Yes, but which is the better school? UCF or ECU? Who has the hotter chicks? (feel free to back up your point with photographic evidence)

(12-02-2010 09:47 PM)Purplehook Wrote:  I am not going to do any homework but if you really want to know, then look up ECU's record against BCS teams, and look up the other candidates records versus BCS teams. Go back 5, 10, 20 years. I feel pretty good about track record compared to the other candidates.

Point 2; This major Market stuff is a bunch of bullsh!t. Let's look at some of the other candidates populations: Houston ranks at number 4, Memphis 17, Orlando 107. ECU beats them all in game attendance. Just because people are there doesn't mean they support your team. I bet we have more people drive from Raleigh North Carolina, 1.5 hours away (#58) to go to our home games than some of these other schools that actually live in the universties city.

Look at this latest poll: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/fp/flashP...lId=102878

I guess we have 0 support out of Greenville, NC

Yes, complain we don't have a big city airport for ease of travel. Then grow up.

I make it from Raleigh to Greenville for games in an hour and I am not breaking any speed records.

Also Raleigh/Durham/Chapel Hill has the largest population of ECU alumni of anywhere in the country.

(12-02-2010 07:14 PM)natibeast21 Wrote:  Understandable. I do see advantages to adding ECU. In your opinion what do you think ECU greatest potential is for football. I see UC's potential for the next 10 years a little above average program, but every 3-5 years fielding a team or two that is top 25 and in a bcs game. Just don't know how well ECU would compete since in their two best seasons they had 4 losses.

I have to assume you are like 22 or something...ECU's best season's are not the last two years, those are just CUSA championships. In 1991, ECU finished 11-1 (ranked #9) beating Pitt, South Carolina, NC State, Va Tech and losing on the road to Illinois...In the past twenty years ECU has gone to Bowls more then half the time and even finished 8-3 and didnt go to a Bowl one year. The schedule has always been hard. ECU is 8-6 in the last 14 against NC State....if that doesnt show that ECU would be competitive in the long run, I don't know what will do it for you.

Asking which school would be better is subjective. Everyone has an opinion, and each one is different. You have to try to project into the future. The crystal ball isn't always so clear...

IMO ECU is another VT waiting to happen. But my opinion counts for little...

The UCF-USF I-4 rivalry could end up becoming the 2nd most important rivalry in The BEast, behind the Backyard Brawl...

(12-02-2010 09:55 PM)Raleighwood Pirate Wrote:  Also Raleigh/Durham/Chapel Hill has the largest population of ECU alumni of anywhere in the country.

My brother and I drive from Raleigh to every game.

(12-02-2010 06:57 PM)NashvillePirate Wrote:  Now, I do not think the Big East will add East Carolina because they feel that they should concentrate on larger media markets. However, it is my personal belief that this is a losing strategy and the Big East will one day fall apart. I'm not psychic & my opinion means absolutely nothing, but I'm pretty comfortable that it could all happen this way.

Man, who would have thought that only East Carolina could save the Big East? I never thought of it that way!

(12-02-2010 09:17 PM)CatsClaw Wrote:  

(12-02-2010 08:12 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(12-02-2010 05:08 PM)natibeast21 Wrote:  

(12-02-2010 04:56 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  If you wanted no argument between fans of the 2 schools, you shouldn't have started a new thread to ask this question you asked of an individual in another thread. It looks to me like you're trying to provoke a fight in multiple threads...

Well i have good reasons I started this thread. 1) No one talks in the smack boards ,and also that question was directed to a certain individual who responded my post and he responded why UCF shouldn't be. 2) I have never seen a good reason to invite ECU. I'm sure there is a good reason and i wanted to know. 3) To me it seems UCF fans give reasons why they should be in while ECU fans are putting down UCF to not be in. I really am not trying to start a fight and I want ECU fans to respond to this why they should be in over other schools without putting those other schools down.

I'll bite.

Both ECU and UCF would be great additions to the BE. However ECU would be a better addition because we (1) have more fans, which equals more viewers, (2) we have a much richer football history, (3) we offer a truly "new market" that the BE is not getting much (if any real) exposure in, (4) there are more "non-fans of ECU" that will associate ECU football with "success" than they will with UCF; by this I mean we have more history with being a "giant killer" than UCF does (they've never killed a giant...we were their biggest win of the year). We have beaten numerous BCS schools, including NCSU, UNC, VPI, Cincinnati (whom we have a large advantage over in wins -I'm not diggin at ya, but it's the truth, WVU, Syracuse, South Carolina, Wake Forest, Duke, TCU (soon to be a BE BCS school; we own a 2-1 winning record against them...the last time we beat them they were ranked), Louisville, Pittsburgh, Texas Tech and Virginia to name a few. Look at the ESPN/SB poll...although the sample size is small, this proves my point. We are even getting most of the vote in Pennsylvania. (6) Our Olympic sports are just as good as their OS are across the board, maybe better (with the exception of basketball). (6) Finally, we "command" our market better than UCF does; this has to do with, once again, the fans.

There is no arrogance here...it''s just the facts. I could argue that we even have more potential than UCF because we do not have the same amount of football competition throughout our region as they do, plus if we have done this well until now and they have not, just think what we could do with BCS access.

I guess at the end of the day, the BE will have to decide between percieved potential vs. reality. It's like hiring an employee to work for you; any good business man will ALWAYS choose experience (by looking at the prospect's accomplishments and numbers as of late and over time) over a prospect who "may" bring something to the table.

At the end of the day, both ECU and UCF will be in BCS conferences...most likely with the current BE football schools.

We weren't in the BCS when you won those games and Cincinnati has a three game winning streak vs you so using past wins as an example in this case is ridiculous.

Think about what you just said and remember the history of the BCS.

No, it's not ridiculous to say that. We were beating South Carolina, Pittsburgh and NCSU, West Virginia, Syracuse and others before they were BCS as well. Remember that it's only been around since 1999.

If we beat you then on a level playing field then, it is very safe to say that we would beat you again on a level playing field now. I'm not saying that we would have won this year...but it would have been 50%/50%.

(12-02-2010 11:26 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(12-02-2010 09:17 PM)CatsClaw Wrote:  

(12-02-2010 08:12 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(12-02-2010 05:08 PM)natibeast21 Wrote:  

(12-02-2010 04:56 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  If you wanted no argument between fans of the 2 schools, you shouldn't have started a new thread to ask this question you asked of an individual in another thread. It looks to me like you're trying to provoke a fight in multiple threads...

Well i have good reasons I started this thread. 1) No one talks in the smack boards ,and also that question was directed to a certain individual who responded my post and he responded why UCF shouldn't be. 2) I have never seen a good reason to invite ECU. I'm sure there is a good reason and i wanted to know. 3) To me it seems UCF fans give reasons why they should be in while ECU fans are putting down UCF to not be in. I really am not trying to start a fight and I want ECU fans to respond to this why they should be in over other schools without putting those other schools down.

I'll bite.

Both ECU and UCF would be great additions to the BE. However ECU would be a better addition because we (1) have more fans, which equals more viewers, (2) we have a much richer football history, (3) we offer a truly "new market" that the BE is not getting much (if any real) exposure in, (4) there are more "non-fans of ECU" that will associate ECU football with "success" than they will with UCF; by this I mean we have more history with being a "giant killer" than UCF does (they've never killed a giant...we were their biggest win of the year). We have beaten numerous BCS schools, including NCSU, UNC, VPI, Cincinnati (whom we have a large advantage over in wins -I'm not diggin at ya, but it's the truth, WVU, Syracuse, South Carolina, Wake Forest, Duke, TCU (soon to be a BE BCS school; we own a 2-1 winning record against them...the last time we beat them they were ranked), Louisville, Pittsburgh, Texas Tech and Virginia to name a few. Look at the ESPN/SB poll...although the sample size is small, this proves my point. We are even getting most of the vote in Pennsylvania. (6) Our Olympic sports are just as good as their OS are across the board, maybe better (with the exception of basketball). (6) Finally, we "command" our market better than UCF does; this has to do with, once again, the fans.

There is no arrogance here...it''s just the facts. I could argue that we even have more potential than UCF because we do not have the same amount of football competition throughout our region as they do, plus if we have done this well until now and they have not, just think what we could do with BCS access.

I guess at the end of the day, the BE will have to decide between percieved potential vs. reality. It's like hiring an employee to work for you; any good business man will ALWAYS choose experience (by looking at the prospect's accomplishments and numbers as of late and over time) over a prospect who "may" bring something to the table.

At the end of the day, both ECU and UCF will be in BCS conferences...most likely with the current BE football schools.

We weren't in the BCS when you won those games and Cincinnati has a three game winning streak vs you so using past wins as an example in this case is ridiculous.

Think about what you just said and remember the history of the BCS.

No, it's not ridiculous to say that. We were beating South Carolina, Pittsburgh and NCSU, West Virginia, Syracuse and others before they were BCS as well. Remember that it's only been around since 1999.

If we beat you then on a level playing field then, it is very safe to say that we would beat you again on a level playing field now. I'm not saying that we would have won this year...but it would have been 50%/50%.

I agree that 50 percent of your team would compete well against a Big East team and 50 percent would not.

(12-02-2010 11:37 PM)Mission9 Wrote:  

(12-02-2010 11:26 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(12-02-2010 09:17 PM)CatsClaw Wrote:  

(12-02-2010 08:12 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(12-02-2010 05:08 PM)natibeast21 Wrote:  Well i have good reasons I started this thread. 1) No one talks in the smack boards ,and also that question was directed to a certain individual who responded my post and he responded why UCF shouldn't be. 2) I have never seen a good reason to invite ECU. I'm sure there is a good reason and i wanted to know. 3) To me it seems UCF fans give reasons why they should be in while ECU fans are putting down UCF to not be in. I really am not trying to start a fight and I want ECU fans to respond to this why they should be in over other schools without putting those other schools down.

I'll bite.

Both ECU and UCF would be great additions to the BE. However ECU would be a better addition because we (1) have more fans, which equals more viewers, (2) we have a much richer football history, (3) we offer a truly "new market" that the BE is not getting much (if any real) exposure in, (4) there are more "non-fans of ECU" that will associate ECU football with "success" than they will with UCF; by this I mean we have more history with being a "giant killer" than UCF does (they've never killed a giant...we were their biggest win of the year). We have beaten numerous BCS schools, including NCSU, UNC, VPI, Cincinnati (whom we have a large advantage over in wins -I'm not diggin at ya, but it's the truth, WVU, Syracuse, South Carolina, Wake Forest, Duke, TCU (soon to be a BE BCS school; we own a 2-1 winning record against them...the last time we beat them they were ranked), Louisville, Pittsburgh, Texas Tech and Virginia to name a few. Look at the ESPN/SB poll...although the sample size is small, this proves my point. We are even getting most of the vote in Pennsylvania. (6) Our Olympic sports are just as good as their OS are across the board, maybe better (with the exception of basketball). (6) Finally, we "command" our market better than UCF does; this has to do with, once again, the fans.

There is no arrogance here...it''s just the facts. I could argue that we even have more potential than UCF because we do not have the same amount of football competition throughout our region as they do, plus if we have done this well until now and they have not, just think what we could do with BCS access.

I guess at the end of the day, the BE will have to decide between percieved potential vs. reality. It's like hiring an employee to work for you; any good business man will ALWAYS choose experience (by looking at the prospect's accomplishments and numbers as of late and over time) over a prospect who "may" bring something to the table.

At the end of the day, both ECU and UCF will be in BCS conferences...most likely with the current BE football schools.

We weren't in the BCS when you won those games and Cincinnati has a three game winning streak vs you so using past wins as an example in this case is ridiculous.

Think about what you just said and remember the history of the BCS.

No, it's not ridiculous to say that. We were beating South Carolina, Pittsburgh and NCSU, West Virginia, Syracuse and others before they were BCS as well. Remember that it's only been around since 1999.

If we beat you then on a level playing field then, it is very safe to say that we would beat you again on a level playing field now. I'm not saying that we would have won this year...but it would have been 50%/50%.

I agree that 50 percent of your team would compete well against a Big East team and 50 percent would not.

Ahhh, you have got to love the folks who make a smart-alec response in a debate and then claim "Victory!" even though their response makes no sense whatsoever.

In response to your statement I will say that if your think that all of the BE teams would definitely win over us NOW, even with all of the injuries, then you are sadly mistaken. I know that USF, WVU and UCONN would win...I'm pretty certain of that. But Rutgers, Syracuse and Cinci? I am not so sure they would beat us consistently. Louisville would be a toss-up, even though they have been playing better as of late. Who knows with Pitt...they are good at times and really bad at times too.

BTW, what are the USF fans thinking of Skip? He's a good coach...and he will win a BE championship for ya'll.

(12-02-2010 11:17 PM)Mission9 Wrote:  

(12-02-2010 06:57 PM)NashvillePirate Wrote:  Now, I do not think the Big East will add East Carolina because they feel that they should concentrate on larger media markets. However, it is my personal belief that this is a losing strategy and the Big East will one day fall apart. I'm not psychic & my opinion means absolutely nothing, but I'm pretty comfortable that it could all happen this way.

Man, who would have thought that only East Carolina could save the Big East? I never thought of it that way!

I don't think that is exactly what he meant...

(12-02-2010 11:37 PM)Mission9 Wrote:  

(12-02-2010 11:26 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(12-02-2010 09:17 PM)CatsClaw Wrote:  

(12-02-2010 08:12 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(12-02-2010 05:08 PM)natibeast21 Wrote:  Well i have good reasons I started this thread. 1) No one talks in the smack boards ,and also that question was directed to a certain individual who responded my post and he responded why UCF shouldn't be. 2) I have never seen a good reason to invite ECU. I'm sure there is a good reason and i wanted to know. 3) To me it seems UCF fans give reasons why they should be in while ECU fans are putting down UCF to not be in. I really am not trying to start a fight and I want ECU fans to respond to this why they should be in over other schools without putting those other schools down.

I'll bite.

Both ECU and UCF would be great additions to the BE. However ECU would be a better addition because we (1) have more fans, which equals more viewers, (2) we have a much richer football history, (3) we offer a truly "new market" that the BE is not getting much (if any real) exposure in, (4) there are more "non-fans of ECU" that will associate ECU football with "success" than they will with UCF; by this I mean we have more history with being a "giant killer" than UCF does (they've never killed a giant...we were their biggest win of the year). We have beaten numerous BCS schools, including NCSU, UNC, VPI, Cincinnati (whom we have a large advantage over in wins -I'm not diggin at ya, but it's the truth, WVU, Syracuse, South Carolina, Wake Forest, Duke, TCU (soon to be a BE BCS school; we own a 2-1 winning record against them...the last time we beat them they were ranked), Louisville, Pittsburgh, Texas Tech and Virginia to name a few. Look at the ESPN/SB poll...although the sample size is small, this proves my point. We are even getting most of the vote in Pennsylvania. (6) Our Olympic sports are just as good as their OS are across the board, maybe better (with the exception of basketball). (6) Finally, we "command" our market better than UCF does; this has to do with, once again, the fans.

There is no arrogance here...it''s just the facts. I could argue that we even have more potential than UCF because we do not have the same amount of football competition throughout our region as they do, plus if we have done this well until now and they have not, just think what we could do with BCS access.

I guess at the end of the day, the BE will have to decide between percieved potential vs. reality. It's like hiring an employee to work for you; any good business man will ALWAYS choose experience (by looking at the prospect's accomplishments and numbers as of late and over time) over a prospect who "may" bring something to the table.

At the end of the day, both ECU and UCF will be in BCS conferences...most likely with the current BE football schools.

We weren't in the BCS when you won those games and Cincinnati has a three game winning streak vs you so using past wins as an example in this case is ridiculous.

Think about what you just said and remember the history of the BCS.

No, it's not ridiculous to say that. We were beating South Carolina, Pittsburgh and NCSU, West Virginia, Syracuse and others before they were BCS as well. Remember that it's only been around since 1999.

If we beat you then on a level playing field then, it is very safe to say that we would beat you again on a level playing field now. I'm not saying that we would have won this year...but it would have been 50%/50%.

I agree that 50 percent of your team would compete well against a Big East team and 50 percent would not.

And I agree 100% with this assessment....Not going to make any excuses for our defense this year. It is something we will get corrected and when we do we will be a very difficult opponent for most teams.

(12-03-2010 12:04 AM)Ned Low Wrote:  In response to your statement I will say that if your think that all of the BE teams would definitely win over us NOW, even with all of the injuries, then you are sadly mistaken. I know that USF, WVU and UCONN would win...I'm pretty certain of that. But Rutgers, Syracuse and Cinci? I am not so sure they would beat us consistently. Louisville would be a toss-up, even though they have been playing better as of late.

I'm not trying to throw needless stones, but I was glad to see ECU is not headed to St. Pete. The reason is I suspect that's where UofL is headed, and to be honest, I want a game.

ECU gave up 55 a game over their last 5. Considering that anyone and everyone was scoring on the Pirates and UofL has a top 20 scoring defense, I think the Cards would roll in this one.

As for a 3rd party opinion, Sagarin has ECU as at least a touchdown dog (or more) to WVU, Pitt, UofL, UConn, & USF. He favors UC and Syracuse by 5 over the Pirates. Only Rutgers would be an underdog to ECU.

(12-03-2010 02:05 AM)CollegeCard Wrote:  

(12-03-2010 12:04 AM)Ned Low Wrote:  In response to your statement I will say that if your think that all of the BE teams would definitely win over us NOW, even with all of the injuries, then you are sadly mistaken. I know that USF, WVU and UCONN would win...I'm pretty certain of that. But Rutgers, Syracuse and Cinci? I am not so sure they would beat us consistently. Louisville would be a toss-up, even though they have been playing better as of late.

I'm not trying to throw needless stones, but I was glad to see ECU is not headed to St. Pete. The reason is I suspect that's where UofL is headed, and to be honest, I want a game.

ECU gave up 55 a game over their last 5. Considering that anyone and everyone was scoring on the Pirates and UofL has a top 20 scoring defense, I think the Cards would roll in this one.

As for a 3rd party opinion, Sagarin has ECU as at least a touchdown dog (or more) to WVU, Pitt, UofL, UConn, & USF. He favors UC and Syracuse by 5 over the Pirates. Only Rutgers would be an underdog to ECU.

I would hope so this year.....We are a very young team that lost the most letter man of any team in the country last year. At last count from last years roster we lost over 30 players with a large number of them off of the defense. To me this actually shows improvement in the ECU program. We were able to still be a decent team and go to bowl game in a rebuilding year. In the past our rebuilding year would be a 3 or 4 win season.

And I assure you ECU would give Louisville a game this year...You guys would probably win but it would not be a cake walk.

Sorry but, stop giving false numbers on players lost. It's only one number 29..... 28 SRs and 1 JR. Lost 3 starting DL to injury this year. 30 or 30+ lost off last years team is just false.

As someone who is a graduate of UCF, I could certainly add fuel to the fire, but I would say that since UCF has joined the C-USA, ECU has proven to be a very fine football school that has been the Knights main opponent in winning Conference USA's Eastern Division. The Big East could do a lot worse than bring in ECU.

UCF Grad, alum, former player, etc... Sure, there are some things that ECU fans are fond of presenting as "indisputible facts" that I, and others, can certainly make a credible case against, BUT.....

ECU is an excellent football school, (baseball as well), with great, loyal fans, top-tier facilities, and an underrated market in which they reside.

For us, they are a great rival and I would love nothing more than for UCF to get the invite to join the B.E. and for ECU to get one, at least for FB, as well to allow us to continue what has been an excellent, growing rivalry.

(12-03-2010 08:01 AM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  Sorry but, stop giving false numbers on players lost. It's only one number 29..... 28 SRs and 1 JR. Lost 3 starting DL to injury this year. 30 or 30+ lost off last years team is just false.

Ummm....What about the players who quit or were dismissed. Brandon Jackson, D. Freeney, and our starting center. So by my count that puts us at 32. So you may want to do some research before you accuse me of giving false information.

(12-03-2010 11:24 AM)ECU-DMB Fanatic Wrote:  

(12-03-2010 08:01 AM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  Sorry but, stop giving false numbers on players lost. It's only one number 29..... 28 SRs and 1 JR. Lost 3 starting DL to injury this year. 30 or 30+ lost off last years team is just false.

Ummm....What about the players who quit or were dismissed. Brandon Jackson, D. Freeney, and our starting center. So by my count that puts us at 32. So you may want to do some research before you accuse me of giving false information.

Thats a very good point...you may refer to these as transitional losses, which may not have happened if the coaching staff remained in place. It was a triple whammy to the Defense this year to lose 9 starters, have transitional losses because of coaching and then have guys go down during the year. That isnt the case next year, where you bring back more experience, have a year in the system and add depth to the program. Considering we had more depth on offense and there should be less transitional losses, it bodes well for a 6th straight Bowl.

The loss of BJ and DF were not losses that hurt our team. IMO they were if anything big distractions for the rest of the team with their off the field issues. Plus, freeney wasn't dismissed until this fall after meet the pirates event. In any case the losses on offense had little if any affect on this year's results. That is I guess the main point I'm trying to get at and the mother ship says 29. I do realize that a few others were dismissed either this summer or late fall but, you could lump them in with this years losses more or less.

Freeney is gone because of off the field issues ie grades, Brandon Jackson was give one last chance by Ruff and then got any legal trouble again, Ruffin is going to put up with that so he was dismissed. The center maybe the only real trans. loss but, all 3 on the offensive side and didn't hurt, O-line has done a good job, RBs and WRs well the numbers we put up speak for them selves.