(02-04-2018 05:13 PM)AppinVA Wrote:  Ah, mother "Pimp My School" thread.

I’m not shocked by this.

Damn, there sure are a lot of sleeping giants.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

(02-04-2018 01:26 AM)hawghiggs Wrote:  Georgia state is the answer. To much talent surrounding them not to be. The AAC should offer a expansion invite.

LOL

Illinois
Excellent large school in a large population state that under-performs in every major sports. Some day they will get their act together.

(02-04-2018 08:01 AM)Mav Wrote:  - Houston
In a massive, football-crazed market surrounded with talent, and with enough distance from the UT machine to carve its own niche. The administration is throwing money at improving their facilities, and with A&M struggling, the window's open for them to cement their place as one of the best programs in Texas.
- UCF
MASSIVE student pop and alum base in a city nearly unrepresented by professional sports. This year was a glimmer, but other schools like Tulane have had undefeated seasons they haven't built upon. How they follow it up will be key.
- Arizona State
There's absolutely zero reason why they shouldn't be better. Money, location, local talent, and reputation, they should be up there with USC and Stanford competing for division and conference titles, but they can't put it together.

UNCC is in an oversaturated state. North Carolina didn't need another FBS program. I'd put their ceiling at 7-5.
Georgia State is too close to Georgia and in the same city as Georgia Tech. Atlanta's not really a great sports city to begin with anyway. I honestly think Georgia Southern has more long-term potential.
What does FAU have to offer that FIU doesn't, or for that matter, Miami? Again, they're in a suburb, but Miami's notoriously awful when it comes to supporting its local teams.

UCF is not sleeping; they just won the NC in FB.

The fact of the matter is with the exception of possibly a handful of AAC/MWC teams, the rest of the G5 is a day late and a dollar short (and the handful l I mentioned might be as well).

Some of the schools mentioned in this thread might possibly have a great season or two, but barring a divine intervention that would restructure college athletics, the dye is cast. There is just too much gap in money. If a Georgia State (for example) hires the next Nick Saban, it doesn't matter... he's gone in a flash to a P5 school. Same with assistants... P5 schools are paying their assistants coaches more than what head coaches are making at the SBC/CUSA/MAC level.

Not sleeping giants but these programs have seen better days before and have the tools to make a comeback:

UTEP
New Mexico
UNLV
Houston
New Mexico State
Tulsa
Colorado State
Utah State
Charlotte
Old Dominion
UAB
Western Kentucky

Those just too my head, I’m sure there’s more.

C-USA 3.0 has UTEP, UAB, WKU, ODU and Charlotte......there’s no excuse for being a one bid league with that group of schools followed by MTSU, La Tech and Marshall.

How about the University of Texas at Austin? Flagship university of a very high population state, large enrollment, great academics, top research profile, huge endowment, lots of wealthy benefactors, sweet TV deal, member of a P5 conference, but major sports there ain't what they used to be. Let's face it, in spite of the condescension and air of entitlement in Austin, they've sucked. Kind of like a gorgeous cheerleader with terminal halitosis. Really bad. But if they could get their act together, they might amount to something -- a big IF.

Texas has enjoyed a long history of screwing and repelling its conference mates, many of whom have already fled to greener pastures. The remaining few are looking at options. As things stand now, whoever's paying for the LHN Network is getting screwed.

(02-05-2018 09:47 AM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  Illinois
Excellent large school in a large population state that under-performs in every major sports. Some day they will get their act together.

They made the national title game in basketball relatively recently. Football has pretty much never been great and it's tough to be good when you have to deal with Wisconsin, Ohio State, Michigan, Penn. State and Michigan State.

(02-05-2018 11:06 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 09:47 AM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  Illinois
Excellent large school in a large population state that under-performs in every major sports. Some day they will get their act together.

They made the national title game in basketball relatively recently. Football has pretty much never been great and it's tough to be good when you have to deal with Wisconsin, Ohio State, Michigan, Penn. State and Michigan State.

With the exception of good runs, like Purdue this year and last in basketball, the "Illiana-4" (LOL) are near the bottom of the barrel for the conference. Rutgers is down there, too. Maryland and Nebraska aren't too much higher. The conference is tiered by perception: top (Michigan, Michigan St, Ohio St, Penn St, Wisconsin), middle (Iowa, Minnesota, Maryland, Nebraska), and bottom (Illinois, Northwestern, Indiana, Purdue, Rutgers). This isn't to say a school can't have a good run for a few years, but they can't run by name alone - see Nebraska football and Indiana basketball. Northwestern may be the only the school the bottom tier that could actually be in the middle.

(02-05-2018 11:31 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 11:06 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 09:47 AM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  Illinois
Excellent large school in a large population state that under-performs in every major sports. Some day they will get their act together.

They made the national title game in basketball relatively recently. Football has pretty much never been great and it's tough to be good when you have to deal with Wisconsin, Ohio State, Michigan, Penn. State and Michigan State.

With the exception of good runs, like Purdue this year and last in basketball, the "Illiana-4" (LOL) are near the bottom of the barrel for the conference. Rutgers is down there, too. Maryland and Nebraska aren't too much higher. The conference is tiered by perception: top (Michigan, Michigan St, Ohio St, Penn St, Wisconsin), middle (Iowa, Minnesota, Maryland, Nebraska), and bottom (Illinois, Northwestern, Indiana, Purdue, Rutgers). This isn't to say a school can't have a good run for a few years, but they can't run by name alone - see Nebraska football and Indiana basketball. Northwestern may be the only the school the bottom tier that could actually be in the middle.

I also believe there are no 'sleeping giants' in the G5. Sleeping giants are the programs who have all of the needed pieces but fail to put them together. The P5 schools who underachieve in spite of all of their advantages. Illinois and Cal are the most obvious to me.

(02-05-2018 11:06 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 09:47 AM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  Illinois
Excellent large school in a large population state that under-performs in every major sports. Some day they will get their act together.

They made the national title game in basketball relatively recently. Football has pretty much never been great and it's tough to be good when you have to deal with Wisconsin, Ohio State, Michigan, Penn. State and Michigan State.

Note that Illinois actually made it to the Rose Bowl (2007 season) more recently than the national title game in basketball (2005), so it's not as if though the Illini are foreclosed from football success. The problem with the football program for the last 20 years is the complete lack of consistency: it has very long bad periods and then all of the sudden they come out of nowhere to win the Big Ten... and then promptly perform terribly the next season again. My hope is that Lovie Smith can eventually turn this around, but it's excruciatingly brutal to watch in person. Fortunately, the Illini are in the Big Ten West division that's a little bit more forgiving than the East (with Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State and Michigan State).

I think Illini basketball is in a very unusual trough (where they've never had a 4-year stretch as bad as the current one) and it will bounce back - the recruiting class coming in next season is great and Brad Underwood is respected as a coach. There's a more reasonable expectation and history of consistency for Illinois in basketball compared to football.

By the way, I'd put UCLA on the list of sleeping giant football programs. (It's still on the elite list of basketball programs, even if it's not the power that it used to be.) With its resources, location and facilities, it baffles me that UCLA is consistently so far behind USC year-in and year-out. On paper, there shouldn't be a gap at all.

(02-05-2018 01:00 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  By the way, I'd put UCLA on the list of sleeping giant football programs. (It's still on the elite list of basketball programs, even if it's not the power that it used to be.) With its resources, location and facilities, it baffles me that UCLA is consistently so far behind USC year-in and year-out. On paper, there shouldn't be a gap at all.

As a former UCLA fan, I always wondered the same thing. I’d put Arizona State in that category as well.

I'm going to exclude Charlotte due to bias

-Liberty. Their financial resources are near limitless. They also have the chance to develop a nationwide appeal, and are already drawing well despite being in the Big South.

-UTSA. Fertile recruiting grounds, large city with no NFL competition in football crazed state, nice stadium (if not on campus), and decent fan support already.

Re Illinois, it was my understanding that their facilities regularly fall in the bottom half of the B1G and have for awhile.

A school that is spending millions more than anyone else but is wasting the money isn't really taking advantage of higher resources.

If you spend money on things like G5 home and homes that everyone else gets for free.....the money makes no incremental difference on how you rise.

Money only matters if you are spending it to get what your competitors cannot get.

(02-04-2018 06:08 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(02-04-2018 05:42 PM)Mav Wrote:  

(02-04-2018 02:11 PM)bullet Wrote:  There are no sleeping giants in football. Other than the Florida schools, the teams at the top are the same teams you would see in the late 60s and early 70s.

Basketball where you only use 7-8 players is different.

Yeah, I mean, TCU, Oregon, and Wisconsin were so competitive back then, and Nebraska, Tennessee, and Colorado are doing so well. We might as well pack it in and accept Alabama running the sport until they try to outlaw football again.
Bad post. There's still room to rise and fall.

Yep, lots of examples. Add in Virginia Tech, Miami(FL), Louisville, etc. On the flip side schools like Pitt, Syracuse, Purdue and Minnesota were once powerhouses.

Fortunes change all the time

Add in Louisiana. The Ragin Cajuns are currently 20-3 in basketball, Top 20 in baseball and softball (both voted the best atmospheres in the country), football went to 5 bowls in last 7 years (won 4 straight but down last 2 years, so just hired OC from AZ State as new HC in football), recently spent ~ $50M on facilities (Athletic Performance Center, Cajun Dome renovations, Indoor Practice Facility upgrade, new Baseball Stadium, upgraded Softball facility, end zone football stadium expansion to 43,000 (full football stadium upgrade - increase seating from 43,000 to 50,000, suites, new press box, administrative offices to come shortly), new AD from Missouri, and at long last a commitment from the President to move athletics to another level. Keep an eye on UL.

(02-05-2018 03:51 PM)HoustonCajun Wrote:  

(02-04-2018 06:08 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(02-04-2018 05:42 PM)Mav Wrote:  

(02-04-2018 02:11 PM)bullet Wrote:  There are no sleeping giants in football. Other than the Florida schools, the teams at the top are the same teams you would see in the late 60s and early 70s.

Basketball where you only use 7-8 players is different.

Yeah, I mean, TCU, Oregon, and Wisconsin were so competitive back then, and Nebraska, Tennessee, and Colorado are doing so well. We might as well pack it in and accept Alabama running the sport until they try to outlaw football again.
Bad post. There's still room to rise and fall.

Yep, lots of examples. Add in Virginia Tech, Miami(FL), Louisville, etc. On the flip side schools like Pitt, Syracuse, Purdue and Minnesota were once powerhouses.

Fortunes change all the time

Add in Louisiana. The Ragin Cajuns are currently 20-3 in basketball, Top 20 in baseball and softball (both voted the best atmospheres in the country), football went to 5 bowls in last 7 years (won 4 straight but down last 2 years, so just hired OC from AZ State as new HC in football), recently spent ~ $50M on facilities (Athletic Performance Center, Cajun Dome renovations, Indoor Practice Facility upgrade, new Baseball Stadium, upgraded Softball facility, end zone football stadium expansion to 43,000 (full football stadium upgrade - increase seating from 43,000 to 50,000, suites, new press box, administrative offices to come shortly), new AD from Missouri, and at long last a commitment from the President to move athletics to another level. Keep an eye on UL.

I would say that the most likely three programs from the Belt to make waves are App, Ark State, and ULL. Each of these programs has built up a program over a decade or so and have a base of support to take advantage of a strong run in sports, IF one develops.

Programs rarely go from 0 to prominent. It takes decades.

(02-05-2018 01:09 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 01:00 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  By the way, I'd put UCLA on the list of sleeping giant football programs. (It's still on the elite list of basketball programs, even if it's not the power that it used to be.) With its resources, location and facilities, it baffles me that UCLA is consistently so far behind USC year-in and year-out. On paper, there shouldn't be a gap at all.

As a former UCLA fan, I always wondered the same thing. I’d put Arizona State in that category as well.

I'm not understanding how you can be a former UCLA fan. It's not like a sports team that moved away.