+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: ACCbbs (/forum-381.html)
+---- Forum: ACC Conference Talk (/forum-351.html)
+---- Thread: Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse (/thread-756341.html)
Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - XLance - 11-05-2015 08:28 AM
It's because we have to put up with faculty conspiracies designed to eliminate intercollegiate athletics at Carolina.
http://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2015/11/letter-ncaa-is-exploiting-and-hurting-students
I hope you will scroll down in the comment section to read the reaction of Maryland's Len Elmore.
RE: Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - jaminandjachin - 11-05-2015 08:51 AM
This is a contributing factor but it's not the only reason. Pay wise, we won't compete with the elite programs. We can pay 5-6 million if we wanted to, but we won't. We have issues with the dilution of talent across a ton of FBS programs in a state of this size. NC State, Duke, ECU, Wake, App St.--all fighting for similar talent. What would it be like if NC was like Ohio and it was just us (like Ohio St.), and then some other smaller programs not in a major conference? We just need the right coach who's in it for the long haul.
RE: Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - georgia_tech_swagger - 11-05-2015 09:41 AM
UNC has long been one of the biggest incubators disconnected-from-reality ivory tower self-righteous hyper-progressivism.
Tenure keeps this issue from being fixable in your lifetime.
RE: Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - uofl05 - 11-05-2015 10:01 AM
(11-05-2015 08:51 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote: This is a contributing factor but it's not the only reason. Pay wise, we won't compete with the elite programs. We can pay 5-6 million if we wanted to, but we won't. We have issues with the dilution of talent across a ton of FBS programs in a state of this size. NC State, Duke, ECU, Wake, App St.--all fighting for similar talent. What would it be like if NC was like Ohio and it was just us (like Ohio St.), and then some other smaller programs not in a major conference? We just need the right coach who's in it for the long haul.
Makes no sense to me, and times have changed. UNC needs to re-evaluate their stance on going all in for football. They have long been a sleeping giant IMO and there is no reason they can't be really good at both sports.
RE: Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - vandiver49 - 11-05-2015 10:07 AM
(11-05-2015 09:41 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: UNC has long been one of the biggest incubators disconnected-from-reality ivory tower self-righteous hyper-progressivism.
Tenure keeps this issue from being fixable in your lifetime.
That hasn't stopped Standford, Cal and other liberal cathedrals from fielding a competitive football team.
RE: Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - jaminandjachin - 11-05-2015 10:11 AM
(11-05-2015 10:01 AM)uofl05 Wrote:(11-05-2015 08:51 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote: This is a contributing factor but it's not the only reason. Pay wise, we won't compete with the elite programs. We can pay 5-6 million if we wanted to, but we won't. We have issues with the dilution of talent across a ton of FBS programs in a state of this size. NC State, Duke, ECU, Wake, App St.--all fighting for similar talent. What would it be like if NC was like Ohio and it was just us (like Ohio St.), and then some other smaller programs not in a major conference? We just need the right coach who's in it for the long haul.
Makes no sense to me, and times have changed. UNC needs to re-evaluate their stance on going all in for football. They have long been a sleeping giant IMO and there is no reason they can't be really good at both sports.
We have been good at both sports at the same time so we know it can be done.
We've tried the all in football thing with Butch Davis and it bit us in the rear. Now everyone is super sensitive.
RE: Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - nole - 11-05-2015 10:12 AM
Stanford, Michigan, Texas, Florida....just a few high end academic schools who are big time in college football.
The ACC academic high end schools all play the UNC method of basically.... just kinda trying.
As I have said over and over....the ACC is setup where schools either can't or won't help carry the weight needed to make the revenue gap not so huge.
You HAVE to change revenue sharing to reward the schools willing to compete that allow the ACC to have the revenue it needs.
But the schools sitting on their butts play it both ways....they don't want to give up their share and they don't want to do the work.
It won't last.
RE: Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - Hokie Mark - 11-05-2015 10:41 AM
(11-05-2015 10:11 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:(11-05-2015 10:01 AM)uofl05 Wrote:(11-05-2015 08:51 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote: This is a contributing factor but it's not the only reason. Pay wise, we won't compete with the elite programs. We can pay 5-6 million if we wanted to, but we won't. We have issues with the dilution of talent across a ton of FBS programs in a state of this size. NC State, Duke, ECU, Wake, App St.--all fighting for similar talent. What would it be like if NC was like Ohio and it was just us (like Ohio St.), and then some other smaller programs not in a major conference? We just need the right coach who's in it for the long haul.
Makes no sense to me, and times have changed. UNC needs to re-evaluate their stance on going all in for football. They have long been a sleeping giant IMO and there is no reason they can't be really good at both sports.
We have been good at both sports at the same time so we know it can be done.
We've tried the all in football thing with Butch Davis and it bit us in the rear. Now everyone is super sensitive.
Better example: the Mack Brown/Dean Smith years.
RE: Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - jaminandjachin - 11-05-2015 10:50 AM
(11-05-2015 10:41 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:(11-05-2015 10:11 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:(11-05-2015 10:01 AM)uofl05 Wrote:(11-05-2015 08:51 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote: This is a contributing factor but it's not the only reason. Pay wise, we won't compete with the elite programs. We can pay 5-6 million if we wanted to, but we won't. We have issues with the dilution of talent across a ton of FBS programs in a state of this size. NC State, Duke, ECU, Wake, App St.--all fighting for similar talent. What would it be like if NC was like Ohio and it was just us (like Ohio St.), and then some other smaller programs not in a major conference? We just need the right coach who's in it for the long haul.
Makes no sense to me, and times have changed. UNC needs to re-evaluate their stance on going all in for football. They have long been a sleeping giant IMO and there is no reason they can't be really good at both sports.
We have been good at both sports at the same time so we know it can be done.
We've tried the all in football thing with Butch Davis and it bit us in the rear. Now everyone is super sensitive.
Better example: the Mack Brown/Dean Smith years.
Mack Brown wasn't an all-in football move. We hired him from Tulane. And Mack didn't get us to elite until his last 2 years. Now Butch came in with the whole "I built one of the best teams in college football history at Miami" rhetoric. He had the name recognition and respect. We all thought we were headed into greener pastures. Didn't quite work out.
RE: Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - Marge Schott - 11-05-2015 10:53 AM
(11-05-2015 10:12 AM)nole Wrote: Stanford, Michigan, Texas, Florida....just a few high end academic schools who are big time in college football.
Texas and Florida are good schools, for sure. But they aren't on Stanford or Michigan's level.
RE: Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - nole - 11-05-2015 11:02 AM
(11-05-2015 10:53 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:(11-05-2015 10:12 AM)nole Wrote: Stanford, Michigan, Texas, Florida....just a few high end academic schools who are big time in college football.
Texas and Florida are good schools, for sure. But they aren't on Stanford or Michigan's level.
No doubt...wasn't making that case.
But they are 'high end academic schools' EASILY in the respectable zone of the academic world.
The argument that academics prevents 'us' from competing in football is shot IMHO.
RE: Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - Marge Schott - 11-05-2015 11:02 AM
"Carolina"? What are we talking about here, South Carolina?
RE: Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - georgia_tech_swagger - 11-05-2015 11:55 AM
(11-05-2015 10:07 AM)vandiver49 Wrote: That hasn't stopped Standford, Cal and other liberal cathedrals from fielding a competitive football team.
Cal hasn't had a good football team in a LONG LONG time.
Stanford recruits nationally -- more so than any other team in the entire country. Also, it took a legend (Harbaugh) to get Stanford out of the toilet.
RE: Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - mj4life - 11-05-2015 02:53 PM
(11-05-2015 10:50 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:Mack was UNC going all in. It's not about throwing a ton of money at a big name coach. You hire a good coach, you give him the resources to compete & it's really that simple.(11-05-2015 10:41 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:(11-05-2015 10:11 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:(11-05-2015 10:01 AM)uofl05 Wrote:(11-05-2015 08:51 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote: This is a contributing factor but it's not the only reason. Pay wise, we won't compete with the elite programs. We can pay 5-6 million if we wanted to, but we won't. We have issues with the dilution of talent across a ton of FBS programs in a state of this size. NC State, Duke, ECU, Wake, App St.--all fighting for similar talent. What would it be like if NC was like Ohio and it was just us (like Ohio St.), and then some other smaller programs not in a major conference? We just need the right coach who's in it for the long haul.
Makes no sense to me, and times have changed. UNC needs to re-evaluate their stance on going all in for football. They have long been a sleeping giant IMO and there is no reason they can't be really good at both sports.
We have been good at both sports at the same time so we know it can be done.
We've tried the all in football thing with Butch Davis and it bit us in the rear. Now everyone is super sensitive.
Better example: the Mack Brown/Dean Smith years.
Mack Brown wasn't an all-in football move. We hired him from Tulane. And Mack didn't get us to elite until his last 2 years. Now Butch came in with the whole "I built one of the best teams in college football history at Miami" rhetoric. He had the name recognition and respect. We all thought we were headed into greener pastures. Didn't quite work out.
RE: Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - jaminandjachin - 11-05-2015 03:14 PM
(11-05-2015 02:53 PM)mj4life Wrote:(11-05-2015 10:50 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:Mack was UNC going all in. It's not about throwing a ton of money at a big name coach. You hire a good coach, you give him the resources to compete & it's really that simple.(11-05-2015 10:41 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:(11-05-2015 10:11 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:(11-05-2015 10:01 AM)uofl05 Wrote: Makes no sense to me, and times have changed. UNC needs to re-evaluate their stance on going all in for football. They have long been a sleeping giant IMO and there is no reason they can't be really good at both sports.
We have been good at both sports at the same time so we know it can be done.
We've tried the all in football thing with Butch Davis and it bit us in the rear. Now everyone is super sensitive.
Better example: the Mack Brown/Dean Smith years.
Mack Brown wasn't an all-in football move. We hired him from Tulane. And Mack didn't get us to elite until his last 2 years. Now Butch came in with the whole "I built one of the best teams in college football history at Miami" rhetoric. He had the name recognition and respect. We all thought we were headed into greener pastures. Didn't quite work out.
He did have the resources to compete. We finished in the top 10 his last 2 years then he went to Texas. We're not outbidding Texas.
RE: Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - mj4life - 11-05-2015 03:24 PM
(11-05-2015 03:14 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:I know that. If a Texas type program comes along then you can kiss the coach good bye but what you don't do is make a bad hire(Torbush) & replace him with a worst choice(Bunting) & allow him to stay with the mediocre results he produced.(11-05-2015 02:53 PM)mj4life Wrote:(11-05-2015 10:50 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:Mack was UNC going all in. It's not about throwing a ton of money at a big name coach. You hire a good coach, you give him the resources to compete & it's really that simple.(11-05-2015 10:41 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:(11-05-2015 10:11 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote: We have been good at both sports at the same time so we know it can be done.
We've tried the all in football thing with Butch Davis and it bit us in the rear. Now everyone is super sensitive.
Better example: the Mack Brown/Dean Smith years.
Mack Brown wasn't an all-in football move. We hired him from Tulane. And Mack didn't get us to elite until his last 2 years. Now Butch came in with the whole "I built one of the best teams in college football history at Miami" rhetoric. He had the name recognition and respect. We all thought we were headed into greener pastures. Didn't quite work out.
He did have the resources to compete. We finished in the top 10 his last 2 years then he went to Texas. We're not outbidding Texas.
RE: Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - jaminandjachin - 11-05-2015 03:32 PM
(11-05-2015 03:24 PM)mj4life Wrote:(11-05-2015 03:14 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:I know that. If a Texas type program comes along then you can kiss the coach good bye but what you don't do is make a bad hire(Torbush) & replace him with a worst choice(Bunting) & allow him to stay with the mediocre results he produced.(11-05-2015 02:53 PM)mj4life Wrote:(11-05-2015 10:50 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:Mack was UNC going all in. It's not about throwing a ton of money at a big name coach. You hire a good coach, you give him the resources to compete & it's really that simple.(11-05-2015 10:41 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote: Better example: the Mack Brown/Dean Smith years.
Mack Brown wasn't an all-in football move. We hired him from Tulane. And Mack didn't get us to elite until his last 2 years. Now Butch came in with the whole "I built one of the best teams in college football history at Miami" rhetoric. He had the name recognition and respect. We all thought we were headed into greener pastures. Didn't quite work out.
He did have the resources to compete. We finished in the top 10 his last 2 years then he went to Texas. We're not outbidding Texas.
The players revolted and pressured the AD into hiring Torbush. Then the AD decided to hire someone with UNC ties (Bunting is an alum). That didn't quite work out either. People got sick and tired and we went and got Butch Davis. That was supposed to be the magic bullet.....nah.
RE: Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - lumberpack4 - 11-05-2015 08:48 PM
(11-05-2015 03:32 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:(11-05-2015 03:24 PM)mj4life Wrote:(11-05-2015 03:14 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:I know that. If a Texas type program comes along then you can kiss the coach good bye but what you don't do is make a bad hire(Torbush) & replace him with a worst choice(Bunting) & allow him to stay with the mediocre results he produced.(11-05-2015 02:53 PM)mj4life Wrote:(11-05-2015 10:50 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote: Carolina has had just one short period of major football sucess and that was in the 1940's. They had some minor success in the early 70's, early 80's and the late 90's.Mack was UNC going all in. It's not about throwing a ton of money at a big name coach. You hire a good coach, you give him the resources to compete & it's really that simple.
Mack Brown wasn't an all-in football move. We hired him from Tulane. And Mack didn't get us to elite until his last 2 years. Now Butch came in with the whole "I built one of the best teams in college football history at Miami" rhetoric. He had the name recognition and respect. We all thought we were headed into greener pastures. Didn't quite work out.
He did have the resources to compete. We finished in the top 10 his last 2 years then he went to Texas. We're not outbidding Texas.
The players revolted and pressured the AD into hiring Torbush. Then the AD decided to hire someone with UNC ties (Bunting is an alum). That didn't quite work out either. People got sick and tired and we went and got Butch Davis. That was supposed to be the magic bullet.....nah.
Carolina has had just one short period of major football success and that was in the 1940's. They had some minor success in the early 70's, early 80's and the late 90's.
While generally forgotten today, it was DUKE that dominated college sports in NC from the early 30's to the early 60's. The proximity of the Duke program to UNC and to NC State stunted both programs.
For Carolina to compete on the football field without gaming the academic side, UNC has to be able to recruit all the really smart kids who otherwise end up at UVa, Duke, or GT. The national reputation value of their degrees is greater than UNC's. Duke can load up with dozens of three start kids with high IQ's but can't hide a 4 star idiot. UNC is large enough to hide a number of idiots but not 30 or so.
Effectively UNC gets squeezed and the route using 3 star egg heads takes 4-5 years to pay off. UNC can't give that time. The 4 star moron route was a disaster of biblical proportions.
The last time UNC was really good under Mack Brown in the late 90's, he was getting most of the talent from the Tidewater of Va. VT then began to eat into that talent base.
There are 18 million people in Florida, but only 3 P-5 schools.
There are 10 million people in NC, but 4 P-5's move out just one state in all directions and you get the following:
NC with VA/SC/TN/GA - about 30 million people and 12 P-5's, plus two AAC schools.
Fla with Bama and GA - about 30 million people and just 7 P-5's and two AAC schools.
The State of NC can successfully support three P-5 programs at most - two public, one private. ECU is a big factor in NC.
What UNC faces is direct superior academic competition for eggheads from Duke and to a lesser degree UVa and GT. On the lower academic end they have competition from ECU, South Carolina. UNC can't compete for a football recruit with ND, Penn State, FSU, or Alabama. Now, once you slice and dice like that what are you left with - not an innate powerhouse. NC State is in nearly the same boat but with a STEM oriented curriculum, and all of this is before you take into account the internal competition between football and basketball.
Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - Pony94 - 11-05-2015 08:49 PM
Saw Mack in Dallas today wearing a Carolina blue sweater
RE: Why Carolina is not a football powerhouse - lumberpack4 - 11-05-2015 09:04 PM
This is how much Duke dominated for 30 years from the time the SEC and ACC schools split:
Conference Champ
33
35
36
38 Rose Bowl
39
41 Rose Bowl
43
44 Sugar Bowl
45
52
53
54 Orange Bowl
55
Orange Bowl In 58 (NC State Conference Champs)
60 Cotton Bowl
61
62
89
16 Titles in 30 years. 6 major bowls in 30 years.
Now look at UNC:
Conference Champ:
46 Sugar Bowl
49 Sugar Bowl
50 Cotton Bowl - MD Conference Champs
63
71
72
77
80
Here is NC State
Conference Champs
27
57 (Duke went to Orange Bowl)
63
64
65
68
73
79
Duke essentially smothered UNC and NC State for three decades until they demphasized football in 1962. By the time that the ACC recovers from the demphasis in the 1970's they are a decade behind the other major conferences and only Clemson and MD manage to recover their their pre 1962 status as major bowl players.