USF turned down a 2 for 1 with Texas.....

[Cubanbull]

Here are KSt's Conference ranked opponents each of their BIG years not including Big12 championship game and their final AP rankings

2003

Texas #12 loss

Nebraska #18 win

2002

Texas #6 loss

Colorado #20 loss

2000

Oklahoma #1 loss

Nebraska #8 win

Iowa St #25 win

1999

Nebraska #3 loss

Texas #21 win

1998

Texas #15 win

Nebraska #19 win

Missouri #21 win

1997

Nebraska #2 loss

Texas AM #20 win

1996

Nebraska #6 loss

Colorado #8 loss

So as you can see most year they faced TWO ranked conference opponents

[smazza]

HOW DOES USF'S TURN DOWN ANY GAMES WITH NATIONAL CHAMPS?

[smazza]

THIS OTHER STUFF ABOUT SCHEDULES OF KSU and fresno st is interesting but turning down texas is crazy

[Joe]

Cuban your shoring up my point that they were harmed for their schedule...They went 11-1 and 10-1 without making a BCS contest while 9-2 teams like Florida, Michigan and Tennessee received at large bids. While in 1998 & 1999 a 8-3; 9-4 Texas team was chosen over them for the Cotton Bowl (be it an Arkansas/Texas matchup in 1999).

For for it being a rebuttal to my 2 top 25 in the BE, the Big 12 has had more teams in that caliber and their year in an out ranking shows it. There are 6 different teams there. K-State was always ridden by the press for their lack of scheduling, Corso called them out a few times on Gameday, just as he did with Texas Tech this year.

You cannot look at that and tell me their scheduling did not hurt them. I am sorry, but 11-1/10-1 BCS Conference teams do not play in Dec 27/29th bowl games unless there is something against them.

[SRQ]

How 'bout we get to 11-1 and then worry about it?

[Triple B]

Yes, but they are easily a more recognized and touted program than we are. They have been in the top 25 at one point each of the last 6 years and have scored 1 and 1's with 4 top 25 schools. My point was their name is out there because they were willing to step up to the plate.

They've been 1-A for twenty five years longer than we have, of course they're more recognized and they were willing to step to the plate because they HAD to to get their name out there.  We are very fortunate that we are not in that position.

Being a BCS school doesn't give you instant name credibility. Baylor, Indiana, Wake Forest, and Kentucky can agree to that .

I never said just BEING a BCS school did give you instant name recognition but WINNING a BCS conference will ....

and we have that opportunity already.

Scheduling is key to noteriaty when your an unknown in college football. Unfortunatley college football is based on the nature of the press, not on the field.

Scheduling is key to notoriety when you're an unknown independent college football program or in a non-BCS conference .....

[Triple B]

HOW DOES USF'S TURN DOWN ANY GAMES WITH NATIONAL CHAMPS?

Just say "no".

[South_Florida_Flip]

THIS OTHER STUFF ABOUT SCHEDULES OF KSU and fresno st is interesting but turning down texas is crazy

Steve, Woolard's position on schedules is quite clear. If it's not 1 for 1 with a BCS team, then we are not interested. There is nothing wrong with the way we have scheduled teams since Woolard has taken over.

[Bullpride08]

Bein,

1st - I know college football MUCH better than you. I am not a newby, I was raised around it and I don't care what insides or how greatly connected to the program you are, your calling Syracuse a great is stupid. They were solid at best. McNabb's senior year they were 8-4...thats not a great season.

Syracuse has had some great players, however outside the 60's  and 4 or 5 years in the late 80s early 90s they have never been a threat for anything. They are a solid NCAA program and that is it. They went to the Bowl Coalition game (Fiesta) In 97 because of Miami's probation and an off year for Va. Tech (they went 7-5)...they were subsequently run into the ground by K-State. The same bodes for that 98 team who was absolutley embarrased by Florida in the Orange Bowl (Miami was still on probation)...Since then they have had ONE season with more than 7 wins....So no, they are not BCS caliber at this point...they went 1-10 last season....Further Great programs don't take 13 years off from going to bowl games 1966-1979, and yes I know they have won a national title, but so has Kentucky, Mississppi, and Maryland.

Quote me where I said Syracuse is a "non BCS" team?  I believe I said "caliber." 1-10 last year...Lost to TEMPLE twice in the last 5 years...that isn't BCS caliber. Will they rise again, possibly, but it will be a few years...For now they're signing deals to play 1 and 1 road games at Miami (OH) and Wyoming...Power House!

As for K-State, don't come running with facts that NEVER happened. K-State has NEVER played Nebraska in the Big 12 Title game... Name the BCS conference teams that have finished 11-1 and not gotten a BCS bid... K-State. Going 11-1 and NOT getting a BCS bid is a big deal, especially when your last game was a 3 point loss...Thats great that the Holiday Bowl pays similar, but 11-1 and playing in the Holiday or Alamo Bowl, that's great that they finished ranked high...but what did it get them, a date on ESPN playing 8-4 Purdue? a nice Holiday Bowl match up with 7-4 Washington? THAT IS NOT A GOOD WAY FOR A 11-1 TEAM TO FINISH A SEASON. SO don't feed me they accomplished a lot crap. DO you not remember the controversy their AD created when he called the BCS crap?!

I fail to see how K-State was taken seriously by people when they were a top 5 team playing non Top 25 teams in bowl games, but I'm sure you'll spin it someway to make it look like they benefited from going 11-0 until your conference title game and then not even being in your conference's top 2 bowl games.

You are ridiculous, and must be a youngster around 22, and do not possess the background or insight to have even a nominal clue about Syracuse.  You're knowledge goes back to Donovan McNabb, don't make me laugh.  Syracuse was kicking around first round draft picks before UF even knew about football.  Check out some statistics and stop deriving this ignorant world according to Joe in which you base all your posts.  I can't understand how you look at Syracuse, and derive your opinion by spout off about the past 2-3 years as if that's all Syracuse has to offer.  That's just ignorant talk.  

Fact Joe, as some already know, my knowledge of football isn't just by connection but by association.

The thing is you equate all college football, statistics, notoriety and importance, within the last 15-20 years.  You completely ignore any fact that football has been played for nearly a century in the nCAA, and other teams have dominated, possibly before you were born.  That doesn't diminish their importance just because you were to young to know.

As far as your KSU contention, you just contradict yourself.  How was a top 5 team not respected?  Uhh, hey  they were top 5 weren't they?  Someone had to respect them to give them that ranking.  Utah's 2005 undefeated cupcake season couldn't even crack as high as KSU did.  WIN JOE.  That's how you get respect.  OH and by stopping this no-sensical approach to debating.  

KSU is actually the worst example you can call up to prove your point because KSU's past 12 years has proven that all you need to do is schedule a cup cake OCC schedule and win your conference to go BCS, and crack the top 5.  That contradicts all the points your trying to make, think about it for a second.  

[Joe]

Bein,

Syracuse has had some great players, however outside the 60's  and 4 or 5 years in the late 80s early 90s they have never been a threat for anything. They are a solid NCAA program and that is it. They went to the Bowl Coalition game (Fiesta) In 97 because of Miami's probation and an off year for Va. Tech (they went 7-5)...they were subsequently run into the ground by K-State. The same bodes for that 98 team who was absolutley embarrased by Florida in the Orange Bowl (Miami was still on probation)...Since then they have had ONE season with more than 7 wins....So no, they are not BCS caliber at this point...they went 1-10 last season....Further Great programs don't take 13 years off from going to bowl games 1966-1979, and yes I know they have won a national title, but so has Kentucky, Mississppi, and Maryland.

Quote me where I said Syracuse is a "non BCS" team?  I believe I said "caliber." 1-10 last year...Lost to TEMPLE twice in the last 5 years...that isn't BCS caliber. Will they rise again, possibly, but it will be a few years...For now they're signing deals to play 1 and 1 road games at Miami (OH) and Wyoming...Power House!

I'm 25, and played some college and coached too. I come from a football family where my father, uncle, and grandfathers have all been high school coaches...

I have followed college football since I was a young kid and have played the game since then. Don't tell me I'm being ignorant because I'm not the reason I brought up McNabb is because YOU DID. Cuse had strong teams for a few years in the late 80s and early 90s. I was at the game in Syracuse when Florida played them and lost big (Parents are UF alum and travel to many games if they can)...so yes I know Syracuse and the fact that they were a powerful squad. I also said they are a SOLID program right now...however, that current program/squad is NOT BCS caliber. They have problems that extended from a rough departure of Pasqualoni and the AD basically firing him on air during the Champs Sports Bowl broadcast. Many alumni withdrew funding because of the way it was handled. What was once a strong recruiting area for them has been compromised by Rutgers and UConn's emergance and Boston College's ability to keep their head above the water. I didn't just use the past 2-3 years...read what I wrote. They didn't go to a bowl game for 13 years in the 60s-70s and have not been consistent since the mid to late 90s. Great programs don't do that unless they are put on probation, they will have dry years (see Penn State, USC) it happens, but in modern college football Syracuse has not dominated the way that the great programs have. SO don't call me ignorant and read everything I wrote, I was using it to show that the last 2-3 years they have not been a BCS caliber program.

The reason I equate noterity to the last 30 years isn't because I'm ignoring the past, its the fact that the game was MUCH different then. There were no scholarship limits, there was no institutionalized control, many players were being paid by boosters. How can you compare that to today's football? Those teams that did dominate enough from those eras are still around. Last I checked, Alabama, USC, ND, Penn State were at the top of teh rankings last year...Nebraska is on it's way back after having some of the greatest years a program has ever had in the 90s.

How was KSU not respected? They never finished with a top 5 ranking despite going 11 - 1 Twice and 11-2 once...

1997 - 11-1 - 8th ranked - Three 2 loss teams ahead of them (UF, UCLA, Tenn.)

1998 - 11-2 - Finished regular season undefeated lost to 11-2 Texas A&M in Big 12 title game, sent to Alamo Bowl as an 11-1 team (4th pick in teh Big 12 deals) to play 8-4 Purdue.

1999 - 11-1- 6TH Ranked - Two 2 loss teams in front of the (Wisconsin, Michigan) Lost BCS at large bids to 2 loss Michigan and Tennessee...

I don't see any disrepect there...I mean the same would have happened to Texas, LSU, or Wisconsin I'm sure...

It all stems from their weak schedule...they said it back then and the same people will say it now.