Ohio U is definitely pretty good. They are terrible on the lines but have some impressive athletes and a nice linebacker.

Temple was exposed badly.

(11-27-2009 10:34 PM)zibby Wrote:  

(11-27-2009 09:56 PM)brista21 Wrote:  Considering the way Buffalo screwed us with backing out of our series for more payday games

What are you talking about? UB did not back out of a game with Rutgers. A game was pushed back one year so UB could play a payday game, but no games were canceled.

The series also had 3 other games in it 2 home for RU 1 home for UB which were canceled so they could pursue more paycheck games.

(11-27-2009 11:06 PM)brista21 Wrote:  

(11-27-2009 10:34 PM)zibby Wrote:  What are you talking about? UB did not back out of a game with Rutgers. A game was pushed back one year so UB could play a payday game, but no games were canceled.

The series also had 3 other games in it 2 home for RU 1 home for UB which were canceled so they could pursue more paycheck games.

When UB changed from a "knows-nothing-about-football" AD to Warde Manual our scheduling philosophy changed. If there was a 2-1 Rutgers deal in place (an extention of our early 2000's deal) that was cancelled, I wouldn't be surprised. We have tried for more equal deals (1 for 1, 2 for 2) with BCS and non-AQ schools, with 3 FCS home games to get us 6 yearly home dates (i.e. UB being the one doling out pay-checks). The only pay-day game we have upcoming is at BC in 2011.

However, the only time UB went for a bigger playcheck game was the WVU/Auburn drama. It burned WVU, but I loved it since I wouldn't have to choose between my 'eers and my alma mater.

Exactly why would Syracuse be threatened by Buffalo recruiting and not threatened by Temple recruiting?

Is upstate NY a hotbed for FB recruits? No it is not. I'd imagine that Buffalo, Temple and Syracuse would look from NJ south to get good talent. BUth would dream of gettin kids from Florida- like everybody else.

So how is Buffalo more a threat to Syracuse then Temple would be. I'd imagine more talent from hot climates would prefer Temple to Buffalo. If we were to add a MAC team- its a no brainer- for market potential it would be Philly over Buffalo. HAs nothing to do with competition between BUffalo and Syr for recruits.

I've never been to UB but I've been to Buffalo State College. Buffalo is a nice city but Philly is a lot bigger.[/b]

(11-27-2009 02:27 PM)zibby Wrote:  At last Temple is finally exposed for what it is: the product of a weak schedule. They played the bottom seven teams in the MAC along with Army and Navy. And now they finally play a decent team with the division title on the line and they're getting beaten like a red-haired stepchild.

Same old Temple.

Anyone who thinks for even a nanosecond that Temple is a viable candidate for the Big East is an idiot.

So every team that is in the top three spots in a conference is a fraud because they beat the teams under them and in the bottom three spots in the conference plus a 1 -AA team. Sorry don't follow the logic. Are you a tad bit bitter and jealous Buffalo fan because Temple beat you this year.
:yikes:

Besides Ohio is a top ranked team in the MAC EAST and this game was for first place in the MAC East and a chance to play in the MAC Championship Game. Plus Temple beat a pretty good Navy team that beat Division One Notre Dame. I don't see a faud here. However I do see a team in Temple under Golden and an administation that trying to get Temple back to the top of whatever conference they play in rather than trying to kill the program like the last university president tried to do. Congratualtions on a great season Temple.
:kneelsucka:

(11-27-2009 10:43 PM)uconnbaseball Wrote:  Ohio U is definitely pretty good. They are terrible on the lines but have some impressive athletes and a nice linebacker.

Temple was exposed badly.

I watched the game and it was pretty close for the most part. Exposed? I don't think so, they didn't even have their starting RB, who is like number four in the nation in yards.

As for the scheduling, doesn't that have to do with Temple being bad last year so they got an easier schedule? UB was good last year so they had a harder schedule. It's not rocket science.

(11-28-2009 11:00 AM)esayem Wrote:  they didn't even have their starting RB, who is like number four in the nation in yards.

Golly, it must suck to play without your starting RB. What's that like?

(11-28-2009 11:00 AM)esayem Wrote:  As for the scheduling, doesn't that have to do with Temple being bad last year so they got an easier schedule?

Are you kidding me? You're allegedly a fan of a team in a 12-team conference and you don't understand how non-round-robin scheduling is done?

Would you think it was fair if one team played Virginia Tech or Georgia Tech two years in a row while another team played Duke or Virginia two years in a row?

Well Buffalo has played Central Michigan two years in a row while they haven't played Eastern Michigan since 2005. Sometimes I think the idea that UB and EMU are in the same conference is just a rumor.

Awww the silly Buffalo fan is upset. Stop crying. How sad are you, that you waited until we lost to post this crap. I know you were sitting at your computer just gleefully waiting for us to lose. Here are the main points:

-Ohio U. is a very good team. Hard to beat them without your Heisman caliber RB
-We know we didn't exactly beat a bunch of top teams, but so what?
-This was our first winning season since 1990
-This will be our first Bowl Game since 1979
-Temple football=progression
-We certainly don't believe we're just going to pack up and move back to the BE immediately

If that's too difficult to understand, you probably shouldn't be posting on message boards.

T for Temple U. Go Owls!

(11-27-2009 02:42 PM)zibby Wrote:  Scheduling in the MAC is ridiculous. Temple played the bottom three teams in the MAC West and didn't play Bowling Green, the third best team in the East. Only one of the teams Temple beat has a winning *conference* record and that's Kent State, which is 4-3 and is playing right now. It might end up that Temple didn't beat a team with a winning conference record all year.

Meanwhile Buffalo had to play Central Michigan and Western Michigan two years in a row. Those two teams finished in the Top 3 in the West each year.

Here's an idea, instead of whining about Temple, why don't you whine about the conference. If your conference actually stepped up and improved then there wouldn't be so much dead weight for Temple to allegedly feast on. And if Buffalo has a problem with Temple playing weak teams maybe they should man up and beat Temple head-to-head, instead of getting their @sses spanked, and then forcing Big East fans to listen to Buffalo fans whining on our message board.

(11-27-2009 10:43 PM)uconnbaseball Wrote:  Ohio U is definitely pretty good. They are terrible on the lines but have some impressive athletes and a nice linebacker.

Temple was exposed badly.

I'm still trying to figure how losing to a good team on the road "exposes" a team. I mean, really, that's like saying UConn got "exposed" because they lost on the road to Cincinnati. It just seems to me that some of you guys have an axe to grind with Temple. So instead of giving credit to Ohio, you want to discredit Temple.

(11-28-2009 01:51 PM)CatsClaw Wrote:  

(11-27-2009 10:43 PM)uconnbaseball Wrote:  Ohio U is definitely pretty good. They are terrible on the lines but have some impressive athletes and a nice linebacker.

Temple was exposed badly.

I'm still trying to figure how losing to a good team on the road "exposes" a team. I mean, really, that's like saying UConn got "exposed" because they lost on the road to Cincinnati. It just seems to me that some of you guys have an axe to grind with Temple. So instead of giving credit to Ohio, you want to discredit Temple.

Exactly, most Big East fans can understand what its like to experience the highs of a successful season after years of doubt and even futility. This goes double for us Rutgers fans, it was only 5 years ago we were still trying to find the way to a winning record. Now, we're not worldbeaters at least not yet but at least we're having some success at laying down a foundation for the program. Temple is approaching that part of the road too and I say good for them I'm happy to see it.

And if its one thing Cincy fans have done this year is show how to have a national championship contending season with extreme class. Nice to see a group of people never forget where they came from.

(11-28-2009 01:51 PM)CatsClaw Wrote:  

(11-27-2009 10:43 PM)uconnbaseball Wrote:  Ohio U is definitely pretty good. They are terrible on the lines but have some impressive athletes and a nice linebacker.

Temple was exposed badly.

I'm still trying to figure how losing to a good team on the road "exposes" a team. I mean, really, that's like saying UConn got "exposed" because they lost on the road to Cincinnati. It just seems to me that some of you guys have an axe to grind with Temple. So instead of giving credit to Ohio, you want to discredit Temple.

Not to mention it was on Thanksgiving weekend at 11 AM, in cold weather with rain and snow.

(11-27-2009 07:36 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(11-27-2009 06:12 PM)zibby Wrote:  What the Hell are you talking about? Everyone who lives in Upstate NY knows Syracuse gets more snow than Buffalo.

Yes, absolutely. Its not even close.

Too true. My sister lives outside Utica, and the snow she receives is about equal to what Syracuse receives. But lake effect snow comes in bands. There will be heavy snow in one area, and almost nothing not too far away. Buffalo is in one of the band areas that doesn't get much lake effect snow. They're in between bands...