Love the RU board when it comes to expansion

[PhatOrange]

You don't get it. For a program like UCONN or SU, conference affiliation isn't anywhere near as important as coaching. Look at BCU - they have been cashing the biggest non-PSU checks in the northeast and their BB and football programs are at all-time type lows. WVU was in a weak conference and with great coaching, kicked Big 12 & SEC champs all over the field.

You guys play the "tradition" card so hard you lose all credibility. First of all, in the last 40 years, SU has been down except for the end of the MAC era and most of the PP era. Other than that, SU hasn't been anything. So, your tradition isn't keeping your program relevant, but good coaching did.

There is nobody that hates BC more than me but you are flat out wrong about them cashing in large checks and not being deserving of it because as you say they are "at all-time type low". That's flat out wrong.

Since joining the ACC these are BC's records:

2005 = 9-3
10-3
11-3
9-4
8-5
7-6
2011 = 4-8

Yes they are in a down turn but if you had been a football fan longer than 10 years you'd know this is how it works. Things go in cycles and they're only one year removed from a winning season anyhow.

As for tradition, that's another thing you're just wrong about but I wouldn't expect anything from a fan who's football tradition spans 10 years.

40 years is a long time. The 'except' part that you mentioned spanned almost 20 years. Syracuse had darn near a 20 year run of great football. That's a hard thing to do. At one time during the run Syracuse was with FSU for longest bowl streaks which I think was 14. Even in the down years of that time Syracuse produced guys like Larry Csonka, Joe Morris and Art Monk and we probably have produced as many pro's in the 2000's as Uconn has.

 

[SU2NASA]

There is nobody that hates BC more than me but you are flat out wrong about them cashing in large checks and not being deserving of it because as you say they are "at all-time low". That's flat out wrong.

Since joining the ACC these are BC's records:

2006 = 9-3
10-3
11-3
9-4
8-5
7-6
2012 = 4-8

Yes they are in a down turn but if you had been a football fan longer than 10 years you'd know this is how it works. Things go in cycles and they're only one year removed from a winning season anyhow.

As for tradition, that's another thing you're just wrong about but I wouldn't expect anything from a fan who's football tradition spans 10 years.

40 years is a long time. The 'except' part that you mentioned spanned almost 20 years. Syracuse had darn near a 20 year run of great football. That's a hard thing to do. At one time during the run Syracuse was with FSU for longest bowl streaks which I think was 14. Even in the down years of that time Syracuse produced guys like Larry Csonka, Joe Morris and Art Monk and we probably have produced as many pro's in the 2000's as Uconn has.

Great post. Damn that whole logic thing - one losing season = downturn?

 

['72 Orange]

Great post. Damn that whole logic thing - one losing season = downturn?

Using PhatOrange's figures BC Averaged 10 wins for the first three seasons (great results). They averaged 6.3 wins over the last three seasons. Although they were bowl eligible for 6 of the 7 seasons (a result we would kill for) the number of wins steadily declines over the last 5 years. - if that is not a nose dive I don't know what the hell is.

 

[PhatOrange]

Using PhatOrange's figures BC Averaged 10 wins for the first three seasons (great results). They averaged 6.3 wins over the last three seasons. Although they were bowl eligible for 6 of the 7 seasons (a result we would kill for) the number of wins steadily declines over the last 5 years. - if that is not a nose dive I don't know what the hell is.

4-8 aside they trended down by 1 loss per season. I don't see that as a big deal because to sustain 9-3 type seasons isn't realistic. Even mighty Florida (13-1, 8-5, 7-6)and Texas (13-1, 5-7, 8-5) have down cycles.

I measure college football in 4/5 year cycles because of turnover/recruiting classes.

 

[SU2NASA]

Using PhatOrange's figures BC Averaged 10 wins for the first three seasons (great results). They averaged 6.3 wins over the last three seasons. Although they were bowl eligible for 6 of the 7 seasons (a result we would kill for) the number of wins steadily declines over the last 5 years. - if that is not a nose dive I don't know what the hell is.

I'd be happy to have their downturn the last 6 years.

 

[Scooch]

The "BC blocked UConn" meme is downright hysterical. I'm actually one of the few folks here who's vaguely sympathetic towards UConn, because I live in CT and know a lot of great fans of their programs. But we're supposed to believe that the North Carolina Mafia, who supposedly runs the ACC with an uncompromising iron fist, let the newbie liberal Yankees from Boston tell them who to invite to their club? Come the hell on.

I have no doubt that UConn was seriously discussed, but Pitt was a much safer choice on many fronts.

As to Rutgers, I mean since 2003 the ACC has expanded by 5 teams, the Big Ten by 1, and the Big XII lost 4 and added 2. Yet there has not been one credible, sourced report that RU was ever a serious candidate for any of those openings. They're an hour south of a huge city that doesn't give a rat's patootie about college sports, that's what they got going for them. Hooray.

 

[HOFCeluck]

The "BC blocked UConn" meme is downright hysterical. I'm actually one of the few folks here who's vaguely sympathetic towards UConn, because I live in CT and know a lot of great fans of their programs. But we're supposed to believe that the North Carolina Mafia, who supposedly runs the ACC with an uncompromising iron fist, let the newbie liberal Yankees from Boston tell them who to invite to their club? Come the hell on.

I have no doubt that UConn was seriously discussed, but Pitt was a much safer choice on many fronts.

As to Rutgers, I mean since 2003 the ACC has expanded by 5 teams, the Big Ten by 1, and the Big XII lost 4 and added 2. Yet there has not been one credible, sourced report that RU was ever a serious candidate for any of those openings. They're an hour south of a huge city that doesn't give a rat's patootie about college sports, that's what they got going for them. Hooray.

Yeah, I'm sure Uconn was all ready to get the second invite until BC shot it down. I'm sure it has nothing to do with UCONN SUING THE ACC.

 

[HOFCeluck]

BC's fall in football can be traced to one event, and it wasn't joining the ACC.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

BC's fall in football can be traced to one event, and it wasn't joining the ACC.

Diamond Ferri?

 

[HOFCeluck]

Diamond Ferri?

LOL. I'm surprised the program wasn't cancelled after he ripped the hearts out of the Superfan collective.

 

[Scooch]

BC's fall in football can be traced to one event, and it wasn't joining the ACC.

You know, it wouldn't surprise me if ultimately that didn't have a huge impact. I mean maybe it did, I don't know. But I'm guessing a lot of the ACC ADs and Presidents weren't around in 2003/4, and even if some were, the lure of more money seems to trump past offenses in the world of college athletics.

I think Pitt just fit better. The ACC really wanted to sell the expansion as an all-sports move, with a nod to football. Now hoops may have been a huge driver, but I think they wanted to downplay that angle. Pitt hasn't been great in a long time, but they've had solid years, and have a storied history. The brand thing. They also allow the ACC to place a flag in a talent-rich part of the country.

I also don't recall there being a major Pitt scandal recently (aside from the head football coach thing, but that was rectified quickly) although I may be totally forgetting something else. The ACC has a lot going on in that regard, so bringing in a relatively clean program probably had some appeal. And in terms of hoops, Pitt has a record of success under multiple coaches. I'm sure there is skepticism that with the sanctions, coupled with Calhoun's eventual departure, that UConn's hoops succes is sustainable.

 

[texascpa]

How did a thread discussing Rutger's fan's inflated views of their program dissolve into an argument of the merits of UConn's program. As much as I dislike UConn, I hate Rugters. Let's keep on point here people.

 

[sdhusky]

There is nobody that hates BC more than me but you are flat out wrong about them cashing in large checks and not being deserving of it because as you say they are "at all-time type low". That's flat out wrong.

Since joining the ACC these are BC's records:

2005 = 9-3
10-3
11-3
9-4
8-5
7-6
2011 = 4-8

Yes they are in a down turn but if you had been a football fan longer than 10 years you'd know this is how it works. Things go in cycles and they're only one year removed from a winning season anyhow.

As for tradition, that's another thing you're just wrong about but I wouldn't expect anything from a fan who's football tradition spans 10 years.

40 years is a long time. The 'except' part that you mentioned spanned almost 20 years. Syracuse had darn near a 20 year run of great football. That's a hard thing to do. At one time during the run Syracuse was with FSU for longest bowl streaks which I think was 14. Even in the down years of that time Syracuse produced guys like Larry Csonka, Joe Morris and Art Monk and we probably have produced as many pro's in the 2000's as Uconn has.

20 Year run? Really? Well, considering 3 of them were under Mac, the rest were under the current UCONN coach. In the last 40 years, two SU coaches never had a winning season in that span, one had one winning season and one had 3/7. MAC turned things around (I was living in Syracuse in '87, was at the dome for the PSU game) and had some winning seasons and PP took SU to a level of consistency it hasn't otherwise achieved in a generation or two. When he left, it fall back down to where it was before.

As far as BC goes, you missed my point completely. Things are grim this season and they sucked last year. Why? Because they have poor coaching and have had little stability in coaching. That is more important than them being in the ACC. When Spaz goes, they will have a chance to turn things around with a good hire. If they bring in GROB, it will get worse. If they bring in Petrino, it will get better until he leaves for greener pastures (BC isn't a traditional Big time program, FYI).

 

[HOFCeluck]

20 Year run? Really? Well, considering 3 of them were under Mac, the rest were under the current UCONN coach. In the last 40 years, two SU coaches never had a winning season in that span, one had one winning season and one had 3/7. MAC turned things around (I was living in Syracuse in '87, was at the dome for the PSU game) and had some winning seasons and PP took SU to a level of consistency it hasn't otherwise achieved in a generation or two. When he left, it fall back down to where it was before.

As far as BC goes, you missed my point completely. Things are grim this season and they sucked last year. Why? Because they have poor coaching and have had little stability in coaching. That is more important than them being in the ACC. When Spaz goes, they will have a chance to turn things around with a good hire. If they bring in GROB, it will get worse. If they bring in Petrino, it will get better until he leaves for greener pastures (BC isn't a traditional Big time program, FYI).

You would trade places with BC in a heartbeat. That is a fact and really all that needs to be said.

 

[Scooch]

sdhusky, no one is arguing that coaching isn't important, or that league affiliation is some magic potion that guarantees success.

The issue is that having revenue stability allows programs to correct mistakes more easily. Mistakes that every single program makes. I use the analogy of baseball -- it's not that low payroll/small market teams can't win, they can, it's that a few bad decisions cripples those franchises. Whereas the big market, cash-flush teams have the ability to swallow the financial ramifications of mistakes much more easily, and get competitive again more quickly.

That's what the ACC gives a school like SU.

 

[SU2NASA]

Diamond Ferri?

And somewhere in this world, Diamond Ferri just scored another touchdown.

 

[sdhusky]

sdhusky, no one is arguing that coaching isn't important, or that league affiliation is some magic potion that guarantees success.

The issue is that having revenue stability allows programs to correct mistakes more easily. Mistakes that every single program makes. I use the analogy of baseball -- it's not that low payroll/small market teams can't win, they can, it's that a few bad decisions cripples those franchises. Whereas the big market, cash-flush teams have the ability to swallow the financial ramifications of mistakes much more easily, and get competitive again more quickly.

That's what the ACC gives a school like SU.

I agree with everything you said. And that's why UCONN desperately wants to get to the ACC or Big 10.

 

[SU2NASA]

20 Year run? Really? Well, considering 3 of them were under Mac, the rest were under the current UCONN coach. In the last 40 years, two SU coaches never had a winning season in that span, one had one winning season and one had 3/7. MAC turned things around (I was living in Syracuse in '87, was at the dome for the PSU game) and had some winning seasons and PP took SU to a level of consistency it hasn't otherwise achieved in a generation or two. When he left, it fall back down to where it was before.

As far as BC goes, you missed my point completely. Things are grim this season and they sucked last year. Why? Because they have poor coaching and have had little stability in coaching. That is more important than them being in the ACC. When Spaz goes, they will have a chance to turn things around with a good hire. If they bring in GROB, it will get worse. If they bring in Petrino, it will get better until he leaves for greener pastures (BC isn't a traditional Big time program, FYI).

And after all of your delusional drivel, UConn is still screwed. Again, why do you feel the need to try and convince us that UConn is anything more than a footnote of football mediocrity? No one cares, especially the Big Ten and ACC.

Go rot in the Sun Beast.

 

[PhatOrange]

20 Year run? Really? Well, considering 3 of them were under Mac, the rest were under the current UCONN coach. In the last 40 years, two SU coaches never had a winning season in that span, one had one winning season and one had 3/7. MAC turned things around (I was living in Syracuse in '87, was at the dome for the PSU game) and had some winning seasons and PP took SU to a level of consistency it hasn't otherwise achieved in a generation or two. When he left, it fall back down to where it was before.

Like I said, a darn near 20 year run. I’d say from about 1985 (cherry bowl) to 2004 (champs sport bowl)

I’m not really sure what you’re arguing here?

It only makes sense that 2 coaches did well, they coached for 24 or so of those 40 years. P while at Syracuse is the winningest coach in BE history.

Syracuse started trending down while under P's watch, that's why he was fired.

1956 / 7-2 - Cotton Bowl Classic (L 28-27 vs TCU) 8 - Ben Schwartzwalder
1957 / 5-3-1 - Ben Schwartzwalder
1958 /8-2 Orange Bowl (L 21-6 vs Oklahoma) 9 - Ben Schwartzwalder
1959 /11-0 ***Cotton Bowl Classic (W 23-14 vs Texas) 1 - Ben Schwartzwalder
1960 /7-2 - Ben Schwartzwalder
1961 /8-3 Liberty Bowl (W 15-14 vs Miami) 16 - Ben Schwartzwalder
1962 /5-5 - Ben Schwartzwalder
1963 /8-2 - Ben Schwartzwalder
1964 /7-4 - Sugar Bowl (L 13-10 vs Louisiana St) 12 29,510 Ben Schwartzwalder
1965 /7-3 - Ben Schwartzwalder
1966 /8-3 - Gator Bowl (L 18-12 vs Tennessee) 16 32,976 Ben Schwartzwalder
1967 /8-2 - Ben Schwartzwalder
1968 /6-4 - Ben Schwartzwalder
1969 /5-5 - Ben Schwartzwalder
1970 /6-4 0 - Schwartzwalder
1971 /5-5-1 - Ben Schwartzwalder
1972 /5-6 - Ben Schwartzwalder
1973 /2-9 - Ben Schwartzwalder
1974 /2-9 - Frank Malony
1975 /6-5 - Frank Malony
1976 /3-8 - Frank Malony
1977 /6-5 - Frank Malony
1978 /3-8 - Frank Malony
1979 / 7-5 - Independence Bowl (W 31-7 vs McNeese St) - Frank Malony
1980 / 5-6 -Frank Malony
1981 /4-6 - Dick MacPherson
1982 /2-9 - Dick MacPherson
1983 /6-5 - Dick MacPherson
1984 /6-5 - Dick MacPherson
1985 /7-5 - ***Cherry Bowl (L 35-18 vs Maryland) - Dick MacPherson
1986 /5-6 - Dick MacPherson
1987 /11-0-1 ***Sugar Bowl (T 16-16 vs Auburn) Dick MacPherson
1988 /10-2 ***Hall of Fame Bowl (W 23-10 vs Louisiana St) Dick MacPherson
1989 / 8-4 ***Peach Bowl (W 19-18 vs Georgia) - Dick MacPherson
1990 /7-4 ***Aloha Bowl (W 28-0 vs Arizona) Dick MacPherson
1991 /10-2 ***Hall of Fame Bowl (W 24-17 vs Ohio St) Paul Pasqualoni
1992 /10-2 0 ***Fiesta Bowl (W 26-22 vs Colorado) Paul Pasqualoni
1993 /6-4-1 - Paul Pasqualoni
1994 /7-4 - Paul Pasqualoni
1995 /9-3 *** Gator Bowl (W 41-0 vs Clemson) Paul Pasqualoni
1996 /9-3 *** Liberty Bowl (W 30-17 vs Houston) Paul Pasqualoni
1997 /9-4 *** Fiesta Bowl (L 35-18 vs Kansas St) Paul Pasqualoni
1998 /8-4 ***Orange Bowl (L 31-10 vs Florida) Paul Pasqualoni
1999 /7-5 ***Music City Bowl (W 20-13 vs Kentucky) - Paul Pasqualoni
2000 / 6-5 - Paul Pasqualoni
2001 /10-3 - ***Insight Bowl (W 26-3 vs. Kansas St) Paul Pasqualoni
2002 /4-8 - Paul Pasqualoni
2003 /6-6 - Paul Pasqualoni
2004 /6-6 ***Champs Sports Bowl (L 51-14 vs. Georgia Tech) - Paul Pasqualoni
2005 /1-10 - Greg Robinson
2006 /4-8 - Greg Robinson
2007 /2-10 - Greg Robinson
2008 /3-9 - Greg Robinson
2009 /4-8 - Doug Marrone
2010 /8-5 ***Pinstripe Bowl (W 36-34 vs. Kansas St) - Doug Marrone
2011 /5-7 — Doug Marrone

 

[Moontan]

if that is not a nose dive I don't know what the hell is.

Seems more like a gentle glide from here... reducing the number of wins one game per season. This landing pattern is consistent with a decline in the program.

A nosedive is more like two consecutive 2-, 3-, or 4- win reductions. This landing pattern would be consistent with a program crash.