Example: Would you choose to be UNT (beat a bad Arkansas team but lost 3 conference games) or UAB (dominated their conference and hit the Top 25 with no impressive out of conference wins).
Example: Would you choose to be UNT (beat a bad Arkansas team but lost 3 conference games) or UAB (dominated their conference and hit the Top 25 with no impressive out of conference wins).
Which one do you think will get the most mileage? I agree, to a CUSA fan the championship is more important, but not to your average fan or recruit. Arkansas=SEC, that’s all they see. We are still getting mileage out of Bama wins from 20 years ago, but nobody but a true fan remembers if we won the WAC or that we played in the CUSA championship twice.
Trophies impress recruits as well, which a conference championship and bowl bring.
Why in the world is this being made out to be some mutually exclusive thing. We can beat the incredibly highly ranked Idaho teams, fill up our trophy case and beat the big dogs on the schedule.
And don't tell me that beating Alabama didn't go very far. Every college football fan in the state of Louisiana knew that we beat Alabama. Only the Tech die hards knew we beat #80 Idaho.
So now you think Skip should be fired? Because he cannot do two of the three things listed here to save himself. He cannot beat a P5 school, he cannot win a conference championship (even though we are in the worst conference), now he can go to a bowl game each year since most teams do (and being in the worst conference helps that).
Last edited by DocMarvin362; 11-15-2018 at 12:25 PM.
I'm not totally sure I understand what's being debated here.
This season we've lost to the good teams we've played (LSU, MSU, and UAB) and beat all the bad teams we've played so far (bad to average if you want to be generous with FAU and UNT and hopefully USM).
Historically we've mostly played (and mostly defeated) bad teams (per the best systems we can come up with to compare all gazillion FBS teams) and a few ok to good teams.
Are we mad because previous coaches (err, coach?) mostly beat the bad teams by a higher margin? We think? Or because the losses to good teams were closer?
I agree that margin of victory (or defeat) can be somewhat predictive, but as Herm says - you play to win the game. The only thing that bothers me about not blowing out Rice or UTEP is what that might say about whether we win at USM and against WKU and Bowl Opponent to be Named. Past that, a win's a win.
Every G5 team in the country that wins more than they lose get most of their wins against bad (or poorly rated) teams.
Time is your friend. Impulse is your enemy. -John Bogle
The easiest way to look at this is to simply see where Dykes' teams were ranked vs Holtz's.
Sonny Dykes' 2012 team finished #33 in the USA Today Final Re-rank poll for the 2012 season. https://www.usatoday.com/story/gameo...1-124/1742041/
Holtz's best LA Tech teams have finished each season as follows:
In 2018, the Dogs are currently ranked #61 https://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ll/1972725002/
In 2017, the Dogs finished #61.
In 2016, the Dogs finished #58.
In 2015, the Dogs finished #59.
In 2014, the Dogs finished #57. Bleacher Report ranked LA Tech #46 in the final 2014 rankings. https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-season#slide8
In 2013, the Dogs finished #58.
https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb...standings.html