UTEPDallas
Heisman
Posts: 6,002
Joined: Oct 2004
Reputation: 330
I Root For: UTEP/Penn State
Location: Dallas, TX
|
RE: The dregs of the P5: worse than the middle of the G5.
(07-05-2020 07:20 PM)cuseroc Wrote: (07-05-2020 12:52 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote: (07-05-2020 12:44 PM)bullet Wrote: (07-05-2020 12:40 PM)bill dazzle Wrote: (07-05-2020 12:27 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote: Guys, I used to think the same before I attended Penn State. My logic was “give a G5 the same opportunity as the bottom of the P5 and it will work.” Not true.
There’s exceptions, of course. I believe Utah has pulled its weight in the Pac-12. It has been ranked multiple times, played in the CCG twice and was in the conversation for the Rose Bowl and CFP. But they proved they could compete at the highest level in the MWC. TCU started strong in the Big XII even though they’ve been struggling lately. They won the Peach Bowl and almost made it to the CFP in 2014. But those two are the exception rather than the rule.
You replace Rutgers, Oregon State, Wake Forest, Kansas and Vanderbilt with most G5’s and the result will still be the same. Schools like Penn State will always have an advantage in recruiting elite players even in their own conference. Rutgers, Maryland, Indiana, Illinois, Purdue, Minnesota will always be at a disadvantage compared to the Penn States, Michigans and Ohio States of the world.
I think BYU, Cincinnati, the U_F twins and Houston might be able to compete but it’ll take several recruiting classes to get to that level. Or they might never get there and become the new Oregon State or Illinois. Just a sacrificial lamb for the top schools in the conference to get an automatic win.
Overall, I agree with you. As a Memphis and Cincy fan, I admit that the Tigers would be in the bottom half of SEC football and the Bearcats in the bottom half of the Big Ten (or in the bottom half if both were, say, in the Big 12). Now in basketball, I feel both could be more competitive in any of those league affiliation scenarios. They still might not be in the top half in hoops year in and year out, but they could compete. Football would be considerably tougher (if not a losing proposition).
The reality is, there is only one P5 league (the ACC) that is home to a true "urban public" university (in this case, Louisville). Public urban schools with DI football located in cities and that are not state flagships — Temple, Memphis, Houston, Cincy, UNLV, San Diego State, UCF, USF, UAB, Charlotte, ODU, Toledo, Fresno, Boise, etc. — generally are not well suited for inclusion in the Power 5. Louisville was the exception for many, many reason (discussed on this board).
Houston was competitive in the SWC. They would be a solid mid-level P5 school.
At worst, they could be like Texas Tech but they’ll never be at the level of Texas and Oklahoma in the Big XII (well few schools can’t). I don’t think they would ever be competitive in the SEC. Just look at Texas A&M. The Pac-12? Perhaps but they don’t fit the profile so it’s a moot point. I believe if there’s any chance of Houston joining a P5 is the ACC.
Why do you feel his way? I was always of the opinion that Houston would be a lock for the B12. But then again, I guess they have enough schools in Texas.
Houston fits better as an institution in the ACC than the Pac-12 and even the Big XII. They have non flagship schools and private schools in urban areas. Cincinnati is another school that fits that profile as well. But as somebody wrote above, if you’re the ACC, why settle for fourth place in Texas? The Big XII has four Texas schools, they don’t need a fifth one just like the ACC doesn’t need the U_F twins as long as Miami and Florida State are members.
|
|