(08-01-2013 03:35 PM)SVHerd Wrote:  It's not how you start, it's where you finish. Although with ECU getting votes, the rest of the East Division should just give up - they are that damn good! LOL!

Yeah, don't worry about it; because coaches don't know what the Hell they are talking about. Besides that; Phil Steele said... .

and you forgot USA Today. How many you got on the watch lists?

(08-01-2013 03:44 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  7-1 with the one loss to a team that's gone.

We were last year, and return just about everyone.

Yep, and played 4 teams during the regular season with a winning record and lost by at least 20 to every single one of them. Thank God for that schedule last year.

I'm glad ECU received those three votes. I want your hopes to be as high as they can possibly be.

(08-01-2013 03:51 PM)cortezthekiller Wrote:  and you forgot USA Today. How many you got on the watch lists?

And CBSSports too. Oh wait... .

Don't worry. The coaches don't know anything.

The fact that some of you think that anyone in a non-AQ conference besides Boise and Louisville(though technically this will be AAC's last AQ year) is ranked in the top 25 is laughable. Just cause you beat a couple of Power 5 teams doesn't mean you're team is in the top 25 in the nation. Don't be delusional. The reason some 7-6 teams like USC is ranked and a team like Tulsa isn't is because USC plays ranked teams yearly. Even though they had a **** awful down year, the amount of talent they have is ridiculous. Tulsa's best team they played was Iowa State last year and that series is 1-1. They even lost to Arkansas. ECU hasn't beaten a winning team in the past two years. Why the hell do you deserve any points towards being a top 25 team in the nation? Hell Northern Illinois went undefeated in MAC play and won their championship game only to be stomped by Florida State who at the time was only ranked 3 higher than them. Being in the top 25 means you can beat most of the other teams not in the top 25. The closest to be able to would probably be Tulsa but even that is iffy.

Mack Brown's UT Longhorns were 13 and 1 in 2009 and were picked to finish in the Top 5 in 2010 but finished that season 5 and 6. Some wanted to fire him after that season saying "Mack has lost his touch."

It seems most polls and college football magazines (except Phil Steele's) rely heavily on the previous year's teams to forecast their rankings for an upcoming season while (seemedly) not taking into account some of those teams who graduated many of their key players.

And it seems the UT's of the NCAA can reload much quicker than most of us in G5 conferences.
My .02 on the subject.

(08-01-2013 04:13 PM)ODU14 Wrote:  The fact that some of you think that anyone in a non-AQ conference besides Boise and Louisville(though technically this will be AAC's last AQ year) is ranked in the top 25 is laughable. Just cause you beat a couple of Power 5 teams doesn't mean you're team is in the top 25 in the nation. Don't be delusional. The reason some 7-6 teams like USC is ranked and a team like Tulsa isn't is because USC plays ranked teams yearly. Even thought they had a **** awful down year, the amount of talent they have is ridiculous. Tulsa's best team they played was Iowa State last year and that series is 1-1. They even lost to Arkansas. ECU hasn't beaten a winning team in the past two years. Why the hell do you deserve any points towards being a top 25 team in the nation? Hell Northern Illinois went undefeated in MAC play and won their championship game only to be stomped by Florida State who at the time was only ranked 3 higher than them. Being in the top 25 means you can beat most of the other teams not in the top 25. The closest to be able to would probably be Tulsa but even that is iffy.

Most of the teams in the so called P5 are overrated. Some of them don't have any business being rated at all, but they get the nod simply because they are in those conferences. You are going find out real fast when your schools start to play those schools that your record is a product of always having to play them on the road. And as soon as you get them on your field a few times; you start whipping them. If anything Tulsa, Boise etc., are underrated in comparison to the middle of the road BCS clubs. There is a reason that schools like NC State, Miss St., Oklahoma St., etc.; don't like to line up against schools like ECU, Southern Miss, Tulsa, etc. Those schools are a lot closer talentwise than people care to admit. The top BCS just have too much talent, but those middle BCS schools know that they can be had. BTW, NIU lost to Iowa last year and Iowa was not good; so NIU's success comes from playing in the MAC rather than in a league like CUSA. Hell Marshall was the same way and then they came to CUSA and they have been in the witness protection program every since.

yeah and after they left the MAC about a double handful did pretty good in the league too....so maybe not all weak competition like the team that beat the Pirates in the Bowl. That was a Herd MAC team if I remember right, huh?

(08-01-2013 03:56 PM)banker Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 03:44 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  7-1 with the one loss to a team that's gone.

We were last year, and return just about everyone.

Yep, and played 4 teams during the regular season with a winning record and lost by at least 20 to every single one of them. Thank God for that schedule last year.

So we played a bunch of bad loser teams just like that bad loser 5-7 Marshall team.... It wasn't our fault you sucked. Not like you did anything to help that schedule.

(08-01-2013 04:13 PM)ODU14 Wrote:  The fact that some of you think that anyone in a non-AQ conference besides Boise and Louisville(though technically this will be AAC's last AQ year) is ranked in the top 25 is laughable. Just cause you beat a couple of Power 5 teams doesn't mean you're team is in the top 25 in the nation. Don't be delusional. The reason some 7-6 teams like USC is ranked and a team like Tulsa isn't is because USC plays ranked teams yearly. Even though they had a **** awful down year, the amount of talent they have is ridiculous. Tulsa's best team they played was Iowa State last year and that series is 1-1. They even lost to Arkansas. ECU hasn't beaten a winning team in the past two years. Why the hell do you deserve any points towards being a top 25 team in the nation? Hell Northern Illinois went undefeated in MAC play and won their championship game only to be stomped by Florida State who at the time was only ranked 3 higher than them. Being in the top 25 means you can beat most of the other teams not in the top 25. The closest to be able to would probably be Tulsa but even that is iffy.

There are some very good (top25) non P5 teams. Evidently, the coaches and media disagree with your opinion, as they had Tech, Utah State, San Jose from the WAC in the Top 25 at some point during the season. While I think it is difficult for a G5 school to consistently be in the Top 25, there are years where a team has the ability to play with some tough competition. When the G5 are beating schools from the P5, why shouldn't they be given Top 25 consideration. These are the same teams the Top 25 P5 teams are beating, and being rewarded with high rankings. There is a difference in that a P5 team can lose and not be hurt in the rankings, whereas a G5 team will drop out faster than the speed of light. Your argument is the same used by the P5 teams, but in reality there a are a lot of crappy teams in the P5 conferences.

65-59 2OT at Greenville with Cato on the bench most of 2nd half and the 4th string RB in the game who fumbled twice and 2nd string QB ran for a TD but also threw a pick thats 3 TOs by the subs...if we suck then what are you...lol

(08-01-2013 05:54 PM)cortezthekiller Wrote:  65-59 2OT at Greenville with Cato on the bench most of 2nd half and the 4th string RB in the game who fumbled twice and 2nd string QB ran for a TD but also threw a pick thats 3 TOs by the subs...if we suck then what are you...lol

winners.

scoreboard.

(08-01-2013 06:46 PM)ECMAN79 Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 05:54 PM)cortezthekiller Wrote:  65-59 2OT at Greenville with Cato on the bench most of 2nd half and the 4th string RB in the game who fumbled twice and 2nd string QB ran for a TD but also threw a pick thats 3 TOs by the subs...if we suck then what are you...lol

winners.

scoreboard.

Truth.

(08-01-2013 05:54 PM)cortezthekiller Wrote:  65-59 2OT at Greenville with Cato on the bench most of 2nd half and the 4th string RB in the game who fumbled twice and 2nd string QB ran for a TD but also threw a pick thats 3 TOs by the subs...if we suck then what are you...lol

Whatever dude, every team has injuries and your back-up QB sure as hell did not lose the game for you...Would have been tough for Cato to perform any better.

Why are you always so worried about ECU anyway, if we suck so bad and are so overrated then why are you so obsessed with us?

Hell, we should have have killed you guys anyway but our players got a little relaxed with the HUGE lead we had and let you guys back in the game...It happens.

(08-01-2013 07:11 PM)ECU-DMB Fanatic Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 05:54 PM)cortezthekiller Wrote:  65-59 2OT at Greenville with Cato on the bench most of 2nd half and the 4th string RB in the game who fumbled twice and 2nd string QB ran for a TD but also threw a pick thats 3 TOs by the subs...if we suck then what are you...lol

Whatever dude, every team has injuries and your back-up QB sure as hell did not lose the game for you...Would have been tough for Cato to perform any better.

Why are you always so worried about ECU anyway, if we suck so bad and are so overrated then why are you so obsessed with us?

Hell, we should have have killed you guys anyway but our players got a little relaxed with the HUGE lead we had and let you guys back in the game...It happens.

Yep, up 35-14 with 6:56 to go in the second quarter.

Oh Cortez, your wrong on the turn overs, Cato-1 int. cashed in for 7, Frohnapfel-1 cashed in for 3, fumbles 2, 1 lost in 2nd OT, ECU scores when they get the ball, game over. Oh, that fumble was lost by your leading rusher for the game, Essray Taliaferro.

Also, Cato didn't come out of the game till late in the 3rd with 7:10 to go in the quarter. Came back in for one play at the start of the 4th. And, we knocked him out of the game.

Taliaferro was our 4th string back. He was the leading rusher in the game because Grooms, Butler and Watson all had various injuries. Essentially you beat our second string offense by 6, in double overtime, at home.

And you wonder why were confident? I've tried to be nice saying I think it will be a close game. In reality, I'll really be surprised if we don't beat you by at least 14.

(08-01-2013 08:41 PM)banker Wrote:  Taliaferro was our 4th string back. He was the leading rusher in the game because Grooms, Butler and Watson all had various injuries. Essentially you beat our second string offense by 6, in double overtime, at home.

And you wonder why were confident? I've tried to be nice saying I think it will be a close game. In reality, I'll really be surprised if we don't beat you by at least 14.

LOL.

So how did you guys loose to UAB?

We will all know the better team after week 4. Whoever beats VT by a bigger margin is the better team.

(08-01-2013 08:41 PM)banker Wrote:  Taliaferro was our 4th string back. He was the leading rusher in the game because Grooms, Butler and Watson all had various injuries. Essentially you beat our second string offense by 6, in double overtime, at home.

And you wonder why were confident? I've tried to be nice saying I think it will be a close game. In reality, I'll really be surprised if we don't beat you by at least 14.

Whatever dude, it is not that simple...You are making an assumption that we were a healthy team and playing with all of our starters....We had injuries as well...The injury excuse is the biggest chump fan move of all...It is football, all teams have injuries, but if it helps you sleep at night then whatever...

But for comparisons sake I would like for you to look back at ECU's 2008 CUSA Championship team...That team could have packed it in and made excuses but they did not and they kept grinding it out to a CUSA Championship...That team had more injuries than I can ever remember in my 30 years of following ECU football. It is a physical sport with injuries and part of being a good team is being able to overcome the inevitable injuries that will happen..When one player goes down the next one must step up...No Excuses.

(08-01-2013 06:46 PM)ECMAN79 Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 05:54 PM)cortezthekiller Wrote:  65-59 2OT at Greenville with Cato on the bench most of 2nd half and the 4th string RB in the game who fumbled twice and 2nd string QB ran for a TD but also threw a pick thats 3 TOs by the subs...if we suck then what are you...lol

winners.

scoreboard.

+2 well played sir