Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Scooch, post: 1183279, member: 628"]
Not sure we're talking about the same thing.  My point is that when people suggest "all" we need to do is replicate what we did in the 80s and 90s that I think it's a fools errand.  We took advantage of the ever-popular "market inefficiencies" back then (recruiting black QBs, recruiting under-the-radar kids in FL, converting player's positions to emphasize speed, focus on special teams, benefiting from Pitt/Temple/Rutgers being total jokes, etc).  We need to find those kind of under-utilized opportunities today.  Or we can try to be a "hardnosed" and win 7 games in a good year.

FWIW, I'd suggest that the reasons why some programs are typically "good" is because college athletics is a rigged game.  The system is built to make sure that the schools with legacies and big revenue-generating machines stay on top.  It's actually a much bigger surprise that a Michigan can go through the down cycle they're in now than to see a Baylor ascend, IMHO.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?