(11-21-2013 05:14 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  No wonder some of you say what you do. You actually think the ACC's crappy schools are better than the SEC's.

I'm not saying they are better. I'm saying they are on par with each other. The biggest difference between the ACC and SEC is the SEC has more top tier teams.

(11-21-2013 05:14 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  No wonder some of you say what you do. You actually think the ACC's crappy schools are better than the SEC's.

I was going to rank the referenced teams from most suck to least suck but after looking further, the worst of the worst are all bunched closely together with only a few points of suck separating them if you look at the computers.

I'd say from worst to first of the bowl ineligible:

UK/UVA/NC State/Arkansas/Wake (Nothing makes one stand out above the others)
Maryland
Miss St
Tennessee

I don't get why this turned into an ACC vs SEC thread.

In football, the ACC will never surpass the SEC in terms of perennial football strength top to bottom. Give it up already southern fans. It simply isn't happening.

Where does the ACC middle tier and bottom rank in comparison with the BiG's, the Big 12's, and the PAC's is where the emphasis should be.

The Top already compares favorably. To get the ACC above a 5th place ranking of the power conferences it's the middle tier and bottom programs that will have to do better.

Cheers,
Neil

(11-22-2013 01:18 PM)omniorange Wrote:  In football, the ACC will never surpass the SEC in terms of perennial football strength top to bottom. Give it up already southern fans. It simply isn't happening.

I'm not sure who you're actually speaking to by saying "southern fans". As clearly not every "southerner" on this board has the same opinion on this topic.

(11-22-2013 01:18 PM)omniorange Wrote:  To get the ACC above a 5th place ranking of the power conferences it's the middle tier and bottom programs that will have to do better.

Absolutely. But some on here will tell you the ACC's bottom tier is better than the SEC's. Or, at least equal to the SEC's.

Some here will also tell you that there is an SEC bias. I don't believe it, but there it is.

(11-22-2013 01:49 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Absolutely. But some on here will tell you the ACC's bottom tier is better than the SEC's. Or, at least equal to the SEC's.

Well that's mostly due to overlapping territory like NO OTHER P5 conference has to deal with.

If you line up the ACC against ANY conference not named the $ec then they are at worst EQUALS!!! But the top of the $ec overtilts the scales in their favor, the rest of that conference is pure crap though.
FlossY out...

(11-22-2013 01:18 PM)omniorange Wrote:  I don't get why this turned into an ACC vs SEC thread.

In football, the ACC will never surpass the SEC in terms of perennial football strength top to bottom. Give it up already southern fans. It simply isn't happening.

Where does the ACC middle tier and bottom rank in comparison with the BiG's, the Big 12's, and the PAC's is where the emphasis should be.

The Top already compares favorably. To get the ACC above a 5th place ranking of the power conferences it's the middle tier and bottom programs that will have to do better.

Cheers,
Neil

What do you mean by better? ACC this year will have 10 or even 11 bowl teams. The problem is there needs to be a third or fourth top team to step up. When Miami was still ranked high, the ACC was 3rd in conference standings. Miami fell off the radar and so did VT. Once that happened the league slipped down the standings.

(11-22-2013 02:59 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-22-2013 01:18 PM)omniorange Wrote:  I don't get why this turned into an ACC vs SEC thread.

In football, the ACC will never surpass the SEC in terms of perennial football strength top to bottom. Give it up already southern fans. It simply isn't happening.

Where does the ACC middle tier and bottom rank in comparison with the BiG's, the Big 12's, and the PAC's is where the emphasis should be.

The Top already compares favorably. To get the ACC above a 5th place ranking of the power conferences it's the middle tier and bottom programs that will have to do better.

Cheers,
Neil

What do you mean by better? ACC this year will have 10 or even 11 bowl teams. The problem is there needs to be a third or fourth top team to step up. When Miami was still ranked high, the ACC was 3rd in conference standings. Miami fell off the radar and so did VT. Once that happened the league slipped down the standings.

^This^

The ACC needs 2 teams in the Top 10 and 2-3 more teams hanging around in the polls.

The ACC Coastal has cannibalized itself.

Duke lost to Ga Tech and Pitt, but beat VT and Miami
Miami beat Ga Tech but lost to VT and Duke
Va Tech lost to Duke but beat Miami, Pitt and Ga Tech

NONE of them lost any OOC games except VT (to Alabama).

I think if you're a fan of an ACC school who is in the middle of the pack it's pretty exciting from week to week. I figured Pitt would roll Duke and lose big to GT and both games ended up being close. Last week we lost another close one to UNC. This week, I expect a close game with Syracuse. If we play a good game against Miami we may be able to keep it close as well.

I like the parity. I guess I've just accepted that Pitt isn't a top tier program, though. It seems on this board the people who are unhappy are FSU and Clemson fans. In a way, I guess you have a right to be unhappy with the rest of the league but remember - you need somebody to beat on a weekly basis. The grass isn't always greener. There'd be issues in the SEC as well.

(11-22-2013 09:04 PM)ndlutz Wrote:  I think if you're a fan of an ACC school who is in the middle of the pack it's pretty exciting from week to week. I figured Pitt would roll Duke and lose big to GT and both games ended up being close. Last week we lost another close one to UNC. This week, I expect a close game with Syracuse. If we play a good game against Miami we may be able to keep it close as well.

Not sure how close this game will be. We have 12 players out for this game. Five are out with season ending injuries from the last several games and seven are out from the last 2 weeks. They were all in the rotation and five of the seven were starters. May be a long day in the Dome for the Cuse as what little depth we had is sort of depleted.

We're not any good so I expect a close game. I don't think we out-talent you guys much this year either.

(11-22-2013 01:49 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(11-22-2013 01:18 PM)omniorange Wrote:  In football, the ACC will never surpass the SEC in terms of perennial football strength top to bottom. Give it up already southern fans. It simply isn't happening.

I'm not sure who you're actually speaking to by saying "southern fans". As clearly not every "southerner" on this board has the same opinion on this topic.

Poorly worded on my part. The OP, which was by you I believe, was about the fact that the ACC was ranked 5th in terms of P5 and then it went immediately from there to comparing the ACC with the acknowledged best football conference, the SEC.

It's futile to try and compare the ACC to the SEC since there is none other than a geographical overlap. To complain about a 5th place perception and then jump immediately to a comparison of #1 was flawed.

So while there may be disagreement about which has the better bottom teams, this fascination with comparing d@#% size with the SEC is futile and is mostly meant to try and denigrate the ACC (surprise, surprise).

The saner objective is to get the ACC in football to BiG, Big12, and PAC levels, which is doable, imho.

Cheers,
Neil

Wanna know how to fix this? Add UCF and ECU.

(11-23-2013 12:41 PM)PurpleReigns2012 Wrote:  Wanna know how to fix this? Add UCF and ECU.

(11-23-2013 01:23 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-23-2013 12:41 PM)PurpleReigns2012 Wrote:  Wanna know how to fix this? Add UCF and ECU.

Both are better than NCSux and Virginia.

(11-23-2013 01:31 PM)PurpleReigns2012 Wrote:  

(11-23-2013 01:23 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-23-2013 12:41 PM)PurpleReigns2012 Wrote:  Wanna know how to fix this? Add UCF and ECU.

Both are better than NCSux and Virginia.

They're better than the two worst teams in the entire conference. Real high standard there.

Let me get those invitations printed right up. Not.

No directionals. Ever. Even if they are coached by Ditka, have the '73 Dolphins as a roster, and Jesus as coordinator.

Also, both would do pretty poorly in either division.

(11-23-2013 01:40 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-23-2013 01:31 PM)PurpleReigns2012 Wrote:  

(11-23-2013 01:23 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-23-2013 12:41 PM)PurpleReigns2012 Wrote:  Wanna know how to fix this? Add UCF and ECU.

Both are better than NCSux and Virginia.

They're better than the two worst teams in the entire conference. Real high standard there.

Let me get those invitations printed right up. Not.

No directionals. Ever. Even if they are coached by Ditka, have the '73 Dolphins as a roster, and Jesus as coordinator.

Also, both would do pretty poorly in either division.

(11-23-2013 01:59 PM)PurpleReigns2012 Wrote:  

Yea, because adding two directional schools, in media markets the ACC already dominates, which are teams with no MNCs or major bowls, who have less wins all time than Duke, who didn't even exist as Universities until after John Heisman went from living legend to legend, who struggle to perennially dominate a VERY weak conference, who have academics that would be unquestionably the worst in the conference by FAR, who offer absolutely positively NOTHING in all non-football sports, and who would add another mouth to feed but virtually no extra revenue to conference distribution ..... THAT would somehow be sane.

Smh.

The ACC already dominates eastern North Carolina? :snicker: