Early Pete > Early Dabo

creepycoug said:

YellowSnow said:

creepycoug said:

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.

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.

creepycoug said:

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.