(09-04-2013 08:22 PM)Marge Schott Wrote: ACC greatness? You hear this same crap every year.
You should know better than to spew that garbage... in the past, some ACC teams would've lost to FCS teams and/or lower-ranked FBS. That didn't happen this year (and, oh by the way, it DID happen to every other P5 conference - including the SEC).
I think it's very hypocritical to complain about how being in the ACC drags down your program, but then when YOUR team wins, it isn't an ACC win. Bull. Either every team affects every other, or they don't - you can't have it both ways (IMO they do affect each other, but don't take my word for it, ask some team that was lousy before joining the SEC - like S. Carolina)
You guys (and you know who you are) seem to be able to find something bad to say even in the best of situations. Give me a break!
[/rant]
You talking to the wrong person or something? Because all I'm thinking while reading this and seeing what I said is, "What the f*ck are you talking about?!"
Just to clarify....when the ACC sucks in football it is solely the responsibility of Clemson and FSU to fix it, but when we do it suddenly becomes a group effort.
The win we had Saturday night was inspite of, not because of, the ACC.
(09-05-2013 06:39 AM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote: Just to clarify....when the ACC sucks in football it is solely the responsibility of Clemson and FSU to fix it, but when we do it suddenly becomes a group effort.
The win we had Saturday night was inspite of, not because of, the ACC.
Any win in football from any conference member is a win for the whole ACC and for that particular conference member. Clemson's win over Georgia was two-fold because the win helped the ACC (reputation wise) and helped Clemson (by placing them in the hunt for a NC title).
In regards to strength of schedule, the ACC will be ok when Miami can be Miami again (no NCAA restrictions) and when Va Tech can win some meaningful games (they a beefing up their schedule, but they need to win some marquee games too). For right now, FSU and Clemson are holding the fort down for the ACC.
(This post was last modified: 09-05-2013 07:22 AM by LUcanesfan.)
(09-05-2013 06:39 AM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote: Just to clarify....when the ACC sucks in football it is solely the responsibility of Clemson and FSU to fix it, but when we do it suddenly becomes a group effort.
The win we had Saturday night was inspite of, not because of, the ACC.
So I guess all those wins by Va Tech meant nothing?
Let's be real - some schools have more upside than others in football (a fact which you are quick to point out when someone brings up UConn - and I agree). Realistically, Duke & Wake are never going to carry the ACC in football. The fact that Duke is no longer a total dumpster fire but instead is now beating teams 45-0 is a big improvement for them, as well as the conference as a whole. Duke's win helps Clemson's perception, especially when combined with all of the other OOC wins.
Do I wish VT had beaten 'Bama? Duh! But at least our D played well. VT is in the "Bobby Bowden death spiral" right now. Hopefully we will get a new coach soon so we can resume kicking Clemson tail, along with Alabama and the rest of y'all... In the meanwhile, I have 13 other teams I can also root for OOC.
[/OUT]
(09-04-2013 09:04 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: You should know better than to spew that garbage... in the past, some ACC teams would've lost to FCS teams and/or lower-ranked FBS. That didn't happen this year (and, oh by the way, it DID happen to every other P5 conference - including the SEC).
(09-05-2013 06:39 AM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote: Just to clarify....when the ACC sucks in football it is solely the responsibility of Clemson and FSU to fix it, but when we do it suddenly becomes a group effort.
The win we had Saturday night was inspite of, not because of, the ACC.
Agree 100%. Could care less what Clemson or FSU does. I am a Carolina fan, not an ACC fan. I root for them to win against SEC teams, but it does not make me feel all warm and fuzy at all.
Observation - last year FSU and CU had their SOS tanked by BC, WF and UMD all having horrible seasons at the same time. Everybody has up and down years, but such a situation would be untenable if it were permanent.
Every school in the conference has to work to be the best that they can be if the conference is to produce champions that will qualify for the CFP. Reaching a critical mass of competitive schools will allow other schools to improve their own recruiting dramatically. Check out Vanderbilt. The big difference between Vandy and WF or Duke is that Vandy can recruit using the SEC as a sales point. It's the same formula that the Big East employed in basketball over the past 8 years.
FSU and CU have stepped it up a notch. We are adding UL next year. Miami may be rebounding. We are approaching critical mass, but again it is up to everyone if we are to get there.
I just want as many RANKED ACC teams as possible before conference play begins, so that way much like the $ec when we lose in conference it won't be looked at as bad, and when we win it will count double!
PERIOD.
Whether you cheer for the ACC or not is irrelevant. This conference needs at least 5 ranked teams a year! Consistently!
FLossY out...
(09-05-2013 06:39 AM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote: Just to clarify....when the ACC sucks in football it is solely the responsibility of Clemson and FSU to fix it, but when we do it suddenly becomes a group effort.
Same thinking in regards to tv revenue. "The ACC doesn't have as big of a contract as the Big Ten and SEC because the football schools weren't any good." I've discussed why this "logic" is flawed in other threads.
(09-05-2013 09:51 AM)IceJus10 Wrote:
(09-04-2013 09:04 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: You should know better than to spew that garbage... in the past, some ACC teams would've lost to FCS teams and/or lower-ranked FBS. That didn't happen this year (and, oh by the way, it DID happen to every other P5 conference - including the SEC).
It's only one week... don't jinx it!
Yup.
(This post was last modified: 09-05-2013 03:43 PM by Marge Schott.)
(09-05-2013 03:17 PM)HRFlossY Wrote: I just want as many RANKED ACC teams as possible before conference play begins, so that way much like the $ec when we lose in conference it won't be looked at as bad, and when we win it will count double!
PERIOD.
Whether you cheer for the ACC or not is irrelevant. This conference needs at least 5 ranked teams a year! Consistently!
FLossY out...
The more uniform interest there is in ACC sports in general, the better the conference will be situated. FSU/Clemson fans watching and caring about teams like BC and SU and visa versa is HUGE. Intuitively it means better ratings and more fan passion, which is good for media contracts. Obviously there are two ways to show interest: by following a team to support it (i.e. the people who watch UMASS play Vermont), or by following a team to watch it lose (i.e. most people who watch ND play). Out of the two, it's better for the conference that those who watch ACC games pull for the ACC. That improves the perceived strength of the conference, positively affecting the rankings of every team in the conference, and it helps make it a more valuable selling point for recruits.
Admittedly the above explanation is an over-simplification, but I don't think that its over-simplified to the point of being wrong. That's why I think that all fans of ACC schools should follow the ACC in general and root for other ACC schools when they play OOC games. Conference pride is important.
IMO, the schools that let their officials trash their conference are short-sighted and hurting their position, regardless of which conference they are in. IMO, the schools that promote such a view point tend to have large T-shirt fan followings, who become galvanized by such asinine statements, which is why those schools make them. Unfortunately, the schools with large segments of T-shirt fans are also athletic powers.
EDIT:
I'm not naïve and I understand that in every conference there is a sizable group of fans who hate the rest of the conference, and the ACC is no exception. In fact, we have the added hurdle of being a conference that runs from the north to the south, and there is no shortage of anti-northern animus down south, which gets taken out on the northern schools (BC, SU, and Pitt). I admittedly have no idea why the animus still exists, but I don't think that anyone will seriously deny that it isn't still there. However, the conference should do the best that it can and make the most of our situation by promoting unity as much as possible. We will never achieve it completely, but we should never stop trying.
(This post was last modified: 09-05-2013 04:16 PM by nzmorange.)
It's about rivalries. A school from Boston and Syracuse will never by a rivalry to Florida State or Clemson. College football rivalries are largely based on being regional. That is why this league alignment is so off.
(09-05-2013 04:59 PM)Ragu Wrote: It's about rivalries. A school from Boston and Syracuse will never by a rivalry to Florida State or Clemson. College football rivalries are largely based on being regional. That is why this league alignment is so off.
That's ONLY true unless BC or the Orange become highly ranked and fight for that TOP SPOT with you!!!
Success in itself breeds rivalries!! Regions are only part of it.
FlossY out...
(09-05-2013 04:59 PM)Ragu Wrote: It's about rivalries. A school from Boston and Syracuse will never by a rivalry to Florida State or Clemson. College football rivalries are largely based on being regional. That is why this league alignment is so off.
It's not about rivalries, although that doesn't hurt. It is about having multiple top 10-15 ranked schools and one top 2 or 3 school. Here is a direct correlation between TV rankings and having multiple top 10-15 ranked schools playing against each other in both basketball and football. Similarly, top 3 schools draw a higher tv audience regardless of opponent. Having 2 top 10-15 schools gives you one game a year. Having 3 gives you 3 games. Having 4 gives you as many as 6 games. This year for instance, the sEC has 8 such games among top 12 preseason ranked schools in conference, not even counting OOC games like UF-FSU, CU-SCar, and CU-UGAg.
(09-05-2013 03:57 PM)nzmorange Wrote: The more uniform interest there is in ACC sports in general, the better the conference will be situated. FSU/Clemson fans watching and caring about teams like BC and SU and visa versa is HUGE.
EDIT:
I'm not naïve and I understand that in every conference there is a sizable group of fans who hate the rest of the conference, and the ACC is no exception. In fact, we have the added hurdle of being a conference that runs from the north to the south, and there is no shortage of anti-northern animus down south, which gets taken out on the northern schools (BC, SU, and Pitt).
But I don't care about those teams. If they aren't competing for the division title, I have almost ZERO interest in watching them. The only ACC teams I try to watch are VT, Miami, GT and Clemson. UNC, NC State, UVA, BC, Wake and Duke aren't usually good enough to warrant such attention. It's likely that Cuse and Pitt will fall into that latter group more often than not. And I think UL will have a tough go in the ACC early on for the same reason I think Cuse and Pitt will. They'll also likely be without Bridgewater when they join and that's a huge loss for that program even though Strong looks like a good coach. (Truth be told, I have my concerns about VT's staying power once Beamer leaves and Clemson's ability to remain near-elite once Boyd and Co. are gone and Morris gets a job elsewhere. I'm also not sure Golden is the guy to return Miami to the top, although he does appear to have stabilized the program after the Coker/Shannon years. GT will, imo, never be elite with Johnson even if they are 9-3/8-4 every year. I think after this year Fisher will have proven himself to be a very good coach and capable of keeping FSU near the top, having used multiple QBs, OCs and DCs. My only negative here is that unless FSU gets to the national title this year, he won't have proven he's capable of getting FSU back there, either, but I'd be ok with ACC Champs every other year and near-annual BCS/Playoff invites.
You have to be kidding me that the reason some of the fans of southern schools aren't big fans of the northern schools is because the south hates the north. That's about as ridiculous a thing as anyone's ever said on here. The best school from that northern/northeastern area isn't in the ACC. The other 3 northern schools in the ACC haven't been all that relevant the last 25 or so years outside of a nice run by Cuse in the 90's. That's just the way it is. BC was actually at the top of their game when they entered the ACC and look at them now. They are one of the dregs these last few years. A lot of people don't expect anything different from Pitt and Cuse.
(09-05-2013 03:57 PM)nzmorange Wrote: The more uniform interest there is in ACC sports in general, the better the conference will be situated. FSU/Clemson fans watching and caring about teams like BC and SU and visa versa is HUGE.
EDIT:
I'm not naïve and I understand that in every conference there is a sizable group of fans who hate the rest of the conference, and the ACC is no exception. In fact, we have the added hurdle of being a conference that runs from the north to the south, and there is no shortage of anti-northern animus down south, which gets taken out on the northern schools (BC, SU, and Pitt).
But I don't care about those teams. If they aren't competing for the division title, I have almost ZERO interest in watching them. The only ACC teams I try to watch are VT, Miami, GT and Clemson. UNC, NC State, UVA, BC, Wake and Duke aren't usually good enough to warrant such attention. It's likely that Cuse and Pitt will fall into that latter group more often than not. And I think UL will have a tough go in the ACC early on for the same reason I think Cuse and Pitt will. They'll also likely be without Bridgewater when they join and that's a huge loss for that program even though Strong looks like a good coach. (Truth be told, I have my concerns about VT's staying power once Beamer leaves and Clemson's ability to remain near-elite once Boyd and Co. are gone and Morris gets a job elsewhere. I'm also not sure Golden is the guy to return Miami to the top, although he does appear to have stabilized the program after the Coker/Shannon years. GT will, imo, never be elite with Johnson even if they are 9-3/8-4 every year. I think after this year Fisher will have proven himself to be a very good coach and capable of keeping FSU near the top, having used multiple QBs, OCs and DCs. My only negative here is that unless FSU gets to the national title this year, he won't have proven he's capable of getting FSU back there, either, but I'd be ok with ACC Champs every other year and near-annual BCS/Playoff invites.
You have to be kidding me that the reason some of the fans of southern schools aren't big fans of the northern schools is because the south hates the north. That's about as ridiculous a thing as anyone's ever said on here. The best school from that northern/northeastern area isn't in the ACC. The other 3 northern schools in the ACC haven't been all that relevant the last 25 or so years outside of a nice run by Cuse in the 90's. That's just the way it is. BC was actually at the top of their game when they entered the ACC and look at them now. They are one of the dregs these last few years. A lot of people don't expect anything different from Pitt and Cuse.
Weird because you bring at least one of SU, BC, UL, and Pitt up in almost every post. Also, I distinctly remember certain posters using the term "Yankees" to describe the northern ACC teams, and I don't think that it was out of endearment. Actually, the last NCSU forum that I saw was pretty up in arms about it.
