(10-11-2016 11:31 AM)Ragpicker Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 10:14 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 10:08 AM)Ragpicker Wrote:  Objectively What is the Problem.....

G5 STATUS WITHIN THE AAC.

UC athletics will continue to decline across all teams, including MBB, until the above is fixed. If leadership can't fix it then alumni and fan support will decline, merchandising will decline, revenues will decline, and subsequently admissions will decline as well as academic donations will decline.

This is far more than just a semi (OK, a fully) retired head coach. UC is on the fast train to MAC membership.

Other teams are in the AAC and performing at a significantly higher level. No reason UC cannot compete in this conference. To be where we really want to be we have to get in a P5 league, but being 0-3 in this league is more than just being in this league.

Houston will be done after this year when Herman leaves and takes his 5 and 4 star recruits. Just like Dantonio did when he went to MSU. UCF went from BCS to winless in just a couple of years. Winning in the G5 is not sustainable. And UC fans in a major league city will not accept a team that makes mid-level bowl games - maybe this year not at all.

How does being stuck in AAC hamper UC in competing against other AAC teams?

I agree to an extent, although I wouldn't say it's the biggest factor.

Fans believed the BE was really big time and we were winning it. Fans believe the AAC sucks so we should be killing these teams. Reality is we were really good with Kelly and otherwise held our own in the weakest BCS league by a good amount. The AAC is barely worse as a league if at all and we have no real advantage to make us better than them.

Expectations<>Reality

(10-11-2016 12:41 PM)uccheese Wrote:  I agree to an extent, although I wouldn't say it's the biggest factor.

Fans believed the BE was really big time and we were winning it. Fans believe the AAC sucks so we should be killing these teams. Reality is we were really good with Kelly and otherwise held our own in the weakest BCS league by a good amount. The AAC is barely worse as a league if at all and we have no real advantage to make us better than them.

Expectations<>Reality

Was the BE really the weakest league? I remember the ACC going through a low patch, when the BE was still in existence.

With the right coach and recruiting we can definitely compete with other G5 programs. Right now we are not even doing that, let alone competing against lower level P5 sans Purdue.

(10-11-2016 12:46 PM)bearcatmill Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 12:41 PM)uccheese Wrote:  I agree to an extent, although I wouldn't say it's the biggest factor.

Fans believed the BE was really big time and we were winning it. Fans believe the AAC sucks so we should be killing these teams. Reality is we were really good with Kelly and otherwise held our own in the weakest BCS league by a good amount. The AAC is barely worse as a league if at all and we have no real advantage to make us better than them.

Expectations<>Reality

Was the BE really the weakest league? I remember the ACC going through a low patch, when the BE was still in existence.

With the right coach and recruiting we can definitely compete with other G5 programs. Right now we are not even doing that, let alone competing against lower level P5 sans Purdue.

If you look at the top-to-bottom Sagarin ratings for those years, the BE was a very worthy BCS conference, competitive with the B10 and ACC, except that the BE usually didn't have a T10 team. Sometimes, the ACC never had T10 team. The other BCS conferences nearly always had at least one T10 team.

Big East was light years better football than this.

(10-11-2016 12:46 PM)bearcatmill Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 12:41 PM)uccheese Wrote:  I agree to an extent, although I wouldn't say it's the biggest factor.

Fans believed the BE was really big time and we were winning it. Fans believe the AAC sucks so we should be killing these teams. Reality is we were really good with Kelly and otherwise held our own in the weakest BCS league by a good amount. The AAC is barely worse as a league if at all and we have no real advantage to make us better than them.

Expectations<>Reality

Was the BE really the weakest league? I remember the ACC going through a low patch, when the BE was still in existence.

With the right coach and recruiting we can definitely compete with other G5 programs. Right now we are not even doing that, let alone competing against lower level P5 sans Purdue.

Important to make good hires; more important to cut the bad ones loose fast, 3 year max.

(10-11-2016 01:53 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Big East was light years better football than this.

Bottom half of AAC much weaker than bottom half of BE.

(10-11-2016 01:53 PM)Former Lurker Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 12:46 PM)bearcatmill Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 12:41 PM)uccheese Wrote:  I agree to an extent, although I wouldn't say it's the biggest factor.

Fans believed the BE was really big time and we were winning it. Fans believe the AAC sucks so we should be killing these teams. Reality is we were really good with Kelly and otherwise held our own in the weakest BCS league by a good amount. The AAC is barely worse as a league if at all and we have no real advantage to make us better than them.

Expectations<>Reality

Was the BE really the weakest league? I remember the ACC going through a low patch, when the BE was still in existence.

With the right coach and recruiting we can definitely compete with other G5 programs. Right now we are not even doing that, let alone competing against lower level P5 sans Purdue.

Important to make good hires; more important to cut the bad ones loose fast, 3 year max.

Exactly my thoughts. The whole thing was completely mismanaged from the get go by not interviewing a single candidate. Unless it is just a slam dunk elite head coach, that should NEVER happen during a coaching search. And I agree, letting it drag out instead of cutting ties quickly and decisively makes the rebuild more difficult every day.

(10-11-2016 02:00 PM)Marcus Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 01:53 PM)Former Lurker Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 12:46 PM)bearcatmill Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 12:41 PM)uccheese Wrote:  I agree to an extent, although I wouldn't say it's the biggest factor.

Fans believed the BE was really big time and we were winning it. Fans believe the AAC sucks so we should be killing these teams. Reality is we were really good with Kelly and otherwise held our own in the weakest BCS league by a good amount. The AAC is barely worse as a league if at all and we have no real advantage to make us better than them.

Expectations<>Reality

Was the BE really the weakest league? I remember the ACC going through a low patch, when the BE was still in existence.

With the right coach and recruiting we can definitely compete with other G5 programs. Right now we are not even doing that, let alone competing against lower level P5 sans Purdue.

Important to make good hires; more important to cut the bad ones loose fast, 3 year max.

Exactly my thoughts. The whole thing was completely mismanaged from the get go by not interviewing a single candidate. Unless it is just a slam dunk elite head coach, that should NEVER happen during a coaching search. And I agree, letting it drag out instead of cutting ties quickly and decisively makes the rebuild more difficult every day.

Go back four years, who would have compared to sweet talking former SEC HC Tommy Tuberville?

(10-11-2016 02:12 PM)The T-Shirt Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 02:00 PM)Marcus Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 01:53 PM)Former Lurker Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 12:46 PM)bearcatmill Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 12:41 PM)uccheese Wrote:  I agree to an extent, although I wouldn't say it's the biggest factor.

Fans believed the BE was really big time and we were winning it. Fans believe the AAC sucks so we should be killing these teams. Reality is we were really good with Kelly and otherwise held our own in the weakest BCS league by a good amount. The AAC is barely worse as a league if at all and we have no real advantage to make us better than them.

Expectations<>Reality

Was the BE really the weakest league? I remember the ACC going through a low patch, when the BE was still in existence.

With the right coach and recruiting we can definitely compete with other G5 programs. Right now we are not even doing that, let alone competing against lower level P5 sans Purdue.

Important to make good hires; more important to cut the bad ones loose fast, 3 year max.

Exactly my thoughts. The whole thing was completely mismanaged from the get go by not interviewing a single candidate. Unless it is just a slam dunk elite head coach, that should NEVER happen during a coaching search. And I agree, letting it drag out instead of cutting ties quickly and decisively makes the rebuild more difficult every day.

Go back four years, who would have compared to sweet talking former SEC HC Tommy Tuberville?

Who knows, but the job of the AD is to at least look at several options. Honestly, we'll be luck at this point to get a good up and coming coordinator. I think getting a current HC is completely unrealistic now.

So they haven't posted the video of Tuberville's Tuesday presser. Do they not have one on a bye week? That'd explain it I guess.

(10-11-2016 02:12 PM)The T-Shirt Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 02:00 PM)Marcus Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 01:53 PM)Former Lurker Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 12:46 PM)bearcatmill Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 12:41 PM)uccheese Wrote:  I agree to an extent, although I wouldn't say it's the biggest factor.

Fans believed the BE was really big time and we were winning it. Fans believe the AAC sucks so we should be killing these teams. Reality is we were really good with Kelly and otherwise held our own in the weakest BCS league by a good amount. The AAC is barely worse as a league if at all and we have no real advantage to make us better than them.

Expectations<>Reality

Was the BE really the weakest league? I remember the ACC going through a low patch, when the BE was still in existence.

With the right coach and recruiting we can definitely compete with other G5 programs. Right now we are not even doing that, let alone competing against lower level P5 sans Purdue.

Important to make good hires; more important to cut the bad ones loose fast, 3 year max.

Exactly my thoughts. The whole thing was completely mismanaged from the get go by not interviewing a single candidate. Unless it is just a slam dunk elite head coach, that should NEVER happen during a coaching search. And I agree, letting it drag out instead of cutting ties quickly and decisively makes the rebuild more difficult every day.

Go back four years, who would have compared to sweet talking former SEC HC Tommy Tuberville?

That's a good point. It's a given that he succeeded at a higher-level program than UC. The obvious questions that should have been asked were whether he had a chip on his shoulder after getting canned at Auburn? Did he have a burning drive for redemption? We know now that he just wanted a cushy retirement job= bad fit.

(10-11-2016 12:33 PM)Racinejake Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 12:24 PM)dsquare Wrote:  "So objectively, we can't run the ball which leads us to throwing the ball more than we should (given the quality of our QBs sans Kiel) which leads to interceptions which keeps points off the board. Then on defense, we can't get off the field on 3rd and 4th downs which extends drives and puts points on the board for the other team (but not an absurd number of points we're middle of the pack nationally)."

It's a little misleading to say we can't run the ball. What we're seeing teams do post Houston is basically way overload the line of scrimmage/box which really makes it difficult for any team to run the ball. Our problem has been not having qb's who can make the opponents pay for cheating the line of scrimmage. If either of them was more consistently accurate both throwing the ball and reading what's out there we would be able to pull teams out of that. Until we do, you could have Jim Brown back there with 7 and something 8 guys in the box and he'll struggle. You have to make defenses pay by getting behind them in those sets. Moore had 27 incompletions Saturday.

"While I agree our struggles passing the ball are not helping the run game, our O line has not been good. We're getting beat at the line of scrimmage by most teams. But we also haven't been very creative in our run game. Seems to be a lot of the same inside handoffs (although we did exploit USF in the first half with wide running which they adapted to in the 2nd half). Which that leads into an overall theme of lack of creativity from the offense. I thought we play called extremely well against Purdue. Now maybe it was magnified by how bad Purdue is but it does seem the overall playcalling has been particularly bland the last several games."
[/quote]

Purdue didn't load up in the box so it wasn't as much of an issue. In order for us to run the ball given we do not have perimeter speed they almost have to play double tight ends to cover everyone, ie an nfl set. There are just to many guys in the box to get daylight and block 7 or 8 with 5. This is another factor in why those inside screens are consistently being thrown off lineman and when they do complete one the guy is buried. Nowhere to go. Unless you have a back who can get outside "now"(and we do not) you will get the one and two yards we're seeing. Just no separation and to many guys to block.

(10-11-2016 12:36 PM)levydl Wrote:  How does being stuck in AAC hamper UC in competing against other AAC teams?

UC competed against Houston and UConn. Not so much vs USF. We will get a couple of AAC wins this season. Then the bowlcation against a Sun Belt team - yipppeee!

Pretty much been competing every season in the AAC. Its fairly easy to compete at the AAA level. We would be competitive in the MAC too. As the abyss widens, no G5 team will dominate any league. A good season or two, but then back down the ladder.