That "Buzz" you feel is for REAL!

[Bullpride08]

Syracuse football has always been an up and down affair.  They haven't really had a good team since 2001. 

They have lost some key recruits in recent years. 

They have some tradition to turn to, but I think it will still be a while before they return to prominence.  A friend of mine was their starting QB for a year so I followed them for a bit. 

As much as their fans would like to think they are a perennial football powerhose and have been that way since day 1, they have always experienced periods of some pretty mediocre teams like they are going through now.

Nice school, Great lacrosse team, great basketball school, but throughout history, their football team goes up and down. 

They will be back at some point, but it may take a while.

84, I think the only thing that will take a while is finding the right coach.  Syracuse has all the trappings they just need a good coach, no one I know was ever sold on Robinson.  My in-laws are scattered in Syracuse and Rome, NY and not one was ever a big fan of the Robinson hire.  They had better options but Robinson had a pretty resume.  The stick of it is Robinson left as DC at Texas, yet Texas' defense IMPROVED once he left under the tutelage of Gene Chizik.  Robinson is not real charismatic, he's an average recruiter, and his offensive staff is average.  But Da Cuse has a strong, strong fan base, deep pocketed big name donors, huge name recognition, a national championship a heisman trophy winner, and lots of NFL clout.  It will just take a great coach.

Also keep in mind that in the spring Cuse lost their best RB in Delone Carter to a dislocated hip, and Brinkley also has a lingering injury that could force him out the first two months of the season.

[usfgrad84]

Syracuse football has always been an up and down affair.  They haven't really had a good team since 2001. 

They have lost some key recruits in recent years. 

They have some tradition to turn to, but I think it will still be a while before they return to prominence.  A friend of mine was their starting QB for a year so I followed them for a bit. 

As much as their fans would like to think they are a perennial football powerhose and have been that way since day 1, they have always experienced periods of some pretty mediocre teams like they are going through now.

Nice school, Great lacrosse team, great basketball school, but throughout history, their football team goes up and down. 

They will be back at some point, but it may take a while.

84, I think the only thing that will take a while is finding the right coach.  Syracuse has all the trappings they just need a good coach, no one I know was ever sold on Robinson.  My in-laws are scattered in Syracuse and Rome, NY and not one was ever a big fan of the Robinson hire.  They had better options but Robinson had a pretty resume.  The stick of it is Robinson left as DC at Texas, yet Texas' defense IMPROVED once he left under the tutelage of Gene Chizik.  Robinson is not real charismatic, he's an average recruiter, and his offensive staff is average.  But Da Cuse has a strong, strong fan base, deep pocketed big name donors, huge name recognition, a national championship a heisman trophy winner, and lots of NFL clout.  It will just take a great coach.

Also keep in mind that in the spring Cuse lost their best RB in Delone Carter to a dislocated hip, and Brinkley also has a lingering injury that could force him out the first two months of the season.

Oh, I agree.  The elements for them to be back are always there.  They have lots to offer.  However, I believe there is (and I guess there always is) a changing landscape in college football (especially in the BE) with teams like Rutgers making a big move (and all indications are they'll be a the top a while), UL gaining more national prominence, USF.  There are a bunch of other teams throughout the country.  My point here is there are now other options for top recruits that used to make the commitment to Syracuse.  It makes it more difficult to have a quicker turnaround.

I also get a little tired of hearing from some of the Syracuse on other boards how Syracuse was always a national powerhouse and how we have no right to be on the field with them. As I pointed out, they have had stretches of good teams and stretches of some pretty bad teams.  It's a different time now.  They need to get it through their heads that we are an up and coming team and to answer the initial prompt of this thread, they are a way off from being competitive with us on the football field for a while. 

[USF-PMR]

Syracuse football has always been an up and down affair.  They haven't really had a good team since 2001. 

They have lost some key recruits in recent years. 

They have some tradition to turn to, but I think it will still be a while before they return to prominence.  A friend of mine was their starting QB for a year so I followed them for a bit. 

As much as their fans would like to think they are a perennial football powerhose and have been that way since day 1, they have always experienced periods of some pretty mediocre teams like they are going through now.

Nice school, Great lacrosse team, great basketball school, but throughout history, their football team goes up and down. 

They will be back at some point, but it may take a while.

84, I think the only thing that will take a while is finding the right coach.  Syracuse has all the trappings they just need a good coach, no one I know was ever sold on Robinson.  My in-laws are scattered in Syracuse and Rome, NY and not one was ever a big fan of the Robinson hire.  They had better options but Robinson had a pretty resume.  The stick of it is Robinson left as DC at Texas, yet Texas' defense IMPROVED once he left under the tutelage of Gene Chizik.  Robinson is not real charismatic, he's an average recruiter, and his offensive staff is average.  But Da Cuse has a strong, strong fan base, deep pocketed big name donors, huge name recognition, a national championship a heisman trophy winner, and lots of NFL clout.  It will just take a great coach.

Also keep in mind that in the spring Cuse lost their best RB in Delone Carter to a dislocated hip, and Brinkley also has a lingering injury that could force him out the first two months of the season.

Oh, I agree.  The elements for them to be back are always there.  They have lots to offer.  However, I believe there is (and I guess there always is) a changing landscape in college football (especially in the BE) with teams like Rutgers making a big move (and all indications are they'll be a the top a while), UL gaining more national prominence, USF.  There are a bunch of other teams throughout the country.  My point here is there are now other options for top recruits that used to make the commitment to Syracuse.  It makes it more difficult to have a quicker turnaround.

I also get a little tired of hearing from some of the Syracuse on other boards how Syracuse was always a national powerhouse and how we have no right to be on the field with them. As I pointed out, they have had stretches of good teams and stretches of some pretty bad teams.  It's a different time now.  They need to get it through their heads that we are an up and coming team and to answer the initial prompt of this thread, they are a way off from being competitive with us on the football field for a while. 

You may agree but are not convienced that Syracuse is one of the great teams in the USA.  This is true; as it is for plenty of other teams nationwide. Some examples of great teams are:  UCLA, Notre Dame, Penn State, Florida, Nebraska, Ohio State, Miami, and so on...

Ultimately, beating Syracuse 2 x in as many years indicates that the BULLS are really that good!

[usfgrad84]

Like I said, the elements for them to return to being good are there.  However, historically they have been up and down.  They were average for most of the '50s until the Championship year.  Decent to average for most of the '60s.  pretty pathetic for most of the '70s.  Bad to average for most of the early '80s then good for a few years.  A strong team in the  early '90s, but average for the rest of the decade.  Pretty bad so far this decade.  Sorry, the other teams you mentioned (I wouldn't count UCLA football in that list) have down years, but are never down for continous, repeated extended periods of times.  I don't consider Syracuse a great football dynasty.  they have great trams then disappear for a while.  It's been that way for a long time.  They will be back.  Just when is a question mark at this point.

[USF-PMR]

Like I said, the elements for them to return to being good are there.  However, historically they have been up and down.  They were average for most of the '50s until the Championship year.  Decent to average for most of the '60s.  pretty pathetic for most of the '70s.  Bad to average for most of the early '80s then good for a few years.  A strong team in the  early '90s, but average for the rest of the decade.  Pretty bad so far this decade.  Sorry, the other teams you mentioned (I wouldn't count UCLA football in that list) have down years, but are never down for continous, repeated extended periods of times.  I don't consider Syracuse a great football dynasty.  they have great trams then disappear for a while.  It's been that way for a long time.  They will be back.  Just when is a question mark at this point.

Basis for my opinion: Tenure, Longevity, Exposure, Name Recognition, Star Power, Academic Power, and Overall Win/Loss percentage.  The Bulls, by the time Leavitt has 25 years under his belt, will resemble many of the qualities listed (except for Academic Power - albeit they are a Research I university).

[usfgrad84]

Like I said, the elements for them to return to being good are there.  However, historically they have been up and down.  They were average for most of the '50s until the Championship year.  Decent to average for most of the '60s.  pretty pathetic for most of the '70s.  Bad to average for most of the early '80s then good for a few years.  A strong team in the  early '90s, but average for the rest of the decade.  Pretty bad so far this decade.  Sorry, the other teams you mentioned (I wouldn't count UCLA football in that list) have down years, but are never down for continous, repeated extended periods of times.  I don't consider Syracuse a great football dynasty.  they have great trams then disappear for a while.  It's been that way for a long time.  They will be back.  Just when is a question mark at this point.

Basis for my opinion: Tenure, Longevity, Exposure, Name Recognition, Star Power, Academic Power, and Overall Win/Loss percentage.  The Bulls, by the time Leavitt has 25 years under his belt, will resemble many of the qualities listed (except for Academic Power - albeit they are a Research I university).

Interesting argument about greatness.

Question.  Based on your paramters of greatness, do you consider the University of Minnesota to be a a great football team?

[USF-PMR]

Like I said, the elements for them to return to being good are there.  However, historically they have been up and down.  They were average for most of the '50s until the Championship year.  Decent to average for most of the '60s.  pretty pathetic for most of the '70s.  Bad to average for most of the early '80s then good for a few years.  A strong team in the  early '90s, but average for the rest of the decade.  Pretty bad so far this decade.  Sorry, the other teams you mentioned (I wouldn't count UCLA football in that list) have down years, but are never down for continous, repeated extended periods of times.  I don't consider Syracuse a great football dynasty.  they have great trams then disappear for a while.  It's been that way for a long time.  They will be back.  Just when is a question mark at this point.

Basis for my opinion: Tenure, Longevity, Exposure, Name Recognition, Star Power, Academic Power, and Overall Win/Loss percentage.  The Bulls, by the time Leavitt has 25 years under his belt, will resemble many of the qualities listed (except for Academic Power - albeit they are a Research I university).

Interesting argument about greatness.

Question.  Based on your paramters of greatness, do you consider the University of Minnesota to be a a great football team?

Well actually no, not really.  The Golden Gophers are not too fierce.  The 1930's were during the depression and not too many kids made college "lucrative" was not the status quo!

[usfgrad84]

I guess my basis for greatness is a bit different then.  I look at greatness of a program not only in recent history, but longevity and all time with the baility to maintain that highest level consistently.  I would lump Minnesota in the same grouping as Syracuse in terms of greatness.  Maybe even a notch higher from the historical perspective.  In my opinion they are one the greatest programs in college football history. Both teams have fallen from prominence though.

Hard to ignore a team that has won 6 national championships and 17 Big 10 Championships. They have sent a lot of players to both the college Hall of Fame and the NFL hall of Fame. 

I don't really see how you can say Syracuse is great, but not Minnesota.  Actually Minnesota's last National Championship was the year after Syracuse won it for the only time.  Both team's winning percentages all time are fairly similar.  Also, using your standards, they are again probably similar with the edge again, perhaps going to Minnesota.

I find this to be a fun argument while things are slow getting ready for our season.  For a team to truly be considered GREAT, I want that team to be considered great for all time.  Historically having many National Championships.  Never down and out for extended periods of time,  Consistently holding up to the test of the greatest programs of all time.  USC, Notre Dame, Michigan, Ohio State, Alabama, Miami has been there now for 30 years consistently, PSU, Texas, Nebraska, Oklahoma. 

[USF-PMR]

I guess my basis for greatness is a bit different then.  I look at greatness of a program not only in recent history, but longevity and all time with the baility to maintain that highest level consistently.  I would lump Minnesota in the same grouping as Syracuse in terms of greatness.  Maybe even a notch higher from the historical perspective.  In my opinion they are one the greatest programs in college football history. Both teams have fallen from prominence though.

Hard to ignore a team that has won 6 national championships and 17 Big 10 Championships. They have sent a lot of players to both the college Hall of Fame and the NFL hall of Fame. 

I don't really see how you can say Syracuse is great, but not Minnesota.  Actually Minnesota's last National Championship was the year after Syracuse won it for the only time.  Both team's winning percentages all time are fairly similar.  Also, using your standards, they are again probably similar with the edge again, perhaps going to Minnesota.

I find this to be a fun argument while things are slow getting ready for our season.  For a team to truly be considered GREAT, I want that team to be considered great for all time.  Historically having many National Championships.  Never down and out for extended periods of time,  Consistently holding up to the test of the greatest programs of all time.  USC, Notre Dame, Michigan, Ohio State, Alabama, Miami has been there now for 30 years consistently, PSU, Texas, Nebraska, Oklahoma. 

Intriguing...I too embrace Longitudinal success within the definition of GREATNESS.  Minnesota is a fine school, playing football since the game was founded (early 1880's).  Both Syracuse and Minnesota resemble that quality.  Getting back to point; the Bulls will some day be on the 100+ year list of Greatness.

touchee' - However one of their greatest accomplishment is providing the 1980 USA Mens Hockey team with a head coach; Mr. Herb Brooks.