Who is the biggest underachiever in college football?

[ClonerJams]

There was discussion about how Florida has really underachieved lately during the Utah game last night. They're not alone - who is the worst offender in terms of resources, recruiting territory, ect? I struggled if I should include Michigan and Notre Dame on this list as they've been very good as of late, but given their history and expectations not winning a championship for so long I included them.

 

[JHUNSY]

Either Texas school listed.

 

[Farnsworth]

If history is a criteria, what timeframe are we evaluating the "underachieving" period?

 

[ClonerJams]

If history is a criteria, what timeframe are we evaluating the "underachieving" period?

For me I'm going off the last decade or so mainly, but its subjective.

 

[JP4CY]

For me I'm going off the last decade or so mainly, but its subjective.

Man, I could really see an argument for Georgia Tech. VERY talent rich area.

 

[ABECyguy]

Texas or aTm. I voted for Texas as in the last ten years I’d argue the big 12 should’ve been easier to win than the SEC.

Both those schools have unprecedented financial resources and recruiting advantages compared to most other fbs schools and they struggle to go 8-4, much less win their division, conference, or a national championship.

 

[carvers4math]

Texas can’t figure it out with all the money in the world.

 

[Farnsworth]

Talking resources and recruiting landscape, I think Texas is the obvious answer. They have unlimited amounts in both and always preseason darlings, yet they never perform up to expectations lately.

 

[inCyteful]

Has to be Texas.

Give those resources to any number of schools and they would be competing for National Titles 3 out of every 5 years.

I initially thought about Nebraska but in reality, they are now performing pretty much where they should. They were an anomaly in their hay day because cheating was less monitored and they made a nice run playing off the walk on resources.

 

[JM4CY]

It’s Texas. Zero question.

The more interesting argument would be for who’s second after them.

 

[BMWallace]

Texas and Texas A&M are 1A and 1B. I think A&M might have the slight lead in the Jimbo-era for disappointment just with how much they have invested in him and the absolute f**kton of oil money they have backing them.

 

[CascadeClone]

Texas, and it's not close.

They have all the money in the universe. 5-star talent falling from the trees all around them. They should be able to hire a great coach.

But they keep doing everything wrong. And for a decade or so, they haven't just been disappointing, they've been mostly average even with all those advantages.

Texas was born on third base, thinks they hit a triple, but can't score on a line drive to the gap because they are arguing with the 3rd base coach.

 

[SolterraCyclone]

I posted this in another thread, but I think it’s Texas A&M. At least Texas has their NCAA title in 2005 and national championship appearance in 2010. It’s A&M even more if you broaden the scope beyond just football to the entire athletic department. Here’s what I posted in the other thread.

Everyone likes to bag on Texas, but is there a school that does less with more than A&M.

Their last football national championship was in 1939 and their overall bowl record is 20-22. They won one Big 12 title in 16 years with the conference in 1998, which is their most recent conference title anywhere.

Fun fact, they have 17 NCAA titles across all sports in their history. Which is a whopping 2 FEWER than our beloved Iowa St Cyclones.

 

[HFCS]

Illinois is up there for both major sports, especially hoops. DePaul is up there for hoops too for same reasons.

 

[BWRhasnoAC]

Nebby. At least Texas wins more than they lose.

 

[cyclone1209]

It’s Texas. Zero question.

The more interesting argument would be for who’s second after them.

I think it's A&M and FL.

A&M b/c their warchest of NIL funds is never ending, they spent 100MM on a coach, and their record in many of the last few years is bottom of the barrel.

Florida b/c they have excellent facilities, all the talent nearby, and the tradition. Yet they have stunk the last several years (on a relative basis for them)

 

[gocy444]

Nebby. At least Texas wins more than they lose.

There’s more talent in the Austin metro than the entire state of Nebraska.

 

[BWRhasnoAC]

There’s more talent in the Austin metro than the entire state of Nebraska.

And?

 

[gocy444]

And?

With the resources and local talent texas has they should be Bama. Nebraska has great backing, but worse local talent that even ISU. Texas underachieves more than Nebraska.

 

[HFCS]

With the resources and local talent texas has they should be Bama. Nebraska has great backing, but worse local talent that even ISU. Texas underachieves more than Nebraska.

I'm guessing Nebraska's basketball history matches up with their basketball talent.

Are they the smallest population state that has a major conference team? I'm pretty sure they are.