Utah: undefeated regular season, wins 2009 Sugar Bowl over #4 Alabama ----> joins PAC in 2010
TCU: undefeated regular season, wins 2011 Rose Bowl over #4 Wisconsin ----> joins XII in 2012

Houston: 1-loss regular season, wins 2015 Peach Bowl over #9 FSU


So it would seem the 2015 Houston season was a half-step below what Utah and TCU did in their respective 2008 and 2010 seasons.


The questions, then:

- does Houston's 2015 season "do enough" for them to be pulled up into the P5?

- if Houston had a 2016 like a 2008 Utah/2010 TCU season, would that be enough?

What you're missing is that TCU and Utah were not 1 year wonders. They were consistently at the top of their conference, and they had each other and BYU to battle year after year for the conference title.

And yes, Houston isn't necessarily a 1 year wonder, but they haven't been consistently at the top year after year battling for a BCS/CFP bid. Also, the one thing that helped is that there were 3 teams always at the top of the Mountain West year after year, so people didn't have to learn "new" teams like they have with the AAC.

Houston is on the right path, but don't know if the P5 will act sooner or later.

Utah did not get invited to the PAC because of one bowl win. Utah was identified as and expansion target as early as 1990.

TCU did not get invited to the Big XII because of one bowl win. They were invited because the Big XII was down to 8 schools and needed 10 to keep the TV contract. TCU was easily available since they were in the process of changing from the MWC to the Big East.

(01-06-2016 11:18 AM)leofrog Wrote:  What you're missing is that TCU and Utah were not 1 year wonders. They were consistently at the top of their conference, and they had each other and BYU to battle year after year for the conference title.

And yes, Houston isn't necessarily a 1 year wonder, but they haven't been consistently at the top year after year battling for a BCS/CFP bid. Also, the one thing that helped is that there were 3 teams always at the top of the Mountain West year after year, so people didn't have to learn "new" teams like they have with the AAC.

Houston is on the right path, but don't know if the P5 will act sooner or later.

Thanks for the post and good points.

Post more often!

(01-06-2016 11:22 AM)lew240z Wrote:  Utah did not get invited to the PAC because of one bowl win. Utah was identified as and expansion target as early as 1990.

TCU did not get invited to the Big XII because of one bowl win. They were invited because the Big XII was down to 8 schools and needed 10 to keep the TV contract. TCU was easily available since they were in the process of changing from the MWC to the Big East.

Also good points.

By the way, I wasn't necessarily stating a causality effect. Just an observation.

I think Houston's 2015 season is more like UCF 2013. 12-1 with a BCS/NY6 bowl win. UCF didn't follow through - and has kind of fallen off the realignment radar for now.

Houston would definitely need to follow-up with a strong 2016 season - may be even win another NY6 bowl game.

However, I note that Boise St. had three undefeated seasons including the 2007 win over Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl. IMO, the difference is that U of Houston sits in a top-10 media market and extremely fertile recruiting territory.

(01-06-2016 11:12 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Utah: undefeated regular season, wins 2009 Sugar Bowl over #4 Alabama ----> joins PAC in 2010
TCU: undefeated regular season, wins 2011 Rose Bowl over #4 Wisconsin ----> joins XII in 2012

Houston: 1-loss regular season, wins 2015 Peach Bowl over #9 FSU


So it would seem the 2015 Houston season was a half-step below what Utah and TCU did in their respective 2008 and 2010 seasons.


The questions, then:

- does Houston's 2015 season "do enough" for them to be pulled up into the P5?

- if Houston had a 2016 like a 2008 Utah/2010 TCU season, would that be enough?

You are forgetting many successfull seasons by both.

(01-06-2016 11:22 AM)lew240z Wrote:  Utah did not get invited to the PAC because of one bowl win. Utah was identified as and expansion target as early as 1990.

TCU did not get invited to the Big XII because of one bowl win. They were invited because the Big XII was down to 8 schools and needed 10 to keep the TV contract. TCU was easily available since they were in the process of changing from the MWC to the Big East.

But, neither would have been invited if they didn't make serious improvements and commitments to their overall Athletics departments, especially football. There's a reason SMU or Houston wasn't on the radar at the time, but TCU was.

Houston is just getting back to where it was at long last. Houston was another Georgia Tech, Cal or Syracuse as recently as 20-25 years ago.

(01-06-2016 12:36 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Houston is just getting back to where it was at long last. Houston was another Georgia Tech, Cal or Syracuse as recently as 20-25 years ago.

Yes but the SWC was equivalent to a P conference, at that time, I'm guessing.

How often did Houston beat their Texas rivals in the last ___ years of the SWC (10, 15, etc.)?

(01-06-2016 01:14 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-06-2016 12:36 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Houston is just getting back to where it was at long last. Houston was another Georgia Tech, Cal or Syracuse as recently as 20-25 years ago.

Yes but the SWC was equivalent to a P conference, at that time, I'm guessing.

How often did Houston beat their Texas rivals in the last ___ years of the SWC (10, 15, etc.)?

Without looking it up, Houston held their own and then some. But, they were under NCAA sanctions and probation the last 5 or so years of the SWC when the Big 12 was formed.

But, 20-25 years ago is a long time in college football. It's what have you done the let 10-15, and that's where TCU and Utah have outpaced the rest of the G5.

I would certainly say they are next on the list, followed by Memphis.

(01-06-2016 11:22 AM)lew240z Wrote:  Utah did not get invited to the PAC because of one bowl win. Utah was identified as and expansion target as early as 1990.

The Pac didn't consider Utah as a top candidate until after the Utes won 2 BCS bowls.

In 1994, the Pac-10 invited Colorado alone, and would have had an 11-team conference if CU had accepted at that time.

(01-06-2016 12:36 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Houston is just getting back to where it was at long last. Houston was another Georgia Tech, Cal or Syracuse as recently as 20-25 years ago.

No, no they werent. They were a late add to the swc that had a reputation for a gimmick offense that ran up the score on bad teams.

None of teams you listed did that.

Ga tech shouldnt be included they won a national champuonship in 1990. Syracuse tied auburn in a sugar bowl. I cant remember cal doing anything much ever

On the other hand, UCF had a great season in 2013 (1-loss w/ P5 opponents, won the Fiesta Bowl over #6 Baylor) and Cincy had a great season in 2009 (undefeated w/ P5 opponents, but got blasted in the 2010 Sugar Bowl vs #5 Florida).

Neither of those were able to sustain.

(01-06-2016 01:51 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-06-2016 11:22 AM)lew240z Wrote:  Utah did not get invited to the PAC because of one bowl win. Utah was identified as and expansion target as early as 1990.

The Pac didn't consider Utah as a top candidate until after the Utes won 2 BCS bowls.

In 1994, the Pac-10 invited Colorado alone, and would have had an 11-team conference if CU had accepted at that time.

Add to that Utah wasn't even considered until Texas et. al, decided to keep the Big 12 intact.

(01-06-2016 01:25 PM)leofrog Wrote:  

(01-06-2016 01:14 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-06-2016 12:36 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Houston is just getting back to where it was at long last. Houston was another Georgia Tech, Cal or Syracuse as recently as 20-25 years ago.

Yes but the SWC was equivalent to a P conference, at that time, I'm guessing.

How often did Houston beat their Texas rivals in the last ___ years of the SWC (10, 15, etc.)?

Without looking it up, Houston held their own and then some. But, they were under NCAA sanctions and probation the last 5 or so years of the SWC when the Big 12 was formed.

But, 20-25 years ago is a long time in college football. It's what have you done the let 10-15, and that's where TCU and Utah have outpaced the rest of the G5.

Bill Yeoman

He gave Houston a full decade of national relevance.

(01-06-2016 01:14 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-06-2016 12:36 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Houston is just getting back to where it was at long last. Houston was another Georgia Tech, Cal or Syracuse as recently as 20-25 years ago.

Yes but the SWC was equivalent to a P conference, at that time, I'm guessing.

How often did Houston beat their Texas rivals in the last ___ years of the SWC (10, 15, etc.)?

Houston beat Texas at least four times in the last ten years of the SWC, including the original Rout 66 at Texas. Back then John Jenkins had no reservations about running up the score.

They struggled against A&M and Arkansas but that wasn't because they didn't have some teams capable of beating them.

Like I said, Houston was looked upon like any other middling P5 school that wasn't a state flagship or if anything better (Houston athletic history still blows away South Carolina's for example unless you want to bring up women's basketball or something like that).

(01-06-2016 01:14 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-06-2016 12:36 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Houston is just getting back to where it was at long last. Houston was another Georgia Tech, Cal or Syracuse as recently as 20-25 years ago.

Yes but the SWC was equivalent to a P conference, at that time, I'm guessing.

How often did Houston beat their Texas rivals in the last ___ years of the SWC (10, 15, etc.)?

Houston beat Texas at least four times in the last ten years of the SWC, including the original Rout 66 at Texas. Back then John Jenkins had no reservations about running up the score.

They struggled against A&M and Arkansas but that wasn't because they didn't have some teams capable of beating them.

Like I said, Houston was looked upon like any other middling P5 school that wasn't a state flagship or if anything they were better.

(01-06-2016 01:52 PM)shere khan Wrote:  No, no they werent. They were a late add to the swc that had a reputation for a gimmick offense that ran up the score on bad teams.

None of teams you listed did that.

Ga tech shouldnt be included they won a national champuonship in 1990. Syracuse tied auburn in a sugar bowl. I cant remember cal doing anything much ever

You're missing my point. Whether it was basketball, football, track & field or as a school overall, UH was looked upon with a certain respect. It was seen like Pitt is today. I think that's the best and fairest comparison

(01-06-2016 02:14 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(01-06-2016 01:14 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-06-2016 12:36 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Houston is just getting back to where it was at long last. Houston was another Georgia Tech, Cal or Syracuse as recently as 20-25 years ago.

Yes but the SWC was equivalent to a P conference, at that time, I'm guessing.

How often did Houston beat their Texas rivals in the last ___ years of the SWC (10, 15, etc.)?

Houston beat Texas at least four times in the last ten years of the SWC, including the original Rout 66 at Texas. Back then John Jenkins had no reservations about running up the score.

They struggled against A&M and Arkansas but that wasn't because they didn't have some teams capable of beating them.

Like I said, Houston was looked upon like any other middling P5 school that wasn't a state flagship or if anything they were better.

(01-06-2016 01:52 PM)shere khan Wrote:  No, no they werent. They were a late add to the swc that had a reputation for a gimmick offense that ran up the score on bad teams.

None of teams you listed did that.

Ga tech shouldnt be included they won a national champuonship in 1990. Syracuse tied auburn in a sugar bowl. I cant remember cal doing anything much ever

You're missing my point. Whether it was basketball, football, track & field or as a school overall, UH was looked upon with a certain respect. It was seen like Pitt is today. I think that's the best and fairest comparison

Pitt is awful. Turrible. But ok

Pitt couldnt win the Funbelt