facts about next years football opponent UConn...

H

hiveredtech

Dodd-Like
Joined
Sep 24, 2002
Messages
5,889
There are lot of folks bashing UConn as not being a worthy opponent of ours, which I find quite humorous. Agreed they do not have the big name yet...which makes it somewhat of a no-win situation...but they did start earning respect from analysts at ESPN, etc...Randy Edsall has them playing great ball.

Here are some things you may not have known:
1) They were 9-3 last year
2) They beat Wake Forest in Winston-Salem 51-17
3) They won their last 5 games in 2003
4) They finished #53 in the Sagarin power rankings...this put them ahead of teams such as Penn State, Colorado, Hawaii, BYU, Stanford, Texas A&M, Arizona, Kentucky, Louisville, Cincinnati, Vandy (105), and North Carolina (93).
 
Re: You con\'t have to convince me...

UConn is a quality opponent.

Dan Orlovsky (top rated QB out of CT and very important recruit for Coach Edsall) will be a SR. and perhaps the best QB we face all year.
 
Re: You con\'t have to convince me...

Once again, you have not read of one person "bashing" Uconn. The bashing is on clough and braine for putting them and Samford on the schedule. GT deserves, and should expect a better schedule, unless the goal is to lower the expectations for GT football. It is not hard to understand. We are in deep south football country. The teams we want to recruit against (see threads above this post) are not after players that can compete vs Samford or Uconn but rather ugag, UM, Clemson, FSU, UF. Why is this so hard to understand. This schedule is a disgrace athletic wise, poll wise, financial wise, competition wise, pride wise, and any way you want to take it.
 
Sure, I agree with that

[ QUOTE ]
Once again, you have not read of one person "bashing" Uconn. The bashing is on clough and braine for putting them and Samford on the schedule. GT deserves, and should expect a better schedule, unless the goal is to lower the expectations for GT football. It is not hard to understand. We are in deep south football country. The teams we want to recruit against (see threads above this post) are not after players that can compete vs Samford or Uconn but rather ugag, UM, Clemson, FSU, UF. Why is this so hard to understand. This schedule is a disgrace athletic wise, poll wise, financial wise, competition wise, pride wise, and any way you want to take it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hopefully this won't be a habit but what's done is done and we still have to win these games next year to get back to a bowl game or better.
 
You are related to Bobby Ross, aren\'t you ?

only Bobby Ross could use "wise" more than you... athletic wise, poll wise, financial wise, competition wise, pride wise /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugher.gif
 
Weren\'t we kinda

forced to take Samford? I know at one time MTSU may have been on the docket, but I thought that most potential schools that we could have a home date with or a home/home arrangement were pretty much spoken for by the SEC schools - more $$$$ in other words.
Alabama - Utah State & Western Carolina
Arkansas - New Mexico State & Louisana Monroe
Auburn - Ball State, Citadel & Louisana Tech (no wonder they dropped Clempsom)
Florida - MTSU & Eastern Michigan
UGAg - Georgia Southern & Marshall (Leftwich is gone folks)
Kentucky - Ohio U & Indiana
LSU - Houston & Troy State
Mississippi - Arkansas St, Memphis and Wyoming
Miss State - they are the patsies
USC(the sucky USC that is) - USF and Troy State
Tennessee - UNLV - Credit for playing Miami last year & ND next - wish they'd pony up and play us
Vandy - Rutgers, Navy, Eastern Kentucky, themselves

We'd probably be complaining with any of the above teams. At least Samford is from the south unlike the some of the above.
 
Re: Weren\'t we kinda

Per the local papers, Southern Miss was looking to schedule a game with regional powers and we wouldn't do it.

Don't know how far the discussions got, but that's what the paper reported.
 
Re: Weren\'t we kinda

[ QUOTE ]
Per the local papers, Southern Miss was looking to schedule a game with regional powers and we wouldn't do it.

Don't know how far the discussions got, but that's what the paper reported.

[/ QUOTE ]
Probably wanted Bamalama type $$$ for the game, which we would have a harder time paying.
 
Re: Weren\'t we kinda

[ QUOTE ]
Per the local papers, Southern Miss was looking to schedule a game with regional powers and we wouldn't do it.

Don't know how far the discussions got, but that's what the paper reported.

[/ QUOTE ]

SoMiss likes those huge payout SEC games. However, all schools from major conferences are starting to stay away from them because you have nothing to gain. They are capable of pulling off big wins...yet you get no credit or gain respect for beating them.

If you are going to play a game you should win to get your team ready...then you better make darn sure you are going to win it.
 
Re: You con\'t have to convince me...

[ QUOTE ]
Once again, you have not read of one person "bashing" Uconn. The bashing is on clough and braine for putting them and Samford on the schedule. GT deserves, and should expect a better schedule, unless the goal is to lower the expectations for GT football. It is not hard to understand. We are in deep south football country. The teams we want to recruit against (see threads above this post) are not after players that can compete vs Samford or Uconn but rather ugag, UM, Clemson, FSU, UF. Why is this so hard to understand. This schedule is a disgrace athletic wise, poll wise, financial wise, competition wise, pride wise, and any way you want to take it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe this isn't bashing, but I can't even find a back-handed compliment in this statement. It is, at the least, insulting.
 
Re: You con\'t have to convince me...

Sorry sir, but the schedule is insulting to GT. I'm not on this board to compliment other schools. As for coach Ross, he is the one who, I believe, advocated tougher schedules. He tried to get us away from the Curry/Rice schedules of at least 2 Southern conference teams per year. I consider that wise. I dunno, maybe more on this board will be happier with a win over Uconn than a win over Auburn, but like I said before, God Almighty how I despise the lowering of expectations that has befallen our school.
 
Re: You con\'t have to convince me...

Finally, this is the last I will post on the schedule. Clough/Braine do not care what I have to say or what I think, only how much more money I can give. My only concern now is to get S/A's like Miller, Robertson, Dickey, Morris and others.
 
Re: You con\'t have to convince me...

I don't see what is so hard to understand that this boils down to the $$$ that we would have to pay to get a Southern miss to come here to play. Jeez, look at who the SEC teams posted above are playing: Western Carolina, Troy State, Ball State, UNLV etc... It's not like our schedule is so much different than anybody else's in the SEC or even ACC so get over it and stop that whiney "I'm embarrassed" act and get off of Braine's and Clough's back.
 
so what that says to me is

we've scheduled a team that our players and fans won't take serious, won't sellout anywhere near 55k seats and won't gain us any respect for beating them.

but is extremely capable of beating us if we don't show up with our A game.

Given that we struggle when heavily favored, this is a death trap game.
 
let me walk you through some numbers

We will be hard pressed to sell 30k seats for this thing.

25k unsold seats * $36 = $875,000
25k * $4 in concessions per tix = $100,00

So ball park we're talking about $1 million in lost revenue for this thing. Not to mention that there's 1 more game that our stadium crowd will look like hell thus making recruiting tougher.

Scheduling this game was sheer lunacy from the jump by Braine.

And there's no way that SMiss or another Tier 2 MAC or CUSA team would have charged us more than that to come.
 
Claiming 25K unsold seats is among the dumbest

things I have read on here in a while. If the season is in the tank when the Conn game rolls around we might have 25K empty seats, but we won't have 25K unsold.

When was the last time we sold less than 27K seats? 1994?
 
you are kidding yourself.....

the attendance for this game will equal or greater than had we kept wake on the schedule. UCONN is a big school with many locals here in Atl. I imagine they will have as many fans as NCST brings to our stadium.

UConn may win the big east this year and they are a quality team. They beat Wake by the same score that wake beat clemson which beat F$U.

and if they beat us then even more reason to schedule the tough game. If we lose the game we deserve to lose the game. I don't want to run from a big east school.
 
Re: you are kidding yourself.....

So how many single seats do we actually sell? As much as people want to complain about the mini-packages, what they mean is that all the seats are sold whether anyone is sitting in them or not. Not that it's okay to sell seats and have noone show up, it's better than not selling them.
 
we averaged over 50K and I think we were 4th or

5th in attendance. If you search attendance you will find the post that gives the numbers
 
Re: Weren\'t we kinda

Southern Miss did not want money. They wanted a home and home and we said no.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top