I like GOOOOLD (and green)

One bad season is meaningless, I would quit harping on that. They have won 4 of their last 5 conference championships or something. I don't know who that Flugar guy is or whoever, but I was at a conference in Dallas early this week and the names I heard were UC/UH/UConn/UCF with the big ? being whether two were getting in or 4. If 2, then its UC/UConn. But, it was just a collection of Dentists and their student organizations-what do they know about that stuff-except for being heavy donors?

That goes 2 ways: despite not being in a BCS conference they still managed signature wins against P5 teams and have been more successful lately at beating them. Besides, I think the one year AAC/Big east was a BCS conference was the year they won a BCS bowl, technically that means they have as well. Not to be rude but GOL was notorious for not running up scores, I think the score differential is a bit skewed because of that between the two schools. The academics are pretty close as well, and the endowment difference is real. That being said they've spent hundreds of millions of their dollar on infrastructure the past 5-10 years. Once they stop building, their endowment will become more of a focus I imagine. There is definitely an advantage there though! I don't know how much endowment really matters though..

Since I don't have a forum to put my opinion on... My beliefs: (four teams added) Cincy, EITHER BYU or UConn (E vs W skew), UCF, and EITHER USF or Memphis. I know many may not like the order of things, but its just an outsider's perspective. I believe like many here that UH isn't getting in, and they know already, hence why they are talking with PAC12. What I THINK should happen: double down on the southeast (plus Cincy); Cincy, ECU, USF, UCF. I know it won't happen of course, but I see merits when looking at it from a football perspective alone. edit: actually what I REALLY think should happen is ECU USF UCF and Tulane. But that would take a major leap of faith on the part of the B12.

In reality most teams would probably just fly in/out of Orlando then shuttle to Tampa, they have direct flights to those locations and are generally cheaper with more departure/arrival times than Tampa. Not sure how that fits into the USF narrative but from a practical standpoint that's probably more likely.

Not that you asked for my opinion or anything, but I always go to the beach when I visit my mom in Orlando. It's less than an hour drive. If it's nothing to me, a regular visitor, it's nothing for once a year/good season for a fans team/once in a lifetime trippers that would come for festivities. The beach angle isn't going to win you favors to outsiders though-not in a significant way at least. EVERYWHERE in FLA is close to the beach, that is all that matters to 98.5% of visitors. This is in no way a knock to the Tampa area, which I truly enjoy! Orlando is just more fun-even if you don't go to a theme park. Plus, it's growing so fast it's really hard to typecast as it's constantly changing. The same is true to a slightly lesser extent for Tampa, these are good things for expansion though! If Greenville NC was growing like Tampa or Orlando they would be near the top of any expansion list probably. Edit: Ionbull hit the nail on the head, USF should (probably already does) tout their proximity to Orlando attractions, it shouldn't be about which one is better than the other...it should be how close in proximity everything is to one another.

You're probably right, OU nearly got bumped out as it was.

I'm not trying to be contrarian, but you are putting too much stock in one season. I think if one of you two would be waiting, it would be UCF for USF still, and tbh there are probably a couple schools ahead of the two as well. Now, another season of similar results for both schools and I think you would have a much cleaner position.

I already explained in clear terms above, if you care for me to explain in your terms, you will need to provide something to compare it to. For example: Going back 10 years (to 2005), how does the number of years with a record over .500 compare between ECU and USF? To which I would answer: well, it would the same for each, 6. That's how the conversation should flow...not: 'oh, let me pick one arbitrary stat with no control or test subject to compare with and try to make hay from it while completely ignoring a well laid out rationale just a couple replies above'. It should be noted that USF's and Cincy's relative history in these meaningless 'discussions' are the only schools in the current AAC (save Navy-losses/sample size) that compares favorably to that of ECU's over a similar time, so focusing on USF really doesn't deviate from the original point that ECU is still consistently better than most of the current AAC schools. Also, just for good measure-having a record over .500 more often than not over 15 years like Dogma suggested is actually ahead of the curve, especially for a small time team.

I don't mean to come across as rude, but the lack of reading comprehension is apparent, which seems to happen with alarming frequency here: I said there were consistent results compared to teams CURRENTLY in the AAC. That means the history extends beyond the infancy of the AAC. Conference names aside, most of the same teams have been playing each other for over a decade now. But since you asked the question: the Pirates have been part of the AAC for two seasons, and in those two seasons despite a down year this year have more wins than everyone but Cincy, Memphis, Houston, and Temple in that time (remember multiple outcomes(seasons) -> trend). So even though that wasn't the basis of my statement, it still holds true...just further solidifies what I said. I know that's a bit of ownage, so I wanted to take a step back to emphasize that I am here to have intelligent conversation that is balanced...in the interest of being balanced I should note that USF and Navy are the TWO programs in the AAC that own the head to head against ECU. So, while what I have said over the past couple hours is completely true, I must acknowledge the job USF has done against the Pirates, in particular.

A single outcome does not quantify a trend by any measure; consistency is derived from trends. The previous statement makes complete sense, and the proper word was indeed used. Is this where someone who thinks they're being clever adds a classy 'your thinking isn't thinking the way it should be thinking' or 'maybe your thinking is the problem' meme?

Because that's just one season, Apis. This theory applies across the board, not just to the Pirates. For example, despite a good season USF has been consistently bad for the last half decade...UCF despite a bad season has been consistently good over the same amount of time. I understand that it behooves your psyche attm to have a short memory on these matters but consistency is the true measure of a program and that is what ECU is seeking. They are hoping to establish a 5-7 young/injury riddled campaign as the nadir. ECU is doing what they can to position themselves for growth, like everyone else in the American. Time will tell rather quickly whether this move pays off or not. Butch Davis would be a good pickup.

ECU has $ to spend on a coach, looking at a fresh face with recruiting prowess. ECU isn't a blueblood but they are a consistently better team than most that currently reside in the AAC.

I would say there was probably 38K there.

I'm not getting involved in this debate, I just wanted to say that after watching that game I don't think FIU is a bad team AT ALL. They looked very good on multiple fronts. I expect they will contend for CUSA this season. Focus on adjustments UCF, not kicking around USF.

OMG

FIU looks really good to be honest, they are fast and are making UCF look weak on both sides of the run.

What exactly is the argument here? Holtz has been successful at each of his stops except USF, including his current stint with LTech. There is really no debate to this. I don't understand the depths or nature of USF's sorrow dating back to the end of his tenure but I don't think he was the cause of it.

WV is nice, but Louisville is entirely overrated. They are the luckiest school in the NCAA, except for perhaps TCU/Baylor

I think he is down the middle, with a slight lean to homer. I largely feel his predictions are right on for ECU, though maybe inflated by one game. He has ECU beating both Cincy and Temple at home. I happen to think that Temple will be at least as good as last year, and Cincy is the favorite-but ECU matches up well and its at home...I still think they lose one of those two games. He had 7-5, I have 7-5, but with one fewer conference win and one more OOC win (VT). I don't know his breakdown for other teams, but looking at USF's schedule I don't see 1-7 in conference play. SMU is what I presume was the conference game he picked USF to win-I agree. I also think USF will beat UConn, but I do think UConn will be improved from last season so it isn't a sure win from my perspective-plus its in CT, which can be nasty weather-wise that time of year. I have Temple beating USF, unfortunately, but I would rate that as the next best chance conference win mainly bc it's in Tampa, Temple could really have a down year-that often comes with increased expectations...and they certainly have increased expectations. I think ECU and Temple will finish at the same level or Temple a game ahead, but since USF's coming here this year, I think ECU wins that game-our offense won't be that shabby despite being in a rebuild. I won't pretend to be in the know regarding USF's situation, but to me it seems that the key to USF's season is the Syracuse game. If they can capitalize on Syracuse's rebuild there is a solid chance you could win 3 games in a row. With momentum like that, who knows how far you can take it. If Syracuse's size and athleticism wins out, then I don't see much of a window to improve upon last years' record. Short story long, compared to his AAC outlook, I see 3 good teams, 1 below average team, and two bad teams out west....which is largely what he has, though he might overrate Tulsa by one game. In the east, I have two good teams, two decent teams, 1 below average team, and one bad team. I think he overrates ECU by a game and underrates Temple and USF by a game or two, and UConn by a game.

I have a serious question that seems kinda related to this topic, but could go in the recruiting thread, I guess: When these 'star' ratings are compiled, yahoo, 247, espn, etc...do they take into account only athletic metrics? Production in HS, abilities such as the 40 and benching, potential for physical maturation as examples. The reason why I ask is that I feel this may be the case, and that one can presume naturally that the higher number of starred athletes you bring in the higher % of them turn out successful/pro type players. But, these ratings may not take into consideration intangibles between the ears-not necessarily JUST static intelligence...but sense of accountability, team work, sacrifice, work ethic, and intelligence too of course-among others. You hear things about certain schools and how they're run that suggests they look for certain types of players, not necessarily the highest profile players. Now, I casually wrote that mindset off as compensation for not being able to attract the number of 4 and 5 star players many schools can attract. But, maybe there is something to this-teams like Boise, Navy, NIU, ECU, and other directional schools have been putting out quality teams (some more than others) and in some cases a good number of NFL players despite lower ceiling players supposedly. It can't all be chalked up to staff development, can it? These are college kids that have to balance education and being a kid a college with football growth. What do you guys think?

Hey now! I'm still feeling good about our season...it wasn't a runaway QB battle anyway.

SAD FACE! Time to see what Kemp can do...

Not sure what you meant by your statement that after you see my writing you can see why I am defending UCF.... With games @ FLA, Navy, and BYU and VT at home to consider, if we were still undefeated by the time USF comes then I think everyone here would be completely tired of my excitement. In reality I expect we will both probably be within one game of eachother in the loss column.

What am I doing wrong when trying to post links? I click the little link button, put in the URL, and press OK-right?

For some reason I am unable to post links. CBSsports.com released an interesting article that laid out all the CoA stipends for each school ordered by conference. The AAC stacks up pretty well, I must say. Half the conference is at or over $4000. It goes into some detail that I found informative.