(07-02-2020 05:54 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  Definition of "dregs":

1 : sediment contained in a liquid or precipitated (see precipitate entry 1 sense 3a) from it : lees —usually used in pluralcoffee dregs at the bottom of the cup
2 : the most undesirable part —usually used in pluralthe dregs of society
3 : the last remaining part : vestige —usually used in pluralthe last dregs of fuel

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dreg


By "dregs," I'm not referring to sediments, but to definitions #2 and #3 above - - just the lowest ranked teams.

But then the bottom third still doesn't work, because "the MOST" would not mix together WVU, Massey 70 and Kansas, Massey 106 ... for two reasons:

First, even in that single season, there is a clear difference in quality between 70 and 106. If you are looking at "the most undesireable", and you have Kansas sitting in there as one of the examples of "the most undesirable", then WVU does not fit.

Second, if you averaged over four or five years, Kansas and Rutgers would still be down there, but the make up of the top half of the "bottom third" would see a lot of turnover.

The definition of "the MOST undesirable part" or "the LAST remaining part" is based on the meaning of the term in use, and as we normally use it, the bottom third is not "the dregs".

Quote: You're in a tenable position to complain about listing the "dregs" of the P5 in 2019 and noting that they were ranked below a good many G5 teams.

I'm complaining about the difference between what the post title advertises it is about, and what the post itself claims it is about.

It is clearly true -- not as shown by your numbers, since who knows where THAT ranking comes from, but as shown by a comment going to a reasonably credible ranking and specifying which ranking they used -- that the "dregs" of the P5 are worse than the middle of the Go5.

It is clearly untrue, as shown by the Massey rankings, that the entire bottom third of the P5 is worse than the middle of the Go5.

And when pressed on that, you shift the goalposts to the bottom third of the P5 (in a given year) being worse then the top third of the Go5 (in a given year).

Who ever got a job by saying “I’m slightly better than your worst employee”

(07-03-2020 12:45 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Who ever got a job by saying “I’m slightly better than your worst employee”

A case could be made for Rutgers.

(07-03-2020 05:07 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 12:45 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Who ever got a job by saying “I’m slightly better than your worst employee”

A case could be made for Rutgers.

Rutgers aspires to be slightly better than the worst incumbent Big Ten school at the time, and I wish them well in their endeavors.

Seems like we added Rutgers for the PATH train to Penn Station, the recruiting grounds and the W in what would be a tough Eastern Division. I'm sure the bean counters double checked that they were a Division 1, FBS school before confirming the add could go ahead.

It's like hiring the construction company hiring the nephew of the influential city councilor to run their IT and then hiring them an assistant who knows IT.

(07-04-2020 04:48 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 05:07 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 12:45 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Who ever got a job by saying “I’m slightly better than your worst employee”

A case could be made for Rutgers.

Rutgers aspires to be slightly better than the worst incumbent Big Ten school at the time, and I wish them well in their endeavors.

Seems like we added Rutgers for the PATH train to Penn Station, the recruiting grounds and the W in what would be a tough Eastern Division. I'm sure the bean counters double checked that they were a Division 1, FBS school before confirming the add could go ahead.

It's like hiring the construction company hiring the nephew of the influential city councilor to run their IT and then hiring them an assistant who knows IT.

Were it not for Rutgers, the race to the bottom of the Big Ten would be fairly close. In their six seasons in the league, the Scarlet Knights have won 7 conference games (out of 52). Wins by their closest pursuers:

13...Illinois
14...Maryland
15...Purdue
16...Indiana

(07-04-2020 09:25 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-04-2020 04:48 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 05:07 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 12:45 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Who ever got a job by saying “I’m slightly better than your worst employee”

A case could be made for Rutgers.

Rutgers aspires to be slightly better than the worst incumbent Big Ten school at the time, and I wish them well in their endeavors.

Seems like we added Rutgers for the PATH train to Penn Station, the recruiting grounds and the W in what would be a tough Eastern Division. I'm sure the bean counters double checked that they were a Division 1, FBS school before confirming the add could go ahead.

It's like hiring the construction company hiring the nephew of the influential city councilor to run their IT and then hiring them an assistant who knows IT.

Were it not for Rutgers, the race to the bottom of the Big Ten would be fairly close. In their six seasons in the league, the Scarlet Knights have won 7 conference games (out of 52). Wins by their closest pursuers:

13...Illinois
14...Maryland
15...Purdue
16...Indiana

Yeah, when Maryland's performance on the boards is included to their performance on the in line with the worst of the Big Ten incumbents on the gridiron, it could well be Maryland who is bragging "I'm better than your worst employees!"

(07-03-2020 12:45 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Who ever got a job by saying “I’m slightly better than your worst employee”

Whoever got turned away from a job when it was obvious that they were clearly better than many current employees?

(07-05-2020 10:04 AM)colohank Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 12:45 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Who ever got a job by saying “I’m slightly better than your worst employee”

Whoever got turned away from a job when it was obvious that they were clearly better than many current employees?

That happens all the time. New employees are always a risk; existing employees, while possibly not performing up to expectations, at least have a track record. It's "the devil you know is better than the devil you don't know" theory.

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.

(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).

(07-05-2020 11:49 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(07-05-2020 10:04 AM)colohank Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 12:45 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Who ever got a job by saying “I’m slightly better than your worst employee”

Whoever got turned away from a job when it was obvious that they were clearly better than many current employees?

That happens all the time. New employees are always a risk; existing employees, while possibly not performing up to expectations, at least have a track record. It's "the devil you know is better than the devil you don't know" theory.

There''s that, sure, but there's also often tenure issues, union rules, worries about discrimination claims, etc. Getting rid of a long-standing employee can be risky (on an individual basis) if you haven't built a thick file of poor objective performance reviews.

(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.

(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.

(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).

It’s easier to recruit in basketball having the power school tag especially if there’s history there like Cincinnati (they proved their worth in the Big East). Memphis football is not consistent to compete with the big boys. They would need a Utah, TCU and Boise State like run of multiple top 25 rankings, major bowl victories and beating top P5 schools in order to get to that level. Even the G5 darling, Boise State would get destroyed playing a full P5 schedule until they start recruiting P5 caliber players. It’s not the same to look up for one or two games against the P5 compared to playing 8-10 P5 schools in OOC and conference play.

As for Louisville, they cheated their way to the P5. They’re very lucky the whole Petrino-Pitino-Jurich scandal happened until they got their ACC invite. Otherwise Cincinnati would be in (since ACC fans keep saying UConn was a big no regardless).

(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.

(07-05-2020 10:04 AM)colohank Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 12:45 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Who ever got a job by saying “I’m slightly better than your worst employee”

Whoever got turned away from a job when it was obvious that they were clearly better than many current employees?

"Obvious" and "clearly" would be the debatable terms here, wouldn't they?

If you performed at a high level when your competition is weaker then you could be perceived as better, but there's nothing of substance that actually proves you are.

(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.

I tend to agree with him. The Big 12 has plenty of TX schools whereas it would be a fresh market for the ACC. Similar reason why the ACC would probably never take UCF or USF unless there were defections.

(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.

Agree fully.

(07-05-2020 07:51 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I tend to agree with him. The Big 12 has plenty of TX schools whereas it would be a fresh market for the ACC. Similar reason why the ACC would probably never take UCF or USF unless there were defections.

I don't think the ACC needs to go way down to Houston level just to get into Texas. Not even Texas Tech would be worth it for the ACC. Yeah you're in Texas but you're at best the third or fourth choice behind Bevo and Aggie, what's the point?

On the Houston going to a P5 program theme ... and let's not consider BYU or UConn for this:

Houston (compared to the other G5s) offers the best combo of football, hoops and baseball. It is located in a city of 7 million people. It has a history of big-time sports. And it now has a medical school.

As a Memphis and Cincy fan, I am hugely pleased to have the Cougars as an AAC league mate.