re: Sleeping Giant schools in College Football.

Michael Crow at ASU is definitely trying to awaken the football program. Every student was forced to purchase season tickets with it being included in their tuition (football and basketball). 80,000 x $200 is a pretty good flow of money. And however much y'all may dislike Todd Graham (crappy situation at Pitt and everything went wrong for both sides), he's finally brought us back to relevance with a Pac-12 Championship appearance last year.

We still can't hang with the ultimate power team in our conference, Stanford, but we're finally competitive in every other game minus the Texas Tech debacle at the Holiday Bowl last year. Offense is getting back to the early 2000's. Defense is getting bigger and faster. Stadium renovations. Getting 5 star recruits. Really excited for the program!

As for other sleeping giant programs, I think Michigan State would have qualified as one. UCLA is starting to get solid year after year too.

I'm trying to imagine teams that...

1) had a winning tradition for a long time
2) fell into a cycle of mediocrity that's just above being bad enough that you still mention them every so often
3) then had a staccato of victorious seasons (I think ASU and UCLA are here)
4) before finally breaking through to become winning programs again (I think MSU is here, we'll see after this season)

I thought Penn State might fall into the #2 stage after the Sandusky incident, but they seem to be surviving... USC almost did too after all the sanctions and what occurred at the Sun Bowl against GT, but we'll see what happens with Sarkisian... Definitely not the unbeatable team they used to be in the Carroll era, but still good enough that they haven't fallen to the #2 stage.

quote:

---

I think you're pretty much right. Like you said, it's a basketball school. But it's tough to say they should "own" Chicago. Chicago is closer to South Bend than Champaign and obviously SB is home to a much better program (both historically and currently). And lastly, it's not like Chicago is a major football hotbed. They produce some good players, but not like Miami, Cincinnati, Dallas/Houston, southern California, etc. Still, Illinois should be able to get enough recruits to consistently be around .500, but I really think only every decade or so will they produce a team that challenges for the Big Ten/a major bowl (like in 89, 01, 07

---

Of course ND will usually win out on the top talent from the area, but Illinois is letting other Big Ten schools come in every year and get solid players while they battle NIU for instate recruits.

I'm not saying they could be a national title contender year after year, but I think the right coach could get them near Wisconsin's level.

quote:

---

UVA again...like UCLA,

---

Ya, I agree. They just have too nice of a campus setup in two of the most desirable campus environments in the country.

They need a rough and tumble neighborhood like the ghetto USC (and other schools) is in. I believe this is a real thing. Being around too much blue blood makes you soft over 4 years.

quote:

---

University of Houston - if they get more exposure and create a better campus atmosphere(drop the commuter school moniker), they have all the resources to be a powerhouse...recruiting, money, alumni, big market, etc.

They've shown signs in the past with good runs during the 70's and 80's, the Jack Pardee/Andre Ware/David Klingler era, and Art Briles/Kevin Sumlin recently.

---

Problem with the cougs are they are not in a big boy conference which will hinder them from becoming elite. The power 5 conferences are moving farther and farther away each year with rules favoring them making it tougher for mid majors to compete for championships. I'd almost say they would have to go independent and schedule like notre dame does but with teams in the Big 12 and SEC.

Tulane. Private school in NOLA they will dominate the AAC and the nonpowerfive division of CFB in a few years

UCF is a sleeping giant. It's the biggest school in Florida and if they were in a better conference like the ACC or SEC, they'd compete with FSU and UF for recruiting.

I agree with this. The history is there with Red Grange. Just need to consistently win Chicago. Beckman is not the coach to do it. He can build for the next guy with a losing record, but solid growth this year.

quote:

---

if Stanford can do it, Virginia doesn't have an excuse

---

That's not what I'm saying - academics.

Don't let Stanford's academics fool you.

Stanford is a sports machine and wants to win at freaking everything.

Until recently - outside of football/basketball - they owned the nation at most sports...

They have won the Director's Cup 22 years in a row.

Stanford has always been insanely sports driven...but, like UCLA...doesn't have a history of dominance in one sport that they cling to...strive for...and worship. UCLA worships UCLA basketball.

Stanford worships sports in general. They had no hindrance in getting good at football...we all know...those players aren't getting in on the same standards as the rest of the student body.

And Stanford despite being IVY league rated in academics...doesn't act like an IVY league school.

UVA acts like an IVY League school. They're too gentlemen to bust through...as if the school administration would consider it ungentlemanly to be great at CFB...they'd rather dominate a "gentleman's game" - Lacrosse.

South Alabama.

College Gameday even knows what's up.