Schadenfreude wrote:basketballcontact wrote:However, there is no way that you could convince me that we're a true Top 25 program at this point.
Two years ago when we were ranked 22 or so and got as I high as 16 I think, we were right ahead of teams like Florida. Now, you may say UF sucked because of Ron Zook but if they would've played our schedule, they would've gone undefeated and vice-versa, we would've been lucky to be .500.
The MAC in general sucks, period. This season out of 119 or so DI-A teams, I remember the MAC having about 5 or 6 spots below 100. I love BG but we are getting a little bit too big for our britches at this point. Half of our wins come from bottom feeder teams! Ball State, Western Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Buffalo, Central Michigan....these programs are a joke and not too long ago, we were too! Indiana and Northwestern and Illinois would compete for a MAC title at this point, year in and year out.
[sarcasm]I'm certainly pleased we have people like you working for the cause of Falcon athletics[/sarcasm]
There is little doubt in my mind that if Bowling Green was playing a Big Ten schedule, the Falcons would be qualifying for bowl games.
We have a fantastic football team, and I am hopeful that this fall will finally put doubters like you to rest.
But, we're an Omar blown ACL from being a 6-5 team.
Two words: Anthony Turner.
:coo-coo:
I am trying to resist the temptation to write a very pissy response to basketballcontact's post full of contradictory statements.
I will add this - If we played in the Big Ten there are a ton of differences including revenue, exposure, etc. which can not be examined in any way other than theory. Let's realistically look only at having a big ten or a big east schedule.
We finished just outside of the top 25 in both polls, right by Pittsburgh and WVU. Minnesota and Purdue also were nearby.
Let's look at Pitt's Sched (I underlined the Home Games):
September
Sept. 11 Pittsburgh 24, Ohio 3
Sept. 18 Nebraska 24, Pittsburgh 17
Sept. 25 Pittsburgh 41, Furman 38
Sept. 30 Connecticut 29, Pittsburgh 17
October
Oct. 9 Pittsburgh 27, Temple 22
Oct. 16 Pittsburgh 20, Boston College 17
Oct. 23 Pittsburgh 41, Rutgers 17
November
Nov. 6 Syracuse 38, Pittsburgh 31
Nov. 13 Pittsburgh 41, Notre Dame 38
Nov. 25 Pittsburgh 16, West Virginia 13
December
Dec. 4 Pittsburgh 43, South Florida 14
All Times Eastern
2004 Schedule/Results
January
Jan. 1 Utah 35, Pittsburgh 7
Can you honestly say that Pitt is a better team? I mean we have to beat the Purdues of the world on the road. If we played this schedule, I bet our record would be BETTER than Pitt's. We win all the home games, IMHO. Syracuse and ND? We probably split those too. UConn? tough game.
But in all seriousness - do you think Pitt would have done better in our schedule? They lose at NIU, at Toledo, and at OU. I think they win the rest of the games.
We are a lot more equal than you might have thought. I could do this with Ohio State's schedule too - would we have lost 4 games in their schedule...yeah. Would we have been under .500? I doubt it, especially with getting some of those teams AT HOME.
The same pro BCS people who think we are worse than Pitt seem to think Utah was weak. If that is true, how did Utah beat the crap out of them?????????????? It can't be both ways with BCS teams being "underrated" because of their schedule and getting their jocks handed to them by Utah. BCS conferences are not that much stronger anymore! Take off your blinders - the stats back up my point of view: Utah was legit and we were just as good as the teams around us in the polls.
Look at the Temple score!
Inventor of the Clusterf**k and Shoot offense.
