RE: New Bottom Ten is out
In the grand scheme of things, the casual observer of things wouldn't care that ND was down in 2008 or Texas in 2011 or whatever the years were... The next time we'd play them (or anyone else of note) it would be mentioned that we beat "name team". Yes, fans of those schools and people who vote for the top 10 would know, but that is a small minority that we aren't fighting for anyway. Same thing with injuries and suspensions and the like leading to wins. People looking for reasons to excuse the loss or create 'drama' for a different game will mention it, but most people won't.
As to early bowl talk and fan interest...
One of the big challenges that non p-5 teams playing tough OOC schedules is that you VERY quickly reach a tipping point. Had we looked especially competitive against A&M and ND, even if we had lost... and then if we'd not lost to ODU... even if it was close, the tone around here would be solid. We may not have played well against ODU, but good teams find ways to win, even when not at their best. We did well against A&M so we must be good... and if we can play well against A&M, we stand a good shot at beating everyone else on the schedule. THAT would be the overwhelming consensus.
Instead, we had some moments against A&M and ND, but really weren't competitive. On many levels, that is okay... They are top 10 teams and we just aren't... but now even a close win, much less a loss against ODU creates more doubt in how good we are, and the consensus is now that we have a lot of work to do. That bowl eligibility may be a result of how bad everyone else may be as opposed to how good we are. The only way for us to turn this is to win those games that people think will be our tough ones... and for heaven's sake DON'T lose any 'easy' ones.
This has unfortunately been all too common. We start off with great interest, especially on the heels of a good season... we quickly lose it, and then struggle to regain it by seasons end. SOME of that is the need for cash from our schedule. Perhaps a lot of it; but that isn't likely to change I don't think... so we need to find ways to
a) perform better against really good teams
b) beat 'name' teams if they are down
c) not lose to 'weaker' teams
Bottom line, we need to consistently be the best non-p5 school out there. I actually think that is do-able... and I'm serious. We have FAR FAR more to offer recruits than anyone else in our arena... but it takes money and commitment.
Although I believe David has fully bought into the idea that he has a lot to sell, I don't think he's been able to sell the administration on the idea that in order to bring the best ACADEMIC value to the subsidy (especially the scholarship subsidy) that the University puts up, we MUST find more/better ways to reach recruits. I have some thoughts in this regard but I won't bore you with them now... and the money doesn't necessarily need to come from the University... but it needs to be ALLOWED and ENCOURAGED by the University... and of course, bought in and administered by David and company.
Speaking generically, I think we are putting a team of 2-3 stars against teams of 4-5 stars with the expected results.... and we're pitting our 2-3 stars with high academic expectations against other teams of 2-3 stars with somewhat lesser academic expectations... again I don't think the results are surprising. We seem to have found a way to 'win' against other g-5 schools in our region. We need to find ways to either win against other g-5's outside our region, or win more against p-5's for the 3 and even a few 4 stars. I think we can do that, but we need resources.
Chicken or egg? I think we should be able to sell the idea that while we are certainly looking for the best athletes we can find, ultimately we are trying to get the best STUDENT athlete we can find... and coaches and their networks aren't necessarily the best avenues for identifying those... so in order to allow our coaches to get a better STUDENT, we must help them reach FAR more athletes. It is in the best interests of the academic reputation of the University that they invest 'above and beyond' in ACADEMIC recruiting/identification of athletes. Let's face it... The high school coach gets more praise IN HIS FIELD for sending a kid to Bottom dwelling but p-5 Kansas than they will from sending them to ANY g-5.
(This post was last modified: 10-02-2014 01:41 PM by Hambone10.)
|
