FIRE THE COACH

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 8:26 am

It's pretty simple. Play well enough to be ranked in the top 25 and you'll USUALLY come away with the MAC title.

I care about the MAC Championship, and I badly want to see us win it, but in the end I don't think it does that much for your program unless you start winning them on a regular basis. Getting out there, playing (and beating) top 25 programs, winning bowls, getting into the rankings. Those things make a name for Bowling Green far more than an 8-5 season with a MAC title will.

Like I said, I think Nathan has it wrong. Setting the goal of winning the MAC (Which has been pretty much terrible since '04) is setting the bar too low, IMO. Set the goal to become a top 25 program and the MAC titles will follow.

Warthog · Post by **Warthog** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 8:42 am

Do players get a ring to show off for the rest of their life if we finish ranked #23? If so, do they get one for every poll we are ranked in? Why not just start the "Official Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba College Football Rankings". We could put together some of the more knowledgable posters and make sure we finished ranked in the top 25 every year. That way when we are recruiting, the coaches can say that BG finished ranked in the top 25, they just don't have to tell them which poll it was.

The two go hand in hand when building a program. Win a championship and the rankings will come. Look at what Boise did last year? Do you think they could have been in that position if they were a one-year wonder? First step is to win championships. Then you worry about the rankings. So, yes, being a ranked team is great, but you can't get there on a consistent basis if you can't win championships.

BGSUFootballFan · Post by **BGSUFootballFan** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 8:43 am

hammb wrote:It's pretty simple. Play well enough to be ranked in the top 25 and you'll USUALLY come away with the MAC title.

I care about the MAC Championship, and I badly want to see us win it, but in the end I don't think it does that much for your program unless you start winning them on a regular basis. Getting out there, playing (and beating) top 25 programs, winning bowls, getting into the rankings. Those things make a name for Bowling Green far more than an 8-5 season with a MAC title will.

Like I said, I think Nathan has it wrong. Setting the goal of winning the MAC (Which has been pretty much terrible since '04) is setting the bar too low, IMO. Set the goal to become a top 25 program and the MAC titles will follow.

Based on our team's preparation and efforts on the field the past few years wouldn't you say we are already following your guidelines? Sure we haven't been great lately, but we always play way over our heads in big games and play down to our lower level opponents once the MAC season starts.

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 8:45 am

Warthog wrote:
Flipper wrote:I don't think the MAC title is wrth as much as a national ranking...
Flipper, can you explain what you mean by "worth"? A program isn't worth anything, IMO, if it can't win a championship. Rankings are just fluff.

To me, an actually championship won on the field is something that you have proven you are the best. A national ranking is some kind of esoteric measurement drawn up by computers and sportswriters who have probably only seen highlights of our games. You can't argue with the fact that you are the best in your conference when you win the title. You can argue for eternity about rankings.

I'll take the championship any day.

Worth=value, cache, notoriety...you don't achieve any notoriety winning the MAC. You achieve more notoriety and approval from your peer group (coaches at oher schools and the media) by winning big OOC games and getting ranked. The MAC title is a nice regional achievement, being ranked and winning a bowl is a national achievemant. The scope of the two do not comapre in my mind.

I'll go one step further...UT beat us in 2004 nd won the MAC. Then they got drilled by UCONN in the MCB. We won the GMAC bowl and finished ranked just outside the top 25. I'll take our season over UT's...would have been better to beat them on the field, but the last impression people had of us that year is that we were an exciting team that won. The last impression people had of the Rockets was"loser"

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 8:59 am

BGSUFootballFan wrote:
hammb wrote:It's pretty simple. Play well enough to be ranked in the top 25 and you'll USUALLY come away with the MAC title.

I care about the MAC Championship, and I badly want to see us win it, but in the end I don't think it does that much for your program unless you start winning them on a regular basis. Getting out there, playing (and beating) top 25 programs, winning bowls, getting into the rankings. Those things make a name for Bowling Green far more than an 8-5 season with a MAC title will.

Like I said, I think Nathan has it wrong. Setting the goal of winning the MAC (Which has been pretty much terrible since '04) is setting the bar too low, IMO. Set the goal to become a top 25 program and the MAC titles will follow.

Based on our team's preparation and efforts on the field the past few years wouldn't you say we are already following your guidelines? Sure we haven't been great lately, but we always play way over our heads in big games and play down to our lower level opponents once the MAC season starts.

No, I hardly think that we're playing anywhere near a top 25 ranking. I think that a lot of it stems from the fact that a ground mole could motivate a bunch of kids to go out and "shock the world" against the higher ranked teams, but it takes a good coach to get his team ready to play the conference games week in/week out.

Like I said, I'm not downplaying the conference championship. Nor am I saying I'd prefer to be a one year in 10 flash in the pan who hits the rankings then fades back down. My point is that if you set your goal at a conference championship that's all well and good but rankings and exposure don't nessarily come with it. In my mind if you are playing well enough to be considered a top 25 team that means that you are also cruising through the MAC and winning MAC titles as well.

I guess the only thing I'm saying is that I want to win every game we play regardless of the opponent, and I don't sit back and accept a loss because it was a powerhouse we weren't supposed to compete with. Conversely the win a championship only philosophy seems to discount the OOC games as meaningless, or only used as tuneups for the conference schedule.

It really doesn't matter because we aren't even close to achieving either of these goals right now.

bgsufn · Post by **bgsufn** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 8:59 am

Flipper wrote:The last impression people had of the Rockets was"loser"

As it should be

h2oville rocket · Post by **h2oville rocket** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 9:01 am

Flipper wrote: Worth=value, cache, notoriety...you don't achieve any notoriety winning the MAC.

Do you really want notoriety? Cause if you want notoriety you should be rooting for UT.

bgsufn · Post by **bgsufn** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 9:06 am

h2oville rocket wrote:
Flipper wrote: Worth=value, cache, notoriety...you don't achieve any notoriety winning the MAC.
Do you really want notoriety? Cause if you want notoriety you should be rooting for UT.

"I don't care who you are, that's funny right there."

Warthog · Post by **Warthog** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 9:46 am

Flipper wrote:You achieve more notoriety and approval from your peer group (coaches at oher schools and the media) by winning big OOC games and getting ranked.

But if you go on to lose games to Kent or Central MI or Toledo, you are going to lose that ranking. You have to continue to win for any OOC victory to mean anything. Yes, we beat Minnesota in the opener, but we got embarrased by Miami in a league game. Which of those two games have more significance in the big picture?

Flipper wrote:UT beat us in 2004 nd won the MAC. Then they got drilled by UCONN in the MCB. We won the GMAC bowl and finished ranked just outside the top 25. I'll take our season over UT's...

Fair enough, we just have a difference of opinions. I really don't think I could consider us a better team them someone that beat us on the field even though they went on to lose their next game and we won ours.

I'll take a championship because that is an undeniable fact that you are the champion. And winning a championship brings more "worth" to the program as it shows the ability to win week in and week out as opposed to a single game victory over a BCS team or a bowl game.

To bring this all back to the topic of this thread, no matter how you judge the worth of the program, we aren't getting there with the current staff. Brandon has to go!

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 10:02 am

Warthog wrote:
Flipper wrote:You achieve more notoriety and approval from your peer group (coaches at oher schools and the media) by winning big OOC games and getting ranked.
But if you go on to lose games to Kent or Central MI or Toledo, you are going to lose that ranking. You have to continue to win for any OOC victory to mean anything. Yes, we beat Minnesota in the opener, but we got embarrased by Miami in a league game. Which of those two games have more significance in the big picture?

I'll admit...the scenario of not winning the title and being ranked doesn't really work this year. It worked nicely in 2003 when we lost to Miami and OSU and then we built on that success by winning just enough in 2004 to remain on the radar. Even if we ran the table form here on out and finished the regular season at 9-3, I don't think we'd be ranked and we might not even win the east given the whammy Miami put on us.

Rightupinthere · Post by **Rightupinthere** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 12:08 pm

h2oville rocket wrote:
Flipper wrote: Worth=value, cache, notoriety...you don't achieve any notoriety winning the MAC.
Do you really want notoriety? Cause if you want notoriety you should be rooting for UT.

Well played.

Falconfreak90 · Post by **Falconfreak90** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 12:41 pm

Schadenfreude wrote:
Lord_Byron wrote:It's a time thing. The immediate feeling of finishing in the top 25 and winning a bowl game is very satisfying and in the short term, I think I like that feeling better than a conference championship.

However, going back to the Doyt five or ten years after that, it's kind of nice to see the championships up on the wall. It's a more permanent success.
Good point.

For what it's worth, the championships are no longer on the wall. I'm not happy with that.

Maybe someone finally concluded that 1992 was an awful long time ago.

SF,

I sent an email to the "Ask the AD" segment on the official site asking if those Title years will be displayed somewhere in Perry Stadium. I love all the upgrades but am not happy with the absence of the Title years...even if the last one was 15 years ago.

San Fran Falcon · Post by **San Fran Falcon** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 7:24 pm

Schadenfreude wrote:I'm with Flip. A national ranking -- if sustained at the end of the season -- is a little more meaningful to me than a MAC title. It seems to be harder to do, and it gets more national attention.

I lived through the 1991, 1992, 2003 and 2004 seasons. To me, 2003 was the most meaningful, even though we didn't win the conference.

National rankings get us far more publicity than a MAC title, and publicity helps us build the program.

I would point out that, historically speaking, there isn't a whole lot of either/or to this question. The 2003 Falcons are almost certainly the only program in MAC history to finish in the Top 25 without winning a conference title.

Agreed. Of those teams mentioned ('91,'92, '03, '04) the 2003 team is the one that sticks out the most. 85% of the country (unfortunately) doesn't give a hoot who won the MAC and probably don't even notice. However, finishing in the Top 25 and winning a bowl game is more fulfilling IMO. But, shoot, doing all 3 things (top 25, bowl, and MAC championship) would be a nice hat-trick. Obviously, that's not in the cards this year, but 2 out of 3 ain't bad. I'm still trying to believe we can win the conference.

BGSUFootballFan · Post by **BGSUFootballFan** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 7:26 pm

The good thing about winning the conference or at least getting to the MACCG is that it gets a bowl game. I think making a bowl game and winning the MAC should be team goals pretty much each and every year at BG.

BGorDeath · Post by **BGorDeath** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 8:51 pm

If winning MAC titles is worthless, why don't we just become an Independent. If there is no value in your conference's championship, why be a member?