Conference Champs

[Gort]

Here are the league champs from the major playoff conferences over the past ten years. Obviously a few leagues were totally dominated by a few programs, while others conferences seem to be much more competitive. Any thoughts as to why?



A10

95 - Delaware
96 - W&M
97 - Villanova
98 - Richmond
99 - JMU/UMass
00 - Delaware/Richmond
01 - Hofstra/Maine/W&M/Villanova
02 - N'eastern/Maine
03 - Delaware/UMass
04 - W&M/JMU/Delaware


Gateway

95 - EIU/UNI
96 - UNI
97 - WIU
98 - WIU
99 - ISU
00 - WIU
01 - INI
02 - WKU/UNI
03 - SIU/UNI
04 - SIU


SoCon

95 - ASU
96 - Marshall
97 - GSU
98 - GSU
99 - GSU/ASU/Furman
00 - GSU
01 - GSU
02 - GSU
03 - Wofford
04 - GSU/Furman


Big Sky

95 - Montana
96 - Montana
97 - EWU
98 - Montana
99 - Montana
00 - Montana
01 - Montana
02 - Montana/Montana St/ISU
03 - Montana/Montana St/NAU
04 - Montana/EWU


Southland

95 - McNeese St
96 - Troy St
97 - McNeese St/NW St
98 - NW St
99 - SFA/ Troy St
00 - Troy St
01 - McNeese St/ SHS
02 - McNeese St
03 - McNeeese St
04 - NW St/SHS


OVC

95 - Murrary St
96 - Murrary St
97 - EKU
98 - Tenn St
99 - Tenn St
00 - WKU
01 - EIU
02 - EIU/Murrary St
03 - Jacksonville St
04 - Jacksonville St


Patriot

95 - Lehigh
96 - Bucknell
97 - Colgate
98 - Lehigh
99 - Lehigh/Colgate
00 - Lehigh
01 - Lehigh
02 - Colgate/Fordham
03 - Colgate
04 - Lehigh/Lafayette

[Wmbgskip]

I think expectation of parity has a lot to do with it. Georgia Southern and Montana are far and away the best teams in their conferences (and nationally), and while each year you may have the same folks challenging them, they keep pulling it out...like FSU in the ACC. People start expecting them to be the best, and life begins to mirror expectations.

In other leagues, there is no recognized "dominant" school. In the A-10, at the beginning of the season, you can only pick three, maybe four teams at most that AREN'T going to be in the championship race...and still, they're good enough to give the frontrunners regular scares and pull the semi-regular upset. Players look around, and can say "hey, this program hasn't had much more distinction than ours, and the players aren't hands down better, and look, they won the conference last year! We can do that, too!"

--Skip

[Tribe4SF]

The balance in the A-10 is long established and reflects how many schools in the league are committed to excellence. The league's reputation is a recruiting draw of its own.

[grizbeer]

For the Big Sky it has to be pointed out that the Nevada (91), Idaho and Boise State (95) all left right before the period you mention, and PSU, Sac State and Cal State Northride had all just moved up from D-II and joined the conference, so the Big Sky wasn't as strong then as it is today, which is why you see more co-champs today than 5 years ago in the Big Sky.

Also realize that 1/2 of those years Montana played in a National Championship and you have to think that Montana would have been conference champion in most major conferences in those years.

[ngineer]

Seems to me a lot of programs run in 10 year cycles (although I hope I'm wrong since Lehigh's current 'hot' cycle would be about up!). Also, nowadays the leagues and conferences change frequently or membership does, and that effects the balance, too.

[Down with the Foe!]

Daaaaaa Griz!!



nuff said?



Giddddddyyyyyyy up!

[OL FU]

RE: SoCon, I believe GSU has shared the title a few more times than listed, however, that does not diminish their dominance. There may be a few more reasons for success with GSU. Success breeds Success. Consistent style of football even after coaching changes. Great fan support.

Fan support, consistent style and success make it a great football environment.

[GannonFan]

I think it has to do entirely with the quality of the depth of the conference - there are some conferences where there are 2-4 real good teams, and they're the same teams year after year, and then the rest of the conference is bad year after year. Comparing the SoCon and the A10 is a good example. The SoCon has the GSU's and Furman's, who are good, and good nationally, year in and year out. However, the bottom of that conference is bad - TN-Chatt, ETSU before they dropped football, WCU, Elon now - these schools have had bad teams for years. In the A10, you can only really point to Rhode Island as a perpetually bad team - the rest of them are all good at some point in time, although not always at the level of a GSU and Furman. It all has to do with the quality of depth in a conference - no depth means that only a small handful of teams always win - a lot of depth and you have a turnstile at the top.

[Proud Griz Man]

Montana's fortunes changed in 1986. The Griz had a terrible stadium up until the opening of Washington Grizzly Stadium in October 1986. We also got a better coaching staff in 1986, led by Don Read. Montana's facilities and coaching staff have helped us develop a strong tradition, but it is relatively short-lived.

Go Griz!

[bluehenbillk]

It's amazing that 9 of the 11 A-10 schools that were in the league got a conference crown during that time.

[OL FU]

Gannon Fan,

I agree on why certain conferences are dominated and others have parity. I wonder which type of conference typically does better in the playoffs? Last year was obviously A10 year. My guess is that teams from conferences without parity typically do better in the playoffs , of course, that view is skewed by GSU and Montana's success. What do you think?

[89Hen]

Also realize that 1/2 of those years Montana played in a National Championship and you have to think that Montana would have been conference champion in most major conferences in those years.

It's possible, but I think that may be a bit of a stretch. I still think there's a chance that Montana's excellent playoff performance is partly a factor of being IN the playoffs every year. We all accept the notion in Professional sports that teams with veterans who have 'been there before' are better off than a team making their first trip to the playoffs.

I could argue the converse, that if you took GSU, UD, YSU, McNeese... and put them in the BSC, they would have won the conference in most of those years too. With that much playoff experience they too may have been in the final half the years.

Just a theory.

[89Hen]

My guess is that teams from conferences without parity typically do better in the playoffs , of course, that view is skewed by GSU and Montana's success. What do you think?

See my above post for why that may be true.

I posted on this topic on the old board several times and I can't remember the years or exact results, but look at Montana. In a year where they went to the playoffs after a couple year absence, they didn't perform as well as years when they were returning to the playoffs back to back. My theory is that more players had playoff experience in subsequent years and therefore they perfomed better. It may just be coincidence too.

[Proud Griz Man]

I think it has to do entirely with the quality of the depth of the conference - there are some conferences where there are 2-4 real good teams, and they're the same teams year after year, and then the rest of the conference is bad year after year. It all has to do with the quality of depth in a conference - no depth means that only a small handful of teams always win - a lot of depth and you have a turnstile at the top.

Your point partially applies to the Big Sky Conference, but that is changing. Case in point = Eastern Washington beating #1 SIU last year, Northern Arizona beating #1 McNeese State a couple years ago. Impressive wins on the road!

[Proud Griz Man]

See my above post for why that may be true.

I posted on this topic on the old board several times and I can't remember the years or exact results, but look at Montana. In a year where they went to the playoffs after a couple year absence, they didn't perform as well as years when they were returning to the playoffs back to back. My theory is that more players had playoff experience in subsequent years and therefore they perfomed better. It may just be coincidence too.

I agree with your point, in general terms. Playoff experience does help, but I am increasingly focusing on which team is hot (playing well in November-December). JMU and Montana are good examples last year. In 2002 Montana was limping through November-December, and could not duplicate the playoff successes of 2000 & 2001. Hen, does that apply to UD championship year? I thought so! :D

[Ronbo]

See my above post for why that may be true.

I posted on this topic on the old board several times and I can't remember the years or exact results, but look at Montana. In a year where they went to the playoffs after a couple year absence, they didn't perform as well as years when they were returning to the playoffs back to back. My theory is that more players had playoff experience in subsequent years and therefore they perfomed better. It may just be coincidence too.

We had 16 Freshmen and Sophmores either starting or splitting time 50/50 last year during the playoff run. We had some positions that the Coaches started the Senior but split time with the younger player because they were as good or better. Even though we have 15 starters back, it's probably closer to 20 or 21 if you count players that started half the season or split time with the starter. Montana was rebuilding last year and even though we had a good QB, the rest of the team was young.

[putter]

I can't speak for other conferences but, as was mentioned before, the Big Sky has lost some quality programs in the last 10 years. Nevada, Boise St, and Idaho were all playoff teams in the Big Sky and with their departure the Big Sky definitely was weakened and is now coming back to having more parity.

[89Hen]

We had 16 Freshmen and Sophmores either starting or splitting time 50/50 last year during the playoff run.

But the veterans were there to lead the team. Sometimes that's their role.

[Ronbo]

The Griz will have 10 Seniors starting this season and half those will split time with the younger player behind them. The youngsters are that good. Now if the QB position can pan out we should be pretty formidable the next couple seasons and be right in the mix for a run deep into the playoffs. Eastern Washington and Portland State will also be good, and MSU will have an awesome Offense but their Defense is questionable.

[SoCon48]

It's tough for some teams to win the conference championship when the top team in that conference (GSU) wins the national championship so many times. It would have looked rather silly for other SoCon teams to have won the conference championship but Georgia Southern still won all those NC's.

[WCU LawCat]

WCU, Elon now - these schools have had bad teams for years.

We are not quite that bad every year. We have been stuck in 4th and 5th place now for years and its disturbing for us. If you look at the SoCon, teams 5-8 can't keep a head coach long enough to establish a system or coaching staff. Take us (WCU) for example. We had a good year in 2001 with a 7-4 record. We lost to our Rival App in our final game by 1 touchdown which allowed App (8-3) to go to the playoffs instead of us. That year our head coach Bill Bliel was named coach of the year. Shortly after that he was fired. He was fired because one of his players got in some bad trouble at a club and one of his assistant coaches got a DUI. Instead of axing the assistant they blame the head coach. Instead of kicking the player and others involved off the team, they blame the head coach. the teams at the top of the SoCon keep head coaches around...how do you think Wofford finally poked it head to the top?

My point is that the top teams are at the top because they found good coaches and have been able to keep them for the most part.

...and sorry for getting defensive about WCU. I just get that way sometimes. :rolleyes:

[OL FU]

Keeping good head coaches is key, however, keeping the same system under different coaches may be more important. GSU has had four(?) in the last 20 years. FU, also. But Furman's coaches have all been hired from the same pool (assistants or former assistants) since 1972.

Experience in the playoffs helps, but the ability to obtain that experience may come from being in a conference with less parity.

[ChickenMan]

It would have looked rather silly for other SoCon teams to have won the conference championship but Georgia Southern still won all those NC's.

'98 A10 champs... UConn/Richmond

'98 1AA champ... UMass

silly A10... ;)

[GSUBass]

Keeping good head coaches is key, however, keeping the same system under different coaches may be more important. GSU has had four(?) in the last 20 years. FU, also. But Furman's coaches have all been hired from the same pool (assistants or former assistants) since 1972.

Experience in the playoffs helps, but the ability to obtain that experience may come from being in a conference with less parity.
We had Erk, Stowers, Stowers replacement (to remain nameless), Johnson, and now Sewak.


Now GSU had about 5 different coaches before they dropped the program before WWII...but those teams were also pretty bad.

[blueballs]

Keeping good head coaches is key, however, keeping the same system under different coaches may be more important. GSU has had four(?) in the last 20 years. FU, also. But Furman's coaches have all been hired from the same pool (assistants or former assistants) since 1972.



Stowers, Johnson and Sewak all coached under Erk Russell at GSU, so the same could be said for GSU as FU.

[SoCon48]

It's logical to assume that had GSU and Furman been in any one conference in the nation for a long period of time, we wouldn't be having this discussion, since they were National Champions/runners up so frequently and likely would have been conference champs. So, for instance, the A-10 would have not had so many different conference champions. It would have been GSU or Furman and one or two others. :cool:

[89Hen]

By WCU do you mean 1983 National Champ runner-up Western Carolina? Delaware has been runnerup only once too (1982). So WCU has been "good at some point in time."

Then Southern Illinois and FAMU are historically better than McNeese if you're going to go with that.

[OL FU]

By WCU do you mean 1983 National Champ runner-up Western Carolina? Delaware has been runnerup only once too (1982). So WCU has been "good at some point in time."

I, unfortunately, remember it well. They beat FU in the semi-finals after we tied during the regular season.

[WCU LawCat]

In 1983 I was 3 years old so you can imagine that I am going to go crazy if we don't put together a solid season soon. The 2001 season was the best one that I have seen. I have followed since my Freshamn year in 99.

[89Hen]

I was pointing out that WCU has been "good at some point in time."

Just not in everybody here's lifetime. :p

[OL FU]

In 1983 I was 3 years old so you can imagine that I am going to go crazy if we don't put together a solid season soon. The 2001 season was the best one that I have seen. I have followed since my Freshamn year in 99.

If you don't remember Bob Waters (please tell me I remembered his name?), then you don't remember WCU being a good football team.

[GannonFan]

Gannon Fan,

I agree on why certain conferences are dominated and others have parity. I wonder which type of conference typically does better in the playoffs? Last year was obviously A10 year. My guess is that teams from conferences without parity typically do better in the playoffs , of course, that view is skewed by GSU and Montana's success. What do you think?

I don't think you can definitely say one way or the other - there's enough evidence on both sides to make either argument. Some will say playing a tough in conference schedule gets you ready for the playoffs, some will say not getting beaten up week in week out is better. Sometimes things happen in the playoffs that are just luck, and sometimes really the better team wins. Too hard to draw anything definitive from the past decade or so (plus with Marshall back in the 90's and a better Citadel team the SoCon was probably deeper than it is now).

As for my comment about WCU, I never said they were never good at any point in time (being misquoted there!), I just don't think they've been consistently good over the past 15 years - even Rhode Island can point to a good year here or there, just not a lot of them strung together though. I remember the Sporting News (when they used to cover IAA) saying in '93 or '94 that WCU could break out that year, and instead they meanderd to a 5-6 record - unfortunately, that's what I remember about WCU in the past few years - too many fogettable years like that.

[ChickenMan]

It's logical to assume that had GSU and Furman been in any one conference in the nation for a long period of time, we wouldn't be having this discussion, since they were National Champions/runners up so frequently and likely would have been conference champs. So, for instance, the A-10 would have not had so many different conference champions. It would have been GSU or Furman and one or two others. :cool:

GSU... maybe... Furman I don't think so. Over the past ten seasons Furman's overall record (84-39) is inferior to that of UD's (91-35) and even more telling is the fact that Furman has lost four consecutive playoff games vs four separate A10 schools...

'99 UMass
'00 Hofstra
'02 Villanova
'04 JMU

it's a real stretch to claim that FU would "dominate" the A10 when they have lost their last four playoff games... three of those four on their home field :eek:... vs A10 schools.

:nono:

[89Hen]

1983, 1985, 1988... 1999

Quite the gap there. Most of 1988 is a distant blurry memory for me. Considering that Villanova, William & Mary, Northeastern, JMU, Towson and Hofstra weren't even members back then, how relevant are those games to how Furman would do today in the A10?

[Baldy]

Everone (except ralph) is piling on Furman....cool!!! ;)

[89Hen]

I don't think "today" was the theory.

That sounds like a UMass fan post. UMass has more Yankee/A10 titles than anyone.... sure, if you put Furman in the Yankee 30 years ago, they may have a lot of titles. Since UD, VU, W&M, JMU.... joined, THAT's when we've seen the parity and that marks when the conference started improving.

There were only SIX teams in the conference before Delaware joined. In the period between when I-AA started and the 1988 reference, one of them (UNH) didn't share a title, meaning there were only four winners of the Yankee over an 11 year period. Actually, UNH hadn't won the title since 1968 and ironically didn't start doing well in the conference until it expanded and brought in better teams....

In 1986 1st year Delaware shared the conference title.
In 1987 2nd year Richmond shared the title.
In 1989 2nd year Villanova shared the title.

To me, that suggests that the Yankee prior to 1986 wasn't that good. The point is that when you talk about the A10, you're only really talking about since 1988 when there were more of the current teams.

BTW Baldy, I don't think anyone is piling on Furman, I think most people are trying to disspell the notion that they would have won many A10 titles over the years.

[ChickenMan]

and before that... (Hofstra wasn't A-10 in 2000)

All-Time Furman vs. the A-10/Yankee in the I-AA Playoffs:
1983 Furman 35, Boston U. 16
1985 Furman 59, Rhode Island 15
1988 Furman 21, Delaware 7
1999 Massachusetts 30, Furman 23 (ot)
2002 Villanova 45, Furman 38
2004 James Madison 14, Furman 13


My point was... GSU not Furman... was the power over the past ten years in the SoCon. Furman would have been another "good" team in the A10... but there is no reason to believe that they would have been dominate.

[ChickenMan]

If you say so . :confused: I thought I was reading it quite clear and others were not. BTW, the Atlantic 10 Football Conference debuted in 1997 as you know. ;)

The original thread and my response was relative to the past ten seasons and 1AA 2005's post that claimed that GSU along with Furman would have dominated the A10. I don't think so... what do you think...???

[ChickenMan]

It's logical to assume that had GSU and Furman been in any one conference in the nation for a long period of time, we wouldn't be having this discussion

That was 2005's quote...

ten years is a long time to me... but I quess it is all relative. But regardless... there is no way that FU would have "dominated" in the Yankee/A10... during the past ten year's. Too think other wise.. is illogical... ;)


http://papyr.com/hypertextbooks/engl_102/spock2.gif

[ChickenMan]

Furman has no titles and was runner up once since '95... meanwhile UMass... UD and JMU all have won titles. Case closed...??? :) :D ;)

[Pen Guin]

Why does every thread have to be designed as a pro-A10 parade? Take a look at schedules, post-season results ... anthing ouside of that demonstrates parity, but certainly not superiority as compared to another conference. I remember when fans laughed at the average A-10 schedule ... which only included Ivy and PL teams, if they played outside the conference at all. Now if you only go back 10 years ... it is not quite as bad ... but let's look at everything. Furthermore, the consistent admission of 3 teams to the post-season (from the A-10) has to make their post-season results suspect (for comparison) as well. Whn you have a consistent 16 teams in the post-season, and most all other conference have (on average) 1.5 teams participating (as compared to the SoCon & A-10's 3) ... if you do not win twice as many play-off games ... what does that prove? You are not as good of a conference. The fact remains is that (A-10) conference regulation required the A-10 members to play most all of the teams in their conference ... which did not leave room for much else. So how can there be anything but parity ... given a set period of time. It is a matter of simple math. Parity is a measurement of odds vs evens. When you play the same teams each year (rotating home fields), have the same dollars, have the same number of scholarships ... there is bound be a higher degree of parity. The opposition knows what to expect, knows how to play against each other, knows how to recruit to compete against each other. The only teams that would have a chance of being reflective of NATIONAL parity would be those that were not "in" the A-10 ... but "played" against teams within that, or any given conference.

[GSUBass]

GSU... maybe... Furman I don't think so. Over the past ten seasons Furman's overall record (84-39) is inferior to that of UD's (91-35) and even more telling is the fact that Furman has lost four consecutive playoff games vs four separate A10 schools...

'99 UMass
'00 Hofstra
'02 Villanova
'04 JMU

it's a real stretch to claim that FU would "dominate" the A10 when they have lost their last four playoff games... three of those four on their home field :eek:... vs A10 schools.

:nono:


Don't forget about the loss to Montana in 2001. I know it's not A10, I just like to point out when Furman loses.

( I know, I know...Furman has been holding w/ us the past few years, that's what makes watching them lose even better)

[ngineer]

Keeping good head coaches is key, however, keeping the same system under different coaches may be more important. GSU has had four(?) in the last 20 years. FU, also. But Furman's coaches have all been hired from the same pool (assistants or former assistants) since 1972.

Experience in the playoffs helps, but the ability to obtain that experience may come from being in a conference with less parity.

That's probably the most important reason. Consistency of the program and methodology when you have young players moving through in four years is key for keeping momentum rather than having to keep learning a new system. In the late '80's to mid-90's Lehigh had a high-powered, pass happy offense, but the defense left up almost as many points. Hence, mediocre records, although a lot of exciting high scoring games. When Higgins took over, he changed the philosophy and positioned more of the better athletes on defense. Defense wins championships. Lembo has generally continued the same philosophy. Two new coordinators came in the past two years and while there has been tweaking, to accomodate certain player skills, the system has been basically the same.

[Tribe4SF]

Why does every thread have to be designed as a pro-A10 parade? Take a look at schedules, post-season results ... anthing ouside of that demonstrates parity, but certainly not superiority as compared to another conference. I remember when fans laughed at the average A-10 schedule ... which only included Ivy and PL teams, if they played outside the conference at all. Now if you only go back 10 years ... it is not quite as bad ... but let's look at everything. Furthermore, the consistent admission of 3 teams to the post-season (from the A-10) has to make their post-season results suspect (for comparison) as well. Whn you have a consistent 16 teams in the post-season, and most all other conference have (on average) 1.5 teams participating (as compared to the SoCon & A-10's 3) ... if you do not win twice as many play-off games ... what does that prove? You are not as good of a conference. The fact remains is that (A-10) conference regulation required the A-10 members to play most all of the teams in their conference ... which did not leave room for much else. So how can there be anything but parity ... given a set period of time. It is a matter of simple math. Parity is a measurement of odds vs evens. When you play the same teams each year (rotating home fields), have the same dollars, have the same number of scholarships ... there is bound be a higher degree of parity. The opposition knows what to expect, knows how to play against each other, knows how to recruit to compete against each other. The only teams that would have a chance of being reflective of NATIONAL parity would be those that were not "in" the A-10 ... but "played" against teams within that, or any given conference.

Recent history is what counts now (last 10 years). After all, W&M beat Navy in '67 when they were #2 in the country. Should we claim that reflects on our current program? If you look at A-10 out of conference, it's been strong for awhile. The A-10 is a meatgrinder. 8 games and you're lucky if you can chalk 2 up as automatic wins. When you go to all those games, you see how good these teams are. Check Sagarin and other power ratings and you get the picture. How many in the top 25 of the GPI?

[leatherneck177]

Just wanted to point out that in 2002 WIU had a share of the Gateway title as well. I believe that they shared it with WKU, even though they defeated them in the regular season.

Formerly okray177

[OL FU]

It's logical to assume that had GSU and Furman been in any one conference in the nation for a long period of time, we wouldn't be having this discussion, since they were National Champions/runners up so frequently and likely would have been conference champs. So, for instance, the A-10 would have not had so many different conference champions. It would have been GSU or Furman and one or two others. :cool:

I will give my nod to GSU. (As much as it hurts my head to do so) For long period of time GSU would have been A10 champs (Yankee champs). Furman and other woulds have won occasionally).

[OL FU]

Don't forget about the loss to Montana in 2001. I know it's not A10, I just like to point out when Furman loses.

( I know, I know...Furman has been holding w/ us the past few years, that's what makes watching them lose even better)

I like remembering the game that preceded our losing to Montana.

[89Hen]

For long period of time GSU would have been A10 champs (Yankee champs).

Which period?

[OL FU]

Which period?

I suppose it depends on how far you want to go back, but to keep it recent, not the last two years. Before that I think they would have been contenders for the previous 10 years (excluding their one horrible season) and champion in many of them.

[89Hen]

I don't question that they would be contenders in 9 out of 10 season (many teams contend in the A10). I do however question the championships. In the last 10 years GSU is 5-5 vs. the A10. Compare that with the 61-18 record against the SoCon in that same period which includes an abhorration year of 2-6 in 1996! I think GSU would contend for championships as would Montana, but titles? That's pure conjecture.

[OL FU]

I don't question that they would be contenders in 9 out of 10 season (many teams contend in the A10). I do however question the championships. In the last 10 years GSU is 5-5 vs. the A10. Compare that with the 61-18 record against the SoCon in that same period which includes an abhorration year of 2-6 in 1996! I think GSU would contend for championships as would Montana, but titles? That's pure conjecture.


Conjecture? No Doubt about that. Probably describes the vast majority of post that take on a look at what ifs. Seems reasonable that GSU would have a good shot in 93, 95, 98 ( except that UMASS beat then in the NC) , 99 definitely, 00 definitely, 01 , 02.

[HensRock]

I suppose it depends on how far you want to go back, but to keep it recent, not the last two years. Before that I think they would have been contenders for the previous 10 years (excluding their one horrible season) and champion in many of them.

Previous 5 (1998-2002) I'll give you, but not previous 10.

Previous 10 would be 1993-2002. They would not have been contending in the A10 from 1994 through 1997.

[OL FU]

Previous 5 (1998-2002) I'll give you, but not previous 10.

Previous 10 would be 1993-2002. They would not have been contending in the A10 from 1994 through 1997.

Now that I think about it, why I am doing this? I'm one of those so-called Purple Pansies. I resign from this thread.

[ChickenMan]

Now that I think about it, why I am doing this? I'm one of those so-called Purple Pansies. I resign from this thread.


A Furman fan espousing the attributes of the GSU program... :dizzy:

[OL FU]

A Furman fan espousing the attributes of the GSU program... :dizzy:

Now that I am back from throwing up....

[89Hen]

Seems reasonable that GSU would have a good shot in 93, 95, 98 ( except that UMASS beat then in the NC) , 99 definitely, 00 definitely, 01 , 02.

Again, agreed on 'shot', but remember that UMass wasn't even the A10 champ in 1998. They lost THREEE games to A10 teams. And in '02 GSU lost to middle of the pack and sub .500 in the A10, Delaware, in the regular season. :D

[OL FU]

Again, agreed on 'shot', but remember that UMass wasn't even the A10 champ in 1998. They lost THREEE games to A10 teams. And in '02 GSU lost to middle of the pack and sub .500 in the A10, Delaware, in the regular season. :D

I guess I am going to throw up again. They also lost NC WKU by 3 in the semis.

[Eagle_77]

I believe that everyone that has won a championship in the past 10 years should surrender it to A-10. This is a ridicules topic. As football fans we should know that the playoffs have very little to do with the regular season besides getting you in. Once you are in the playoffs ANYTHING can happen. Its about who is the hottest at the time. As much as I hate talking about it look at UMass in 98. They had a decent regular season that snuck them into the playoffs and then WOW. To say that they were not the best regular season A-10 team then you have an argument but they were by far the best from that conference in the playoffs.

Im with Ralph on this and that the numbers dont lie. Two years back I did an article on the history of the NC game and playoffs. Until recently (past 2-3 seasons) the
A-10 did not fair well in playoffs. To have been such a good conference the past 10 years, or even further back if you like, A-10 was not a premier teams in the playoffs. I do not have the numbers here at work but I will look them up when at home and post that article again.

Its easy to say what if but what if's prove nothing but numbers do. The past 2 years the A-10 has produced the best team in the nation. That is a fact and because of that fact A-10 fans have a good argument as being the best conference in the nation the past two years.

[89Hen]

77, what I and other Hen fans have been arguing is the suggestion that GSU would have won many A10 titles over the year. This isn't about who won the most NC's, who won what in playoffs... the fact remains that GSU, while a great team, and one that would certainly compete for titles regularly in the A10, performed far worse against A10 teams than SoCon teams. I believe it was a SoCon fan that stated GSU and perhaps even Furman would have won multiple titles in the A10. There is NO proof to support such a claim.

[ChickenMan]

I for one never have and never will claim that the A10 or any other conference is tops... as league strength always varies from season to season. This thread originated from a question as to why some leagues... ie Gateway/A10 seem to have been more competitive than some others... SoCon/Big Sky...over the past ten years. A SoCon poster then claimed that had GSU/ Furman been in the Yankee/A10 many current Yankee/A10 teams would have never won any league titles. I agreed that GSU would have won more than a few... but disputed that Furman would have been dominate. Just wanted to set the record straight.

[ChickenMan]

Ralphie... you conveniently left off his last comment...

It's logical to assume that had GSU and Furman been in any one conference in the nation for a long period of time, we wouldn't be having this discussion, since they were National Champions/runners up so frequently and likely would have been conference champs. So, for instance, the A-10 would have not had so many different conference champions, It would have been GSU or Furman and one or two others.

Twisted the facts... ...no but I admit should have said "not many" rather than "any" ... in my response

[ChickenMan]

:confused: :confused: :confused:

[ChickenMan]

OK... ;)

[Proud Griz Man]

Everybody knows that those superior A-10 schools play great football and us folks out west only cheer for overrated teams that would little chance of competing with the eastern powerhouse programs. ;) :D :rolleyes:

[ChickenMan]

Everybody knows that those superior A-10 schools play great football and us folks out west only cheer for overrated teams that would little chance of competing with the eastern powerhouse programs. ;) :D :rolleyes:

Don't be so hard on those Cubbies. They might have a shot vs Rhode Island... :) :D ;)

[Eagle_77]

[B]There is NO proof to support such a claim.

I can read and understand everything that has been said. You prove my point here with this qoute. You are right there is no proof of that just like there is no proof that a team not in the A-10 (such as GSU) would not have won the titles. Its all what if's and couldof shouldof wouldof's.

I may be wrong but I do not think that I concentrated on NC wins. I believe I spoke of playoff performance as a whole.

So once again to make this clear there is no proof that GSU or any other team would have or would not have done well in the A-10 or won any conf titles.

[Proud Griz Man]

Don't be so hard on those Cubbies. They might have a shot vs Rhode Island... :) :D ;)

Just baiting you into responding PoultryMan.

[eaglesrthe1]

77, what I and other Hen fans have been arguing is the suggestion that GSU would have won many A10 titles over the year. This isn't about who won the most NC's, who won what in playoffs... the fact remains that GSU, while a great team, and one that would certainly compete for titles regularly in the A10, performed far worse against A10 teams than SoCon teams. I believe it was a SoCon fan that stated GSU and perhaps even Furman would have won multiple titles in the A10. There is NO proof to support such a claim.


:nono: Gonna throw a big BS this. Comparing GSU's performance against what is largely the A-10s playoff participants against GSU's performance against what is mostly regular season opponents is bogus. It is only logical that the winning pct would be lower.

I would say that the .500 record against the A-10's best would support an argument that GSU could have won several A-10 titles, while the various opponents could have split the rest, but with different teams taking it a different times.

[Tod]

I said A-10!

:nod: :nod: NANNY NANNY BOOGER BUTT! :nod: :nod:
:lmao: :lmao:


Ralph, you stole my line! :)

That's too funny. Glad I finally figured out how to get back on this board :o

[ChickenMan]

I would say that the .500 record against the A-10's best would support an argument that GSU could have won several A-10 titles, while the various opponents could have split the rest, but with different teams taking it a different times.


No doubt that GSU could have won mulitple A10 titles... no arqument there. My disagreement was with the post that put Furman in the same category.

[89Hen]

:nono: Gonna throw a big BS this. Comparing GSU's performance against what is largely the A-10s playoff participants against GSU's performance against what is mostly regular season opponents is bogus.

In those ten games, three were regular seasone and GSU was 1-2. :p

[SoCon48]

Last time I looked, the NCAA play-off selection committee didn't give a big crap about the bottom of EITHER confernce, but they certainly have handed out a ton of NC and runner-up trophies to the top of the SoCon.

[89Hen]

Last time I looked, the NCAA play-off selection committee didn't give a big crap about the bottom of EITHER confernce, but they certainly have handed out a ton of NC and runner-up trophies to the top of the SoCon.

And that has what to do with this conversation? :rolleyes:

[OL FU]

And that has what to do with this conversation? :rolleyes:
I believe I-AA 2005 may be referring to the Southern Conference historical participation in the chamionship game. A SoCon participant in 13 of 22 years since becoming I-AA. (This does not include GSU prior to joining the conference).

[GannonFan]

I believe I-AA 2005 may be referring to the Southern Conference historical participation in the chamionship game. A SoCon participant in 13 of 22 years since becoming I-AA. (This does not include GSU prior to joining the conference).

Geez, looking at it that way only brings up the question (maybe for another thread) of why the SoCon has been in such a championship game drought recently - 3 straight years with no participant. They were in 13 of the past 19 so going 0 for 3 recently is rather noteworthy.

[pete4256]

The reason that the Socon has missed the Championship game the last three years is very simple:

In the face of A-10 dominance we have had no choice but to fold our tents early, saving us the kind of embarrassment we would suffer were we to face a team from the A-10.

Hail, football overlords.

[OL FU]

Geez, looking at it that way only brings up the question (maybe for another thread) of why the SoCon has been in such a championship game drought recently - 3 straight years with no participant. They were in 13 of the past 19 so going 0 for 3 recently is rather noteworthy.

I think it is rather remarkable but I also think it is pertinent to the discussion of dominance and if you give me a little while I will tell you why :bang:

[GannonFan]

The reason that the Socon has missed the Championship game the last three years is very simple:

In the face of A-10 dominance we have had no choice but to fold our tents early, saving us the kind of embarrassment we would suffer were we to face a team from the A-10.

Hail, football overlords.
Well, I'm glad you could add to the discussion by sinking into smack and irrelevance - it was actually a serious question, and I look forward to Ol FU's reply later.

As you do say the SoCon teams wanted to avoid playing an A10 team, actually they did face them in the playoffs - over the 3 year span we are talking about, the A10 and SoCon met 6 times, with the A10 winning 5 of the 6, with 4 of those 6 games being played at the SoCon. ('04 had UNH beating GSU and JMU beating Furman, '03 had UD beating Wofford, and '02 had nova beating Furman, Maine beating Appy St, and GSU beating Maine). Seeing this, maybe you're right, maybe it was the rise of the A10 that saw to the absence of the SoCon in the championship game (WKU was the only non A10 team to dismiss a SoCon team during this time).

[blueballs]

(Q) Why hasn't the SoCon had a championship game rep since 2001?
(A) None of the teams were good and/or lucky enough to win 3 playoff games.

Part of it may have to do with sheer numbers too. The SoCon had 1 team make it in 2003 and 2 in 2004, and that was the deserving number in both cases.

[OL FU]

[QUOTE=GannonFan]Well, I'm glad you could add to the discussion by sinking into smack and irrelevance - it was actually a serious question, and I look forward to Ol FU's reply later.QUOTE]

Gannon Fan,
Thanks for waiting. I suppose we have strayed somewhat from the original topic and I will give my opinion on a few of the issues and head back to the topic. (It has been an interesting stray).

First, given the list of games you recited it would be hard to argue against the A-10's significance for the SoCon's lack of representation in the NC the last few years.

Second, given the success of the SoCon during the previous 10 to 20 years (prior to 2002) I think it is reasonable to assume that the SoCon teams (especialy GSU) would have won a good many A-10 (Yankee (and on another aside it would be interesting for me to understand the history, will research later)) (I think that's too many brackets) championships (maybe not dominate, but it is a good possibility).

Third, with respect to the original question, why some conferences seem to be dominated and others have parity, I am more familiar with the SoCon which has been dominated (albeit by different schools). I will go back to my pool of coaches and keeping the same system argument I made before. In looking at the SoCon for the last 20 odd years, while there have been periods where different teams competed, one team still dominated (FU in the 80's, Marshall mid-90's, GSU late 90's). I think it is clear that a conference that traditionally has three good teams vs. six is more likely to be dominated. The only period I can think of where championships were not dominated by a single team is the early 90's. Furman, ASU, Citadel and then GSU won in consecutive years. (Years where Furman's program fell and GSU began their membership.) However, the important factor related to dominance is how long it lasts. FU has been a quality team for 20 years. GSU, even better, for 20 years.

I think the real test for the sucessful A-10 teams, especially with its parity, is will it continue for a similar period of time. I refuse to make predictions more than six months in advance.

With all of that typing I am sure there are some grammatical mistakes, so fire away.

[ChickenMan]

I think the real test for the sucessful A-10 teams, especially with its parity, is will it continue for a similar period of time. I refuse to make predictions more than six months in advance.




I agree... UD has been such a program for over 25 yrs... but other A10 schools have yet to demonstrate that kind of staying power.

[89Hen]

given the success of the SoCon during the previous 10 to 20 years (prior to 2002) I think it is reasonable to assume that the SoCon teams (especialy GSU) would have won a good many A-10... championships (maybe not dominate, but it is a good possibility).

I think that's fair to say. However, I think it's just as fair to say that GSU may not have had as many conference titles (eight) if they were in the A10 since 1993.

1997 GSU wins SoCon but loses to W&M (4-4 A10, 7-4)
1998 GSU wins SoCon but loses to UMass (6-2 A10, 12-3)
2002 GSU wins SoCon but loses to UD (4-5 A10, 6-6)

Again, this doesn't mean that I think GSU wouldn't have won multiple A10 titles, but I certainly don't think it would be as many as SoCon fans would like to think.

[OL FU]

Again, this doesn't mean that I think GSU wouldn't have won multiple A10 titles, but I certainly don't think it would be as many as SoCon fans would like to think.

That would be ok. I refuse to re-join the GSU cheerleading squad. :)

[blueballs]

UD defeated GSU in the playoffs in 1997.

The 1998 GSU team would have likely been good enough to win the A-10 as their only loss was the mud and sleet bowl loss in the NC. They went 14-1 that year and were often dominating, even scoring 40 something in their only loss despite 7 turnovers.

I'm inclined to say GSU would have won the A-10 in 2002 as well, but I'm not really sure. That squad didn't get its act together until the 4th game of the season but won 10 in a row once it did. I think it might have depended on how many conference games they'd had to play to start the year. Although UD defeated GSU in the season opener, GSU was better by year's end.

The argument cuts the other way too. UD was a powerhouse in 2000 but GSU won there in the semis. What if they played in October instead of December?

I don't think there'd be any debate about 1999 & 2001 though.

[89Hen]

UD defeated GSU in the playoffs in 1997.

Ahh, right you are. So GSU was 7-1 in the SoCon in 1997 and 0-2 vs. the A10. I'm thinking GSU may have finished in the A10 cellar in 1997. :p :p :p

[89Hen]

The argument cuts the other way too. UD was a powerhouse in 2000 but GSU won there in the semis. What if they played in October instead of December?

Then UD and GSU would have been co-champions of the SoCon. :p :p :p

[ChickenMan]

We will never know but here's my take on who would have won a combined conference over the past five years...


'00... GSU/UD both were both very good... GSU... they won the 1AA title

'01... Furman over Maine

'02... GSU over Maine

'03... UD over Wofford

'04... JMU over Furman

[pete4256]

There's nothing really worth arguing here--certainly if a team can win 7 conference championships in 8 years (ignoring shared titles), then a league doesn't have a lot of depth.

The A-10 (bold that ten) has more programs than the Socon (8). When a conference has eight members (football members) and three of them are perennial top five or top ten, then there will be less parity.

The Socon's championship well has been a little dry these past three years because FU and GSU have been breaking in young head coaches (at least that's what I hope).

So, this thread has become a redundant one in which A-10 fans crow about the last short term success and Socon fans point to longer-term dominance. What was the original point anyway?

by the way--when did Hofstra join the A-10? GSU beat them 48-21 (?) in 2001 round two--much to the dismay of their coach, who boasted for a week that he'd solved the triple option. They must not have been A-10 then.

[HensRock]

2001 was Hofstra's first season in the A-10.
However, it was 2000 when GSU beat Hofstra, 48-20.

[blueballs]

We will never know but here's my take on who would have won a combined conference over the past five years...


'00... GSU/UD both were both very good... GSU... they won the 1AA title

'01... Furman over Maine

'02... GSU over Maine

'03... UD over Wofford

'04... JMU over Furman

In 2001 GSU defeated Furman during the regular season and those two shared the conference. Those two teams were very evenly matched and I would rate it as a co-champ.

Another interesting note is that in 2000 GSU travelled to Furman the 10th week of the season and sans AP just got shellacked 45-10 with Louis Ivory going for over 300 yards. GSU then put together 5 in a row and took the NC, but you never would have guessed it watching that Furman game.

It is kinda hard to project who would win what conference because rivalry games don't often turn out the way one would guess and in conference games is where you most often see those rivalries.