http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc ... /31803477/

Great compliments on Belt expansion of AppState and gaso

I'd prefer it if the complimenter picked us higher than 4th.

Sun Belt ranked as the last place conference in their ranking

Why wouldn't they?

All the SBC has to do to change that is win OOC games. Last year we won less than 25% of the non-FCS OOC games that has to improve.

Saint3333 wrote:Why wouldn't they?

All the SBC has to do to change that is win OOC games. Last year we won less than 25% of the non-FCS OOC games that has to improve.

We need all SBC teams to win OOC games and especially against other G5 teams. That is the problem and winning these games is the solution. Our SBC bretheren need to step up this year.

Did you guys read the whole thing? It's pretty long, but it's actually a really optimistic piece that suggests that this is an era of tremendous potential for the Sun Belt. The writer is realistic about the conference's weaknesses to this point, but says a lot of good things about App, GSU, and the Sun Belt's direction as a whole. If nothing else, it was refreshing that the writer seemed to actually know a thing or two about the players and coaches, and I learned a lot about some of the other SBC teams.

A good read.

appchicago wrote:Did you guys read the whole thing? It's pretty long, but it's actually a really optimistic piece that suggests that this is an era of tremendous potential for the Sun Belt. The writer is realistic about the conference's weaknesses to this point, but says a lot of good things about App, GSU, and the Sun Belt's direction as a whole. If nothing else, it was refreshing that the writer seemed to actually know a thing or two about the players and coaches, and I learned a lot about some of the other SBC teams.

A good read.

I thought so, that's why I shared.

An article that stated the Sun Belt is better because it added AppState and gaso is a really good thing.

How can posters cite negative points out of this article and call themselves Mountaineers?

HighlandsApp wrote:
How can posters cite negative points out of this article and call themselves Mountaineers?

Oh, I don't think that's a problem at all. Everyone's entitled to his or her opinion, and if they want to focus on the downside, that's their right. I think that Mountaineers, of all people, cherish their right to think and say pretty much whatever they please.

For my part, I'd rather focus on the fact that this is a realistic, well-informed, and ultimately positive portrait of our conference and our school.

One other thing that many may have missed: The writer pointed out that the SBC sets itself apart from other G5 conferences in that there's a good potential for parity this season. That's good for football, but potentially bad for our better teams, as their chances of running the table and snagging a top bowl spot are lower than those faced in some of the other g5 conferences.

We'll see how this year goes, but thus far the league's problem hasn't been parity, it's been getting killed in the OOC games. One Sun Belt team went unbeaten last year, while another went 7-1. That's not exactly parity. The problem was that those teams went a combined 0-6 in regular season OOC games vs. FBS opponents. (You can throw App in there too, since we went 0-2 with an FCS loss to boot.)

While it's true the league has a few evenly matched teams at the top, it also has a few truly terrible teams at the bottom. I'd say the opportunity is certainly there for somebody to go 7-1 or 8-0 again. But for the league to gain some respect, it will need some teams to start winning 10 or 11 games overall.

Thanks that was a very good article even if I didn't agree with every single point. It was balanced.