(05-25-2012 04:29 PM)PiKappWags Wrote:  Like i said in my original post - I'm trying very hard to be optimistic and only share these reservations with you folks here. I'll be doing all I can from the stands to help the Pirates win.

That graph is amazing.
It was time for Logan to go for several reasons but John Thompson was a complete disaster. Holtz probably couldn't have won but 7 games in 2010 had he stayed... but Ruff second year was a dissappointment. I expect big things in 2012. We need to make waves.

But since I started this thread - I'll return to my point. We could have scheduled UNCC, FIU, ODU, La Tech as an Independent. Am I the only one that thinks our brand and following is a huge selling point for the current CUSA in their media negotiations? Am I the only one that thinks we could have garnered a independent deal worth more money than our cut from CUSA? We're not Texas by any means but I'm just biased enough to think that we are at least worth as much alone as we are bundled with the other members in CUSA.

You'll likely not be able to convince me we couldn't have benefited more by rallying behind a temporary stint on independence. You definatley won't be able to convince me that we'd be worse off. But it doesn't really matter: I lack the resources to be a significant booster and I will always continue to support the program.

I'm not sure what going independent would like like right now. I am not 100% against it like most Pirates are, but I'm not sure it is a better situation than C-USA either.

Here's what I do know. There are 3 paths that I have seen work to get teams into a better conference. One path includes being in a huge market/having a huge endowment. That one doesn't fit us at all. The other 2 paths are independent and dominating a weak schedule.

The first major conference realignment took place around 1991-1992. Many Pirates look at the 2005 and 2013 with frustration and ask why not us? But it was the 91-92 realignment when we were inexplicably left behind.

Florida State: Independent to ACC (1991) - ECU was 0-7 vs FSU from 1980-1990
Virginia Tech: Independent to Big East (1991) - ECU was 4-2 vs VT from 1987-1992
Miami: Independent to Big East (1991) - ECU was 0-8 vs Miami from 1980-1989
Boston College: Independent to Big East (1991)
Rutgers: Independent to Big East (1991)
Syracuse: Independent to Big East (1991) - ECU was 1-2 vs Syracuse from 1988-1991
West Virginia: Indepent to Big East (1991) - ECU as 1-2 vs WVU from 1988-1995
Pittsburgh: Independent to Big East (1991) - ECU was 2-2 vs Pitt from 1984-1992
South Carolina: Independent to SEC (1992) - ECU was 4-4 vs USC from 1988-1996

These were all independent schools that ECU was competing with at the time and ECU was left behind and not chosen by any of the 3 regional conferences (ACC, Big East, SEC). And this was in one of the best eras of ECU football when we were ranked in 1983, 1991, and 1995. As an independent we had a record of 116-106 playing some of the best teams on the East Coast. As a member of C-USA we have a record of 90-93. There is no doubt in my mind that our football program took a hit when we had our best season ever, finished #9 in the country and weren't even thought of as an addition to the ACC or Big East. We have had our successes since then against Miami, UNC, WVU, and VT but they have been mixed in with many losses. It is hard to play some of the worst teams in the nation and then transition into playing a top 15 team and hope to have regular success.

The other path that teams have been taking more recently is to dominate a weaker conference.

TCU did well to have a .667 wining percentage in C-USA for four years but then they elected to go to the MWC where they won 85.5% of their games. Then they get invited to the Big East and then the Big 12.

Boise State played in the pitiful WAC along with playing 1 decent OOC game a year where they won 87.7% of their games. The were then invited to the Big East, a conference who's footprint they were WAY outside of.

Meanwhile ECU has had all the recruiting benefits of playing in a watered down C-USA while maintaining a brutal OOC schedule. The result is even in our best years where we win C-USA back to back we end up with a record of 9-5 and outside of the polls. Granted if we win either of the liberty bowls we probably end up ranked.

I don't know whether going independent or scheduling down OOC is the better choice but either one of them probably gives us a better chance at moving on than playing in a conference with very good teams (USM, Tulsa) but so many crappy teams (UNNC, UTSA, Tulane, UAB, etc) that it gets us no respect. We essentially have a schedule of 5-6 very difficult games a year and 6-7 cupcakes. Enough good teams that a 10+ win season is unlikely but enough pushover teams that a 8 or 9 win season isn't looked at as anything that impressive.

We either needed to upgrade our schedule or downgrade it and dominate. As long as we are in C-USA our schedule has been downgraded, but is it enough to get those 10 win seasons that give us national attention? As long as we play 4 tough OOC games and USM every year, I doubt we do it with much consistency.

(05-24-2012 09:45 PM)TheEastisPurple Wrote:  Well we all know Memphis wasn't taken for football. Basketball is their marquee sport and fits right in with the BE. Our marquee sport was at a low at the time of both realignments and we don't have much in the way of basketball nor do we have an inflated market number to hang our hat on.

I'll be brutally honest here, I don't think it would've mattered what we did prior to this round of realignment or in 2003. MAYBE a 5 year Boise State like run would've forced the Big East to take us. Most likely we aren't going anywhere for a while, if ever. That's no fault of our own it's just the same as it's always been, the dominos would have to fall exactly right at the perfect time and that's never happened.

We're just in a bad spot for moving up no matter what the situation. SEC and ACC are a pipe dream. Big East isn't really a football promotion in my opinion. Big 12 could be a longshot because eventually they'll need a legitimate East division. SEC could be a long shot if NCSU declines and the SEC decides they MUST get into NC.

This will probably ruffle some feathers here but a lot of you are missing the academic issues involved with conferences. Texas Tech is the only #3 state public school that's currently in a BCS conference. Of course that's in Texas where the population is triple NC. All of the rest of the "Big 5" are private schools with top 100 academics, flagship universities or "state U (#2)" schools in their respective states. The Big East is the only conference that draws from the directional and city schools pool and you see how well respected the Big East is. Believe it or not this crap does matter to the college presidents, it's just that the Big East doesn't have a choice. Academia is one of the oldest, snobbish clubs in America.

Realistically the best conference for us would be some kind of post-Big East implosion (Catholics split) mash up of the best of CUSA + Navy, Umass, Temple, USF, UCF, Cincy and maybe Louisville.

No matter what, it is absolutely critical that we win, and win a lot starting in 2012. That's the only thing ECU can control at this point. That's the only thing we haven't been able to do consistently and it drives me nuts. We've got better facilities, better fan support, better atmosphere in football than every school in CUSA and we can't capitalize on it for some reason. 8 wins per season should be the standard all things considered. It's not like we're playing an SEC schedule.

(05-27-2012 05:13 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(05-24-2012 09:45 PM)TheEastisPurple Wrote:  Well we all know Memphis wasn't taken for football. Basketball is their marquee sport and fits right in with the BE. Our marquee sport was at a low at the time of both realignments and we don't have much in the way of basketball nor do we have an inflated market number to hang our hat on.

This will probably ruffle some feathers here but a lot of you are missing the academic issues involved with conferences. Texas Tech is the only #3 state public school that's currently in a BCS conference. Of course that's in Texas where the population is triple NC. All of the rest of the "Big 5" are private schools with top 100 academics, flagship universities or "state U (#2)" schools in their respective states.

There is no tier 3 anymore. There is Tier 1, Tier 2, and Unranked. In those categories ECU is Tier 1 ranked 194th by US News and World Report.

Every BCS school is still ranked ahead of us but there are schools that meet your criteria that are non AQ or FCS.

Colorado State
Delaware
Delaware State
Hawaii
Idaho
Maine
UMass
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Mexico State
North Dakota State
Rhode Island
South Dakota State
Vermont
Wyoming

Those are all land grant institutions that are not historically black colleges that are either non AQ or FCS.

Many of the "Big 6" conferences were founded before we existed or when we were in our infancy. I don't think it's so much that we aren't a flagship school as it is that we weren't there when they were formed and weren't a clear "best option" during expansion in 2005. In 1991 we were in the realm but fell short of teams like WVU, FSU, Miami. This time around the BE clearly wasn't even looking at FB success in most cases but even if they were our last 2 seasons didn't do much to distinguish ourselves.

(05-27-2012 05:50 PM)TheEastisPurple Wrote:  

(05-27-2012 05:13 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(05-24-2012 09:45 PM)TheEastisPurple Wrote:  Well we all know Memphis wasn't taken for football. Basketball is their marquee sport and fits right in with the BE. Our marquee sport was at a low at the time of both realignments and we don't have much in the way of basketball nor do we have an inflated market number to hang our hat on.

This will probably ruffle some feathers here but a lot of you are missing the academic issues involved with conferences. Texas Tech is the only #3 state public school that's currently in a BCS conference. Of course that's in Texas where the population is triple NC. All of the rest of the "Big 5" are private schools with top 100 academics, flagship universities or "state U (#2)" schools in their respective states.

There is no tier 3 anymore. There is Tier 1, Tier 2, and Unranked. In those categories ECU is Tier 1 ranked 194th by US News and World Report.

Every BCS school is still ranked ahead of us but there are schools that meet your criteria that are non AQ or FCS.

I totally understand what you're saying but it's not exactly what I meant. ECU is the #3 public school in NC academically. Academically it's, UNC, NCSU and then us and Charlotte tied for #3 with a 194 ranking. I didn't really mean Tier 1, 2 and 3. What I have in bold is the main point that I believe matters here. The Big 5 is a fairly exclusive group, whether we like it or not.

We've got our work cut out for us on the field and in the classroom. Our best chance of moving up is to vastly improve academics but even then it's tough when UNC controls the purse strings.

(05-27-2012 06:01 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(05-27-2012 05:50 PM)TheEastisPurple Wrote:  

(05-27-2012 05:13 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(05-24-2012 09:45 PM)TheEastisPurple Wrote:  Well we all know Memphis wasn't taken for football. Basketball is their marquee sport and fits right in with the BE. Our marquee sport was at a low at the time of both realignments and we don't have much in the way of basketball nor do we have an inflated market number to hang our hat on.

This will probably ruffle some feathers here but a lot of you are missing the academic issues involved with conferences. Texas Tech is the only #3 state public school that's currently in a BCS conference. Of course that's in Texas where the population is triple NC. All of the rest of the "Big 5" are private schools with top 100 academics, flagship universities or "state U (#2)" schools in their respective states.

There is no tier 3 anymore. There is Tier 1, Tier 2, and Unranked. In those categories ECU is Tier 1 ranked 194th by US News and World Report.

Every BCS school is still ranked ahead of us but there are schools that meet your criteria that are non AQ or FCS.

I totally understand what you're saying but it's not exactly what I meant. ECU is the #3 public school in NC academically. Academically it's, UNC, NCSU and then us and Charlotte tied for #3 with a 194 ranking. I didn't really mean Tier 1, 2 and 3. What I have in bold is the main point that I believe matters here. The Big 5 is a fairly exclusive group, whether we like it or not.

We've got our work cut out for us on the field and in the classroom. Our best chance of moving up is to vastly improve academics but even then it's tough when UNC controls the purse strings.

Sorry I misread what you were saying.

ECU endowment is also lagging behind ... Of course academics and endowment somehow seem to live together ... the better educated give more.

(05-29-2012 10:16 AM)Dub591 Wrote:  ECU endowment is also lagging behind ... Of course academics and endowment somehow seem to live together ... the better educated give more.

I'm not familiar with what your tie to ECU is or where you went to school. I can say that implying that ECU grads are poorly educated compared to other graduates isn't going to fly on an ECU board. I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt that the words didn't come out quite right.

Now if what you meant to say is that ECU graduates on average make less money than some other school's graduates and therefore give less, I could understand that.

(05-29-2012 03:50 PM)TheEastisPurple Wrote:  

(05-29-2012 10:16 AM)Dub591 Wrote:  ECU endowment is also lagging behind ... Of course academics and endowment somehow seem to live together ... the better educated give more.

I'm not familiar with what your tie to ECU is or where you went to school. I can say that implying that ECU grads are poorly educated compared to other graduates isn't going to fly on an ECU board. I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt that the words didn't come out quite right.

Now if what you meant to say is that ECU graduates on average make less money than some other school's graduates and therefore give less, I could understand that.

Grad School - UGA (go dawgs) Hope that answers your question.
My money went and still goes to ECU, kids went there, and we contribute annually to the Pirate Club ... my tie-in, since you asked.

Per my opinion - ECU endowment (money in the bank sorta) is $millions behind the ACC/SEC for instance, and a quad zillion behind Texas, but everything is bigger in Texas. ECU is about average for CUSA, and while I am proud to say the education level is improving and should be higher rated - a key to several ratings is simply buying ads in their magazines - e.g. Princeton Review; that said, big donations help the programs of the school. To measure up to the ACC the ECU endowment will have to increase greatly. Examples: UNC endowment 2.6B, ECU 13m (2009).

Freindly reminder that East Carolina started as a teachers college and remains the state's leader. Not exaclty a high paying gig.

(05-30-2012 07:26 AM)Dub591 Wrote:  

(05-29-2012 03:50 PM)TheEastisPurple Wrote:  

(05-29-2012 10:16 AM)Dub591 Wrote:  ECU endowment is also lagging behind ... Of course academics and endowment somehow seem to live together ... the better educated give more.

I'm not familiar with what your tie to ECU is or where you went to school. I can say that implying that ECU grads are poorly educated compared to other graduates isn't going to fly on an ECU board. I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt that the words didn't come out quite right.

Now if what you meant to say is that ECU graduates on average make less money than some other school's graduates and therefore give less, I could understand that.

Grad School - UGA (go dawgs) Hope that answers your question.
My money went and still goes to ECU, kids went there, and we contribute annually to the Pirate Club ... my tie-in, since you asked.

Per my opinion - ECU endowment (money in the bank sorta) is $millions behind the ACC/SEC for instance, and a quad zillion behind Texas, but everything is bigger in Texas. ECU is about average for CUSA, and while I am proud to say the education level is improving and should be higher rated - a key to several ratings is simply buying ads in their magazines - e.g. Princeton Review; that said, big donations help the programs of the school. To measure up to the ACC the ECU endowment will have to increase greatly. Examples: UNC endowment 2.6B, ECU 13m (2009).

I'm not arguing your endowment statement. Just a suggestion not to come on an ECU board and down talk the education that many here received.