oleschoolaggie
Official BDF member
2009 Poster of the Year, 2009 Most Knowledgeable Poster
Posts: 24,207
|
Post by oleschoolaggie on Apr 8, 2009 12:41:03 GMT -5
Have we ever won a meac all sports trophy? Where do we stack up against the other worst d-1 schools in one of the worst d-1 conferences? yes, we won the meac all sports award in '95 and '96. but i don't place very much stock in the all sports award because track and field skews the results every year. they count track and field twice, once for indoors and again for outdoors. so field the best track program and chances are you'll win the all sports award. that's why norfolk state has won about 4 or 5 all sports awards in a row. anyway, no one will argue that we haven't performed well athletically in recent years. but its not because we can't compete at the d1 level, its because we've had poor leadership. instead of dropping to d2 because our leadership is inept, i'd suggest staying where we are and bring in better leadership. is being d1 a matter of pride? of course it is! is there more to gain at the d1 level than at the d2 level? of course there is! do we have admins who are too lazy to get off their azzes and operate like a d1 program instead of a d2 program? of course we do! then if we stand to gain more at the d1 level and the primary thing that's holding us back is our leadership, then i say get better leadership! instead of the tail wagging the dog, how 'bout the dog wagging the tail... |
|
|
|
Post by econgrad71 on Apr 13, 2009 16:16:08 GMT -5
oleschoolaggie... You make more sense than most on this board... put together!!!
|
|
DECKS
Official BDF member
2008 Poster of the Year
Charter Member of the BDF
Posts: 10,411
|
Post by DECKS on Apr 13, 2009 18:39:59 GMT -5
I went to Howard. I know they won it. I also know that it was stripped from them for playing ineligible players. Forgive me for not being emotionally invested in being d-1. I'd rather we be competitive and spend wisely at the same time. Howard also lost to IU in the 1988 NCAA Soccer Championship. Now that the big boys give a damn about the sport that's not likely to happen again anytime soon. We'd have a small chance in basketball at a lower division but I honestly don't see us winning a championship in a major sport at the D-I or D-II level. If we really want to play for a title then we better aim for an HBCU Champs trophy.  |
|
|
|
Post by aggielove on Apr 14, 2009 11:54:08 GMT -5
If we really want to play for a title then we better aim for an HBCU Champs trophy. [/quote] That's what it looks like we'll be headed for, at least for football, if they go to a conference championship game. We'd play the Heritage Bowl (or whatever they want to call it) against the SWAC champ and be happy about the party!! |
|
oleschoolaggie
Official BDF member
2009 Poster of the Year, 2009 Most Knowledgeable Poster
Posts: 24,207
|
Post by oleschoolaggie on Apr 14, 2009 13:52:52 GMT -5
realistically, the mass majority of d1 schools don't have a shot to win a national championship either. and think about it, famu is the only hbcu that i can think of that's ever won an "ncaa" (not naia) national championship in football. so in my opinion, not winning a national championship should not prohibit a school from competing for one, regardless of division. because "most schools" in general will never win one either...
|
|
|
|
Post by DOOMS on Apr 14, 2009 14:22:32 GMT -5
Oleschool, if you review the posts on this thread you’ll find that most often you were the individual that brought up winning championships as a barometer of success. I’ve argued this point for years and I’ve been far more concerned with maintaining a level of competitiveness without breaking the bank than winning championships. I would like to have a shot at winning one, but I would also like to avoid embarrassment like having the worst mbb, wbb, and football teams in the nation, all in a 10 year period. In division I we don’t have one iota of a shot at a championship in any sport, and other than women’s bowling we never have and never will. Now that the majors have taken notice of women’s bowling we can hang that one up too. Our realistic goal is to win one playoff game or one ncaa tourney game. Our realistic goal is to win one playoff game or one ncaa tourney game. That thought in itself is SAD to me. Could we do better with better leadership? Of course! But better leadership is hanging out with better coaches and big money donors and corporate sponsors, which is nowhere near any hbcu. Before I really started looking at numbers and questioning why things happened a certain way for hbcus, I was very pro d-1. I started paying attention and reading a little more and I realized just how off base my thinking was. I fully understand where you’re coming from, but I’m past that point. Nothing good comes of foolish pride. We have to deal with where we are now. We have a middle of the road division II budget and we are in a recession. We will never have a budget to compete with pwc d-1 schools. So why are we here? So we can win one out of 10? I can’t believe I posted this two pages and almost two weeks ago: To me the bottom line is in d-1 we are sorry as hell. We have always been and will get worse as the economy tanks and we have revolving doors at the University for key personnel. If you ain't heard of A&T and you see a score scroll across the screen (usually with us on the losing side) you say "I ain't know AT&T had a school." The numbers are stacked against us yet we continue to spit into the wind. I said it before and I'll say it again, if we moved to d-2 half the MEAC would come a day later. All the ciaa schools would line up to see us play. We'd probably drastically increase ticket sales for that reason, albeit it may or may not be our own supporters. We are surrounded by d-1 schools in a state full of them. When you are in that sort of situation you have to do something better than the competition, i.e. outspend the comp. We clearly aren't doing that. That's why we haven't seen sustained success since Corbett. Who has the overall worst losing record in the men's ncaa touney? That was a trivia question I saw on ESPN during March Madness the last time we went. Although there are a number of teams that never won a game, only one had been around ten times and hadn't made a dent. Aggie Pride? Pride goeth before the fall. I'm not inviting arguments because I heard all the mess people who think we should be in d-1 have to say. Their arguments are NEVER based in logic and are ALWAYS emotional. A few years ago I asked for just one logical statement that showed a benefit of us being in d-1 and the response was that we were included on some college football game on x-box. Sad. I drove past Finley stadium earlier today. It was beautiful. I didn't even wonder if we could get there. If you have to ask the significance of Finley stadium then we might as well be worried about playing in Braly Stadium. |
|
|
|
Post by Aggie Monster on Apr 15, 2009 8:18:16 GMT -5
Only way I would consider div2 a good move is if the entire conference moved down so we would still have the Howards, Hamptons, Fams, SC States, etc to continue to play and keep the little bit of interest we already got.
All the fair weather A&T fans I know and you talking about having a schedule featuring NCCU and maybe Winston. After that you follow up with Fay state, Shaw, JC Smith, St Aug, Elizabeth City, SAINT PAUL, Virginia Union, and Bowie.
You know what?!.................. That schedule aint so bad now that I look at it. Besides the fact there is no real "travel" game on it. Outside of Howard no out-of-state schools travel to A&T anyway. I would not want to travel to those garbage a$$ CIAA stadiums though.
Might be on to something Dooms.
On the other hand,
Our talent level would also deteriorate completely. Div2 football talent is way lower than Div1-AA, just as we are to Div1. Athletes would Ruuuuun away from A&T!
I'm not willing to go watch lesser talent either. I've done that for the last 3-4 years anyway. I take it all back. Sorry Dooms, I'm for Div1. LOL
|
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Apr 15, 2009 9:36:11 GMT -5
Not only athletic talent, but talent in regards to coaches and athletic administrators as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aggie One on Apr 15, 2009 10:00:52 GMT -5
Don't look now but the upcming summer NCAA meetings will be discussing and voting on doing away with the lower entrance standards for D-II athletes starting in 2011.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aggie Monster on Apr 16, 2009 6:41:54 GMT -5
Don't look now but the upcming summer NCAA meetings will be discussing and voting on doing away with the lower entrance standards for D-II athletes starting in 2011. meaning DivII will have the same standards as DIV1 when it comes to grades and SAT? |
|
|
|
Post by DOOMS on Apr 16, 2009 7:06:21 GMT -5
That makes no sense.
But as I've stated time and time again, anybody that thinks that d-2 talent is somehow lower than our talent level hasn't been looking at who the players we've recruited over the years are also being recruited by. They are being recruited by d-2s. A prime example is the o-lineman who wavered between us and Fayetteville State and ended up with FSU.
The only difference is we are allowed to give more scholarships.
The academic standards actually give d-2 an edge in recruiting better athletes. I know y'all on here talking about a lower level of athleticism wouldn't want to tangle with half the (pwc) teams in this state. Anybody remember the first time we played Elon with our bcf national championship team of 1999? Them d-2 boys whupped up something like 34 to 7 and didn't punt in the first half.
D-2 athletes worse. Please. Same for the coaches and administrators. Bill Hayes was hired from a d-2 school. He wasn't somehow a worse coach as a result.
Monsta, I honestly believe if A&T showed up at the meac conference meetings with a solid plan for a move to d-2 showing the financial and competitive advantages, 3/4 of the conference would follow. I fully agree we have no business playing a good deal of the ciaa in football. But the larger schools would clean our clock unless we upped our budget.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Apr 16, 2009 8:13:30 GMT -5
Bad example. Prior to being a head coach at WSSU, Hayes honed his skills at Wake Forest. On the other hand, Charlie Davis was the AD at Bowie State before arriving at A&T. That didn't work out too much.
True, there are talented individuals at every level, but I think most players, coaches and administrators aspire to perform on the highest of levels. Hell, that's why Hayes left WSSU, why Tressel left Youngstown State, etc.
|
|
oleschoolaggie
Official BDF member
2009 Poster of the Year, 2009 Most Knowledgeable Poster
Posts: 24,207
|
Post by oleschoolaggie on Apr 16, 2009 8:27:59 GMT -5
That makes no sense. But as I've stated time and time again, anybody that thinks that d-2 talent is somehow lower than our talent level hasn't been looking at who the players we've recruited over the years are also being recruited by. They are being recruited by d-2s. A prime example is the o-lineman who wavered between us and Fayetteville State and ended up with FSU. The only difference is we are allowed to give more scholarships. The academic standards actually give d-2 an edge in recruiting better athletes. I know y'all on here talking about a lower level of athleticism wouldn't want to tangle with half the (pwc) teams in this state. Anybody remember the first time we played Elon with our bcf national championship team of 1999? Them d-2 boys whupped up something like 34 to 7 and didn't punt in the first half. D-2 athletes worse. Please. Same for the coaches and administrators. Bill Hayes was hired from a d-2 school. He wasn't somehow a worse coach as a result. Monsta, I honestly believe if A&T showed up at the meac conference meetings with a solid plan for a move to d-2 showing the financial and competitive advantages, 3/4 of the conference would follow. I fully agree we have no business playing a good deal of the ciaa in football. But the larger schools would clean our clock unless we upped our budget. dooms, if d2 athletes are just as talented as fcs athletes, then the ciaa and siac should be producing just as many pro football players as the meac and swac. now i don't have the numbers but based my general knowledge, i don't think the ciaa and siac produce more nfl players than the meac and swac... |
|
|
|
Post by DOOMS on Apr 16, 2009 10:27:37 GMT -5
Thrilla, what difference does what you're talking about make? Your best point is . While Bill Hayes "cut his teeth" as a rb coach at Wake, Charlie Davis "cut his teeth" as a administrator at the same school. I'm not getting your point on that one.
Now I wholeheartedly agree that a large number of players, coaches and administrators aspire to perform on the highest of levels. That being stated, a large number aspire to perform where they are most comfortable. Eddie Robinson never took an NFL job. Lou Holtz did, and wished he hadn't. That rb from Dudley went to Florida State and probably wishes he hadn't.
I guess you wanted to make the point that theoretically a kid would rather play at a I-AA than a d-2. I would think so too, if the kid is up on the difference. Most seem to know that 1) they want a scholly, 2) they want to play for a bowl team, 3) if not a bowl team then some sort of team that competes for a championship 4) if not that, they want to be on t.v.
If A&T was a d-2 team that routinely won in the d-2 playoffs, do you think we’d get better quality players than being a d-1 also-ran provides us? I do. We would just have less schollys to give and we’d have to be more creative with parceling scholly’s out.
Now Oleschool, none of the conferences you listed are producing very many NFL players anymore.
That’s because few of the participants of the conferences spend anything on recruiting. Statistically speaking, I would expect a conference that gives more scholarships to have more guys with an opportunity, wouldn’t you?
I will make a better argument for you. Instead of limiting to hbcu conferences, lets state that overall more NFL players come from I-AA (or FCS) schools than division 2 schools. I have no idea if that’s true but I would be shocked if it were untrue. That being typed, like I stated above the opportunity to give more schollys gives you more guys that may or may not stick to an NFL team.
That being typed, I have never liked the NFL comparison when talking about college talent level. Reason being, there aren’t any NFL teams in college. It’s a totally different animal. Some of the best college players at various positions never make or play in the NFL.
Again, if we are recruiting the same athletes, they have the same talent. They’re the SAME athletes. We’ve had guys transfer to A&T from d-2 schools and start immediately. And not just one or two either.
Oleschool, here’s question to demonstrate my point. In a game between Tuskeegee and SC State, who do you think would win? I honestly cannot say for sure. That alone tells me that the difference in talent ain’t great.
I’ve brought this up a lot over the years when people insult or downplay d-2. In 1994, defending I-AA national champion Youngstown State played defending d-2 national champion University of North Alabama in Youngstown. Both YSU and UNA went on to win another national championship in their respective divisions that year. The final score was 17-14, YSU. Three points separated the best in I-AA from the best in d-2. YSU was 14-0-1 that year. UNA was 14-1 I think. Three points. UNA played YSU closer than I-A Akron, I-A Kent State, Montana, Umass, Steve McNair led Alcorn State, and everybody else they played with the exception of two teams.
My point remains, the difference in talent is nominal at best. The difference in NFL-level talent may be greater or less, I have no idea. But the difference in college-level talent? Negligible other than depth.
Let’s not even talk about basketball. Y’all know the type of talent we can’t get into school that flourishes at d-2s. Heck, half the best players on our teams end up at d-2s after a year or two.
I have to admit, I’m enjoying this discussion even though when I saw thrilla post the topic I was like “oh Lord” as this is a downright touchy and emotion-driven subject for practically every fan involved. NOBODY wants to move to d-2 in spite of the fact we’re pretty much there already.
I’ll tell you guys the obvious advantages to being d-1. We already are and so are our friends. That’s about it. “Keeping up with the Joneses” as a model for running a college athletic department. Interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aggie Monster on Apr 16, 2009 10:46:07 GMT -5
Like your argument Dooms, but.... Your comparing our sorry a$$ teams of the last 3-4 years to Division 2. They have been a Div 2 talented team. With that being said. We got CRUSHED by our Div1-AA oponents. So the talent level difference is huge.
Kids laugh at Div2. The good ones REALLY laugh and almost have a disgust for DIV2. I talk to these kids on the regular and Div2 is not even a consideration for the kids that people expect to play at the next level. no kids (or parent for that matter) says "I'm/He is pretty good", lets look into Shaw, St Aug, etc... They say UNC, NC State, and then move to A&T, Howard.....but the looking stops there. Div2s get the kids that either 1)dont have the grades or 2)Woudl have been going to an HBCU anyway and just happened to be decent enough to earn a scholly in their sport.
For example, Say I've never wanted to attend a div1 school to just go to school. I've always wanted to go HBCU for my education. I also happen to be decent-to-good in football...Hmmm, "lets see about playing football at Shaw. I could go for free then." Thats there mentaliy. The hardcore football heads dont even consider div2 unless its a grades issue.
Say the entire MEAC moves to Div2. The white Div1AA conferences would become stronger and almost be able to contend with some lesser Div1 teams. We would just have lesser talent on the field, still missing extra points and droppin passes.
As for everything outside of football, the same would occur. We would go to a A&T bball game and not even see any dunks, LOL. You think donations to sports are low now, go to Div2 and see what happens.
|
|
