Shout out to Cincinnati

[Triple B]

3 minutes ago, sloan1919 said:

Can you help @Triple Blearn that lesson? 

UCF isn't where they are because of their ocs. It's because they hit on 2 1/2 great coaching fits ....

[sloan1919]

21 minutes ago, Triple B said:

UCF isn't where they are because of their ocs. It's because they hit on 2 1/2 great coaching fits ....

The OCS is just a building and isn’t responsible for the state of the program. However, it is a symptom of a bigger problem. When I, as a parent of a potential recruit, am faced with two options: 1) School A that consistently invests in athletics and the numbers back it up or 2) School B that talks a huuugggeee game “we are already there” etc. but consistently underinvests in athletics and is not only way below the national median, but at the bottom of the AAC in terms of $$$s.

Which do you think I’m picking? 
 

Also, think about it from coaches perspective. They are the ones out there selling the program. Do you really think the other recruiting school aren’t bringing up our investment levels to the parents? 

Edited December 6, 2021 by sloan1919

[BullyPulpit]

35 minutes ago, Triple B said:

And that's all I'm saying. People trying to pin where we are right now on the lack of an ocs do not have a valid argument, IMO. Your other points make sense and I've never been against having one, just that it wasn't a necessity for success ...

I agree with you that the OCS, in and of itself, is not the reason that we are where we currently find ourselves. The lack of an OCS, IPF, and really any appreciable investment directly into football in the past decade are all indicative of the University either resting on its laurels or not prioritizing athletics in any meaningful way. 

[USFBULL_08]

1 hour ago, Triple B said:

 

So we were the outlier through 2010? You people crack me up .... outlier, funny stuff. Take all the programs with an ocs and split them into successful and unsuccessful and I'm confident you'll find the unsuccessful a higher percentage. An ocs will be awesome but lack of one is not responsible for where we are right now and is not critical to on the field success.

Yes.

Split teams without an ocs into successful and unsuccesful.

Success is a subjective thing for college football teams, so I can see why people might not think it matters.

[Orlando Bull]

Sometimes I just click on the last page of a thread when I miss the earlier parts to see where it is going, I figured this one would be about cincy/bama game...nope... somehow got to OCS.

 

But.. congrats Cincy. They bested us on several levels, but I still find it funny that they were the AAC team to break through and not anyone else.

[BullyPulpit]

34 minutes ago, Orlando Bull said:

Sometimes I just click on the last page of a thread when I miss the earlier parts to see where it is going, I figured this one would be about cincy/bama game...nope... somehow got to OCS.

 

But.. congrats Cincy. They bested us on several levels, but I still find it funny that they were the AAC team to break through and not anyone else.

All the remaining Big East teams broke through....Cincy got the ceiling while USF and UCONN took care of the floor! 

[Triple B]

2 hours ago, sloan1919 said:

The OCS is just a building and isn’t responsible for the state of the program. However, it is a symptom of a bigger problem. When I, as a parent of a potential recruit, am faced with two options: 1) School A that consistently invests in athletics and the numbers back it up or 2) School B that talks a huuugggeee game “we are already there” etc. but consistently underinvests in athletics and is not only way below the national median, but at the bottom of the AAC in terms of $$$s.

Which do you think I’m picking? 
 

Also, think about it from coaches perspective. They are the ones out there selling the program. Do you really think the other recruiting school aren’t bringing up our investment levels to the parents? 

Honestly, I can't answer any of that. No idea what parents would be asking about. If it was me, it would be coaches first, with education a very close second .....