182 replies to this topic

[mweb08]

The AP Poll has existed for 85 years. Maybe it would take forever to see how every school did every year to measure all their ten year stretches. But going by your definition of consistency, finishing in the top-25 60% of the time, only five schools have done that. Only 10 schools have finished in the AP top 25 50% of the time.

Teams outside of that 10 include LSU, Auburn, Georgia, Clemson, Florida. Some of them better recently rather than in years past. Some of the ones in the top 10 were better in years past than they are recently. USC, Texas, Nebraska, Tennessee.

Coaching matters a lot. If James Franklin took over for Fridge, who knows what MD looks like the last decade. Probably a lot better. Maryland has its flaws, but Franklin put together solid teams, selling kids on playing for child molester university. Was there a tougher sell in college sports?

Nebraska has made some bad coaching hires (which I don't understand why Frost sucks so bad given his background) but they haven't finished a season ranked since 2013. I think you can fall out of consistency easier than it takes to stay consistent. If Alabama hires the wrong coach after Saban, they might go the way the of Nebraska. They were unranked 8 out of 11 years before Saban. 12 years if you count Saban's first season there. Florida State, Texas, powerhouse schools that can't find decent coaches recently.

It goes the other way. Clemson had some success in the early 80s. Average up until Dabo Swinney comes in and they go to an elite program. Nat'l titles, 11 of his 12 seasons finishing ranked.

It's not impossible for Maryland to one day find that right combination.

Only 5 schools have had 10 year stretches of consistently being in the top 25? Because that's what I was talking about, not the entire history of the program.

[Mike in STL]

Only 5 schools have had 10 year stretches of consistently being in the top 25? Because that's what I was talking about, not the entire history of the program.

I was giving an average. I’m not going to look at over 100 schools and see how many of them ended the year ranked 6 times out of 10. I got stuff to do. I mean, you brought up the mid 1950s. So I figured I’d go back only 20 more years. What’s the difference?

There is probably a handful of schools that were never consistently top 25, but since the turn of the century, have been. Meaning it can be done.

[BSLMikeLowe]

 

Just so we're clear my gripe with the Big 10 for basketball is more due to the fact that Maryland sticks out like a sore thumb geographically compared to the other schools, especially when it comes to the competitive basketball schools.  Michigan, MSU, OSU, Wisconsin, Iowa, Purdue, Indiana are all good programs.  They all also are geographically much closer to each other than to Maryland, and have many cases have natural rivalries with long histories.  (Purdue/Indiana, Michigan/OSU, Michigan/MSU, to name a few.)  IMO it helps to sustain interest in a program during down years when schools have natural rivals with long histories.  And during good years, I think the fire burns even brighter.  You see this in other leagues as well.  Giants/Dodgers.  Yankees/Red Sox.  Ravens/Steelers.

 

Yeah I get that Maryland didn't really have any natural rivals in the ACC either other than *maybe* UVA (which diminished in importance after the Hokies joined the ACC) but I believe that Maryland's proximity to those schools really helped people become emotionally invested in the games in a big way.  You're more likely to run into an ACC student/grad around Maryland/DC than a Big Ten student/grad.

 

If Penn State or Rutgers somehow become elite basketball schools, sure, it becomes a little bit easier to stay in the Big Ten and be happy.  And we have no idea how the ACC will play out with Coach K out at Duke.  But assuming Scheyer doesn't misfire, it's a lot easier to imagine the ACC as a conference where Maryland could play meaningful basketball that lots of people in the region are emotionally invested in.

 

And yeah, football might have a deeper conference to test their mettle in the Big Ten.  But Maryland has shown zero ability or desire to build and support a top-flight football team over the past 100 or so years.  Sure it could happen, but if you were to bet who is more competitive over the next 20 years, Maryland Football vs Maryland Basketball, I am pretty sure 100% of the money would go to the basketball team.  I think Maryland has to build a decent football program before they consider things like geography and natural rivals.  With basketball, they're at least already decent and have a long history of being decent-to-great.

It sounds like your biggest gripe about being in the Big Ten is the same gripe MD fans had with the “old” ACC, that they were the geographic outlier and thus treated like a red-headed stepchild, despite your claim otherwise.

[BSLRoseKatz]

It sounds like your biggest gripe about being in the Big Ten is the same gripe MD fans had with the “old” ACC, that they were the geographic outlier and thus treated like a red-headed stepchild, despite your claim otherwise.

Yeah if Maryland wants a conference where it truly fits geographically it should be trying to figure out a way to convince WVU, UVA and PSU to all join the same conference otherwise you're either playing a bunch of tobacco farmers or a bunch of corn farmers 

[mweb08]

I was giving an average. I’m not going to look at over 100 schools and see how many of them ended the year ranked 6 times out of 10. I got stuff to do. I mean, you brought up the mid 1950s. So I figured I’d go back only 20 more years. What’s the difference?

There is probably a handful of schools that were never consistently top 25, but since the turn of the century, have been. Meaning it can be done.

No one asked you to and no one asked for you to provide averages over the existence of college football rankings either, yet here we are for some reason.

I brought up the 50's because that along with the stretch in the 70's were the only ones that approach or meet the consistent top 25 criteria depending on how you define that. 6 out of 10 is the best Maryland has ever done, which is why I brought that up, but that's pretty weak to be considered a consistent top 25 team imo.


So those are outliers and not particularly relevant to what the program is capable of now imo due to how long ago they were and that they were surrounded by a lot of mediocrity at best.

Maryland is among this "handful" of teams that haven't done it recently enough to matter, if ever, and I'd guess that much more than a handful also haven't done it.

And yes, of course it can be done. Good thing I've already said that several times. There's not a good case to think it will be done anytime soon though. That's a homer position. Unbiased college football fans don't look at Maryland as a team that should consistently be a top 25 team.

[BSLMikeLowe]

Yeah if Maryland wants a conference where it truly fits geographically it should be trying to figure out a way to convince WVU, UVA and PSU to all join the same conference otherwise you're either playing a bunch of tobacco farmers or a bunch of corn farmers 

 

Before they went to the Big Ten, Joe Paterno wanted all the NE independent schools (PSU, Pitt, WV, BC, Syracuse, Rutgers) along with MD to form their own conference. I forget if Miami and FSU would have been a part. But MD obviously wasn't going to entertain leaving the ACC at that time, and the PSU admins preferred the Big Ten. And the others just decided to make the Big East a football conference too.

[BSLZackKiesel]

Just so we're clear my gripe with the Big 10 for basketball is more due to the fact that Maryland sticks out like a sore thumb geographically compared to the other schools, especially when it comes to the competitive basketball schools.  Michigan, MSU, OSU, Wisconsin, Iowa, Purdue, Indiana are all good programs.  They all also are geographically much closer to each other than to Maryland, and have many cases have natural rivalries with long histories.  (Purdue/Indiana, Michigan/OSU, Michigan/MSU, to name a few.)  IMO it helps to sustain interest in a program during down years when schools have natural rivals with long histories.  And during good years, I think the fire burns even brighter.  You see this in other leagues as well.  Giants/Dodgers.  Yankees/Red Sox.  Ravens/Steelers.

 

Yeah I get that Maryland didn't really have any natural rivals in the ACC either other than *maybe* UVA (which diminished in importance after the Hokies joined the ACC) but I believe that Maryland's proximity to those schools really helped people become emotionally invested in the games in a big way.  You're more likely to run into an ACC student/grad around Maryland/DC than a Big Ten student/grad.

See, I actually disagree with this. After growing up in the Baltimore area and living in the DC area for the last 5 years, I've run into far more Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, and Rutgers alums than I ever did anyone in the ACC other than Virginia or Virginia Tech. The Big Ten has an enormous alumni base in this area, and it's one of the reasons why they held the Big Ten Tournament here a few years ago. Hell, even last week the majority of the Iowa fans I met lived around here.

[mweb08]

See, I actually disagree with this. After growing up in the Baltimore area and living in the DC area for the last 5 years, I've run into far more Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, and Rutgers alums than I ever did anyone in the ACC other than Virginia or Virginia Tech. The Big Ten has an enormous alumni base in this area, and it's one of the reasons why they held the Big Ten Tournament here a few years ago. Hell, even last week the majority of the Iowa fans I met lived around here.

I agree here. I know / run into way more people from Penn State, the Michigan schools, Ohio State, Illinois, and Rutgers than the Virginia schools or any of the ACC schools further South.

Penn State is especially common here (lots of gear seen in the city too).

[BSLRoseKatz]

Before they went to the Big Ten, Joe Paterno wanted all the NE independent schools (PSU, Pitt, WV, BC, Syracuse, Rutgers) along with MD to form their own conference. I forget if Miami and FSU would have been a part. But MD obviously wasn't going to entertain leaving the ACC at that time, and the PSU admins preferred the Big Ten. And the others just decided to make the Big East a football conference too.

Yeah if the goal to make a conference where everyone plays FBS football and is a better geographic fit than Iowa or Georgia Tech, I think it'd have to this with 10

 

1. Maryland

2. Syracuse

3. Penn State

4. Pitt

5. UVA

6. VT

7. Rutgers

8. WVU

9. BC

10. Temple

[BSLMikeLowe]

See, I actually disagree with this. After growing up in the Baltimore area and living in the DC area for the last 5 years, I've run into far more Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, and Rutgers alums than I ever did anyone in the ACC other than Virginia or Virginia Tech. The Big Ten has an enormous alumni base in this area, and it's one of the reasons why they held the Big Ten Tournament here a few years ago. Hell, even last week the majority of the Iowa fans I met lived around here.

 

Same. I think I encountered more PSU alums when I lived in Baltimore than all other ACC schools (save UM of course) combined.

[BSLMikeLowe]

The AP Poll has existed for 85 years. Maybe it would take forever to see how every school did every year to measure all their ten year stretches. But going by your definition of consistency, finishing in the top-25 60% of the time, only five schools have done that. Only 10 schools have finished in the AP top 25 50% of the time.

 

Teams outside of that 10 include LSU, Auburn, Georgia, Clemson, Florida. Some of them better recently rather than in years past. Some of the ones in the top 10 were better in years past than they are recently. USC, Texas, Nebraska, Tennessee. 

 

Coaching matters a lot. If James Franklin took over for Fridge, who knows what MD looks like the last decade. Probably a lot better. Maryland has its flaws, but Franklin put together solid teams, selling kids on playing for child molester university. Was there a tougher sell in college sports? 

 

Nebraska has made some bad coaching hires (which I don't understand why Frost sucks so bad given his background) but they haven't finished a season ranked since 2013. I think you can fall out of consistency easier than it takes to stay consistent. If Alabama hires the wrong coach after Saban, they might go the way the of Nebraska. They were unranked 8 out of 11 years before Saban. 12 years if you count Saban's first season there. Florida State, Texas, powerhouse schools that can't find decent coaches recently.

 

It goes the other way. Clemson had some success in the early 80s. Average up until Dabo Swinney comes in and they go to an elite program. Nat'l titles, 11 of his 12 seasons finishing ranked. 

 

It's not impossible for Maryland to one day find that right combination. 

 

As you illustrate, hiring the right coach is everything.

[Mike in STL]

No one asked you to and no one asked for you to provide averages over the existence of college football rankings either, yet here we are for some reason.

I brought up the 50's because that along with the stretch in the 70's were the only ones that approach or meet the consistent top 25 criteria depending on how you define that. 6 out of 10 is the best Maryland has ever done, which is why I brought that up, but that's pretty weak to be considered a consistent top 25 team imo.


So those are outliers and not particularly relevant to what the program is capable of now imo due to how long ago they were and that they were surrounded by a lot of mediocrity at best.

Maryland is among this "handful" of teams that haven't done it recently enough to matter, if ever, and I'd guess that much more than a handful also haven't done it.

And yes, of course it can be done. Good thing I've already said that several times. There's not a good case to think it will be done anytime soon though. That's a homer position. Unbiased college football fans don't look at Maryland as a team that should consistently be a top 25 team.

I don’t know what your point is then other than you woke up on the wrong side of the bed and you don’t like amateur athletics anyway. Chris said MD could one day be consistently top 25. You said that’s delusional. He defended his stance and called you defeatist. You called your stance realistic rather than defeatist. You pointed out MDs top 25s from decades ago, and I thought you were defining consistency as having 6 of 10 years of top 25s. Or 60% of the time. So I was curious how that stacked up to other teams. I know MD isn’t good, but how many teams are top 25 more than 60% of the time, is something I wanted to know. A lot, a little? I wanted to know.

You insinuated anything good MD does would be unexpected. Not predicted. To which I say, hi. Welcome to sports. Expect the unexpected. It’s half the reason anyone follows, to see the unexpected and live in that moment.

So again, I don’t know what your point is. Maryland hasn’t proved they can be consistently (which you I guess actually haven’t defined) be in the top-25. Is that it? If they get there, it will be a shock to the college football world. Right?

[mweb08]

I don’t know what your point is then other than you woke up on the wrong side of the bed and you don’t like amateur athletics anyway. Chris said MD could one day be consistently top 25. You said that’s delusional. He defended his stance and called you defeatist. You called your stance realistic rather than defeatist. You pointed out MDs top 25s from decades ago, and I thought you were defining consistency as having 6 of 10 years of top 25s. Or 60% of the time. So I was curious how that stacked up to other teams. I know MD isn’t good, but how many teams are top 25 more than 60% of the time, is something I wanted to know. A lot, a little? I wanted to know.

You insinuated anything good MD does would be unexpected. Not predicted. To which I say, hi. Welcome to sports. Expect the unexpected. It’s half the reason anyone follows, to see the unexpected and live in that moment.

So again, I don’t know what your point is. Maryland hasn’t proved they can be consistently (which you I guess actually haven’t defined) be in the top-25. Is that it? If they get there, it will be a shock to the college football world. Right?

I don't know how you couldn't figure my point. It was rather explicitly made. You can try rereading or you can tell me that you don't have time to do so. Either way, I'm good.

[Mike in STL]

I don't know how you couldn't figure my point. It was rather explicitly made. You can try rereading or you can tell me that you don't have time to do so. Either way, I'm good.

How about if you just tell me if my last paragraph accurately summed up your point.

[mweb08]

How about if you just tell me if my last paragraph accurately summed up your point.

Yes, you, a person who was all like what even is your point with more nonsense attached to that, summed my point up that it would be quite surprising to see Maryland become a consistent top 25 team anytime soon. That would suggest that the emphasis on not getting a really easy point to get was pointless. Pun intended.

[Mike in STL]

Yes, you, a person who was all like what even is your point with more nonsense attached to that, summed my point up that it would be quite surprising to see Maryland become a consistent top 25 team anytime soon. That would suggest that the emphasis on not getting a really easy point to get was pointless. Pun intended.

Feel better?

[mweb08]

Feel better?

So much so. Thanks!

[Pedro Cerrano]

Lol, oh Weber I missed you

[hallas]

See, I actually disagree with this. After growing up in the Baltimore area and living in the DC area for the last 5 years, I've run into far more Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, and Rutgers alums than I ever did anyone in the ACC other than Virginia or Virginia Tech. The Big Ten has an enormous alumni base in this area, and it's one of the reasons why they held the Big Ten Tournament here a few years ago. Hell, even last week the majority of the Iowa fans I met lived around here.

 

Huh, maybe my experience isn't all that representative.  I definitely ran into more UVA/UNC/VaTech grads and students than I ran into OSU/Michigan/MSU grads.  Though this may have been influenced by the fact that I had 2 siblings that went to UVA.  Regardless I think my high school also had more people attend UVA/UNC/Duke/VT than Michigan/OSU/Penn State.

[hallas]

Yeah if the goal to make a conference where everyone plays FBS football and is a better geographic fit than Iowa or Georgia Tech, I think it'd have to this with 10

 

1. Maryland

2. Syracuse

3. Penn State

4. Pitt

5. UVA

6. VT

7. Rutgers

8. WVU

9. BC

10. Temple

 

You could even throw in UConn and UMass to fill it out a bit.