(08-09-2016 01:47 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 02:06 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  Cincinnati certainly did better but they were a below .500 program in CUSA (52-55-0) we were 38-63-0 which includes our only winless season (0-11) in 2001.

Average is certainly a lot better than well below average, no?

Yes, agreed just putting the numbers out there for others to digest.

(08-09-2016 01:47 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 02:06 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  From 2005-2012 here are the numbers:

Cincinnati 69-33-0, Houston 65-39-0

So Cincinnati gets a slight edge here.

Slight only if you make the assumption that C-SUA 2.0 = Big East 2.0. Otherwise a better record in a better conference, is more than a "slight" edge.

Maybe maybe not I would have to dig into the Bearcats slate both in and out of conference during that period. As it stands now I just have the macro look at the Cincinnati program unlike the Micro approach I have for ours.... without that info it is just a pure opinion versus a fact. The Big East was a BCS conference but losing to a good program isn't anything but a moral victory for either program in either conference. The rubber meets the road with the wins and how much of a quality win that was.

(08-09-2016 01:47 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 02:06 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  Yes in the last 20 years Cincinnati has 2 more wins than Houston but I would call the two programs a wash in the last two decades and they didn't have to stomach an 0-11 season......

Again you sort of leave out the opposition discrepancy in that pure record comparison. Also, how are you spinning a winless season into a positive? Like it doesn't count? Cincy had a really bad year in 98, if you take out their worse season, you end back at square one.

Wasn't spinning anything just making a joke. Yes there may or may not be a factor in level of competition. I will grant that Cincinnati played more name programs in that period but how good were those names? How good were the non-names? And how many of those games did they win.

As I said a loss is a loss regardless of if it was a good team or not. We could have been in the Big East and lost to the same teams. Wins are what matter and against whom.

(08-09-2016 02:24 PM)MickMack Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 02:22 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 02:19 PM)MickMack Wrote:  I don't think that's accurate. I count total wins at 146 for Cincinnati, 132 for Houston.

You may be right I rushed that part and was going off memory of that other thread we discussed recently about the past 20 years. I'll double check that.

Not that I think it changes the conclusion that the programs have been roughly comparable. Houston has been a little more boom or bust.

That I can agree with. I'd say we have been pretty even but our highs and lows have been bigger than Cincinnati.

(08-09-2016 02:23 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 02:19 PM)MickMack Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 02:06 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  Yes in the last 20 years Cincinnati has 2 more wins than Houston but I would call the two programs a wash in the last two decades and they didn't have to stomach an 0-11 season......

I don't think that's accurate. I count total wins at 146 for Cincinnati, 132 for Houston.

that is correct:

Houston is 132-115, 4-7 bowls
Cincinnati is 146-102, 5-9 bowls

Upon actually running the numbers and not trusting my brain.... This is what I have:

Cincinnati 146-102-0
Houston 132-113-0

I have our bowl numbers but Not Cincinnati's so I'll take your word on those.

I recalled now that I was thinking of the last 10 years where Cincinnati has two more wins. That was it!!!

90-40-0 vs. 88-44-0

I knew I wasn't crazy.......

(08-09-2016 02:39 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 02:23 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 02:19 PM)MickMack Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 02:06 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  Yes in the last 20 years Cincinnati has 2 more wins than Houston but I would call the two programs a wash in the last two decades and they didn't have to stomach an 0-11 season......

I don't think that's accurate. I count total wins at 146 for Cincinnati, 132 for Houston.

that is correct:

Houston is 132-115, 4-7 bowls
Cincinnati is 146-102, 5-9 bowls

Upon actually running the numbers and not trusting my brain.... This is what I have:

Cincinnati 146-102-0
Houston 132-113-0

I have our bowl numbers but Not Cincinnati's so I'll take your word on those.

I recalled now that I was thinking of the last 10 years where Cincinnati has two more wins. That was it!!!

90-40-0 vs. 88-44-0

I knew I wasn't crazy.......

You might be. This just isn't proof.

(08-09-2016 02:55 PM)MickMack Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 02:39 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  I knew I wasn't crazy.......

You might be. This just isn't proof.

For the record, following are the win totals for both schools for the past 25 years, broken down by five year periods.

..................Cincy.....Houston

1991-1995....25...........12

1996-2000....26...........23

2001-2005....30...........21

2006-2010....45...........41

2011-2015....45...........47

Total............171.........144


Not that any of this really matters, but on final analysis, Cincy's **** appears to be a little longer. I have no way to measure girth, however, so don't let this keep you from arguing. Carry on.

Wow. People stil arguing over who has the most wins?

That's how the Big 12 is going to decide??


Give it a rest for a couple days guys. Some new article is going to come out later this week, I'm sure. Then we can have a 200 post thread on that one.

I haven't read all 23 pages, so please forgive me if this has been mentioned. I really believe Houston should be selected on its own merits. However, Big 12 can select two teams outside BYU knowing BYU will be there later. UH may not be there later.

(08-09-2016 03:19 PM)coog1927 Wrote:  I haven't read all 23 pages, so please forgive me if this has been mentioned. I really believe Houston should be selected on its own merits. However, Big 12 can select two teams outside BYU knowing BYU will be there later. UH may not be there later.

I think this is (yet another) argument against BYU. No one else is going to take them. I have to think UH and UC are the picks (if expansion happens).

Cincy > Houston; Houston > Cincy; Cincy > Houston; Cincy > Houston; Cincy > Houston; Houston > Cincy; Houston > Cincy;Houston > Cincy; Cincy > Houston; Houston > Cincy; Cincy > Houston; Houston > Cincy; Cincy > Houston; Cincy > Houston; Houston > Cincy; Houston > Cincy; Cincy > Houston; Cincy > Houston;

Love to see who the old northern division likes. I am betting CSU and UC.

Lots of interesting history but not sure how relevant it is
AState won the last 8 meetings against North Texas and last three against Middle Tennessee by an average of 32.7 and CUSA didn't call AState to join.

(08-09-2016 05:09 PM)Groo Wrote:  Love to see who the old northern division likes. I am betting CSU and UC.

Iowa State, Kansas and Kansas State?

It seems like they would like continued access to Texas recruiting grounds while gaining access to new recruiting grounds, and better Eastern Exposure.

That would point to UC and Houston.

It may well be UC and Houston.

But it absolutely won't be UC for reasons of "recruiting grounds" or "Eastern exposure". Please.

(08-09-2016 03:31 PM)MickMack Wrote:  I think this is (yet another) argument against BYU. No one else is going to take them. I have to think UH and UC are the picks (if expansion happens).

I think there is a difference between nobody taking BYU, and BYU being there later. If Texas and Oklahoma leave, BYU may well decide that Independence would be better than a weakened Big 12 without the Sugar Bowl and in G6 status.