(05-15-2012 06:12 PM)Ragu Wrote:  Nonsense. The ACC is way weaker in football than the SEC or Big 12. If FSU or Clemson move on, it will be to a far superior conference in the sport that matters most.

Sure Texas rules the Big 12. Better being ruled by a football school than a couple of basketball schools in fricken North Carolina.

Will be nice to have competent refs as well. Can't tell you how many horrid calls have cost us games in recent years. The ACC says they are equal distributors but that isn't the case. North Carolina keeps their tier 3 rights in basketball and the football ones are sold off to ESPN. FSU, Miami GT and Clemson wanted to keep the football rights. Shocking because they are 4 of the 5 football schools in this conference.

And I would rather get an Eastern division going than have to play Boston College and Syracuse on an annual basis.

You've been so dominating of late that I really do think you should leave. You are so much better than the rest of us. We don't deserve to be on the same field.

gtfo

(05-15-2012 06:37 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(05-15-2012 06:12 PM)Ragu Wrote:  Nonsense. The ACC is way weaker in football than the SEC or Big 12. If FSU or Clemson move on, it will be to a far superior conference in the sport that matters most.

Sure Texas rules the Big 12. Better being ruled by a football school than a couple of basketball schools in fricken North Carolina.

Will be nice to have competent refs as well. Can't tell you how many horrid calls have cost us games in recent years. The ACC says they are equal distributors but that isn't the case. North Carolina keeps their tier 3 rights in basketball and the football ones are sold off to ESPN. FSU, Miami GT and Clemson wanted to keep the football rights. Shocking because they are 4 of the 5 football schools in this conference.

And I would rather get an Eastern division going than have to play Boston College and Syracuse on an annual basis.

You've been so dominating of late that I really do think you should leave. You are so much better than the rest of us. We don't deserve to be on the same field.

gtfo

That's the problem. All the other members say it is FSU's job to rep for the conference even after they carried the conference for over a decade.

FSU and Miami are down and have been most of the last decade. No question about that. A good football conference can keep the name going when a team or two struggle. The ACC doesn't have that. Va Tech is the closest but they aren't title contenders most of the time even while at a high level.

And besides that, you won't be singing the ACC's praises if a few schools bail to the Big 12 and the SEC offer comes to Va Tech. Of course you would want to go to a better conference in football just the same.

Money is what drives this though. And overall, the Big 12 and SEC are going to get more money. The ACC has clearly fallen behind in that race with this joke of a deal brokered by the idiot Swofford.

I agree with Ragu here. When Florida or LSU is a little down they have Alabama or Auburn to pick the league up. Granted VT has had some nice seasons, no one really stepped up. I think all the teams in the conference has to reevaluate their programs and fix what's wrong.

I'm starting to see way too much of the "left behind" syndrome the past 2 days.

BTW, I say this as a person that had a small rooting interest for FSU back in the 90's through my time in the navy. Since then I've really haven't paid attention to my 2nd team.

(05-15-2012 07:45 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  I agree with Ragu here. When Florida or LSU is a little down they have Alabama or Auburn to pick the league up. Granted VT has had some nice seasons, no one really stepped up. I think all the teams in the conference has to reevaluate their programs and fix what's wrong.

I'm starting to see way too much of the "left behind" syndrome the past 2 days.

BTW, I say this as a person that had a small rooting interest for FSU back in the 90's through my time in the navy. Since then I've really haven't paid attention to my 2nd team.

Thing is, this same problem could have happened 20 years ago.


The ACC got lucky in the 1990's when they added FSU. By the time FSU joined the league that Hatfield effect had started to take hold in Clemson, and GT was entering the fiasco of the Bill Lewis years. Then you had NC State, who seemed poised to leap into the limelight, gets rocked by the sudden resignation of Dick Sheridan and the lackluster Mike O'Cain years. Luckily FSU was able to step right into the top dog spot, or the ACC very well could be in the Big East's shoes right now.

(05-15-2012 07:30 PM)Ragu Wrote:  

(05-15-2012 06:37 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(05-15-2012 06:12 PM)Ragu Wrote:  Nonsense. The ACC is way weaker in football than the SEC or Big 12. If FSU or Clemson move on, it will be to a far superior conference in the sport that matters most.

Sure Texas rules the Big 12. Better being ruled by a football school than a couple of basketball schools in fricken North Carolina.

Will be nice to have competent refs as well. Can't tell you how many horrid calls have cost us games in recent years. The ACC says they are equal distributors but that isn't the case. North Carolina keeps their tier 3 rights in basketball and the football ones are sold off to ESPN. FSU, Miami GT and Clemson wanted to keep the football rights. Shocking because they are 4 of the 5 football schools in this conference.

And I would rather get an Eastern division going than have to play Boston College and Syracuse on an annual basis.

You've been so dominating of late that I really do think you should leave. You are so much better than the rest of us. We don't deserve to be on the same field.

gtfo

That's the problem. All the other members say it is FSU's job to rep for the conference even after they carried the conference for over a decade.

FSU and Miami are down and have been most of the last decade. No question about that. A good football conference can keep the name going when a team or two struggle. The ACC doesn't have that. Va Tech is the closest but they aren't title contenders most of the time even while at a high level.

And besides that, you won't be singing the ACC's praises if a few schools bail to the Big 12 and the SEC offer comes to Va Tech. Of course you would want to go to a better conference in football just the same.

Money is what drives this though. And overall, the Big 12 and SEC are going to get more money. The ACC has clearly fallen behind in that race with this joke of a deal brokered by the idiot Swofford.

This isn't about me singing the ACC's praises. It is about arrogant asses coming on here claiming that Clemson and FSU have been god's gift to football and nobody else is worthy to play them. Neither of those schools have been dominant enough to be looking down their noses at anyone else. The same thing you accuse 'tobacco road' of doing is what you are doing now.

(05-15-2012 08:00 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(05-15-2012 07:30 PM)Ragu Wrote:  

(05-15-2012 06:37 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(05-15-2012 06:12 PM)Ragu Wrote:  Nonsense. The ACC is way weaker in football than the SEC or Big 12. If FSU or Clemson move on, it will be to a far superior conference in the sport that matters most.

Sure Texas rules the Big 12. Better being ruled by a football school than a couple of basketball schools in fricken North Carolina.

Will be nice to have competent refs as well. Can't tell you how many horrid calls have cost us games in recent years. The ACC says they are equal distributors but that isn't the case. North Carolina keeps their tier 3 rights in basketball and the football ones are sold off to ESPN. FSU, Miami GT and Clemson wanted to keep the football rights. Shocking because they are 4 of the 5 football schools in this conference.

And I would rather get an Eastern division going than have to play Boston College and Syracuse on an annual basis.

You've been so dominating of late that I really do think you should leave. You are so much better than the rest of us. We don't deserve to be on the same field.

gtfo

That's the problem. All the other members say it is FSU's job to rep for the conference even after they carried the conference for over a decade.

FSU and Miami are down and have been most of the last decade. No question about that. A good football conference can keep the name going when a team or two struggle. The ACC doesn't have that. Va Tech is the closest but they aren't title contenders most of the time even while at a high level.

And besides that, you won't be singing the ACC's praises if a few schools bail to the Big 12 and the SEC offer comes to Va Tech. Of course you would want to go to a better conference in football just the same.

Money is what drives this though. And overall, the Big 12 and SEC are going to get more money. The ACC has clearly fallen behind in that race with this joke of a deal brokered by the idiot Swofford.

This isn't about me singing the ACC's praises. It is about arrogant asses coming on here claiming that Clemson and FSU have been god's gift to football and nobody else is worthy to play them. Neither of those schools have been dominant enough to be looking down their noses at anyone else. The same thing you accuse 'tobacco road' of doing is what you are doing now.

FSU has been that dominant. It was just before you guys entered the league. They were the ones who carried this league for over a decade. Every program is going to have ups and downs. But nobody in this league has become the team to take over once Miami and FSU both unfortunately hit a dry spell at the same exact time. That is a big reason why the contract is terrible and why the SEC and Big 12 have jumped this conference big time in terms of their deals.

I am just tired of seeing everyone else saying Miami and FSU being bad right now is to blame. FSU carried the conference enough. Why should they always have to be the one doing the heavy lifting to keep the conference football prestige as highly regarded?

Hokies, everybody respects VT. It is not your fault that no other ACC members could rise up. It's not FSU's fault, either. I have nothing against VT and think they're the best program out there yet to win a national title. I don't say that to be insulting. I mention that because I think you're that good.

Please do not get caught up in some stupid back and forth with any FSU fan that makes ridiculous claims. The crux of this entire thing is money. It's not Tobacco Road, Swofford or some feeling of superiority. We/I/Most of us just want conference revenue to be on par with the other major conferences and as close to that of the SEC's as possible. Anyone saying anything else as the reason we would leave the ACC just doesn't know what they're talking about.

And FSU fans know we have been done the past decade. We are working on getting back to where we want to be. But so what? Mizzou and A&M were "worthy" of leaving the Big 12 for the SEC? That kind of crap makes no difference.

If you are even insinuating that I don't know about FSU or FAU athletics, you don't know me.

I already brought up the money issues on here plenty. There are more issues than that and if you think there aren't, you are oversimplifying things.

Pretty sure we toasted Auburn, an SEC heavyweight, in the Peach Bowl. Yep nobody steps up. You guys are posers. Please ban them from the ACC boards. It's like they are baiting us to bash FSU and Clemson. Fans of this estimeed league are better than that.

The reason I said toasted is because we dominated that game when nobody expected us to win. Sure it was a while ago but to say nobody has done anything in the ACC is BS. Also we did beat FSU 41-9 that year.

(05-15-2012 10:48 PM)esayem Wrote:  Sure it was a while ago but to say nobody has done anything in the ACC is BS.

Pretty much nobody aside from us and VT has done anything in the ACC in the last 20 years. That's hard to argue.

(05-15-2012 07:58 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  and GT was entering the fiasco of the B*** L**** years.

FIFY.

And GT gets no worse than a B for the 90's. We won the 1990 National Championship ... and should have been in sole possession of that championship, as Colorado needed a 5th down to avoid a loss and then phantom clipping against Notre Dame in the bowl game to avoid another loss. And then by '97 we were back on track again and left 1999 as a Top 10 team.

A whole lot of selective memory going on here. These are the facts:

When FSU first joined the ACC, it was FSU & Clemson - but the Tigers were already on the way down and soon it was just FSU

Then, under Coach George Welsh, Virginia stepped up and for awhile it was FSU & UVa (10 wins 1989, 9 wins each in 94 & 95)

Eventually UNC hired Mack Brown. It took him a few years but eventually he got the Tarheels to the point where they actually went 11-1 in 1997

Shortly after that, FSU declined. That's about the time VT & Miami joined.

Since the original post was about ACC divisions I have a couple of questions. I don't mean to step on any toes. I am really curious.

There seems to be a distinct division among fans on the north/south split. Fans of former BE teams want a north/south split. Why? I understand the desire for regional opponents (which is why I think quads would be better).

All of the north/south scenarios have Miami in the north. Really? That really puts Miami on an island and increases travel for everyone in the north division.

(05-16-2012 08:01 AM)Wolfman Wrote:  Since the original post was about ACC divisions I have a couple of questions. I don't mean to step on any toes. I am really curious.

There seems to be a distinct division among fans on the north/south split. Fans of former BE teams want a north/south split. Why? I understand the desire for regional opponents (which is why I think quads would be better).

All of the north/south scenarios have Miami in the north. Really? That really puts Miami on an island and increases travel for everyone in the north division.

Miami has stated a desire to play in the northeast in the past. Also, Miami is one of the only teams that has to get on a plane no matter where they go.

I don't think it's former Big East vs. Old-school ACC... I think there really is natural North-South rivalry which predates college football, and I think N/S divisions would be a way to tap into that.

Unfortunately, I don't see any way to put the 2 Virginia schools in the Southern division w/o adding 2 more teams, and I don't see 2 more teams I'd want to add... so VT & UVa would probably have to be in the Northern division (but don't EVER call it the Yankee division or we'll have to come down there and kick your tails... again!)

You guys are right. Everyone has pulled their weight. That is why the ACC deal is not grouped with the SEC and Big 12 deals. Makes perfect sense...

As for the divisions, Va Tech is actually a main opponent of them being primarily North/South. Miami with their other former BE teams in the North makes the most sense.

North: Miami, Virginia Tech, Virginia, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Maryland

South: Florida State, Clemson, Georgia Tech, NC, Duke, NC St, Wake

Those are the divisions that actually make sense. Crossovers can include UNC/UVA, FSU/Miami etc.

It is ridiculous that FSU and G Tech aren't in the same division. They actually had a good rivalry brewing and G Tech is the closest school to FSU. But the idiots in leadership positions in this conference found a way to screw it up as usual.

(05-15-2012 11:50 AM)Chris02M Wrote:  this is what i came up with for new coastal/atlantic divisions .

coastal:
duke
maryland
va tech
miami fl
nc state
virginia
syracuse

atlantic:
unc
florida state
georgia tech
clemson
wake forest
pittsburgh
boston college

UNC would never agree to play in a division without Duke, UVA or NC State. Those annual games have to remain

(05-15-2012 11:02 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  

(05-15-2012 10:48 PM)esayem Wrote:  Sure it was a while ago but to say nobody has done anything in the ACC is BS.

Pretty much nobody aside from us and VT has done anything in the ACC in the last 20 years. That's hard to argue.

Not hard at all. I'll just show you UNC the last 20 years:

1992- 9-3, beat Mississippi St. (SEC) in the Peach Bowl, #19
1993- 10-3, lost to Alabama (SEC) in the Peach Bowl, #19
1994- 8-4, lost to Texas (SWC) in the Sun Bowl
1995- 7-5, beat Arkansas (SEC) in the Carquest Bowl
1996- 10-2, beat West Virginia (Big East) in the Gator Bowl #10
1997- 11-2, beat VaTech (Big East) in the Gator Bowl #6
1998- 7-5, beat San Diego St. (WAC) in the Las Vegas Bowl
2000- 6-5, no bowl
2001- 8-5, beat Auburn (SEC) in the Peach Bowl
2008- eight victories vacated
2009- eight victories vacated
2010- 8-5, beat Tennessee (SEC) in the Music City Bowl
2011- 7-6, lost to Missouri (Big XII) in the Independence Bowl

...and we can't count the vacated games under Butch. That aside, eleven (13) winning seasons, four top 25's, and seven bowl victories. Not bad for a "basketball school".

As far as the divisions go, I have absolutely no desire to add any other northern schools. I was never against adding WVU, but UConn and Rutgers don't excite me. I suppose in the remote chance we could get ND on board, I would like to see Rutgers (of course only if PSU and WVU decline). So if Miami is indeed okay with being in the north, then so be it, and send Wake south.

WVU wasn't an option because of all the snob schools in this conference putting academics before athletics when dealing with a fricken athletic conference.

Also did you just post UNC's track record and act like Peach Bowl victories are a highlight? That is a mediocre bowl game for a good football school.

Then again that is now this conference's 2nd biggest bowl game. Yep a non New Years Day bowl is the 2nd best bowl game for this conference to receive. Swofford is just awesome...