PAC10 to offer invites to 6 Big 12 schools

Collegiate Sports
41

In fact, the UM BOT considered the elimination of the football program in 1978. After voting to remain in I-A (BOT also considered dropping to I-AA as well), the Hurricanes hired Howard Schnellenberger to replace the departed Lou Saban. As the old saying goes, the rest is history.

BTW, UM did eliminate men’s hoops after the 1970-71 season, only 6 years after Rick Barry donned the green and orange and led the NCAA with a 37.4 ppg average during the 1964-65 season. So that brings us to a couple of Niners-Hurricanes related tidbits. First, Barry and Jeff Mullins were teammates on the Golden State Warriors’ 1975 NBA championship team. Second, former Niners’ head coach Bill Foster was hired by the Canes to resurrect the men’s program during the mid-1980s.

42

[quote=“Over49er, post:40, topic:23382”][quote=“49RFootballNow, post:36, topic:23382”][quote=“Over49er, post:35, topic:23382”]I’m not saying it’s going to happen, but I won’t be surprised to eventually see four 16 team conferences, with each conference having two 8 team divisions. Those divisional champions play for the conference championship in each conference, and then the 4 conference champions have a 4 team playoff for the National Championship.

Doing the math, there is room for us in one of those conferences, especially if everything happens later rather than sooner.[/quote]

We’ll need 15 years from now to get where we need to be.[/quote]

Maybe… and maybe not.

I won’t even mention USF’s rapid rise to the top, but I will mention another team from the same state. The University of Miami used to draw almost no one, and they were not in a major conference. In just a 2 or 3 year span, they started winning games and captured the hearts of the southern half of Florida.

Of course, we’ll need to gather local support, and lots of it. We’ll need the local support not just for game attendance, but for an inmproved level of interest in the TV market.[/quote]

Miami had a wealth of local talent like no one in the nation enjoyed (just the city of Miami). They lowered their entrance standards for football athletes to “OMG he’s stupid as f***” and they broke every NCAA rule they could on the way to do it. They ARE the reason the NCAA crawls up Universities’ backsides when they get a random tip on violations. They also had 2 really good coaches in a row. I don’t think we can expect to replicate Miami’s 1980’s success.

As for USF we’ve hashed that to death here. Leadership, location and luck. Again, we aren’t in the #1 football recruiting state in the nation.

I think 10 years from today is at best a best case senario for us. Unless a T. Boone Pickens, Daddy Warbucks shows up for us I don’t know how we advance that timeline. 3 to play, 4 to move to FBS and 3 as FBS to prove ourselves worthy.

43

[quote=“49RFootballNow, post:42, topic:23382”][quote=“Over49er, post:40, topic:23382”][quote=“49RFootballNow, post:36, topic:23382”][quote=“Over49er, post:35, topic:23382”]I’m not saying it’s going to happen, but I won’t be surprised to eventually see four 16 team conferences, with each conference having two 8 team divisions. Those divisional champions play for the conference championship in each conference, and then the 4 conference champions have a 4 team playoff for the National Championship.

Doing the math, there is room for us in one of those conferences, especially if everything happens later rather than sooner.[/quote]

We’ll need 15 years from now to get where we need to be.[/quote]

Maybe… and maybe not.

I won’t even mention USF’s rapid rise to the top, but I will mention another team from the same state. The University of Miami used to draw almost no one, and they were not in a major conference. In just a 2 or 3 year span, they started winning games and captured the hearts of the southern half of Florida.

Of course, we’ll need to gather local support, and lots of it. We’ll need the local support not just for game attendance, but for an inmproved level of interest in the TV market.[/quote]

Miami had a wealth of local talent like no one in the nation enjoyed (just the city of Miami). They lowered their entrance standards for football athletes to “OMG he’s stupid as f***” and they broke every NCAA rule they could on the way to do it. They ARE the reason the NCAA crawls up Universities’ backsides when they get a random tip on violations. They also had 2 really good coaches in a row. I don’t think we can expect to replicate Miami’s 1980’s success.

As for USF we’ve hashed that to death here. Leadership, location and luck. Again, we aren’t in the #1 football recruiting state in the nation.

I think 10 years from today is at best a best case senario for us. Unless a T. Boone Pickens, Daddy Warbucks shows up for us I don’t know how we advance that timeline. 3 to play, 4 to move to FBS and 3 as FBS to prove ourselves worthy.[/quote]

Interestingly enough the USF guy in the football feasability meetings said being in FL was an additional hurdle to jump through because the state is so heavily recruited nationally and locally by FSU, Miami and UF, ACC and SEC. He said that a good chunk of their initial class came from outside the state of florida. I think the words he use was “people say we succeeded because we were in florida, I say we succeed despite being in florida”. So while I agree that being in Florida has certainly helped them, initially it was just as much a hurdle as it was a advantage due to the recruiting wars and the fact that there were already 3 title contenders in their own state that courted money and players.

44

[quote=“NinerWupAss, post:43, topic:23382”][quote=“49RFootballNow, post:42, topic:23382”][quote=“Over49er, post:40, topic:23382”][quote=“49RFootballNow, post:36, topic:23382”][quote=“Over49er, post:35, topic:23382”]I’m not saying it’s going to happen, but I won’t be surprised to eventually see four 16 team conferences, with each conference having two 8 team divisions. Those divisional champions play for the conference championship in each conference, and then the 4 conference champions have a 4 team playoff for the National Championship.

Doing the math, there is room for us in one of those conferences, especially if everything happens later rather than sooner.[/quote]

We’ll need 15 years from now to get where we need to be.[/quote]

Maybe… and maybe not.

I won’t even mention USF’s rapid rise to the top, but I will mention another team from the same state. The University of Miami used to draw almost no one, and they were not in a major conference. In just a 2 or 3 year span, they started winning games and captured the hearts of the southern half of Florida.

Of course, we’ll need to gather local support, and lots of it. We’ll need the local support not just for game attendance, but for an inmproved level of interest in the TV market.[/quote]

Miami had a wealth of local talent like no one in the nation enjoyed (just the city of Miami). They lowered their entrance standards for football athletes to “OMG he’s stupid as f***” and they broke every NCAA rule they could on the way to do it. They ARE the reason the NCAA crawls up Universities’ backsides when they get a random tip on violations. They also had 2 really good coaches in a row. I don’t think we can expect to replicate Miami’s 1980’s success.

As for USF we’ve hashed that to death here. Leadership, location and luck. Again, we aren’t in the #1 football recruiting state in the nation.

I think 10 years from today is at best a best case senario for us. Unless a T. Boone Pickens, Daddy Warbucks shows up for us I don’t know how we advance that timeline. 3 to play, 4 to move to FBS and 3 as FBS to prove ourselves worthy.[/quote]

Interestingly enough the USF guy in the football feasability meetings said being in FL was an additional hurdle to jump through because the state is so heavily recruited nationally and locally by FSU, Miami and UF, ACC and SEC. He said that a good chunk of their initial class came from outside the state of florida. I think the words he use was “people say we succeeded because we were in florida, I say we succeed despite being in florida”. So while I agree that being in Florida has certainly helped them, initially it was just as much a hurdle as it was a advantage due to the recruiting wars and the fact that there were already 3 title contenders in their own state that courted money and players.[/quote]

That’s an interesting take on the Florida situation from Paul Griffin. Kind of similar to all those folks that say we don’t need another football program in NC with the 5 FBS and App.

45

[quote=“49RFootballNow, post:44, topic:23382”][quote=“NinerWupAss, post:43, topic:23382”][quote=“49RFootballNow, post:42, topic:23382”][quote=“Over49er, post:40, topic:23382”][quote=“49RFootballNow, post:36, topic:23382”][quote=“Over49er, post:35, topic:23382”]I’m not saying it’s going to happen, but I won’t be surprised to eventually see four 16 team conferences, with each conference having two 8 team divisions. Those divisional champions play for the conference championship in each conference, and then the 4 conference champions have a 4 team playoff for the National Championship.

Doing the math, there is room for us in one of those conferences, especially if everything happens later rather than sooner.[/quote]

We’ll need 15 years from now to get where we need to be.[/quote]

Maybe… and maybe not.

I won’t even mention USF’s rapid rise to the top, but I will mention another team from the same state. The University of Miami used to draw almost no one, and they were not in a major conference. In just a 2 or 3 year span, they started winning games and captured the hearts of the southern half of Florida.

Of course, we’ll need to gather local support, and lots of it. We’ll need the local support not just for game attendance, but for an inmproved level of interest in the TV market.[/quote]

Miami had a wealth of local talent like no one in the nation enjoyed (just the city of Miami). They lowered their entrance standards for football athletes to “OMG he’s stupid as f***” and they broke every NCAA rule they could on the way to do it. They ARE the reason the NCAA crawls up Universities’ backsides when they get a random tip on violations. They also had 2 really good coaches in a row. I don’t think we can expect to replicate Miami’s 1980’s success.

As for USF we’ve hashed that to death here. Leadership, location and luck. Again, we aren’t in the #1 football recruiting state in the nation.

I think 10 years from today is at best a best case senario for us. Unless a T. Boone Pickens, Daddy Warbucks shows up for us I don’t know how we advance that timeline. 3 to play, 4 to move to FBS and 3 as FBS to prove ourselves worthy.[/quote]

Interestingly enough the USF guy in the football feasability meetings said being in FL was an additional hurdle to jump through because the state is so heavily recruited nationally and locally by FSU, Miami and UF, ACC and SEC. He said that a good chunk of their initial class came from outside the state of florida. I think the words he use was “people say we succeeded because we were in florida, I say we succeed despite being in florida”. So while I agree that being in Florida has certainly helped them, initially it was just as much a hurdle as it was a advantage due to the recruiting wars and the fact that there were already 3 title contenders in their own state that courted money and players.[/quote]

That’s an interesting take on the Florida situation from Paul Griffin. Kind of similar to all those folks that say we don’t need another football program in NC with the 5 FBS and App.[/quote]

Yup - I thought the same thing. The difference here is that so much of our instate talent leaves it makes it even more interesting.

46

UM didn’t consider cutting FB in '78, they re-started FB after 40-50 years in '78, with HS as Coach.

47

Did you go to urbanlegends.com for that tidbit?

48

Thought this might add a little bit of discussion to the basketball side of things:

http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/18/news/companies/basketball_profits/index.htm

Charlotte broke even, Duke lost 2 million, NC State made 7 million, Chapel hell made 12 million.

49

[quote=“stonecoldken, post:46, topic:23382”]UM didn’t consider cutting FB in '78, they re-started FB after 40-50 years in '78, with HS as Coach.[/quote]Started football in 1926 with an all-freshman team, going 8-0, including a win against the University of Havana! Began varsity the following season and has been continuous ever since.

More tidbits - first game outside of the South played against Temple in Atlantic City in 1930; lost to the Owls 34-0. First bowl game in the inaugural Orange Bowl in 1934; lost to Bucknell 26-0.

Anyway, more available on Wikipedia: Miami Hurricanes football

50

[quote=“49RFootballNow, post:42, topic:23382”][quote=“Over49er, post:40, topic:23382”][quote=“49RFootballNow, post:36, topic:23382”][quote=“Over49er, post:35, topic:23382”]I’m not saying it’s going to happen, but I won’t be surprised to eventually see four 16 team conferences, with each conference having two 8 team divisions. Those divisional champions play for the conference championship in each conference, and then the 4 conference champions have a 4 team playoff for the National Championship.

Doing the math, there is room for us in one of those conferences, especially if everything happens later rather than sooner.[/quote]

We’ll need 15 years from now to get where we need to be.[/quote]

Maybe… and maybe not.

I won’t even mention USF’s rapid rise to the top, but I will mention another team from the same state. The University of Miami used to draw almost no one, and they were not in a major conference. In just a 2 or 3 year span, they started winning games and captured the hearts of the southern half of Florida.

Of course, we’ll need to gather local support, and lots of it. We’ll need the local support not just for game attendance, but for an inmproved level of interest in the TV market.[/quote]

Miami had a wealth of local talent like no one in the nation enjoyed (just the city of Miami).[/quote]

charlotte, nc has a good bit of talent too.

As for USF we've hashed that to death here.

and it was mentioned the great football in florida actually hurt usf and they had to recruit out of state. you keep forgetting to mention the invitation to the big east did more to help usf football than anything. that invitation was because of tv markets. it can happen to us too. why are you so headstrong against that possibility?

51

charlotte, nc has a good bit of talent too. [/quote]

Yes Charlotte does but Miami, FL in the 1980’s was the college football recruiting goldmind of the nation. I really don’t think Charlotte has ever been in contention for that particular title. Miami, Houston, LA…Charlotte. ::slight_smile:

and it was mentioned the great football in florida actually hurt usf and they had to recruit out of state. you keep forgetting to mention the invitation to the big east did more to help usf football than anything. that invitation was because of tv markets. it can happen to us too. why are you so headstrong against that possibility?[/quote]

I’m assuming Mr. Griffin was refering to the fact that USF found it hard to recruit FL talent; because there is no way that being in FL hurt USF when it came to getting into the Big East. In fact it was the reason they got into the Big East. The Big East schools wanted to maintain a presence in Florida so that THEY could recruit the state. Yes, having BCS money did help USF achieve success relatively quickly, but a lot of us here seem to forget that USF had made the move to FBS BEFORE the ACC expansion occured. We have to be playing FBS football on the day this goes down to be considered, not 7 years from the day this happens. You’re also making the big assumption that there will be a Big East or equivalent BCS conference available for us. If this all results in 4-16 team super conferences then the game is over for everyone left out unless Congress gets involved. We need to have realistic expectations of where this program can land with what it has now to offer to a conference, cause now is all any of these conferences are worried about.

52

I just believe our best bet is going to line up with a good basketball conference for the near future. I think the expectation that football is going to lead us to a big time conference is overblown. I am 44 and do not believe that I will see us in a D1 football conference for 10 years. It takes a long time to build a football team. Do not use USF as an example as everything lined up perfect for them. There are going to be many good basketball school that are left out of the mix during the next few years. I know that Big East leftovers may take X and Dayton, but I hope that Judy is looking at other places that we can land. Basketball can still be a good program if we are proactive during expansion.

53

It all depends on what happens to the Big East and if the basketball schools form a separate league. I don’t want to be in an A-10 without Xavier, Dayton and/or Temple. If that happens then I would suspect that our ticket for full CAA membership will be punched.

54

[quote=“woodniner, post:52, topic:23382”]I just believe our best bet is going to line up with a good basketball conference for the near future. I think the expectation that football is going to lead us to a big time conference is overblown. I am 44 and do not believe that I will see us in a D1 football conference for 10 years. It takes a long time to build a football team. Do not use USF as an example as everything lined up perfect for them. There are going to be many good basketball school that are left out of the mix during the next few years. I know that Big East leftovers may take X and Dayton, but I hope that Judy is looking at other places that we can land. Basketball can still be a good program if we are proactive during expansion.[/quote]I agree with your theory of lining ourselves up with the best basketball conference. That’s what USF did too. You said everything linerd up perfect for them. It can line up perfect for us too.

55

I think the UM and USF examples are great examples and should provide us with positive hope for the future. We have a pretty high tv market which some conference should find appealing. All we can do is strive and hope for the best.

56

I actually agree with FootballNow on this one. I’m not going to pretend to know how all of these conferences are going to shake up. But I do think that if it happens right now it could hurt us. I just don’t see a BCS conference waiting 7 years for us to start Div1 football. Obviously I HOPE I’m completely wrong about that.

I just think that with the major conference realignments, the slower it goes the better it will be for the Niners.

57

I know $ is a huge factor in these realignments. But I don’t think the Big12 schools going to the PAC10 will work. I think Texas will want to stay the big dog in a big conference. For football, the road to winning a NatChamp would be easier by staying in the Big12.

58

[quote=“Normmm, post:57, topic:23382”]I know $ is a huge factor in these realignments. But I don’t think the Big12 schools going to the PAC10 will work. I think Texas will want to stay the big dog in a big conference. For football, the road to winning a NatChamp would be easier by staying in the Big12.[/quote] They would probably be the big dog in the Pac 10 too, especially if two things happen: they get a sweet deal to entice them to join (keeping their own t.v. network revenues to themselves) and if USC sputters whenever the penalties come down for the recent violations. The only drawback is its doubtful they’ll get to have the conference championship game in Texas for the next few years if they are in the Pac 10, too far away. Other than that, the road to the Nat. Champ game is easier in the Pac 10.

59

Oklahoma is still projected to be with Texas in this new Pac-Rediculous. Oklahoma has been their main football rival for leadership of the Big 12 for some time now. I don’t see how adding USC will make winning the conference any easier.

60

[quote=“49RFootballNow, post:59, topic:23382”]Oklahoma is still projected to be with Texas in this new Pac-Rediculous. Oklahoma has been their main football rival for leadership of the Big 12 for some time now. I don’t see how adding USC will make winning the conference any easier.[/quote] Depends on if they take any hits from the NCAA. I think Oregon will actually be better than USC for a little while, but not much better than Nebraska, the likely champ game opponent in the Big 12 for the next few years (if it stays together). The rest of the Pac10 is about as good as the Big12 north, so I mainly see a dilution of competition. At best, it’ll be about the same difficulty. But I think this rumor is mostly to force Nebraska’s hand and pressure them into staying anyway, since the Texas legislature will try to make Texas take Baylor too, which ought to be a real poison pill.