Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
The difference is that Utah and Tulane are always going to be limited because of location and in Tulane case size of the school. Maryland has no excuse though they are a better program than Vandy or either of the Mississippi schools. The fact is Rutgers should be good. They are a rich state school sitting in the middle of a gold mine worth of talent. The coach they brought in has done a great job and looks like he is staying. USF is a relatively new school who has done nothing but improve. Plus they too are located in a area where the talent level is great. Add in the fact they play in a pro stadium and have a good coach...why wouldn't they be good? West Virginia is a good program with a good coach. Louisville may have lost its most important asset when Petrino left but have a high national profile and have done a great job of both keeping homegrown talent and getting kids from all over the country. Syracuse needs to make a change on the top but they could easily go back to being a good program . UConn only has been around in Division 1 for a few years but is already pretty good. Pitt has Wandstad, enough said.
|
marylands problem right now, they can't keep the home grown kids. one of auburn's rb is from the eastern shore of md. sc, clemson and Alabama regularly have kids from the dc area. md was always famous for having the best del-ny-nj kids, outside of psu. those kids are not coming to md anymore. the acc needs md to get better.
wvu and a couple other schools in the big east have an advantage in entrance test scores. they can take kids with test scores that can't qualify for other schools. wvu is also more inclined to take "questionable" kids.