UC has ended the season ranked more times in the last seven years than ECU has in its entire existence.
Also noteworthy: UC has more conference titles in its history than ECU and has just as many bowl wins (in less bowl appearances). ECU has two 10+ win teams in its history; UC has six (five of which were in a BCS conference). All this and UC absolutely SUCKED for decades. How is all this possible when ECU is such a storied program in college football?
(This post was last modified: 11-11-2014 10:28 PM by MickMack.)
UC has ended the season ranked more times in the last seven years than ECU has in its entire existence.
Also noteworthy: UC has more conference titles in its history than ECU and has just as many bowl wins (in less bowl appearances). ECU has two 10+ win teams in its history; UC has six (five of which were in a BCS conference). All this and UC absolutely SUCKED for decades. How is all this possible when ECU is such a storied program in college football?
Because, you're being an ass, sorryt, but you are. You are taking school pride, pride in the special seasons we have had and saying we are acting like we are some great storied program. Well, we aren't, you are choosing to take it that way. That's on YOU, not us.
It's funny that now only 10+ win seasons count for being good! love how that metric has come in the past few years to be the be all, end all mark. Well, for me a team winning 10+ is great/special seasons, 8+ games is good, 6-7 game is average, and 5 or less is bad.
So, yes you have more 10+ win seasons, but only 3 more, and zero before getting in the BE, with the higher TV money, better exposure, increased recruiting. But, E u has one more bowl win than UC. Where the difference shows is in the those good seasons 8+ wins. 18 8+ winning season in 128 seasons, ECU has 22 8+ winning seasons in 79 seasons. Remember that many seasons before 80's there were only 10 games, so 9-1 should be a great season. ECU for example went 9-1 three straight years 1963-65.
