(06-13-2011 08:15 PM)tcufrog86 Wrote:  But yes I get understand what you are saying, it is tricky how you count grad students. I know several people who went to Northwestern for graduate school who go to a lot of Northwestern football games; however, I think in general it is safe to say that graduate school only alumni are less likely to add to the fanbase than undergraduate alumni.

Maybe we need some sort of divisor for how many grad students is one undergrad. My pick would be around 2 or 3.

(06-13-2011 08:53 PM)General Mike Wrote:  No way Pitt is a Baron in that scenario. TCU and Boise aren't Knights in that scenario either.

Boise doesn't quite fit up with the others, but they definitely have a cut above peasant in interest. Boise State-VT was a huge game last year even though both teams were 0-0.

TCU may have been a bit premature. Their games will be bigger the next couple years from the consecutive BCS bowl games and their conference move, but I can't tell if that is a temporary situation or a step to a more permanent position.

Pitt is probably too high. I grew up not too far from there and I may have an overhigh perception of their impact.

(06-14-2011 09:23 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  With only three ranked finishes in the past 50 years and only 17 bowl appearances Navy looks to be more Peasant than Knight. I doubt you'd find many coaches, pundits or fans who would put them in a higher caste than Texas Tech or Illinois. Much less in the came class as Michigan State, Washington or Missouri.

(06-14-2011 09:05 AM)BeatNavy Wrote:  

(06-13-2011 08:56 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  Where the "F" is Army? Should they just be an auto choice for (black) knights...........

In fact, LOL at including Navy but not including Army and Air Force.

The service academies are really tricky on something like this setup. I put Navy a step up because of their recent success and their series with ND which gives them a high profile game (I don't believe any King has an out of division home-and-home rivalry with a peasant). They also have a reasonably good bowl tie-in, which shows their value. If you want to argue that Army's significance both historically and as a school that attracts unaffiliated fans qualifies it as a Knight, I wouldn't object. If you think that they're all peasants, I couldn't argue too strenuously with that point either.

Army and Navy have too much history and too big of followings to ever be considered peasants.

(06-14-2011 10:51 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  Army and Navy have too much history and too bog of followings to ever be considered peasants.

A number of schools on the Peasants list draw more fans to the stadium and better TV ratings than the service academies.

(06-14-2011 11:19 AM)nuftw Wrote:  

(06-14-2011 09:23 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  With only three ranked finishes in the past 50 years and only 17 bowl appearances Navy looks to be more Peasant than Knight. I doubt you'd find many coaches, pundits or fans who would put them in a higher caste than Texas Tech or Illinois. Much less in the came class as Michigan State, Washington or Missouri.

(06-14-2011 09:05 AM)BeatNavy Wrote:  

(06-13-2011 08:56 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  Where the "F" is Army? Should they just be an auto choice for (black) knights...........

In fact, LOL at including Navy but not including Army and Air Force.

The service academies are really tricky on something like this setup. I put Navy a step up because of their recent success and their series with ND which gives them a high profile game (I don't believe any King has an out of division home-and-home rivalry with a peasant). They also have a reasonably good bowl tie-in, which shows their value. If you want to argue that Army's significance both historically and as a school that attracts unaffiliated fans qualifies it as a Knight, I wouldn't object. If you think that they're all peasants, I couldn't argue too strenuously with that point either.

Doesn't matter to me which group anyone hypothetically puts them in, but there is no really good reason to put the service academies into different groups in the "hierarchy."

( BTW, Army's bowl tie-ins mirror Navy's. )

(06-15-2011 06:47 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  

(06-14-2011 10:51 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  Army and Navy have too much history and too bog of followings to ever be considered peasants.

A number of schools on the Peasants list draw more fans to the stadium and better TV ratings than the service academies.

And how many of them have have a combined 4 national titles, 5 heisman winners, 60 consensus all-americans, and a 0.568 winning percentage, and were the dominant programs for several decades?

BTW, Army vs. Navy draws more viewers than most non-BCS Bowl games.

(06-14-2011 11:04 AM)nuftw Wrote:  

(06-13-2011 08:53 PM)General Mike Wrote:  No way Pitt is a Baron in that scenario. TCU and Boise aren't Knights in that scenario either.

Boise doesn't quite fit up with the others, but they definitely have a cut above peasant in interest. Boise State-VT was a huge game last year even though both teams were 0-0.

TCU may have been a bit premature. Their games will be bigger the next couple years from the consecutive BCS bowl games and their conference move, but I can't tell if that is a temporary situation or a step to a more permanent position.

Pitt is probably too high. I grew up not too far from there and I may have an overhigh perception of their impact.

Being 0-0 and being 6-6 are not the same thing and you know that. The number of teams people are going to watch when they are mediocre (5-5, 6-5, 5-4) can be counted on two hands (Notre Dame, Michigan, USC, Alabama, Texas, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Penn State, Florida). Those are the Kings. Everyone else fits in to some other category depending on what your matrix is going to be.

Not sure if Oklahoma has quite the national following of those other programs (though they certainly have as good a program).

(06-15-2011 05:13 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(06-15-2011 06:47 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  

(06-14-2011 10:51 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  Army and Navy have too much history and too bog of followings to ever be considered peasants.

A number of schools on the Peasants list draw more fans to the stadium and better TV ratings than the service academies.

And how many of them have have a combined 4 national titles, 5 heisman winners, 60 consensus all-americans, and a 0.568 winning percentage, and were the dominant programs for several decades?

BTW, Army vs. Navy draws more viewers than most non-BCS Bowl games.

How relevant is that in 2011? When was the last time Army finished a season ranked? Navy last finished ranked in 2004, and prior to that it was 1978. Illinois played in a Rose Bowl just 4 years ago...that trumps anything Army has done in decades.

Tradition is always relevant. That is the only reason Notre Dame is who they are, or why Auburn was who they were before this past season. Obviously recent history caries more weight, but tradition does matter when the team in question still has relevance. army and Navy are not what they were, but they still have a large following (probably due to us being at war), and thus their tradition, even if ancient does mean something. now if you compared it to Harvard, Yale, or Princeton football, or San Francisco or CCNY basketball, then their tradition means nothing since they have NO relevance today.

(06-15-2011 09:04 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  Tradition is always relevant. That is the only reason Notre Dame is who they are, or why Auburn was who they were before this past season. Obviously recent history caries more weight, but tradition does matter when the team in question still has relevance. army and Navy are not what they were, but they still have a large following (probably due to us being at war), and thus their tradition, even if ancient does mean something. now if you compared it to Harvard, Yale, or Princeton football, or San Francisco or CCNY basketball, then their tradition means nothing since they have NO relevance today.

Still don't see how tradition only elevates them ahead of programs that actually have the opportunity to win at a big time level (like Illinois or Texas Tech). Illinois-USC in the Rose Bowl drew bigger ratings than any game Army or Navy has been part of in years. Ditto Texas Tech vs. Texas on ABC a couple years ago. In this past season's bowl games the Armed Forces Bowl featuring Army drew the second lowest ratings of all the bowl games last year.

Army and Navy are closer to schools like Wake Forest and Duke rather than programs Michigan State and Syracuse. Army and Navy have no chance at competing for national titles. They're (well basically just Navy) successful due to a disciplined scheme and the softest schedules in the FBS year in and year out.

Screw Army and Navy. The last time either was relevant in the national picture was WWII...

(06-15-2011 09:04 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  Tradition is always relevant. That is the only reason Notre Dame is who they are, or why Auburn was who they were before this past season. Obviously recent history caries more weight ....

Notre Dame: tons of tradition/history, very little positive recent history.

Boise: very little tradition/history, tons of recent positive history.

Since Notre Dame is about 10 times more valuable and prominent in the football world than Boise, i'd say it suggests that history/tradition matters more than recent success.

Of course that point can be pushed only so far. E.g., schools like Army and Princeton have tons of history/tradition, but it's SO far back as to count as ancient history, and not mean much today.

Another factor to consider is 'downside potential'. E.g., a big flagship school in a major conference can be mediocre for years, even a couple of decades, and still be quite 'major', because of the size of the school, the number of fans, and presence in the media. Whereas if a TCU or Boise starts to lose, their fall from the ranks of the current-elite will be quick and precipitous ...

(06-16-2011 07:51 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Screw Army and Navy. The last time either was relevant in the national picture was WWII...

Wrong.

Ok. I'll give you the Staubach years...

Fun Read...I'm staying out of this one LOL

BTW, when are we starting one of these lists for college basketball?

MLB: Shall we pencil in Cincy in the Knights or Barons?