re: Who are the sleeping giants in college football?

texas is not a sleeping giant, they are just underachievers.

oklahoma before stoops was a sleeping giant. same for usc prior to carroll

quote:

---

UCLA and Cal could both be powerhouses. The problem is that neither institution is going to make a commitment to becoming a football power. Their facilities are mediocre at best. They are unwilling to pay for outstanding coaches. And the cost of living around either school is outrageous, so the assistant coaches can't live near the campuses. There is more than enough talent in California for them to be successful. The education available at either one is first rate. They are within metropolitan areas that have all the cultural and artistic attractions you could imagine. They are also located where outdoor activities are practical all year. It all comes back to institutional commitment. And the focus of both schools has always put academics ahead of athletics.

---

UCLA simply can't afford a big name coach. They are a public school. Their state is broke. They have to get $3M/yr coaching contracts approved by the board. It's hard to do. SC is private. They don't need anyone's approval if they have the cash money. It starts at the top, and trickles down to elite coordinators and position coaches. SC can offer twice the amount of UCLA. which would you choose?

Other than both residing in SoCal, UCLA and SC have little in common with respect to football


And L oh fricking L at whoever said UCLA has nice facilities

As someone pointed out, people are confusing sleeping giants with overacheivers.

The two most obvious SGs:
USF
UCF

Bear Bryant called the state of Fla CFB's SG in the '60s, and he was eventually proven right.

There's too much talent in FL for just three schools.

quote:

---

maryland, dc and northern va

---

Living on the West Coast I always forget how close the states are to each other on the East Coast.

Clemson
UCLA
UGA and Texas should be much more dominant than they are
Miami
One of UVA/VT/Maryland should rise up and dominate recruiting in that region they could be a force
Rutgers if they could lock down the New Jersey/NYC recruiting beds
UNC

quote:

---

Texas A&M - This is surely going to happen. They'll be the only one stopping Saban from throwing rings on his other hand. A&M will rise to one of the top 5 programs in the nation in the next decade.

---

Absolutely. None of the other schools mentioned really even approach them. A public school with 20x the endowment of LSU's in a state with hundreds of div 1 football players produced every year. They plan on expanding their stadium to 100k and have the capability to do so, and unlike the other Texas/Oklahoma schools, they can offer the chance to play in the SEC. They aren't even close to full capacity as a program, yet they stumble on guys like Joekel and Mike Evans, not to mention a Heisman winner that will help propel their brand in the upcoming decade. They will get their 2-deep on the same level as LSU in the not-so-distant future.

Texas A&M--definition of a "sleeping giant."

Started to wake up just a little last year, though.

quote:

---

UGA - Get an elite coach here and they would be ridiculous. It's a shame Richt has been unable to get over the hump with the talent they've had. Put a Gary Patterson there (I know TCU won't let him leave but if he did), and they would wreck shop in the East.

---

UGA has been wrecking shop in the East, but they've run into LSU and Bama in the SEC CG. That's not Richt's fault; any non-idiot can see that.

If you want to name a sleeping giant in GA, you have to look on North Ave. in Atlanta.

quote:

---

If you want to name a sleeping giant in GA, you have to look on North Ave. in Atlanta.

---

Maybe, but GT is becoming less and less of a football-centric school. I like Paul Johnson, but that offense has moved them further away from mainstream, big time CFB. Short term it has been somewhat productive, but I don't think it helps in the end. I'd like for GT to some form of prominence, but I don't think that'll happen, sadly.

UGA is probably the best program not to get over the hump if we're talking titles in the last 10-15 years. But they're close to an elite program already. TAMU is a very strong program historically too, but they may be ready to rise into the higher echelon.

I think UNC is a good choice overall, though. Plenty of money and history, good fan base, good brand, could be attractive to coaches and talent, no other serious competition for CFB in state. No excuse not to make a move.

The one think I think UNC needs to do is streamline its branding for football. I don't think they need to separate from the bball history, but they need to differentiate a little. Basketball stuff (Deacons, tarheels, blue devils, owls, terrapins) just seem weird in the big time CFB world. Need to redo their uniforms and branding to something with a clean, classic football appeal.