most underacheiving program in CFB?

[bone3421]

where is texas A&M .....all the aggies say they are on the same level as texas

 

[bone3421]

Texas was my second choice. All we hear from the media is Mack Brown picks & chooses who he wants out of the state of Texas. Why can't he recruit a QB?

Drew Brees went to Purdue
Stafford went to Georgia
Luck went to Stanford
Aaron Murray is at Georgia

I'm sure their are many more.

For a guy who can apparently get anyone he wants from the state he certainly has blown it when it comes to getting the best QB.

yeah colt and vince were garbage

 

[bone3421]

Recent?

I'm thinking all time.

Texas
858-333-34 (#2 all time wins, #5 all time winning percentage)
26-22-2 bowl record (#2 most bowl wins, 2nd most appereances)

4 national titles (same as Cal, Georgia Tech, Illinois just to name a few)

2nd most ever wins, 2nd most ever bowl wins, 2nd most ever bowl apperances but Texas fans will tell you they had to play in a tough conference back in the SWC days. Yeah, with those records? wtf ever!!!

Texas should have at least 8-10 titles.

but 'bama and ohio st. claim them all

 

[Brasky]

Garret Gilbert was in the same class as Aaron Murray and was actually thought to be the better prospect. It's a roll of the dice.

 

[Brasky]

Stafford wouldn't go to Texas because Colt was locked in as the starter.

 

[Brasky]

Luck was a nerd who wanted to go to a nerdy school.

 

[The Crimson King]

georgia.........easy

 

[OregonDucks]

How was oregon left off the list? This has nothing to do with the OP, but I've personally expected better things from that team and they have let me down.

I'll echo what Brasky and Mark have stated, Oregon if anything is overachieving at this moment. But I'll agree with Brasky in saying it is changing as far as expectations go in Eugene. But reason Oregon isn't on that list because it doesn't fit the mold of those other teams.

It doesn't have the location, it doesn't have the talent pool in it's backyard and just until recently it didn't have the money like some of those schools, it also doesn't have the history like some of those schools do.

But like Brasky said, that is changing, Oregon is starting to win games year after year which is building their history and they are getting a lot of money poured into the program. In 5 years if Oregon hasn't won anything you could argue that they be on this list.

 

[Red_Alert]

Jawjuh made a decent comeback.

 

[yeodonie]

It is flattering that a few of you trolls are saying Oregon. Even with only recently getting anything near top 25 recruiting classes and the location you all expect do much more. I mean hell, they already have three consecutive conference titles, three consecutive BCS games appearances, including the NCG and a Rose Bowl win. Other than not losing on a fluke run and a last minute FG to a very good Auburn team there isn't much else they can do. If Oregon is under achieving you all except maybe Bama have a lot of work to do.

 

[Red_Alert]

Oregon does not belong on the list.

Only recently have they had any expectations and they've had success.

Very few teams can claim a national title without attributing it to a little luck along the way. Any NC coach will tell you that.

OD is right though that if Oregon 'doesn't win anything in the next 5 years' they could be considered.

'Anything' being no CCG's, BCS bowls etc.

 

[iruletheskool]

Missouri should be on the list.

 

[herky]

Stafford went to Georgia bc Texas signed Colt McCoy. Can't really fucking blame him.

Stafford wouldn't go to Texas because Colt was locked in as the starter.

You don't say . . .

 

[Red_Alert]

Oh hell no.

You give Missouri waaaay too much credit.

 

[iruletheskool]

Missouri has a large population base, and enough of a recruiting hot bed to make some noise.. they also make enough $$$


and they have never done ANYTHING

 

[Red_Alert]

Missouri has a large population base, and enough of a recruiting hot bed to make some noise.. they also make enough $$$


and they have never done ANYTHING

Nor has there ever been any real expectation for them to do anything.

 

[rmilia1]

I don't know how anyone can vote for a program other than UCLA. The only reason ND is in the list is because they were SOOO successdul in the past ( I mean its not like Indiana is a hotbed of CFB talent, see Purdue and the Hoosiers), Texas has a great recruiting area but the Longhorns are also super successful, I mean they are probably one of the 10 best CFB programs of all time. I think A@M would have been a better choice than Texas, Arkansas has a had a fine program considering the area they recruit to and who they go up against. UCLA is in a talent rich area, they really only compete directly with 1 other school ( a school who has been under sanctions for alot of the time the alst few decades) yet the Bruins have gained little to no foothold in that market. Hell even over the worst 20 years in Notre Dame football history they still have been better than UCLA in that span. Plus ALL of UCLA's other sports are uber successful. Football is not. Its strange.

 

[iruletheskool]

if R Kansas is on the list, missouri should be.. that is all

 

[rmilia1]

I think Illinois belongs on the list more than Missouri. Illinois has an EXCELLENT athletic tradition in other sports, they pretty much should own Chicago but don't. Plus the Illini have been dreadful for most of the past 4 decades.

 

[KansasSooner]

All the teams listed except for UCLA are in the top 20 for all time wins. UCLA is below Kansas in all time wins!