(10-23-2016 06:12 PM)CyclonePower Wrote:  

(10-23-2016 04:01 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  Central Florida always seemed like such a random choice. Why didn't UConn pick Temple? That seems to have a lot more potential for a football rivalry for the Huskies.

I think part of it goes back to 2014 where UConn's only conference win was against UCF and after that season the rivalry was created. Hard to make a rivalry and trophy if you lost to a team the previous year. Their only choice was UCF.

Just when I thought it couldn't get any sadder...

(10-23-2016 07:29 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Wait, did a Yuengling chugging Yinzer just say that the Bengals aren't a rival but the Browns are? FTW? I know the actual Steeler players don't agree with these knuckleheads.

http://deadspin.com/the-afc-north-needed...1747907958

BTW the two teams have shared a division for 45 frickin years!

I am a Ravens fan, and I will croncede that the Browns and Steelers are each of their longest tenured rivals. When the Ravens first came about, the Jags, who ran roughshod over the division (yeah I forgot too) were our initial rivals, along with Tennessee, when we first became good. It was only after Jax went away, and TNfell off, that the Ravens and Steelers became rivals. But the Steelers and Browns have been going at it for 65 plus years. Yeah it's lopsided now, but that rivalry will exist forever.

(10-23-2016 09:50 AM)westwolf Wrote:  Like most of the aspects of the AAC it is contrived. Attendance at the 6 games in this patchwork league ranges from 22,000 (Tulsa) to 36,000 (Navy) and averaged 28,000. You can't fool the fans.

Convenient how you chose to word that in a way and point it out whenever all the conference leaders in attendance were on the road.

East Carolina = 46,974
Houston = 39,499
UCF = 39,252
Memphis = 37,695

Conference average: 32,591, 28% higher than the next G5.

Hey don't go confusing the board with facts and whatnot.

(10-24-2016 12:00 AM)Kronke Wrote:  East Carolina = 46,974
Houston = 39,499
UCF = 39,252
Memphis = 37,695

Conference average: 32,591, 28% higher than the next G5.

^^^ This ^^^

Can't hold it against the AAC that they don't have Michigan, Texas, Alabama and Ohio State.

The conFLiCT is over.

(10-23-2016 09:12 AM)Tech Savy Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 10:17 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  LOL!

There is nothing remotely heartbreaking about this. It is 100% hilarious and Connecticut completely deserves this humiliation.

The Civil ConnFLict is not the first contrived rivalry in the history of college football. When Penn State joined the Big Ten, that league created the Land-Grant Trophy between the Nittany Lions and Michigan State – and it was completely ridiculous.

When Cincinnati joined the Big East, that league tried to make Cincinnati and Pitt rivals and created the River City Rivalry. I can't speak for how it was viewed on the Cincinnati side but I can tell you that on the Pitt side it was a constant source of ridicule and most people seemed to point at it as Exhibit A for why we needed to get the hell out of the Big East.

The Civil ConnFLict is somehow even cheesier than those two contrivances. Also, the fact of one school did it without the other school's cooperation, and perhaps even knowledge, is just incredible. That's next level cheese ball and absolutely worthy of every ounce of scorn anyone can muster.

I think it's good that UCF ignored the trophy altogether. That's the correct response to something goofy like this.

The difference is Cincinnati and Pittsburgh at least have SOME elements of a potential rivalry (Steelers vs Bengals, easy trip for either fan base, etc). The "rivalry" was helped by the fact that they play for the Conference Title two straight years

Yeah, but it was still ridiculous. Also, the trophy was created before they ever played - making it even sillier. Like I said, it was still somehow less absurd than UConn/UCF (for all the reasons you stated) but it was completely ridiculous on every level and was relentlessly mocked by fans and rival fans alike.

Rivalries need to happen organically and THEN you name them and raise the stakes by creating trophies and whatnot. Trying to just manufacture them from scratch just makes everyone involved look bush league.

(10-24-2016 07:19 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(10-24-2016 12:00 AM)Kronke Wrote:  East Carolina = 46,974
Houston = 39,499
UCF = 39,252
Memphis = 37,695

Conference average: 32,591, 28% higher than the next G5.

^^^ This ^^^

Can't hold it against the AAC that they don't have Michigan, Texas, Alabama and Ohio State.

Guys like Westwolf also fail to include attendance at:

Kansas= 26K
Virginia= 41K
Syracuse= 32K
BC= 31K
Duke = 25K
WF= 25K
Maryland=39K
Purdue= 36K
Northestern= 34K
Oregon State= 36K
Washington State= 31K
Vandy= 30K

Imagine the attendance at these schools if they played an AAC schedule instead of schools that travel 10-15K+ every game?

Rivalries don't come and go. It doesn't matter who is good or bad. Packers-Bears, that is a rivalry. Even when both teams stink, the game still matter. You can't say Jacksonville was a rival in the 90s, but not now, since they suck. It kinda of defeats the whole rivalry thing, doesn't it?

BTW, the biggest rivalry in the sports world, Celtic-Rangers. Look it up.

(10-23-2016 09:45 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(10-23-2016 07:29 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Wait, did a Yuengling chugging Yinzer just say that the Bengals aren't a rival but the Browns are? FTW? I know the actual Steeler players don't agree with these knuckleheads.

http://deadspin.com/the-afc-north-needed...1747907958

BTW the two teams have shared a division for 45 frickin years!

I am a Ravens fan, and I will croncede that the Browns and Steelers are each of their longest tenured rivals. When the Ravens first came about, the Jags, who ran roughshod over the division (yeah I forgot too) were our initial rivals, along with Tennessee, when we first became good. It was only after Jax went away, and TNfell off, that the Ravens and Steelers became rivals. But the Steelers and Browns have been going at it for 65 plus years. Yeah it's lopsided now, but that rivalry will exist forever.

The issue is it hasn't been competitive in 30 years. Thats half the time they've been playing each other.

(10-23-2016 05:21 PM)Blue Dynasty Wrote:  Re: PIT-CIN rivalry:

Steelers-Bengals is probably the most heated rivalry in the NFL right now, and almost all the Steelers' players I've heard on the topic have said the Bengals games have replaced Ravens as the most hard-hitting and toughest on the schedule. Their games are always highly rated, and almost always on a national TV slot now, whether on primetime, or an unopposed network slot in the afternoon (such as the Pats-Steelers game that is currently on as I type this). Historically, the rivalry hasn't been much for sure, but it's really picked up in recent years.

Reds-Pirates was one of the biggest rivalries in the National League at one time (just saw someone else alluded to this above). There actually has been something of a renaissance of the rivalry in recent years in the term of bad blood, as I believe the Reds-Pirates have had more beanball wars/bench clearing incidents than any other combo of teams in MLB the last 5 years or so. But again, between the 70s and now, wasn't much other than an epic 1990 NLCS between the teams.

The cities themselves are pretty compatible, both are river cities with similar demographics and histories. I think I saw this topic broached in another thread recently, but I think Pittsburgh seems more like a midwest city than it does a northeast city and would think it has more in common with, say Cincinnati and Indianapolis, than it does a city in its own state, Philadelphia. Am I way off? I don't live in Pittsburgh nor have I ever, so I certainly would understand someone who has correcting me.

I don't think you are too far off. It's complex but let me explain.

One of the things that makes Pittsburgh such a unique place to live - and why if you ever meet someone from there they are so fiercely proud of/loyal to it - is because both geographically and culturally speaking, it's not really East Coast or Midwestern. It's sort of a hybrid between the two. It has some Midwestern qualities but it also has some Northeastern qualities.

I have never lived in Buffalo but they strike as living on the same island - or at least a neighboring island.

I always refer to it as a Mid-Atlantic city but even that is a stretch because it really isn't like Washington, DC or Richmond. It's kind of a mix between all of those places.

I have lived in many different places over the years, including Cincinnati for seven years (Indian Hill). Cincinnatians are more formal and rigid, IMHO. Perhaps its due to their largely German roots? Whatever it is, they are more serious, IMHO.

Pittsburghers are much more informal and, IMHO warmer. Now, Pittsburghers are also louder and less unassuming. When they walk into anywhere really, be it a bar, an opposing stadium, Disney World, you name it, they are sure to let everyone know who they are and where they are from. Personally, I love that quality but I have many friends who are less enamored by that mentality. You just have to understand that it's usually coming from a place of warmth and you'll get along just fine. They're usually not taunting you, they're just teasing you. There are some jerks but for the most part it's all in good fun.

So, when you say they identify with Cincinnati or Indianapolis more than Philadelphia or New York, the truth is we don't really identify with any of you and that's precisely what makes us who we are.

If you ask a Pittsburgher who they like more Midwesterners or Northeasterners they would probably ***** more about the Northeasterners before grudgingly admitting that they too are part of that crowd - but only loosely so.

As for rivals, that is reflected in that soup of factors.

It is my view that the Philadelphia Flyers are THE most hated franchise in any sport in Pittsburgh. Now, part of that is rooted in Philadelphia's traditional style of play but a bigger part if rooted in the mindset of their fans - whom Pittsburghers generally consider boorish.

In hockey, after Philadelphia it is definitely Washington next followed by the New York teams. Columbus has a chance to wiggle its way in there too but that will take years and years - and several playoff series.

In baseball, the Pirates fans definitely have always seen the Phillies and the Mets as their primary rivals. I'm sure Washington would also be a fierce rival if they were in the same division. That said, the NL Central has been good to us and there have been some spirited games between the Bucs and their divisional foes. Still, in a perfect world we'd probably prefer to be in the NL East. However, that is never going to happen so we may as well make the best of our situation.

In football, I do still consider the Browns to be the Steelers' top rivals. We are just two hours apart and that makes those games nasty. It's just that the Browns have been so bad for so long, it's hard to keep that up. However, if all three divisional teams were equally as good, Cleveland would be the game we most wanted to win, IMHO.

For the past decade or so, Baltimore has filled that spot because of how good they have been and because of their attitude. The Ravens have relished wearing the villain's black hat and Pittsburghers hated those teams with a passion.

Lately the Bengals have usurped the Ravens in quality and consequently as rivals too. However, it's more of a Vontaze Burfict thing than anything else. People here think that dude is straight up nuts...and dangerous!

However, Pittsburghers actually LIKE Marvin Lewis as he is from here. In fact, he is from a town called McDonald, PA which is about 10 minutes from where I live now. You have heard of a one stoplight town. Well, McDonald is literally a ZERO stoplight town and yet it has produced two longtime NFL coaches - Lewis and Marty Schottenheimer.

That's amazing!

Finally, as for college, Paco is right. The rivals card is more full for Pitt than most. We have two arch rivals in Penn State and West Virginia. We have played both nearly 100 times. Penn State leads our all-time series 50-43-4 and we lead the Backyard Brawl all-time, 61-40-3.

In basketball, we have historic rivalries with Penn State and West Virginia as well as Duquesne - our Xavier equivalent but again it's hard because the Dukes haven't been as good as the Musketeers have been for UC.

I just think most Pitt fans took the River City Rivalry thing as a bit of a jarring slap in the face with people elsewhere with no appreciation for Pitt or it's history or tradition saying, "Here's your new rivals - deal with it."

It would be a bit like the AAC making a big deal out of the Cincinnati/Temple game. It just wouldn't make any sense whatsoever.

There are a surprising number of rivalry games without a rivalry trophy. Just for GT:

1) Georgia Tech vs U[sic]GA ... technically there is a Governor's Cup Trophy ... but that damn thing is apparently in witness protection. Go on, try to find a picture of it at a recent game on the field.
2) Georgia Tech vs Clemson
3) Georgia Tech vs Auburn
4) Georgia Tech vs Tennessee


I think there are a bunch more in the ACC as well. BC-Cuse, UNC-UVA, Pitt-WVU, Clemson-FSU just off the top of my head have no trophy.

(10-23-2016 05:21 PM)Blue Dynasty Wrote:  Re: PIT-CIN rivalry:

Steelers-Bengals is probably the most heated rivalry in the NFL right now, and almost all the Steelers' players I've heard on the topic have said the Bengals games have replaced Ravens as the most hard-hitting and toughest on the schedule. Their games are always highly rated, and almost always on a national TV slot now, whether on primetime, or an unopposed network slot in the afternoon (such as the Pats-Steelers game that is currently on as I type this). Historically, the rivalry hasn't been much for sure, but it's really picked up in recent years.

Reds-Pirates was one of the biggest rivalries in the National League at one time (just saw someone else alluded to this above). There actually has been something of a renaissance of the rivalry in recent years in the term of bad blood, as I believe the Reds-Pirates have had more beanball wars/bench clearing incidents than any other combo of teams in MLB the last 5 years or so. But again, between the 70s and now, wasn't much other than an epic 1990 NLCS between the teams.

The cities themselves are pretty compatible, both are river cities with similar demographics and histories. I think I saw this topic broached in another thread recently, but I think Pittsburgh seems more like a midwest city than it does a northeast city and would think it has more in common with, say Cincinnati and Indianapolis, than it does a city in its own state, Philadelphia. Am I way off? I don't live in Pittsburgh nor have I ever, so I certainly would understand someone who has correcting me.

My wife and her entire family are from Pittsburgh (Plum to be exact though the parents used to live in West Mifflin which is where Pittsburgh's favorite amusement park is located) and they would all tell you that Cincy is at the bottom of the division that they care about. They want to win of course but to my wife for instance her biggest problem with them isn't hatred but that she considers them "whinny".

Cleveland and Ravens are worth far more to them than Cincy.

(10-23-2016 07:29 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Wait, did a Yuengling chugging Yinzer just say that the Bengals aren't a rival but the Browns are? FTW? I know the actual Steeler players don't agree with these knuckleheads.

http://deadspin.com/the-afc-north-needed...1747907958

BTW the two teams have shared a division for 45 frickin years!

Yes, I'm telling you that staight up. I don't know of tshirts sold in Pittsburgh about Cincy. And the Brownies regularly suck. Here's a clue: it's proximity. How many years did you live in the 'Burgh?

As I've said, rivalries aren't just about who is good at the moment. Otherwise, every team sharing a division for any length of time are "rivals". Perhaps they are, but there is a pecking order for the general fan base.

I feel bad for Diaco.

UConn got screwed more than anyone else by realignment. At least Cincy and USF were reunited with some schools they previously had relationships with. UConn was with Cuse, Pitt, and the Catholics for 30 years and then overnight they're gone.

So Diaco comes up with this silly rivalry and everyone knows it's absurdly contrived, but it makes things fun and interesting for UConn people and gets them invested in this new conference. And everyone craps all over him for it.

But after this diss from UCF I wouldn't be surprised if UConn actually dislikes UCF now, so maybe it will develop. I think our rivalry with Marshall started because our coach called them rednecks

(10-25-2016 09:34 AM)MechaKnight Wrote:  I feel bad for Diaco.

UConn got screwed more than anyone else by realignment. At least Cincy and USF were reunited with some schools they previously had relationships with. UConn was with Cuse, Pitt, and the Catholics for 30 years and then overnight they're gone.

So Diaco comes up with this silly rivalry and everyone knows it's absurdly contrived, but it makes things fun and interesting for UConn people and gets them invested in this new conference. And everyone craps all over him for it.

But after this diss from UCF I wouldn't be surprised if UConn actually dislikes UCF now, so maybe it will develop. I think our rivalry with Marshall started because our coach called them rednecks

I wonder if this is all planned. It could turn a contrived rivalry into a legit rivalry. And honestly, I don't know how UConn fb would get an AAC rival but for some lightning rod event like this. Now UConn needs to destroy them in basketball and not take the pedal off the gas to get some hate from the UCF side.

(10-24-2016 10:58 PM)Sultan of Euphonistan Wrote:  

(10-23-2016 05:21 PM)Blue Dynasty Wrote:  Re: PIT-CIN rivalry:

Steelers-Bengals is probably the most heated rivalry in the NFL right now, and almost all the Steelers' players I've heard on the topic have said the Bengals games have replaced Ravens as the most hard-hitting and toughest on the schedule. Their games are always highly rated, and almost always on a national TV slot now, whether on primetime, or an unopposed network slot in the afternoon (such as the Pats-Steelers game that is currently on as I type this). Historically, the rivalry hasn't been much for sure, but it's really picked up in recent years.

Reds-Pirates was one of the biggest rivalries in the National League at one time (just saw someone else alluded to this above). There actually has been something of a renaissance of the rivalry in recent years in the term of bad blood, as I believe the Reds-Pirates have had more beanball wars/bench clearing incidents than any other combo of teams in MLB the last 5 years or so. But again, between the 70s and now, wasn't much other than an epic 1990 NLCS between the teams.

The cities themselves are pretty compatible, both are river cities with similar demographics and histories. I think I saw this topic broached in another thread recently, but I think Pittsburgh seems more like a midwest city than it does a northeast city and would think it has more in common with, say Cincinnati and Indianapolis, than it does a city in its own state, Philadelphia. Am I way off? I don't live in Pittsburgh nor have I ever, so I certainly would understand someone who has correcting me.

My wife and her entire family are from Pittsburgh (Plum to be exact though the parents used to live in West Mifflin which is where Pittsburgh's favorite amusement park is located) and they would all tell you that Cincy is at the bottom of the division that they care about. They want to win of course but to my wife for instance her biggest problem with them isn't hatred but that she considers them "whinny".

Cleveland and Ravens are worth far more to them than Cincy.

That is definitely accurate.

I think the Steelers fans think of the Bengals as being cheesy. It's just things like the Icky Shuffle, the Who-Dey cheer, the overly garish costumey uniforms and things like that. The Steelers fans just don't respect it. Cleveland is a pathetic organization but until recently they had great uniforms (they need to go back to those ASAP - these uniforms are atrocious looking) and their fans seem to care.

Baltimore was always a great NFL town and that two seems like a passionate football market.

Cincinnati is more of a baseball town. That's how I have always felt and I'm sure that's how most Steelers fans feel too. The Bengals have been very good the last few years and they could certainly beat Pittsburgh out for the division this year. However, it's just a different kind of place.

Pitt and UC had zero chance of ever becoming a real rivalry. It just had no chance because Cincinnati would've had to vault about seven other teams to get there.

Cincinnati beat Pitt in a great football game the one year that decided the Big East title. Pitt scored with about a minute left but its holder dropped the snap on an extra point at the end and Cincinnati went down and scored and converted on it's extra point.

Really a good game and a good win for the Bearcats in a bad loss for Pitt. However, after the game, the Pitt fans weren't upset with Cincinnati, they were upset with their own coaches and some of the boneheaded decisions they made to allow the Bearcats back into the game.

The next year when the two teams played, the city of Pittsburgh was not abuzz over the big Pitt/Cincinnati college football game. They couldn't care less. Basically the attitude was "Is Pitt going to blow it again against this Conference/USA team?"

That is not fair to Cincinnati and I've made that point to my Pitt friends many times over the years. However, that was definitely the prevailing mentality. That's the exact opposite of a rivalry. It was utter disgust and contempt for the home team.

Also, when Pitt fired Dave Wannstedt, it wasn't because the program had fallen on hard times. Rather, it was because it could not get over the hump in a watered down Big East.

Again, the reasoning went, "How in the hell are we not winning this conference with only West Virginia to really worry about?" Obviously, that's a stupid attitude – and it has cost Pitt immensely in the last 4-5 years – but that was definitely the vibe coming out of Oakland (the Pittsburgh neighborhood where the University of Pittsburgh is located) at the time.

Personally, I think Pitt's administration and fans were way off base. I agree with those who say, "Who the hell are they to be big-timing anyone?" However, that was definitely the mindset. That is literally a 180 from a rivalry and the way the Big East tried to create it by just plopping a trophy in our laps and telling us to get on with things turned a lot of people off not only to that rivalry, but to the conference itself.

Pitt fans were angry when Boston College and Miami left the Big East. Within a few years, that anger turned into a complete disgust for the conference itself. The coup de grace came at the very end when the conference was trying to expand and Pitt and a few others were pushing for teams like TCU and UCF – programs that clearly have a lot of potential – and the Big East was still pushing teams like Villanova and Temple. They were also saying things like, "How can you leave arch rivals like West Virginia and Cincinnati behind?" As if they were remotely the same.

I look at the Big East as a marriage that was great at first, functional for a long time, and then terribly dysfunctional at the end. It needed to end five years before it did but we are onto our second wife now and there's no looking back. This marriage isn't perfect either but it is clearly much, much better than what we left.

(10-23-2016 09:45 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  I am a Ravens fan, and I will concede that the Browns and Steelers are each of their longest tenured rivals. [....] It was only after Jax went away, and TNfell off, that the Ravens and Steelers became rivals. But the Steelers and Browns have been going at it for 65 plus years. Yeah it's lopsided now, but that rivalry will exist forever.

Ravens-Steelers became a rivalry because the first Ravens players had been Browns only one season earlier. The players brought their long-time hate of the Steelers with them from Cleveland and resolved to 'educate' Baltimore fans on the importance of the game.

And educate them they did. In the 1990s the storied Steelers-Browns rivalry spawned Pittsburgh rivalries with two sets of Browns: one the team with the continuous historical connection, and the other the team that actually inherited the name.

The Ravens-Browns rivalry is a rare one in sports. It didn't spread from the top down or start from geography. Players brought the fire and fans caught it.

(10-25-2016 09:50 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 09:34 AM)MechaKnight Wrote:  I feel bad for Diaco.

UConn got screwed more than anyone else by realignment. At least Cincy and USF were reunited with some schools they previously had relationships with. UConn was with Cuse, Pitt, and the Catholics for 30 years and then overnight they're gone.

So Diaco comes up with this silly rivalry and everyone knows it's absurdly contrived, but it makes things fun and interesting for UConn people and gets them invested in this new conference. And everyone craps all over him for it.

But after this diss from UCF I wouldn't be surprised if UConn actually dislikes UCF now, so maybe it will develop. I think our rivalry with Marshall started because our coach called them rednecks

I wonder if this is all planned. It could turn a contrived rivalry into a legit rivalry. And honestly, I don't know how UConn fb would get an AAC rival but for some lightning rod event like this. Now UConn needs to destroy them in basketball and not take the pedal off the gas to get some hate from the UCF side.

Perfect, we'll create a trophy for the game and won't tell uconn about it.

(10-25-2016 12:49 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 09:50 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 09:34 AM)MechaKnight Wrote:  I feel bad for Diaco.

UConn got screwed more than anyone else by realignment. At least Cincy and USF were reunited with some schools they previously had relationships with. UConn was with Cuse, Pitt, and the Catholics for 30 years and then overnight they're gone.

So Diaco comes up with this silly rivalry and everyone knows it's absurdly contrived, but it makes things fun and interesting for UConn people and gets them invested in this new conference. And everyone craps all over him for it.

But after this diss from UCF I wouldn't be surprised if UConn actually dislikes UCF now, so maybe it will develop. I think our rivalry with Marshall started because our coach called them rednecks

I wonder if this is all planned. It could turn a contrived rivalry into a legit rivalry. And honestly, I don't know how UConn fb would get an AAC rival but for some lightning rod event like this. Now UConn needs to destroy them in basketball and not take the pedal off the gas to get some hate from the UCF side.

Perfect, we'll create a trophy for the game and won't tell uconn about it.

And in the space for little nameplates with all the game scores we'll include a plate for our 2011 win over #4 UConn but pretend their wins didn't happen