10 programs that should be better [Archive] - SoonerFans.com Message Boards

View Full Version : 10 programs that should be better

lukin254

9/7/2006, 11:37 PM

What are the top 5 football programs (throughout the country) that underachieve... They could/should be better due to location, size of school, proximity to recruiting base, whatever...

1. aTm (tons of money, tons of seats, lack of women)
2. UCLA (abundance of women, weather and money)
3. Arkansas (only team in state... SEC holds them back)
4. Virginia (tons of talent around, fun town, finally got a band)
5. Ohio State/Texas (successful, but not as much as they should be)

goingoneight

9/7/2006, 11:45 PM

aTm - fires good coaches becuase of consecutive losses to Bob Stoops and/or Mack Brown

UCLA - SC shadow, always will be.

Arkansas - BIG 12 would be better for Hogs, wouldn't hurt to get a better coach, BTW.

Virginia - V Tech and WVU are the only things keeping them on the DL for now...

tOSU - doing just fine for itt-bitty state of Ohio, IMHO

Texass - If you went by money, tradition, recruiting base and reputation, you would think they would win MNCs every other damn year, just doesn't happen, thank God.

Nice overlook though, lukin.

Octavian

9/7/2006, 11:55 PM

Syracuse - they've been down for awhile now...no need to be.

Virginia - how their football program isn't awesome is beyond me.

Cal - great recruiting hotbed, pretty soft conference...not much to show for it

Ole Miss - just seems they should be better

Notre Dame - the most storied/hyped program w/ it's own tv contract hasn't won a bowl game since 1993? C'mon

Readyfor8

9/7/2006, 11:59 PM

Washington is underachieving even though they have 1 MNC in the last 15-16 years. They should have a monopoly on the Pacific Northwest, but they have let Oregon and the tiny WSU/beavers, come up. Dont know if they will ever be back to where they were.

EDIT: Am I the only one that thought Washington should be a major rushing powerhouse? With all that rain and fog they get in the Northwest, you would think they could put together some power I that would dominate and turn thier home field advantage into a monster. Just a thought!!!

I always thought there should be a powerhouse in the Northeast, but there just isn't one. Syracuse made some noise but has never been traditional, and there are plenty of schools who could take there place. I guess people just don't play football up there.

Las Vegas should have a traditional team, IMO. And UNLV is one big traditional Headcoach away from the upper echelon. Big City, no NFL team in the state, no major sports in the area, and plenty of California Talent right across the border.

Althought I have to say I don't think there will ever be another traditional powerhouse in Div1A.

PDXsooner

9/8/2006, 12:30 AM

arizona state - you're telling me you can't recruit kids to tempe? arguably the hottest coeds in the US.

Doged

9/8/2006, 12:47 AM

1. Montana - They got something better to do than play football?
2. UCLA - Women are hotter than at USC but I guess the powder blue thing holds them back some.
3. Hawaii - Sure am glad a hundred or so of those 500 pound Samoans don't all decide to play for them at the same time.
4. Booger Pickins - Don't understand why they can't tackle.. the sheep never seem to get away.
5. MIT - It's all about the physics.

daddywarbucks

9/8/2006, 12:49 AM

Bama???? were have they been ,how long since their last hooray?

Readyfor8

9/8/2006, 12:50 AM

Octavian

9/8/2006, 12:51 AM

Las Vegas should have a traditional team, IMO. And UNLV is one big traditional Headcoach away from the upper echelon. Big City, no NFL team in the state, no major sports in the area, and plenty of California Talent right across the border.

completely agree.

Althought I have to say I don't think there will ever be another traditional powerhouse in Div1A.

In the early 80's, no one would've thought Miami would win 5 titles in less than 20 years (or the 3 added by the Noles and Gators).

It's tough but possible...UNLV's a good choice.

douxpaysan

9/8/2006, 12:56 AM

Survivor, I mean every season I try to watch it but it's just boring....you know what I mean? http://images.zap2it.com/20040209/richardhatch_blur_survivorallstars_240.jpg

Readyfor8

9/8/2006, 12:57 AM

completely agree.

In the early 80's, no one would've thought Miami would win 5 titles in less than 20 years (or the 3 added by the Noles and Gators).

It's tough but possible...UNLV's a good choice.

Yea Parity is a biatch, but I think football changes too much in the next 20 years to make it so that a coach can take a team to the next level. Playoffs are one thing that are going to make it tough, while it will make it so that a new team can win a couple of championships, you wont see any UCON's threaten the Kentucky's or Kansas' of this game. JMO

Octavian

9/8/2006, 12:59 AM

Bama???? were have they been ,how long since their last hooray?

'92

http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/8391/striprq7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

badger

9/8/2006, 01:01 AM

Florida, FSU and Miami have underachieved lately

AlabamaSooner

9/8/2006, 01:20 AM

'92

http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/8391/striprq7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Wow, never expected to see "The Strip" on an OU board. What a great play and a great game. Yes, 1992...Bama's overdue.

Penguin

9/8/2006, 02:01 AM

That was a great game. I swear that every time Miami was on offense all 11 Alabama players were within 3 yards of the line of scrimmage at the snap. What defensive speed.

How can you get a read on a defense when all 11 players are at the LOS?

Desert Sapper

9/8/2006, 02:19 AM

I think all the great defensive players that bama used to get are at UAB now. Part of that whole parity thing somebody else mentioned. Used to be Bama locked up everybody that was any good in the state and surrounding area. Same for Oklahoma. Coaches used to sign guys they knew would never play just to keep other coaches from signing them. Scholly limits remain the biggest limiter to creating a new dynasty.

PrideTrombone

9/8/2006, 06:29 AM

I'd say Missouri. You're the only major team in a state with KC and St. Louis to draw from, and all they have to show for it is Brad Smith and minor bowl games.

soonerinabilene

9/8/2006, 06:53 AM

'92

http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/8391/striprq7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

actually, if we are counting bama titles, one has to be more recent than that. auburn made their own title in '04, and bama played them that year and lost, but then got better, and since auburn didnt actually play in the mnc that year, lets see, carry the two, divided by four, YES... according to bama math, they should be awarded the '04 title.:pop:

BIG_IKE

9/8/2006, 07:18 AM

OklahomaTuba

9/8/2006, 08:20 AM

Didn't Bama have to give up that title?

lukin254

9/8/2006, 08:26 AM

In defense of some of these schools...
Especially the ones in Florida,Texas, Ohio and California. NCAA Division 1AA has changed quite a bit, there are so many more schools that are 1A now.
Those new 1A schools have a wider recruiting reach when they move up.

And the guy who mentioned the Montana Grizzlies? They won the NCAA 1AA Championship less than 10 years ago...

But just look at this

Florida
__________
Florida
Florida State
UCF
South Florida
Florida International
Miami
Florida Atlantic

plus some 1AA's

Ohio...

Ohio U
tOSU
Cincinatti
Akron
Miami of Ohio
Toledo
Dayton

California
__________
USC
Cal
UCLA
Stanford
Fresno St.
San Jose St.
San Diego St.

Texas
__________
Texas
A&M
Baylor
Rice
Houston
TCU
SMU
Texas Tech
UTEP
North Texas

Right... but in those states (other than Florida) there is 1 dominant program, plus an abundance of talent from which to choose... That is, USC typically gets "1st pick" of California talent, Texas has the ability to get first pick out of Texas (although OU takes probably 1/3-1/2 of "first pick" people from Texas)... Ohio State SHOULD be able to nab top pick talent from the state, even from Michigan/PSU/ND as they are the only major institution (no pun intended) in their state...

I don't know if the talent is there in the NE or NW portions of the United States to support a dominant program, although the state of Washington has been producing quite a bit of talent the last 10 years...

Don't know if I agree about the Vegas pick as a sleeping giant... I mean yeah, love the Vegas, but only in doses.

Both Arizona schools should probably be a lot better than they are. And as much as "parity" has come into play in college football, the "bigger" (as in 85% of BCS schools) schools hold a huge advantage with facilities and money, so they should be able to continue to nab all the recruits they need to be dominant... The key is for coaching staffs to properly evaluate talent (instead of just looking at Rivals ***** people), develop that talent, and put the talent in a position to succeed on the field... A coaching STAFF is the most important thing in college football these days, imo.

KaiserSooner

9/8/2006, 09:02 AM

I'd say Missouri. You're the only major team in a state with KC and St. Louis to draw from, and all they have to show for it is Brad Smith and minor bowl games.

If you want to go back that far, they had pretty good teams in the 60s and 70s. But I agree that they've chornically underachieved that past 25-30 yrs.

KaiserSooner

9/8/2006, 09:03 AM

Didn't Bama have to give up that title?

I don't think so. They did get hit with probation do to stuff that occurred during the 93 season. I think they had to forfeit 4 or 5 games from that season.

okienole3

9/8/2006, 10:37 AM

Virginia and Cal have to be held back by entrance requirements.

royalfan5

9/8/2006, 10:52 AM

Missouri really has to excuse for their long time mediocrity, they should be competing for the north title every year.

I've always thought Minnesota should be better than they are.

San Diego State is another program that should be able to thrive given their circumstances

Somebody in the state of North Carolina should step up, but apperantly Mack Brown is the only one who can have any sembalance of success there.

Rutgers in finally starting to put it together. There is too much talent in New Jersey for them not to compete if they can keep kids home. NU has pulled alot of talent out of New Jersey in the past, and I'm sure other schools have done so as well.

westcoast_sooner

9/8/2006, 11:02 AM

1. Texas - They are in the center of the state where a lot of our talent comes from, get all these 4 and 5 star recruits every single year and how many MNCs do they have?

2. Notre Dame - With the tradition these guys have (the program everyone either loves or hates) they should be near the top every year - at least that's the expectation, and until Weis came along it had been awhile.

3. Miami - I friggin despise Thug U, but they since they rose to prominence they have been able to recruit top players for a long time. Dunno - maybe their current coach.... FWIW, I enjoy seeing them lose.

4. Bama - They had a really bad mess down there, and haven't recovered. But I'd like to see them return to the Elite of D1 college football.

5. Nebraska - Everyone seems to think that this will be Callaslash's year in the North. I can't see that anyone else up there is going to be able to win the thing. I do hope that whoever plays them from our division kicks the **** out of them, though. Maybe he'll go soon and they can find a real football coach.

Hmm - looking back at this list, maybe it should be called 5 programs that should be better and that I can't stand....

PDXsooner

9/8/2006, 11:14 AM

Ohio...

Ohio U
tOSU
Cincinatti
Akron
Miami of Ohio
Toledo
Dayton

PLUS: bowling green & kent state