Here is how I see the strength of the conferences going into the 2005 season. Read and comment below.

1) SEC
I am certainly not a SEC fan but it's difficult to argue the fact that this is best football conference in college football. Even bottom-feeder Vanderbilt would finish at least 8th or 7th in any other top four leagues listed here. At this point in time, the SEC is the best - hands down. One question though, how in the world does Auburn go 12-0 and get left out of the national title game last season? That was just plain wrong people.

2) ACC
You can make arguments for either the ACC or Big 12 right now but to me, the addition of V-Tech, Miami of Florida and BC makes this league tremendously deep. Teams like NC State, Virginia, Maryland and Clemson are rock solid but have a hard time cracking a top-4 ranking in this league.

3) Big 12
Oklahoma, Texas and Nebraska are traditional national powers and Texas Tech has become a team to be reckoned with recently. K-State and Iowa State have their moments. Baylor is just plain God-awful.

4) Big Ten
First off, I take points away from them since they cannot count to 11. Seriously, this is a very good league and some can make serious arguments that this league should be rated #3. OSU & Michigan are excellent programs and in certain years, Purdue & Wisconsin are top 15 teams. Penn State is terrible and so is Illinois right now. Minnesota and Michigan State are always "Jekyl & Hyde" teams - sometimes they look great, sometimes they look awful; and that is within the same game.

5) PAC 10
USC is the best team in the nation right now and has been for two straight seasons. The rest of the league is a hodge-podge of decent teams that can occasionally pull off a big upset. Oregon and Oregon State were doormat programs in the mid-1980s, now they are quite good. What happened to Arizona? For that matter, what the heck happened to Washington - this team was a national champion in 1991?

6) Mountain West
There is a huge drop between #4 and #5/#6. Adding TCU to the best non-BCS league is a major coup for this group. Utah carried the flag for all non-BCS teams last season and there are few easy games anywhere within this conference - a rarity for non-BCS leagues.

7) Big East
This league should thank their lucky stars that they are still BCS labeled - for now. Things may change in 2008. WVU is a very good team and program right now and Pitt has some decent talent. Lo'ville will likely come into this league and win the football championship in their first year. UConn is a program on the rise. What has happened to Syracuse? How in the world did South Florida ever get picked? They stink at football and basketball - what gives? I guess location is everything.

8) MAC
No league has improved more that the MAC over the past five seasons. There are some seriously good programs here, compared to either BCS or non-BCS leagues. BG, Toledo, Miami and NIU will once again make some top-25 rankings with the Falcons having the highest probability for a top-20 ranking. Even the bottom teams like EMU, Ball State & Buffalo will field some of their most talented teams in years - even though their win/loss record may not reflect it.

9) Conference USA
There is very little difference between the MAC & C-USA in terms of talent and play on the field. The new C-USA is very watered down going into 2005. UTEP, a perennial national bottom feeder just two years ago - looks to be the best in the league, with Memphis and SoMiss fielding really good teams. Losing TCU & Lo'ville is huge and even a 6-5 Cincy squad finished in a tie for #2 spot last season. Houston, ECU, UCF, Rice, SMU & Tulsa combined for a total of 15 wins in 2004 = an average of 2.5 wins each. Perhaps they can beat on each other now that they play in the same league?

10) WAC
With Lo'ville moving to the Big East and major graduation losses at Utah, Boise State is anointed the label "best non-BCS team in America." This is a rock solid team in any league. Fresno State is a top-20 team this season and Hawaii is very good especially at home. LaTech is quickly becoming a program without a home since they have no business being this league geographically. After that, there is a free-fall with the old Big West and PCAA schools getting back together in the newly reformed WAC - again.

11) Sun Belt
Let's get the record straight, the Sun Belt did go 3-1 against the MAC in 2004 with all three of those wins coming on the road and as underdogs to boot. Still, a league with FIU, FAU, La-Monroe and La-Lafayette is not very good. If conference kingpin North Texas played in the MAC East or West, they would finish in 3rd place in either division. Troy & MTSU have tremendous potential to become good non-BCS programs.

N/A) Independents
OK - so this is not a league, but Notre Dame does play a hellashish schedule every year and Navy is vastly improved. Army & Temple exist as IA teams with middle of the road I-AA talent.

================================================================

Finally, The Knight Time posted earlier about what MAC schools were approached by C-USA. Miami (O) and Toledo were each approached by representatives of C-USA a few years ago along with a consulting firm working on behalf of C-USA. They wanted to know the interest these schools would have in the new-to-be-formed league. Marshall had a lot to do with this since they wanted these two schools to jump ship with them. Miami immediately stated "no" to the consulting firm and Toledo did a feasibility study to see if it would be profitable to move, given the exit fee from the MAC, the entrance fee to C-USA and the incurred costs of all sports travel. It didn't take long for UT to say "no thanks" given the expenditures and that Cincy & Lo'ville were leaving.

Basically the consulting firm was doing the leg work so that once a formal "offer" was made to a school; they already knew in advance who would say yes. No one ever wants to be embarrassed in these things, especially after TCU pulled out of a contractual agreement with the GMAC Bowl two years ago so that they wouldn't get trounced by Ben Roethlisberger & Company. C-USA nearly lost that bowl on their stunt. Give C-USA credit though for maintaining five bowl bids - especially the Hawaii Bowl, a game they nearly lost to the Mountain West and may still soon.

If you want proof, there is an article with the Toledo AD in http://www.ToledoFreePress.com, dated 4/20/05 that explains this, as well as any verification from the Miami athletic department. In fact, reps from C-USA in Texas will tell you the same thing should you inquire.

Oh gawd here we go :rolleyes: Bring on the C-Doa necks

I would still rank the Big East 6th. West Virginia, Pittsburgh, and Louisville are top 25 calibur. As far a tv exposure, stadium size, and overall quality, I still think the Big East is ahead of the MWC. Louisville has a very strong program now.

No easy games in the Mountain West?

It was weak last year. Weak!

That league may surpass the Big East. But Utah aside, last year was a down year for that league.

OUBOBCATJOHN Wrote:I would still rank the Big East 6th. West Virginia, Pittsburgh, and Louisville are top 25 calibur. As far a tv exposure, stadium size, and overall quality, I still think the Big East is ahead of the MWC. Louisville has a very strong program now.

I wouldn't.

Last year's BE "champion" got absolutely steamrolled by the MWC champion- Utah.

WVU and Lousiville are the only real top 25 caliber teams I see. Pitt has a transitional program with a new coach, Syracuse is a total mess, and the rest of the league is comprised of teams that very easilly could be playing in the MAC or CUSA........and be beat.

I think after the top 5 it's very close with the MWC, BE, MAC, and CUSA.

I believe the Sun Belt jumped forward adding Troy, but took 2 BIG steps back by adding FAU and FIU.

I'll avoid discussing the merits of my own conference...that just gets people too riled up.

The MWC over the BE...seriously? Utah lost their coach and QB...TCU was pretty bad last year and, if you ignore the TCU homers, I haven't really heard much to indicate they'll be any better this year. Were there any other decent teams in the MWC last year...not really. I just don't see it. KT...Utah's team was good last year...but the conference as a whole wasn't that good...they just had an awesome Utah team.

I will add this about the ongoing CUSA/MAC internet mudslinging contest...you bash the bottom feeders of CUSA, but talk up the bottom feeders of the MAC.

The MAC has its share of bottom feaders in football;however, those bottom feaders made the post season in hoops(Ohio, UB, WMU, and Kent State) last season so they represent the MAC well. Akron, Ball State and CMU had players drafted by the NFL and Miami, Northern Illinois, Toledo, and BGSU made bowl trips last year. Even EMU has alum starting in the NBA playoffs. That shows that the 12 current MAC schools as a conference can put a strong product on the football field and on the basketball court.

In football, the MAC is getting stronger. The TV exposure for Akron with Charlie Frye as QB of the Browns will be a tremendous recruiting tool for Akron. Ohio with Solich will become a factor on the football field and BGSU, Toledo, NIU and Miami will be strong programs for years. The MAC has a championship game in an NFL stadium. That shows that we are going places.

Quote:hellashish

Umm "Hellacious" maybe?

Ranking conferences is an act in futility. Too many variables involved, SOS, # of home games, bottom feeders vs elitists, etc. Interesting to read, but are largely opinions in the eyes of the beholder.

For the record, can we please stop calling Kent State a bottom feeder in the MAC. For crying out loud, over the past 4-5 years, they are .500 in the conference. While not a championship contender, this is NOT the Kent State of the past. Yes, our attendance sucks, but it is not reflective of the status of the football program. Go ahead and bash away, but I really need to get this point in. :mad:

What about looking 5 years down the road?

I'm sure most of us would agree that SEC, ACC, Big 12, Big 10, and PAC 10 will still occupy, in some order, the top 5 positions.

What about the other six conferences, the "Six Hopefuls"? I think it's going to be a dog fight to claim supremacy.

MWC--I agree with some other posters that the MWC may be weaker than Vandelay thinks. They only had 3 teams with a better than .500 record last year. Colorado St. and BYU have slipped significantly. Looking ahead, I don't see how this conference can rise to the top of the "Six Hopefuls". By the way, I've read that the TV ratings for MWC are among the lowest--not sure why.

WAC--The WAC may always have two of the best teams. But I just don't see how they can do better than that.

Sun Belt--At least for the next few years, they will probably bring up the rear.

OK--That leaves the Big East, the MAC, and C-USA fighting it out for being at the top of the "Six Hopefuls". Right now, I would rank their chances in that order.

A few bottom feeders in these conferences will have little effect, so long as one of them can have 4-5 very good teams. The important thing for the MAC, I think, is that we have a legitimate chance to engage in this dog fight over the next 5 years. If, like Vandelay, we put BG, Miami, NIU, and Toledo (alphabetical order) at the top right now, their future looks good because of recent recruiting. And we might get at least one more very good team in the next few years. I agree with Chryst, that we need to get at least one more bowl game so that our best teams can showcase themselves.

I would agree with the top 5... I would reverse 6 n 7... the NBE has 3 pretty good programs at the top.. and they are bcs. I would also reverse #8 n 9 On the field i think they will be pretty equal.. both conf will have their regular bottom feeders.. USM, and Marshall are both Usually good as are UM of oh and BG. Niu , Memphis,UTEP and uab are on the upswing... I dont see many bottom feeders in the mac that have a whole lot of potential.... CUSA has some that could be pretty good in a couple of years...besides the imediate impact of wins n lossess u have to look at the business end of the deal...CUSA has bigger citys, more tv$$$$$ and probably more bowls... I think the MAC is ahead of the WAC and Southern

MrG Wrote:

Quote:hellashish

Umm "Hellacious" maybe?

I think he meant hashish.

99Tiger Wrote:I'll avoid discussing the merits of my own conference...that just gets people too riled up.

The MWC over the BE...seriously?  Utah lost their coach and QB...TCU was pretty bad last year and, if you ignore the TCU homers, I haven't really heard much to indicate they'll be any better this year.  Were there any other decent teams in the MWC last year...not really.  I just don't see it.  KT...Utah's team was good last year...but the conference as a whole wasn't that good...they just had an awesome Utah team.

I tend to defend the MWC, and I think CSU and BYU will rebound and make the conference more solid.

However, your point about TCU is well-taken. If Vandelay is going to call out Pac 10 history, how about some of this:

1997: 1-10-0
1992: 2-8-1
1993: 4-7-0
1996: 4-7-0
2001: 6-6-0
2004: 5-6-0

Meanwhile, records from 1990-2004:
12 Boise State 0.69369 77 34 0 111
25 Brigham Young 0.63298 118 68 2 188
27 Utah 0.62857 110 65 0 175
28 Air Force 0.62637 114 68 0 182
29 Colorado State 0.62088 113 69 0 182
32 Fresno State 0.61290 113 71 2 186
35 Louisville 0.60169 106 70 1 177
36 Southern Miss 0.59714 104 70 1 175
37 Bowling Green 0.59649 100 67 4 171
46 Texas Christian 0.56358 97 75 1 173

I don't know where the notion of 'coup' comes in for picking up TCU.

I would also flip #9 and #10. Fresno and Boise are better than anyone currently in the WAC. UTEP couldn't compete w/ those guys but does very well in CUSA? More to the point, w/ the WAC consolidating and bringing back in the natural rivalries, the conference will get stronger. It's going to be fun to watch w/ Chris Ault trying to get back what Boise St took from them, and Utah St, UNR, Idaho and Boise St makes for nice regional competition.
CUSA is now your coast-to-coast conference, w/ so many changes that most people won't even know if their alma maters are in or out.

Time to take off the Rick Chryst Party Goggles...... B)

The Big 5 conferences then:

6.Big East. This conference has 3 programs who've contended for National Championships in the recent past (West Virginia, Syracuse, Pitt) with the best non-BCS program (Louisville) joining its ranks. South Florida has the potential to be another NC contender 10 years down the road. UConn and Rutgers are becoming very solid, with UC the addition of at least an average non-BCS program at worst. This conference is in the best position out of anyone not in the big 5 or retaining/maintaining a BCS automatic.

7.MWC. A lot of very solid football schools here. The main difference between the MWC and Big East is the ability to contend for national championships. Big East schools have more local talent to work with while the MWC must scrape California and Texas for players. Definitely a better top to bottom league than CUSA or the WAC. Seven out of the nine schools in this conference can fill a 40,000 stadium with only UNLV, and Wyoming not on the BCS support level.

8.CUSA. Ten regular season ESPN games+Five bowl tie ins=A better conference than the WAC and MAC. Five schools in the league can fill a 40,000 seat stadium (UTEP, Memphis, East Carolina, Southern Miss, Marshall) and another in UCF with long term potential of doing so. Rice, Tulsa, and SMU really drag this conference down, otherwise it would be on par with the MWC. Most of the schools in this conference are in the position of being the only non-BCS school for miles while sitting on talent hotbeds that will keep schools like UAB and Tulane competitive every year.

9.WAC. Fresno State, Hawaii, and Boise are very much big time 40,000 seat filler programs. Boise only has 30k seats but is moving to 40k in a couple of years. All three are deserving of a BCS conference. The other 6 programs in this conference are weak mid-majors, which in turn keeps the Big 3 on top. Even has a slightly better TV deal than the MAC.

10.MAC. NIU has a strong mid major program in a state without traditional 1-A powers. Toledo has its niche in this league as a city school with a nice on campus facility. Miami has that Biff image which is attractive in signing Jocks. Akron had the MAC's best recruiting class and with the talent in NE Ohio is on its way to being a strong program with facility upgrades. The other 8 members of this conference to be honest aren't very notable. The only reason BG is winning is because Urban Meyer got the ball rolling there. Had Urban chose Central Michigan instead, they'd be the ones going to bowl games. Any school in this conference could contend for a MAC Championship for a decent number of years when the right coach is in town but then its right back down the ladder in a weak QB year with coaches moving on to better jobs. NIU, Toledo, and Miami excepted from the cycles because of their advantages. Nobody in this league can fill a 40,000 stadium deserving of the BCS.

11.SBC. Not far behind the MAC. Only 1 bowl game and 3 regular season ESPN games by the SBC.......sounds like where the MAC was 5 years ago. May still have problems with the attendance requirement because its unclear whether FAU and FIU can even make the PAID 15,000 rule. If they could get Western Kentucky to move up for Sun Belt football they could have a nice little 9 school mid major 1-A conference for themselves.

I guess it depends on what you are basing your rankings on. If you go by TV exposure, TV revenue, and bowl tie-ins you will have a different ranking then if you are just looking at the talent of the teams in the conference. Here are my rankings:

1. SEC
2. ACC
3. Big 12
4. PAC 10
5. BIG TEN
6. BIG EAST (Louisville and Pittsburgh is enough to keep them at the #6 spot)
7. MWC
8. MAC
9. C-USA
10. WAC (BSU and FSU are great, but that is not enough to offset the depth in the MAC and C-USA)
11. SUN BELT (North Texas and Troy are alright with FAU as a team in the future)

The MAC is last in talent, as its the worst rated conference in the recruiting rankings every year. CUSA always recruits better and normally wins more and better OCC games against the BCS. Even the SBC had better Sagarin's than the MAC last year....it reflects more overall talent.

Leave the goggles at home. B)

The MAC vs. C-USA arguments are an exercise in futility......besides, both conferences memberships change next year, which adds an extra dose of uncertainty. Personally, with the recent changes, I'd say the leagues in football are basically a toss-up if you're looking at them competitively. Does it really matter which one is better?

Kit-Cat Wrote:The MAC is last in talent, as its the worst rated conference in the recruiting rankings every year. CUSA always recruits better and normally wins more and better OCC games against the BCS. Even the SBC had better Sagarin's than the MAC last year....it reflects more overall talent.

Leave the goggles at home. B)

No goggles, just the facts. Toledo, BG, NIU, and Miami would have beat any SBC team last season. Sure, we have some bad teams that lost to SBC teams but the only good team that played a SBC team won.....NIU over Troy (#2 SBC team). The new C-USA teams don't have anyone that is better than Toledo, BG, NIU, and Miami and IMO the new C-USA teams don't have anyone that is as good as these teams either.

The WAC has Boise State and Fresno State that can play with the top four in the MAC and might even beat them more times than not......not really sure on that. But the fact is that there is no one else in the WAC that can.


So my way of ranking the teams based on talent is that there are more teams in the MAC that are good then there are in C-USA, WAC, and SBC. That has nothing to do with Chryst or MAC colored glasses.

And it is just my opinion, which anyone including you Kit-Cat can disagree with.

rocketfootball Wrote:And it is just my opinion, which anyone including you Kit-Cat can disagree with.

Why disagree with the truth?