(06-28-2015 08:19 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 07:23 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(06-26-2015 06:13 PM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(06-22-2015 07:31 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  Marshall wasn't going to an access bowl. As much as they would have deserved it, that wasn't ever happening last year.

You don't know that. Nobody does.

I saw the polls and I know how much ESPN loves Boise. I think it was obvious. I think part of it was they weren't going to reward Marshall for playing the schedule they did.

I think you're dead wrong. Marshall's brand is well known on the national level. ESPN would have been fine with an undefeated Marshall.

wasn't a no loss Marshall team already ranked below a 2 loss Boise? I don't see how beating a 6-6 Western team and Tech would have changed that.

(06-28-2015 08:51 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 08:19 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 07:23 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(06-26-2015 06:13 PM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(06-22-2015 07:31 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  Marshall wasn't going to an access bowl. As much as they would have deserved it, that wasn't ever happening last year.

You don't know that. Nobody does.

I saw the polls and I know how much ESPN loves Boise. I think it was obvious. I think part of it was they weren't going to reward Marshall for playing the schedule they did.

I think you're dead wrong. Marshall's brand is well known on the national level. ESPN would have been fine with an undefeated Marshall.

wasn't a no loss Marshall team already ranked below a 2 loss Boise? I don't see how beating a 6-6 Western team and Tech would have changed that.

That is correct. I'm not knocking Marshall at all, I'm just telling it the way I saw it. In ESPNs eyes right now, marshall<Boise.

(06-28-2015 08:51 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 08:19 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 07:23 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(06-26-2015 06:13 PM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(06-22-2015 07:31 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  Marshall wasn't going to an access bowl. As much as they would have deserved it, that wasn't ever happening last year.

You don't know that. Nobody does.

I saw the polls and I know how much ESPN loves Boise. I think it was obvious. I think part of it was they weren't going to reward Marshall for playing the schedule they did.

I think you're dead wrong. Marshall's brand is well known on the national level. ESPN would have been fine with an undefeated Marshall.

wasn't a no loss Marshall team already ranked below a 2 loss Boise? I don't see how beating a 6-6 Western team and Tech would have changed that.

No Marshall was ahead of Boise with no losses. The WKU fluke knocked them out of it. They would have gone in undefeated.

(06-29-2015 08:28 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 08:51 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 08:19 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 07:23 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(06-26-2015 06:13 PM)MU ATO Wrote:  You don't know that. Nobody does.

I saw the polls and I know how much ESPN loves Boise. I think it was obvious. I think part of it was they weren't going to reward Marshall for playing the schedule they did.

I think you're dead wrong. Marshall's brand is well known on the national level. ESPN would have been fine with an undefeated Marshall.

wasn't a no loss Marshall team already ranked below a 2 loss Boise? I don't see how beating a 6-6 Western team and Tech would have changed that.

No Marshall was ahead of Boise with no losses. The WKU fluke knocked them out of it. They would have gone in undefeated.

No, they were not. And it appears, no they wouldn't have. We can't say for sure the committee wouldn't have had them leap Boise, but based off of their emphasis on scheduling all year, I can't fathom how they would have.

(06-29-2015 08:28 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 08:51 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 08:19 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 07:23 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(06-26-2015 06:13 PM)MU ATO Wrote:  You don't know that. Nobody does.

I saw the polls and I know how much ESPN loves Boise. I think it was obvious. I think part of it was they weren't going to reward Marshall for playing the schedule they did.

I think you're dead wrong. Marshall's brand is well known on the national level. ESPN would have been fine with an undefeated Marshall.

wasn't a no loss Marshall team already ranked below a 2 loss Boise? I don't see how beating a 6-6 Western team and Tech would have changed that.

No Marshall was ahead of Boise with no losses. The WKU fluke knocked them out of it. They would have gone in undefeated.

marshall was never ahead of boise or csu.....
the week before marshall was ranked CSU was 9-1 and the committee said csu was the top g5..csu lost the next week everyone thought marshall was going to be the top g5, come to find out boise was on top of them aswell

here are the rankings
http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings/_/week/14

my opinion: marshall was never going to get the access because of the precedent it would set, marshall had a joke schedule. what happens year 1 will decide how people schedule going forward....if marshall gets an access on a joke schedule, why are any of us scheduling hard ....

(06-22-2015 06:40 PM)wh49er Wrote:  All of this is true but it comes off as just another USM fan crying who wants to blame everyone else. A once proud program is only in this situation because of some bad internal decisions.

Good news is one more bad season at UNC and Fedora will be available.

Southern Miss had always accomplished way more than its athletic budget warranted. The changing landscape which focuses more on TV market than on on-field accomplishments (USM is in a very small TV market in the poorest state which also has two SEC schools) has had more to do with the decline of USM football than internal decisions. Having said that, some internal decisions have been suspect.

(06-22-2015 10:05 PM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  Karma is a b#tch. When you fire a coach who devoted his life to Southern Miss football and had 14 straight winning seasons, you are going to feel the consequences. Now USM fans live with that decision. For those that wanted Bower gone, they deserve what USM football is now.

The firing of Bower had almost nothing to do with the decline. The growing popularity and monetary value of college football is the culprit. TV is king and a very small TV market in the poorest state that has to compete against two SEC schools is the main reason for the decline of Southern Miss football.

(06-23-2015 11:44 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  USM's descent has everthing to do with USM and nothing to do with CUSA's former members leaving. To argue any different is irresponsible. USM rolled the dice by running off a dedicated coach and a proven winner and by bringing in someone with much bigger aspirations than living in Hattiesburg for long. These days, it's rare to find a coach that's dedicated to a program and who is also a winner. When you find one, you keep him.

It actually has little to do with either. TV is much more important than it was just 10 years ago. Being in one of the smallest TV markets in the poorest state, competing with two SEC schools for viewers in its own state has much more to do with it.

Southern Miss never had a significant advantage as far as athletic budget was concerned, but what little advantage it had against conference teams has disappeared because of the significant influx of TV money. Southern Miss may have an occassional short span of good, productive seasons, but will never dominate for extented periods ever again.

(06-23-2015 12:14 PM)Bleacher Eagle Wrote:  

(06-23-2015 12:04 PM)USMSTUD Wrote:  From 2001 to 2007 his teams won more than 7 games twice.

And from 2008-2014, it's also only been done twice.

It was done twice from 2008-2011. Everything since is the direct result of hiring the disaster that was Ellis Johnson.

(06-23-2015 12:29 PM)BoKnows Wrote:  

(06-23-2015 12:14 PM)Bleacher Eagle Wrote:  

(06-23-2015 12:04 PM)USMSTUD Wrote:  From 2001 to 2007 his teams won more than 7 games twice.

And from 2008-2014, it's also only been done twice.

...and the conference from 2008-2014 isn't the same as the conference from '01-'07..

I think Bower would have done more in that stretch ('08-'14) than USM got. My guess is Bower would have surpassed the win total from '08-'14 by double digits. He probably would have multiple titles within the current configuration. He'd have his statue by now.

Does any USM fan actually want to argue that Bower couldn't have done better from '08-'14? And, if he was, would that have sent USM to another conference? (Remember, the winless season came at the absolute worst time)

No doubt Bower would have more wins simply because Ellis Johnson wouldn't have been here to destroy the program. But I doubt Bower would have avoided a losing season and probably wouldn't have had more than 17 wins in the past three seasons. Plus, he probably would not have won more than 9 games in any season (we won 12 in 2011 under Fedora).

The decline of Southern Miss football has only one main reason and it is Ellis Johnson. The climb back up will be much harder this time due to the abundance of TV money balancing the scales.

(06-23-2015 12:36 PM)Noodles Wrote:  Do you know who hired Bower after we fired him?

...

...

...

...

NOBODY OFFERED BOWER A JOB. DID YOUR SCHOOL HIRE HIM? WHY NOT?

I love Jeff Bower, he is a USM legend, but it was time.

Bingo.

(07-09-2015 06:34 AM)Funslinger Wrote:  

(06-23-2015 12:36 PM)Noodles Wrote:  Do you know who hired Bower after we fired him?

...

...

...

...

NOBODY OFFERED BOWER A JOB. DID YOUR SCHOOL HIRE HIM? WHY NOT?

I love Jeff Bower, he is a USM legend, but it was time.

Bingo.

It seems I remember Bower`s named being mentioned for the WKU job after Elson was fired after the 2008 season. I'm not sure how much interest both parties had at the time. We were in an era of hiring only candidates with strong Western ties so no surprise that Willie Taggart was hired

(06-26-2015 05:14 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(06-26-2015 04:56 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  

(06-25-2015 07:04 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  Lot of USM hate in this thread. You can say the past doesn't matter, but we got to do things the rest of you never will, like play in real bowl games that weren't made up yesterday, and beat top 10 teams. WKU, etc. are stronger than us right now, but this is happening during an era when CUSA football is pure masturbation. You won't get to go to a real bowl game and you'll never go toe to toe with the P5 like we did. So have fun masturbating.

What horsecrap. 0-12, 1-11 and 3-9 is what USM football is these days. I enjoyed our past, but I am realistic about the pile of dung USM football is today. CUSA's laughing stock. Now stfu.

I completely agree with you. But I'm not going to lie about the past or the future just because of the present. There was a time when our ceiling was much higher than any of the newcomers' ever will be, and we did a good job staying close to that ceiling while it was up there. No one else here will ever reach those heights.

Very true words.

(07-09-2015 06:34 AM)Funslinger Wrote:  

(06-23-2015 12:36 PM)Noodles Wrote:  Do you know who hired Bower after we fired him?

...

...

...

...

NOBODY OFFERED BOWER A JOB. DID YOUR SCHOOL HIRE HIM? WHY NOT?

I love Jeff Bower, he is a USM legend, but it was time.

Bingo.

Since you are not him or his agent your statement is incorrect. A couple did contact him and he said not interested. USA, Iowa State and WKU. Any others were not publicly disclosed.

Ace...