bung hole bombarded and generally outclassed by an Alabama team with a retard QB and no big-play receivers who coasted through a down SEC confrunce
- #4 Final generous AP rank based on reputation and name
2016 Washington > 2011 Climpson
Dabo is obviously an elite coach and has a Natty (after only 8 seasons for trying for crying out loud) in the trophy case, but Pete's early returns are objectively better; and by "objectively", I mean in my head. And I would argue Pete stepped into a harder "return a program to dominance" job than Dabo.
-
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.Tequilla said: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:
PAC12
USC
Washington
UCLA
Big 12
Oklahoma
Texas
Big 10
Ohio St
Michigan
Penn St
Michigan St
Wisconsin
SEC
Alabama
LSU
Florida
Georgia
Texas A&M
Auburn
Tennessee
ACC
Florida St
Notre Dame
Clemson
Miami
Virginia Tech
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.
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.
-
Hey fuck youYellowSnow said:
No ASU? Ha haTequilla said: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:
PAC12
USC
Washington
UCLA
Big 12
Oklahoma
Texas
Big 10
Ohio St
Michigan
Penn St
Michigan St
Wisconsin
SEC
Alabama
LSU
Florida
Georgia
Texas A&M
Auburn
Tennessee
ACC
Florida St
Notre Dame
Clemson
Miami
Virginia Tech
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. -
Miami hasn't been a consistent national player in 15 years now ...
For the reasons you mentioned is why I have them on the list as one of the approx 20 programs where national championships aren't surprising ...
There are a lot of really good programs that I don't have on the list -
Except you included Penn State, Notre Dame and Texas. If the standard is "consistent national player," there really are only a handful of schools you can list. Everyone disappears for a while. USC was gone in the 90s, came back from 2000 until they blew up mid-decade, and are working their way back again.Tequilla said:Miami hasn't been a consistent national player in 15 years now ...
For the reasons you mentioned is why I have them on the list as one of the approx 20 programs where national championships aren't surprising ...
There are a lot of really good programs that I don't have on the list
There has been nothing consistent about Notre Dame since the late 80s.
Texas, putting them there is 100% on potential, and you know it, because there is simply nothing else to point to. And once you go there, Miami HAS to be included because of their history and because of who they can get in the door w/o even trying.
Of that list, if "consistent national player" is the standard, whatever the fuck that means, you really only have Alabama, LSU, Ohio State and, stretching a bit, Oklahoma and Florida State. That is it.
I actually don't mind these topics, but you bumble fucked this one with the stupid "blue blood" thing. It's not real. It doesn't translate on the field. It's a fan thing. -
Are you saying Miami football is like UW basketball?creepycoug said:
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.Tequilla said: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:
PAC12
USC
Washington
UCLA
Big 12
Oklahoma
Texas
Big 10
Ohio St
Michigan
Penn St
Michigan St
Wisconsin
SEC
Alabama
LSU
Florida
Georgia
Texas A&M
Auburn
Tennessee
ACC
Florida St
Notre Dame
Clemson
Miami
Virginia Tech
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.
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. -
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. -
Flagged for listing Pac-12 teamsTequilla said: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:
PAC12
USC
Washington
UCLA
Big 12
Oklahoma
Texas
Big 10
Ohio St
Michigan
Penn St
Michigan St
Wisconsin
SEC
Alabama
LSU
Florida
Georgia
Texas A&M
Auburn
Tennessee
ACC
Florida St
Notre Dame
Clemson
Miami
Virginia Tech
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. -
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.creepycoug said:
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.Tequilla said: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:
PAC12
USC
Washington
UCLA
Big 12
Oklahoma
Texas
Big 10
Ohio St
Michigan
Penn St
Michigan St
Wisconsin
SEC
Alabama
LSU
Florida
Georgia
Texas A&M
Auburn
Tennessee
ACC
Florida St
Notre Dame
Clemson
Miami
Virginia Tech
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.
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.
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. -
Bama leases out Jerryworld.YellowSnow said:
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.creepycoug said:
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.Tequilla said: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:
PAC12
USC
Washington
UCLA
Big 12
Oklahoma
Texas
Big 10
Ohio St
Michigan
Penn St
Michigan St
Wisconsin
SEC
Alabama
LSU
Florida
Georgia
Texas A&M
Auburn
Tennessee
ACC
Florida St
Notre Dame
Clemson
Miami
Virginia Tech
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.
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. -
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.Tequilla said: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.
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.
Not one of your better efforts.
-
Right now, yes, except for the winning history part.2001400ex said:
Are you saying Miami football is like UW basketball?creepycoug said:
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.Tequilla said: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:
PAC12
USC
Washington
UCLA
Big 12
Oklahoma
Texas
Big 10
Ohio St
Michigan
Penn St
Michigan St
Wisconsin
SEC
Alabama
LSU
Florida
Georgia
Texas A&M
Auburn
Tennessee
ACC
Florida St
Notre Dame
Clemson
Miami
Virginia Tech
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.
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. -
creepycoug said:
You are grasssping. 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 impreshuns formed 3 decades earlier to axiomatic trooth.Tequilla said: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.
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 intellecshual matter, you've failed to make that relevant. Minnesota was a nashunal 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 gheym, society and demographics have changed.
Whenever it started, they've won 5, FIVE, titles FAGGOT! come within an eyelash of two more, played for an additional two more, knocked off some of the greatest teems in history, produced some of the greatest teems in history, produced unprecedented amounts of talent and been part of some of the biggest gheyms 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 the kewgs.CrispedCreeped. -
@creepycoug I get it that you disagree with me on Miami ... it's not that I view teams as having PAST success as being the only indication of FUTURE success ... but what I am looking at is if you can see programs that have had a historical track record of success throughout time that tells me that the underlying infrastructure is in place to be successful. Of course, that comes with judgement. If you take my above criteria, a program like Nebraska should be on the list. But I have them off the list because there's a very big question that they have had going on 15-20 years now tied to their ability to recruit nationally.
As for Penn State, they've been in the Big 10 now for 24 years. Given their direct competition in Ohio St and Michigan, if you win the Big 10 you are right in the discussion for being able to be in the national title picture. They've won the Big 10 4 times during that interval and their division once. No question that they are in a tier behind Ohio State as Ohio State to me is an ultimate blue blood. Why do I have Penn St in that area? Because in those 24 years, Penn St has won 9 or more games 15 of those 24 years and that's despite going through one of the biggest scandals in the history of college sports. Yet, we have evidence that they've been able to get through that scandal and be fine going forward. They have significant $$$ backing the program and their ability to recruit not only the State of Pennsylvania but also the Eastern seaboard notably in the New York and New Jersey markets puts them in a strong position to have the kind of talent necessary to be capable of winning the Big 10 - which I view very similar to some of the SEC programs behind Alabama.
The Texas argument is even more ridiculous to me. As can be proven with any program, if you hire the wrong coach you can set the program back in the short term. However, make no mistake that Texas is the pre-eminent school in the State of Texas and there is no greater source of recruiting talent than Texas (Florida and California are right there in the same discussion). The short-term view is that Texas has fallen back since winning the National Title with Vince Young and then falling short to Alabama in the 2009 season. I view the current state of Texas similar to where USC was for most of the 1990s ... still plenty of talent but directionless. Here's why I have no problem putting Texas on the list of blue bloods. Prior to the Charlie Strong era, you have to go back to the 1930's and the era of Jack Chevigny (1934-1936) to find a head coach at the University of Texas that did not win a conference championship. If that isn't a blue blood, then I don't know what is.
You also called out Michigan being a blue blood. They lost their way for a little bit with the Rich Rod and Brady Hoke hires. Similar to Texas, you have to go a long way back in history to find a coach that didn't win a conference championship at Michigan. It's a job that you can win and win big at. That's the reality. And I have no doubt that Harbaugh will continue to put Michigan in that position going forward.
Getting back to Miami, their heights are as high as any program in the history of college football not named Alabama and the run they are currently on under Saban. Prior to the 1980s, over a 50+ year period they only had 6 seasons of 1 loss football in a season. The history of success wasn't there. Since Larry Coker won the Big East in the 2003 season, Miami has shared a divisional conference championship ONCE since then with ZERO outright conference championships and only ONCE in that period (2005) have they lost less than 3 games IN CONFERENCE. That's far from elite and being in that national championship picture. The talent that they have available to them is indisputable. But it also has to be noted that the heights of their program coincided with the 1980 and 1990 time periods where Miami was infused with significant drug money and the $$$ handed out within the program is the stuff of legend. Point being that Miami has NEVER proven that they can CONSISTENTLY run a high end program without committing significant NCAA violations. There are also significant questions surrounding the University support of the program and the support of the program within the local community, etc. The ceiling is vast ... but the evidence suggests that Miami may be more of a shooting star than something that is sustainable over the long haul. -
DieTequilla said:@creepycoug I get it that you disagree with me on Miami ... it's not that I view teams as having PAST success as being the only indication of FUTURE success ... but what I am looking at is if you can see programs that have had a historical track record of success throughout time that tells me that the underlying infrastructure is in place to be successful. Of course, that comes with judgement. If you take my above criteria, a program like Nebraska should be on the list. But I have them off the list because there's a very big question that they have had going on 15-20 years now tied to their ability to recruit nationally.
As for Penn State, they've been in the Big 10 now for 24 years. Given their direct competition in Ohio St and Michigan, if you win the Big 10 you are right in the discussion for being able to be in the national title picture. They've won the Big 10 4 times during that interval and their division once. No question that they are in a tier behind Ohio State as Ohio State to me is an ultimate blue blood. Why do I have Penn St in that area? Because in those 24 years, Penn St has won 9 or more games 15 of those 24 years and that's despite going through one of the biggest scandals in the history of college sports. Yet, we have evidence that they've been able to get through that scandal and be fine going forward. They have significant $$$ backing the program and their ability to recruit not only the State of Pennsylvania but also the Eastern seaboard notably in the New York and New Jersey markets puts them in a strong position to have the kind of talent necessary to be capable of winning the Big 10 - which I view very similar to some of the SEC programs behind Alabama.
The Texas argument is even more ridiculous to me. As can be proven with any program, if you hire the wrong coach you can set the program back in the short term. However, make no mistake that Texas is the pre-eminent school in the State of Texas and there is no greater source of recruiting talent than Texas (Florida and California are right there in the same discussion). The short-term view is that Texas has fallen back since winning the National Title with Vince Young and then falling short to Alabama in the 2009 season. I view the current state of Texas similar to where USC was for most of the 1990s ... still plenty of talent but directionless. Here's why I have no problem putting Texas on the list of blue bloods. Prior to the Charlie Strong era, you have to go back to the 1930's and the era of Jack Chevigny (1934-1936) to find a head coach at the University of Texas that did not win a conference championship. If that isn't a blue blood, then I don't know what is.
You also called out Michigan being a blue blood. They lost their way for a little bit with the Rich Rod and Brady Hoke hires. Similar to Texas, you have to go a long way back in history to find a coach that didn't win a conference championship at Michigan. It's a job that you can win and win big at. That's the reality. And I have no doubt that Harbaugh will continue to put Michigan in that position going forward.
Getting back to Miami, their heights are as high as any program in the history of college football not named Alabama and the run they are currently on under Saban. Prior to the 1980s, over a 50+ year period they only had 6 seasons of 1 loss football in a season. The history of success wasn't there. Since Larry Coker won the Big East in the 2003 season, Miami has shared a divisional conference championship ONCE since then with ZERO outright conference championships and only ONCE in that period (2005) have they lost less than 3 games IN CONFERENCE. That's far from elite and being in that national championship picture. The talent that they have available to them is indisputable. But it also has to be noted that the heights of their program coincided with the 1980 and 1990 time periods where Miami was infused with significant drug money and the $$$ handed out within the program is the stuff of legend. Point being that Miami has NEVER proven that they can CONSISTENTLY run a high end program without committing significant NCAA violations. There are also significant questions surrounding the University support of the program and the support of the program within the local community, etc. The ceiling is vast ... but the evidence suggests that Miami may be more of a shooting star than something that is sustainable over the long haul. -
Fucksakes. Creepycoug aboard the Mighty Mo sails up and fires a 16", 2-ton volley of words at Teq on the Yamamoto, only to retaliate with an 18", 2.5-ton broadside.
-
Yamamoto?!GrundleStiltzkin said:Fucksakes. Creepycoug aboard the Mighty Mo sails up and fires a 16", 2-ton volley of words at Teq on the Yamamoto, only to retaliate with an 18", 2.5-ton broadside.
