Team is much better this year

[RU#1fan]

Jackson is such a pleasant surprise coming from D2. He's the type of WR that Michigan State has 3-4 of, every season. I really want to see Brantley but who knows if he will get to play this season. Also excited for the Freshman WR and the big TE transfer from Maine.

Gavin is so much more poised and doesn't try to force into coverage as he did last year. I can't wait to see them against VT.

Maybe we WR Brantley next season. Will be the best WR.

 

[mildone]

I am resolutely NOT going to even consider 6 wins until I see how we do against VT, UM and Wisconsin. We gotta beat VT (soundly) and stay within two TDs of UM, maybe one of Wisconsin. And do so without incurring any key injuries.

Then, maybe, I'll consider 6 wins possible.

 

[Blitz8RUCrazy]

Are you talking Big East or current AAC? With the Temple 2023 schedule- very easily a 8-10 win team.
Old BE would have been tougher as that conference, while not a Conf with very top level- was tough all up and down almost every team each year.

I am talking about the big east from 2007-2011

 

[Blitz8RUCrazy]

That was in reply to @yesrutgers01 to @Blitz8RUCrazy , who said old Big East
On that schedule, I see 7-8 wins as doable. I feel the same way this year. I may be more or less optimistic after Saturday depending on the result. Either way, the trajectory of the program looks good.

I actually meant the BE from 2007-2011. Not the one before BC, Maimi and VT left.

 

[yesrutgers01]

I am talking about the big east from 2007-2011

We do have to remember that as much as many "fans" loved to knock the BE- for many of those years- many in the media often talked about the ACC/Big 10/BE as being pretty much equal and the BE always showed well in Bowls. L'Ville was very good, WVU was very good, Cincy became very good, Pitt had some good teams and UConn even snuck in there. USF had some very good teams during that stretch too.

 

[Blitz8RUCrazy]

We do have to remember that as much as many "fans" loved to knock the BE- for many of those years- many in the media often talked about the ACC/Big 10/BE as being pretty much equal and the BE always showed well in Bowls. L'Ville was very good, WVU was very good, Cincy became very good, Pitt had some good teams and UConn even snuck in there. USF had some very good teams during that stretch too.

They were good teams. But its not comparable to the grind of the SEC or Big Ten. In the Big East you didn't need as quality deep of a team as you do in the Big Ten. As a result the weaker conferences often show better in bowls because they usually have lower attrition as the season wears on and they often face lower quality competition in the bowls from other conferences.

Example BE #2 vs SEC #5 or whatever in bowls etc.

Now that we are on the other side of it, it's easier for us to admit and stomach that it was an apples to oranges comparison.

 

[thegock]

Reading another member's post, I realized that the Owls fumbled, but recovered the ball each time. Was it twice or three times or what? We also tipped 8-13 balls on D, but only had the one INT when a Temple WR tipped to Loyal.

His point was that the game could have been more of a blowout early and he is right.

 

[rutgersdave]

We do have to remember that as much as many "fans" loved to knock the BE- for many of those years- many in the media often talked about the ACC/Big 10/BE as being pretty much equal and the BE always showed well in Bowls. L'Ville was very good, WVU was very good, Cincy became very good, Pitt had some good teams and UConn even snuck in there. USF had some very good teams during that stretch too.

I thought the Big 10 was much weaker before we joined the Big 10. I thought most of the Big 10 teams were beatable with the exception of Michigan and Ohio State. Penn State was weaken by the Sandusky scandal and Wisconsin was an average team. This is base on our strongest 1-2 years. Just like Norte Dame, who became stronger after Brian Kelly, almost every Big East team beat with the exception of Rutgers since we didn’t play them at that time.

 

[jtung230]

I thought the Big 10 was much weaker before we joined the Big 10. I thought most of the Big 10 teams were beatable with the exception of Michigan and Ohio State. Penn State was weaken by the Sandusky scandal and Wisconsin was an average team. This is base on our strongest 1-2 years. Just like Norte Dame, who became stronger after Brian Kelly, almost every Big East team beat with the exception of Rutgers since we didn’t play them at that time.

Remember the SEC speed thing? LOL

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

We do have to remember that as much as many "fans" loved to knock the BE- for many of those years- many in the media often talked about the ACC/Big 10/BE as being pretty much equal and the BE always showed well in Bowls. L'Ville was very good, WVU was very good, Cincy became very good, Pitt had some good teams and UConn even snuck in there. USF had some very good teams during that stretch too.

Again - 5 OOC games (routinely against awful teams) is very different from only 3. Combine that with the schedule often having a few weaker teams in the BE (you played everyone a balanced schedule) it becomes apples and oranges. Only our Ash teams would not have been routinely bowl eligible playing those schedules.