I know people who think ODU has a d-2 football program

(08-21-2017 11:47 AM)MonGNARch Wrote:  I know people who think ODU has a d-2 football program

They sound smart.

(08-20-2017 12:05 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(08-20-2017 09:05 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  Anyone who moved up after LA Tech is not legit IMO.

LMAO. So, Akron and UNLV are legit but Boise St and South Florida aren't?

So, what exactly happened between 1989 and 2000 that makes those schools so much more legit - you know - in your opinion.

Just my own *personal* timeline. By "legit," I mean "team I'm 100% OK with sharing a conference with."

Also, on Akron: I should amend what I posted to mention that, in my mind, the Big West and Mid American conferences weren't "really" I-A. Their champions played each other in a bowl game every year, but other than that, they didn't participate in the bowl system. They were mis-categorized, and their talent was on par with I-AA, at best.

The underlying logic is to include teams that were widely perceived as major football programs when I was a child. My feeling is that the delineation in place back then (except for the mis-categorization of the MAC and Big West) was reasonable.

(08-21-2017 01:26 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(08-20-2017 12:05 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(08-20-2017 09:05 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  Anyone who moved up after LA Tech is not legit IMO.

LMAO. So, Akron and UNLV are legit but Boise St and South Florida aren't?

So, what exactly happened between 1989 and 2000 that makes those schools so much more legit - you know - in your opinion.

Just my own *personal* timeline. By "legit," I mean "team I'm 100% OK with sharing a conference with."

So anyone who came after LT, even by just a few years, is not "legit", but Tech is...

(08-21-2017 08:37 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(08-21-2017 01:26 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(08-20-2017 12:05 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(08-20-2017 09:05 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  Anyone who moved up after LA Tech is not legit IMO.

LMAO. So, Akron and UNLV are legit but Boise St and South Florida aren't?

So, what exactly happened between 1989 and 2000 that makes those schools so much more legit - you know - in your opinion.

Just my own *personal* timeline. By "legit," I mean "team I'm 100% OK with sharing a conference with."

So anyone who came after LT, even by just a few years, is not "legit", but Tech is...

More than few, Middle was 11 years, North Texas would be the closest 7 years after Tech move up

It probably has more to do with being in the Sunbelt than a certain year. The Sunbelt was dead last for so many years, I'm sure Southern Miss fans weren't thrilled to hear the Sunbelt teams moving up

(08-21-2017 12:09 PM)ODUDrunkard13 Wrote:  

(08-21-2017 11:47 AM)MonGNARch Wrote:  I know people who think ODU has a d-2 football program

They sound smart.

Yeah they are the same people who were shocked when I said we have already hosted an ACC team lol. I don't pay mind to those people. Some do it to talk our program down, others think we're still a basketball school, and don't know how the NCAA works haha

(08-22-2017 06:40 AM)MonGNARch Wrote:  

(08-21-2017 12:09 PM)ODUDrunkard13 Wrote:  

(08-21-2017 11:47 AM)MonGNARch Wrote:  I know people who think ODU has a d-2 football program

They sound smart.

Yeah they are the same people who were shocked when I said we have already hosted an ACC team lol. I don't pay mind to those people. Some do it to talk our program down, others think we're still a basketball school, and don't know how the NCAA works haha

When Western won the FCS (1AA back then) title in 02 it got very little press in the state newspapers and I'm pretty sure the Louieville Courier Journal had a little blurb that said we'd won the D2 championship.

When we went FBS we got quite a bit of ink. When we beat Kentucky in back to back seasons we got a lot of press. When we hired Petrino we got more because he'd been at Louieville. When we hired Brohm we got a ton because he comes from Louieville's first family of football. We are now talked about with UK and Louieville. We're still 3rd behind them but we have moved ourselves away from the Commonwealth's other regional universities like EKU, Murray and Morehead and the other smaller schools.

Your people will learn who you are because of the ACC teams you have coming in. Plus you're from a major metropolitan area. That helps too just because of your media associated with your area.

(08-22-2017 12:19 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(08-21-2017 08:37 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(08-21-2017 01:26 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(08-20-2017 12:05 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(08-20-2017 09:05 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  Anyone who moved up after LA Tech is not legit IMO.

LMAO. So, Akron and UNLV are legit but Boise St and South Florida aren't?

So, what exactly happened between 1989 and 2000 that makes those schools so much more legit - you know - in your opinion.

Just my own *personal* timeline. By "legit," I mean "team I'm 100% OK with sharing a conference with."

So anyone who came after LT, even by just a few years, is not "legit", but Tech is...

More than few, Middle was 11 years, North Texas would be the closest 7 years after Tech move up

Again, what was the magic that happened in those 10 years? There is no doubt there have been some programs that made the jump that weren't ready and still aren't. Hell, some started football just for the explicit purpose to move to I-A as soon as possible. MT, for example, has fielded football for over 100 years and has a demonstrated commitment to athletics. I think there is a difference and believe we have paid our dues. After Tech...

1992: Arkansas St and Nevada
1994: ULM (doesn't belong in I-A)
1995: North Texas
1996: Boise St, UCF, Idaho (who as we know is dropping back down)
1997: Marshall (showed how to do it at the right time)
1999: Middle Tennessee (Administration came very close to moving between 1985 and 1990, which could have pre-dated Tech, and is when we should have done it. Was ranked #1 several times during that period. Administration was waiting for "perfect time" of which there is no such thing).
2000: Connecticut, South Florida

(08-22-2017 12:26 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  It probably has more to do with being in the Sunbelt than a certain year. The Sunbelt was dead last for so many years, I'm sure Southern Miss fans weren't thrilled to hear the Sunbelt teams moving up

Tell me all about the glory days of the Big West...

Why isn't this whole conversation dead and committed to the dustbin of history?

(08-22-2017 07:37 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(08-22-2017 12:19 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(08-21-2017 08:37 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(08-21-2017 01:26 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(08-20-2017 12:05 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  LMAO. So, Akron and UNLV are legit but Boise St and South Florida aren't?

So, what exactly happened between 1989 and 2000 that makes those schools so much more legit - you know - in your opinion.

Just my own *personal* timeline. By "legit," I mean "team I'm 100% OK with sharing a conference with."

So anyone who came after LT, even by just a few years, is not "legit", but Tech is...

More than few, Middle was 11 years, North Texas would be the closest 7 years after Tech move up

Again, what was the magic that happened in those 10 years? There is no doubt there have been some programs that made the jump that weren't ready and still aren't. Hell, some started football just for the explicit purpose to move to I-A as soon as possible. MT, for example, has fielded football for over 100 years and has a demonstrated commitment to athletics. I think there is a difference and believe we have paid our dues. After Tech...

1992: Arkansas St and Nevada
1994: ULM (doesn't belong in I-A)
1995: North Texas
1996: Boise St, UCF, Idaho (who as we know is dropping back down)
1997: Marshall (showed how to do it at the right time)
1999: Middle Tennessee (Administration came very close to moving between 1985 and 1990, which could have pre-dated Tech, and is when we should have done it. Was ranked #1 several times during that period. Administration was waiting for "perfect time" of which there is no such thing).
2000: Connecticut, South Florida

Just FYI - North Texas is an original FBS member. The Division I-A and Division I-AA split took place in 1978. UNT was Division I-A until 1982, when they moved down to I-AA. You are correct that they re-joined the FBS again in 1995. Some here may not be aware of this.

(08-22-2017 02:51 PM)joshdude182 Wrote:  

(08-22-2017 07:37 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(08-22-2017 12:19 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(08-21-2017 08:37 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(08-21-2017 01:26 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  Just my own *personal* timeline. By "legit," I mean "team I'm 100% OK with sharing a conference with."

So anyone who came after LT, even by just a few years, is not "legit", but Tech is...

More than few, Middle was 11 years, North Texas would be the closest 7 years after Tech move up

Again, what was the magic that happened in those 10 years? There is no doubt there have been some programs that made the jump that weren't ready and still aren't. Hell, some started football just for the explicit purpose to move to I-A as soon as possible. MT, for example, has fielded football for over 100 years and has a demonstrated commitment to athletics. I think there is a difference and believe we have paid our dues. After Tech...

1992: Arkansas St and Nevada
1994: ULM (doesn't belong in I-A)
1995: North Texas
1996: Boise St, UCF, Idaho (who as we know is dropping back down)
1997: Marshall (showed how to do it at the right time)
1999: Middle Tennessee (Administration came very close to moving between 1985 and 1990, which could have pre-dated Tech, and is when we should have done it. Was ranked #1 several times during that period. Administration was waiting for "perfect time" of which there is no such thing).
2000: Connecticut, South Florida

Just FYI - North Texas is an original FBS member. The Division I-A and Division I-AA split took place in 1978. UNT was Division I-A until 1982, when they moved down to I-AA. You are correct that they re-joined the FBS again in 1995. Some here may not be aware of this.

So was Marshall...

(08-22-2017 04:42 PM)THUNDERGround Wrote:  

(08-22-2017 02:51 PM)joshdude182 Wrote:  

(08-22-2017 07:37 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(08-22-2017 12:19 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(08-21-2017 08:37 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  So anyone who came after LT, even by just a few years, is not "legit", but Tech is...

More than few, Middle was 11 years, North Texas would be the closest 7 years after Tech move up

Again, what was the magic that happened in those 10 years? There is no doubt there have been some programs that made the jump that weren't ready and still aren't. Hell, some started football just for the explicit purpose to move to I-A as soon as possible. MT, for example, has fielded football for over 100 years and has a demonstrated commitment to athletics. I think there is a difference and believe we have paid our dues. After Tech...

1992: Arkansas St and Nevada
1994: ULM (doesn't belong in I-A)
1995: North Texas
1996: Boise St, UCF, Idaho (who as we know is dropping back down)
1997: Marshall (showed how to do it at the right time)
1999: Middle Tennessee (Administration came very close to moving between 1985 and 1990, which could have pre-dated Tech, and is when we should have done it. Was ranked #1 several times during that period. Administration was waiting for "perfect time" of which there is no such thing).
2000: Connecticut, South Florida

Just FYI - North Texas is an original FBS member. The Division I-A and Division I-AA split took place in 1978. UNT was Division I-A until 1982, when they moved down to I-AA. You are correct that they re-joined the FBS again in 1995. Some here may not be aware of this.

So was Marshall...

Tech did the same. Reverted to IAA about that time, back up to IA in 89.

I'll never consider South Florida legit. Tech has football tradition dating back to 1901. ESPN came in and created USF overnight solely on potential viewers.

Boise State will always be a truck driving school to me.