Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Division IV
Page: 5 of 5
Casper71
General User
C71
Member Since: 12/1/2006
Post Count: 3,237
person
mail
Casper71
mail
Posted: 8/8/2014 2:21 PM
Guys, like a few of you I have been around this discussion for over 40 years.  The bottom line is:  In general the MAC and ALL the schools in the "Other 5" have been irrelevant for years.  If you look at the Top 20/25 over the last 40 years or so it is really amazing how many of the same schools show up just in a different order.  I know there have been some breakthroughs but they are really few and far between AND they don't last very long.  I am sure there has been no LITTLE guy in those Top 20s for 20 or more years but one could probably easily list 10 or more BIGG guys that have been.  It is just the NCAA football pecking order.  Just no way schools like ours can get enough 3-4-5 star recruits to battle with the BIGGS consistently. We do not have the resources or history.

Now if you are talking really competing with the Bottom 20-25 schools in the BIG5 that is a whole different issue.  Those schools are just lucky to be in with the BIGG boys so they get a share of the Big bucks but many of them don't really belong there either.
 
Ohio69
General User
O69
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 3,124
person
mail
Ohio69
mail
Posted: 8/8/2014 4:31 PM
Casper71 wrote:expand_more
Guys, like a few of you I have been around this discussion for over 40 years.  The bottom line is:  In general the MAC and ALL the schools in the "Other 5" have been irrelevant for years.  If you look at the Top 20/25 over the last 40 years or so it is really amazing how many of the same schools show up just in a different order.  I know there have been some breakthroughs but they are really few and far between AND they don't last very long.  I am sure there has been no LITTLE guy in those Top 20s for 20 or more years but one could probably easily list 10 or more BIGG guys that have been.  It is just the NCAA football pecking order.  Just no way schools like ours can get enough 3-4-5 star recruits to battle with the BIGGS consistently. We do not have the resources or history.

Now if you are talking really competing with the Bottom 20-25 schools in the BIG5 that is a whole different issue.  Those schools are just lucky to be in with the BIGG boys so they get a share of the Big bucks but many of them don't really belong there either.
 


Maybe.  But, this ain't just about football.  This includes all sports, many of which the other guy is not irrelevant at all.

Oh well.  The TV watching masses won't care.

Its over.  I'll still watch Ohio and my home state Uconn Huskies.  Other than that, I'm mainly a pro-sports guy now.  I won't be missed by them.  The Big 5 will get their billions regardless.
Last Edited: 8/8/2014 4:31:53 PM by Ohio69
colobobcat66
General User
C66
Member Since: 9/1/2006
Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO
Post Count: 4,744
person
mail
colobobcat66
mail
Posted: 8/8/2014 5:09 PM
Casper71 wrote:expand_more
Guys, like a few of you I have been around this discussion for over 40 years. The bottom line is: In general the MAC and ALL the schools in the "Other 5" have been irrelevant for years. If you look at the Top 20/25 over the last 40 years or so it is really amazing how many of the same schools show up just in a different order. I know there have been some breakthroughs but they are really few and far between AND they don't last very long. I am sure there has been no LITTLE guy in those Top 20s for 20 or more years but one could probably easily list 10 or more BIGG guys that have been. It is just the NCAA football pecking order. Just no way schools like ours can get enough 3-4-5 star recruits to battle with the BIGGS consistently. We do not have the resources or history.

Now if you are talking really competing with the Bottom 20-25 schools in the BIG5 that is a whole different issue. Those schools are just lucky to be in with the BIGG boys so they get a share of the Big bucks but many of them don't really belong there either.
The bottom 20-25 still have budgets twice ours , have attendance that is twice ours and athletic donations 10-20 times ours. Granted, there are some teams that are lousy in football in spite of their resources, but that's another story.
Brian Smith (No, not that one)
General User
BSNNTO
Member Since: 2/4/2005
Post Count: 3,057
person
mail
Brian Smith (No, not that one)
mail
Posted: 8/8/2014 10:32 PM
Ohio69 wrote:expand_more
There's two ways to look at this.  Take your pick.


Unfortunately, I think Bill Paxton is gonna be right.


Bill Paxton is always right.
bornacatfan
General User
Member Since: 8/3/2006
Post Count: 5,752
mail
bornacatfan
mail
Posted: 8/11/2014 9:01 AM
Jeff McKinney wrote:expand_more
Bartering is still used as a means of exchange in some parts of Siberia.
nad many parts of America....including SEO and Indiana.......not sure why Siberia is quoted here. http://www.tv.com/shows/barter-kings/
bornacatfan
General User
Member Since: 8/3/2006
Post Count: 5,752
mail
bornacatfan
mail
Posted: 8/11/2014 9:06 AM
Interesting take on the situation by Snyder

http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/story/kansas-st...

Vedder, I believe would fully endorse this view
Last Edited: 8/11/2014 11:32:01 AM by bornacatfan
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,802
person
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 8/11/2014 9:09 AM
bornacatfan wrote:expand_more
Interesting take on the situation by Snyder

http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/story/kansas-st...

Vedder, I believe would fully endorse this view

Bad link
OhioStunter
General User
Member Since: 2/18/2005
Location: Chicago
Post Count: 2,516
mail
OhioStunter
mail
Posted: 8/11/2014 1:17 PM
Delete Pending wrote:expand_more
There's two ways to look at this.  Take your pick.


Unfortunately, I think Bill Paxton is gonna be right.


Bill Paxton is always right.





 
Last Edited: 8/11/2014 1:18:26 PM by OhioStunter
Showing Messages: 101 - 108 of 108
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)