Discussion in 'Other Sports' started by Fry, Dec 8, 2010.
Wow, another 30 seconds of my life I don't get back...
On to next thread.
Is the best you can do an early projection of the 2009 recruiting class? Weak Gloat, real weak. Lets look at the more recent list: http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/recruiting/teamrank/2011/all/all
Who's the top of that list? Hmmm teams like Texas, Alabama, OSU, Oklahoma (probably my other top 4 jobs minus Florida). I realize Florida is 18 and I'm sure the coaching change will affect the recruiting for the short term, but they're still higher than Michigan.
So their recruiting is now bad. (with Michigans)
They suck just as much as Michigan currently.
They have no player like Denard Robinson on their roster.
They have no history.
They have no standards.
They have no prestige or half the campus/academics/etc.
So you guys please remind me again why they're the better job...
Trying to go in to something different and change the argument isn't helping. I'm not falling for it.
Pretty sure you already fell for it....I mean you did make up recruiting rankings and all.
You can and will argue this until you're blue in the face, but I can absolutely guarantee that you are in the very small minority on this. The overwhelming majority of anyone that has a brain would agree that UF is a better job than Michigan & that UF is one of the top 2-3 jobs in the country.
Also, I can't wait to see DeAnthony Arnett (borderline 5 star WR & lifelong UM fan from Saginaw) suit up for the Big Orange next fall.
You do realize that the University of Florida is in the Association of American Universities don't you? Michigan is also in that association and you certainly have to have academic prestige to be in that organization. In 2010 US News and World report ranked Florida as the 15th best public university in the nation, and 53rd overall, and it was ranked in the top 10 for most popular universities, which would obviously indicate that people enjoy the campus and atmosphere of the school. Michigan is ranked 29th overall, and is certainly a top tier school, but you clearly have no clue as to FLorida's academics or prestige, as it is certainly a really good school from an academic standpoint.
In saying all that I am not really sure why academics make a school a good (or bad) coaching job. I certainly don't think anyone would argue that Harvard or Princeton are great coaching jobs because of their academic prestige, so why is that a basis for Florida or Michigan?
The SEC has Sun Belt academic standards. They even lowered them this past season to get better athletes.
And it doesn't make them a better job alone- it's the combination of all these things. Florida lost Tebow. That's all they've EVER had to make them desirable.
The SEC sets a minimum standard, but it is still up to each school to determine who gains admission. You can be the best athlete in the world, but if you don't qualify academically for Vandy, you won't be going there. Florida probably has lower standards for athletes, but that still doesn't mean that Florida isn't a strong academic school which you were trying to make it out to be.
Secondly, are you arguing that the harder the admission standards, the better the job? If that is the case, then how come no schools with strict academic standards for athletes are consistent football powers? Standford, who is good now but in reality isn't a top 25 team every year by any means, is the only team with those types of standards in the top 10. How come Duke and Vandy aren't better programs? Why has Notre Dame's program been on the decline or 15 years? That logic makes no sense.
ETA: The average SAT score for a typical Michigan student and student athlete is separated by 267 points. Michigan also lowers their standards for athletes, which isn't uncommon for large public universities with high academic standards.
Again, I said it's a combination of things... not just standards. Not just history. Not just current rosters.
I think Michigan is a good job, so I am not knocking Michigan in the least, but the only way I think someone would think Michigan is a better job than Florida at this point in time, would be if they had connections to Michigan or the area. Florida is the top football school in one of the best recruiting areas in the country. That alone IMO, makes Florida a better job than Michigan, considering they are fairly equal in most other areas such as money, TV contracts, etc.
Are you sure? Because they've won 2 national championships and have had a Heisman winner since Michigan was last relevant. If kids gave a d@mn about any history beyond 10 years ago Notre Dame and Miami would be power houses instead of pushovers.
Separate names with a comma.