Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="SWC75, post: 3535257, member: 289"] I love college football more than any level of any sport but what I don't like about it, (because we aren't among the elite), is that so much of it is about schools having huge advantages over others, in location, type of school, budget, facilities, fan support, (especially schools that represent the whole state) and recent success, (which is all recruits are likely to know about). We can't be Clemson. We can't be Penn State. It contrasts with college basketball which, because of smaller teams, offers the potential for excellence to many more schools, (including us). The saving graces are: - That those advantages are advantages in recruiting players who are in their mid-teens when they are being recruited. Nobody knows if they've peaked in their development, physically, emotionally or in terms of their sport. You can't be sure about character or work ethic. A player may have problems with discipline or academics. other players may blossom later: Johnny Manziel was a 2 star recruit and Tom Brady was a 6th round draft choice. Mack Brown got blown out by BYU when he was at Texas in a game where He had forty four 4 or 5 star players to nine for the Cougars and that cost him his job there. - It's a sport that came be dominated from certain positions. A great quarterback can elevate you: so can a great defensive player. The 2010 Auburn team with Cam Newton and Nick Fairley has always intrigued me. I've always thought they were our 1998 team if Dwight Freeney was a healthy senior, (2001), instead of an injured freshman. With McNabb on one side of the ball and Freeney on the other side, we could have won it all that year. By the same token, if a "blue blood" program misfires at quarterback and has a great middle line backer jump to the pros, they can be vulnerable. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?