U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > College Football
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-22-2011, 09:47 AM
 
Location: Richardson, TX
8,701 posts, read 11,829,937 times
Reputation: 3726

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by iamjacobm View Post
ND, Miami, USC, SMU, TCU, and BYU all have strong history and are private. I wouldn't say this is a new trend.
SMU and TCU? Really? I would have to step in the way back machine for SMU - Doak Walker days. SMU, TCU and Rice were the whipping boys of the SWC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-22-2011, 10:01 AM
 
Location: The "Rock"
2,551 posts, read 2,412,190 times
Reputation: 1322
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamjacobm View Post
Northwestern won multiple conference championships in the late 90s and 2000. Wake won a conference championship 5 years ago. Duke has 3 wins...

I'm just trying to show how this isn't a new trend...at all. Some of the best examples of the "rise" of the private schools are 3 teams with a combined record of 15-18, that just doesn't make sense to me.

If trading NC contenders for teams that go .500 is progress then maybe I am wrong.

I'm with you... I don't see any trend.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2011, 10:26 AM
JJG
 
Location: Fort Worth
13,247 posts, read 19,169,167 times
Reputation: 7005
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanTerra View Post
SMU and TCU? Really? I would have to step in the way back machine for SMU - Doak Walker days. SMU, TCU and Rice were the whipping boys of the SWC.
TCU at least had a winning history before the 70's. Rice on the other hand...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2011, 11:28 AM
 
Location: Richardson, TX
8,701 posts, read 11,829,937 times
Reputation: 3726
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJG View Post
TCU at least had a winning history before the 70's. Rice on the other hand...
Yeah, way-back. Rice sure makes up for it in other areas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2011, 11:53 AM
 
Location: Central Texas
13,720 posts, read 25,521,627 times
Reputation: 9216
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanTerra View Post
SMU and TCU? Really? I would have to step in the way back machine for SMU - Doak Walker days. SMU, TCU and Rice were the whipping boys of the SWC.
You are forgetting the days of Eric Dickerson and Craig James (early 80s). SMU was easily a top 5 team in several of those years. The wiki says from 1980-1984 their record was 45-5-1, the best in D1 over that period.

The "death penalty" was devastating to the program and only recently have they returned to a reasonable level of D1 play.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2011, 01:37 PM
 
1,261 posts, read 1,770,321 times
Reputation: 371
SMU is a little iffy, or maybe a little early. If they win some conference championships maybe.

Look my vantage point is that, the 90s was a new age for the game what with scholle limits and balooning tv money and exposure. I count the 90s to now as one period that's still moving. Probably the new period after that is when the super conferences officially come into play.

None of the team's I mentioned (Duke, WF, NW) are dregs anymore, they are competitive now, they actually give their fans something to look forward to. As opposed to previous decades.

Is it a golden age, no. But I don't think I said that. Duke's golden age was with Wallace Wade in the 50s.

T
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2011, 01:51 PM
 
3,458 posts, read 3,109,988 times
Reputation: 1532
yeah these up-and-comers like Notre Dame and Southern Cal are really taking the sport by storm.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2011, 06:49 AM
 
Location: Richardson, TX
8,701 posts, read 11,829,937 times
Reputation: 3726
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffdano View Post
You are forgetting the days of Eric Dickerson and Craig James (early 80s). SMU was easily a top 5 team in several of those years. The wiki says from 1980-1984 their record was 45-5-1, the best in D1 over that period.

The "death penalty" was devastating to the program and only recently have they returned to a reasonable level of D1 play.
Oh yeah, that's when they were a pro team. Top 5, really? In the nation or their conference, or the metroplex? And now they are making their way back to "reasonable play."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2011, 07:20 AM
 
Location: Chicago
5,853 posts, read 6,521,925 times
Reputation: 5331
as the OP, I never suggested that the private universities were anything like being on par with the publics; they're not.

and what some of you may have seen as "high praise" on my part for certain programs was not either; i merely was noting where they have become more competitive.

i'm merely asking if you think the stock of private universities has risen, based on the observations I made about a good percentage of them.

I live in the Chicago area. Although I like both Iowa and Illinois, my favorite school in college football is Northwestern. Northwestern had some absolutely awful teams throughout much of the 70's and 80's, dreadful ones where 0-10 seasons were not unheard of and being blown out 64-0 was not unexpected.

NU turned things around with Gary Barnett in the mid-90's, winning outright (1) or sharing (2) B10 titles since then. And since those bad days, they have been a fairly competitive team in the B10, being bowl eligible this year for the fifth straight (albeit with a horrible, winless record in those bowls).

Is Northwestern great? Of course not. But it is a team that shows it well belongs in the conference, something that would not have been said 2 or 3 decades ago.

I offer up NU because I don't think they are alone in this category. I really do see more private schools showing improvement in this current era.

And that's really I was talking about. If you choose to treat this as me being the OP with the idea that the privates have become powerhouses, that's fine; but you'd be putting words in my mouth.

All I've said....whether it be right or wrong.....is that the privates have improved their relative position vis-a-vis the publics, closed the gap a bit; that's all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2011, 07:34 AM
 
Location: Richardson, TX
8,701 posts, read 11,829,937 times
Reputation: 3726
Quote:
Originally Posted by edsg25 View Post
as the OP, I never suggested that the private universities were anything like being on par with the publics; they're not.

and what some of you may have seen as "high praise" on my part for certain programs was not either; i merely was noting where they have become more competitive.

i'm merely asking if you think the stock of private universities has risen, based on the observations I made about a good percentage of them.

I live in the Chicago area. Although I like both Iowa and Illinois, my favorite school in college football is Northwestern. Northwestern had some absolutely awful teams throughout much of the 70's and 80's, dreadful ones where 0-10 seasons were not unheard of and being blown out 64-0 was not unexpected.

NU turned things around with Gary Barnett in the mid-90's, winning outright (1) or sharing (2) B10 titles since then. And since those bad days, they have been a fairly competitive team in the B10, being bowl eligible this year for the fifth straight (albeit with a horrible, winless record in those bowls).

Is Northwestern great? Of course not. But it is a team that shows it well belongs in the conference, something that would not have been said 2 or 3 decades ago.

I offer up NU because I don't think they are alone in this category. I really do see more private schools showing improvement in this current era.

And that's really I was talking about. If you choose to treat this as me being the OP with the idea that the privates have become powerhouses, that's fine; but you'd be putting words in my mouth.

All I've said....whether it be right or wrong.....is that the privates have improved their relative position vis-a-vis the publics, closed the gap a bit; that's all.
Don't take any of the back and forth too seriously, we just like football and talking about it, especially SMACK - this is Texas, afterall. (and I am a Naperville transplant.) TCU's entrance into the Big 12 is significant. I was hoping A&M would stay in the Big 12, started to look like the old SWC. That'd be fun, maintaining old rivalries - even within families, ah good times, good times.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > College Football
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top