C-USA at 3-1 in bowl games
Posted: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:00 pmPage 1 of 2
Posted: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:00 pmPosted: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:42 pmAccording to the chart in the link, there are only 2 conferences ahead of CUSA, so I would think CUSA is third, not fourth.
Posted: Thu Jan 01, 2009 5:26 pmjust hope we can get one of the next two...against the strongest competition CUSA schools will face
Posted: Thu Jan 01, 2009 5:36 pmGo CUSA!
Posted: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:29 pmDiamondM75 wrote:According to the chart in the link, there are only 2 conferences ahead of CUSA, so I would think CUSA is third, not fourth.
it is constantly being updated.....but good point
Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:26 pmI said we would win 4 games and you laughed.
Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 12:26 pmC-USA finished 4-2, tied for 3rd. Not bad at all.
Also, the Big 10+1 and the MAC show their high levels of suck at 1-6 and 0-5, respectively.
Also, the Big 10+1 and the MAC show their high levels of suck at 1-6 and 0-5, respectively.
Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 12:29 pmuntitled wrote:C-USA finished 4-2, tied for 3rd. Not bad at all.
Also, the Big 10+1 and the MAC show their high levels of suck at 1-6 and 0-5, respectively.
The ECU game was the shoulda coulda woulda one that got away.
Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 1:12 pmsurprisingly good showing for c-usa. seems we definitely didnt get enough credit this year. big ten/mac a lot more awful than we thought
Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 1:56 pmNo it shows that CUSA teams don't play very strong opponents in Bowl Games. No CUSA team is among the Top 40 teams in the country. ECU might have had a shot I'll grant you if they hadn't lost a few key players. But I think the Tulsa Arkansas game was a real demonstration of the gulf between CUSA and the top programs much less mediocre programs in the country.
Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:17 pmStallion wrote:No it shows that CUSA teams don't play very strong opponents in Bowl Games. No CUSA team is among the Top 40 teams in the country. ECU might have had a shot I'll grant you if they hadn't lost a few key players. But I think the Tulsa Arkansas game was a real demonstration of the gulf between CUSA and the top programs much less mediocre programs in the country.
I think Rice and Tulsa were top 40 teams this year. The point though is very valid that we do have quantity but not qaulity in our bowl games. Would have loved to have seen Rice and Tulsa play better competition.
C-USA, WAC, MWC, and MAC should set aside the bickering and dreams of BCS inclusion and work to put their best teams in bowls against each other, much like Boise and TCU did. Good bowl, generated buzz and excitement. The C-USA champ should be playing the WAC or MWC champ, not the 7th place finisher in the SEC....booooring, even though ECU choked it this year.
Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:38 pmIn the Sagarin Ratings Tulsa was 42, Rice was 48 Houston was 52 and ECU was 54. That's a respectable showing for CUSA based on past performance. I think its stretching it to say that Rice and Tulsa were Top 40 teams. Losses by Rice to Vandy, Tulsa to Arkansas and ECU to Kentucky are examples. CUSA actually had one of its best years as far as Sagarin Conference ratings finally finishing ahead of the WAC, MAC and Sunbelt for one of the few times since the expansion. BTW Sagarin did a pretty good job of tracking the other polls.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt08.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbc08.htm
...and I will say CUSA is starting to show more strength in recruiting relatively to its poor recruiting in the past. But really I think there is no excuse for CUSA not to be better than the MAC, WAC or Sunbelt-that's a low bar. CUSA teams have bigger budgets, better coaches, better facilities, more tradition, better bowls, better TV contracts etc. To get some respect CUSA has a long way to go to compete with say the MWC and consider itself a strong conference.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt08.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbc08.htm
...and I will say CUSA is starting to show more strength in recruiting relatively to its poor recruiting in the past. But really I think there is no excuse for CUSA not to be better than the MAC, WAC or Sunbelt-that's a low bar. CUSA teams have bigger budgets, better coaches, better facilities, more tradition, better bowls, better TV contracts etc. To get some respect CUSA has a long way to go to compete with say the MWC and consider itself a strong conference.
Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:46 pmStallion wrote:No it shows that CUSA teams don't play very strong opponents in Bowl Games. No CUSA team is among the Top 40 teams in the country. ECU might have had a shot I'll grant you if they hadn't lost a few key players. But I think the Tulsa Arkansas game was a real demonstration of the gulf between CUSA and the top programs much less mediocre programs in the country.
yea u might be right
Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:50 pmThe coaches and sports writers disagree with you.
I am not saying they are right either, (there are certainly teams ranked behind them that I think would beat them easily,) but:
USA Today Poll-- Tulsa 27th, Rice 34th
AP Poll-- Tulsa 30th, Rice 35th
I am not saying they are right either, (there are certainly teams ranked behind them that I think would beat them easily,) but:
USA Today Poll-- Tulsa 27th, Rice 34th
AP Poll-- Tulsa 30th, Rice 35th
Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 3:21 pmYeah well -the game is played on the field and Rice and Tulsa would be lucky to win 1-2 games in conference with teams ranked No. 25-33 in Sagarin. Neither Tulsa or Rice came close to beating a team anywhere close to that competition and both lost to much worse teams
25. Wake Forest
26. West Virginia
27. Pittsburgh
28. Boston College
29. North Carolina
30 Clemson
31. Kansas
32. BYU
33. Michigan St.
25. Wake Forest
26. West Virginia
27. Pittsburgh
28. Boston College
29. North Carolina
30 Clemson
31. Kansas
32. BYU
33. Michigan St.