Now that we have Petrino it's official... ACC Atlantic > SEC East.

I don't get the dislike for Petrino as a coach.

The ACC Atlantic is not better than the SEC East.

And UL going 10-2 next year? Seems similar to the UL will go 12-0 talk for 2013.

(01-08-2014 01:03 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  I don't get the dislike for Petrino as a coach.

The ACC Atlantic is not better than the SEC East.

And UL going 10-2 next year? Seems similar to the UL will go 12-0 talk for 2013.

The ACC Atlantic will be strong. Wake and NCSU still look to be the bottom. FSU will be tops again with Clemson an unknown with a new QB, but the tigers maybe strong defense next year. SU,BC,and UL are better then Tennessee,Vandy. SU/BC ground and pound would give MIZZOU problems too IMO.

(01-08-2014 01:58 AM)PusherT Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 01:03 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  I don't get the dislike for Petrino as a coach.

The ACC Atlantic is not better than the SEC East.

And UL going 10-2 next year? Seems similar to the UL will go 12-0 talk for 2013.

The ACC Atlantic will be strong. Wake and NCSU still look to be the bottom. FSU will be tops again with Clemson an unknown with a new QB, but the tigers maybe strong defense next year. SU,BC,and UL are better then Tennessee,Vandy. SU/BC ground and pound would give MIZZOU problems too IMO.

Cuse and BC being better than Vandy and Tenn is your opinion. They're probably fairly even overall. UL this year was better than all but UL won't be as good next year. And regardless of them being down, Tenn is the best program of the 5.

But Cuse and BC giving Mizzou problems? No. Mizzou's been a solid program for awhile now under Pinkel. And I'm sure you're using Mizzou's performance against Auburn to make your claim that they'd struggle with Cuse and BC. Only problem is Auburn runs an entirely different offense than those teams (plays, formations, tempo). Mizzou would've had a field day against those teams this year.

(01-08-2014 02:30 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 01:58 AM)PusherT Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 01:03 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  I don't get the dislike for Petrino as a coach.

The ACC Atlantic is not better than the SEC East.

And UL going 10-2 next year? Seems similar to the UL will go 12-0 talk for 2013.

The ACC Atlantic will be strong. Wake and NCSU still look to be the bottom. FSU will be tops again with Clemson an unknown with a new QB, but the tigers maybe strong defense next year. SU,BC,and UL are better then Tennessee,Vandy. SU/BC ground and pound would give MIZZOU problems too IMO.

Cuse and BC being better than Vandy and Tenn is your opinion. They're probably fairly even overall. UL this year was better than all but UL won't be as good next year. And regardless of them being down, Tenn is the best program of the 5.

But Cuse and BC giving Mizzou problems? No. Mizzou's been a solid program for awhile now under Pinkel. And I'm sure you're using Mizzou's performance against Auburn to make your claim that they'd struggle with Cuse and BC. Only problem is Auburn runs an entirely different offense than those teams (plays, formations, tempo). Mizzou would've had a field day against those teams this year.

Just last season Syracuse beat Missouri in Columbia. I agree with the rest of your post, just wanted to pick on this part.

(01-08-2014 09:04 AM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 02:30 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 01:58 AM)PusherT Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 01:03 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  I don't get the dislike for Petrino as a coach.

The ACC Atlantic is not better than the SEC East.

And UL going 10-2 next year? Seems similar to the UL will go 12-0 talk for 2013.

The ACC Atlantic will be strong. Wake and NCSU still look to be the bottom. FSU will be tops again with Clemson an unknown with a new QB, but the tigers maybe strong defense next year. SU,BC,and UL are better then Tennessee,Vandy. SU/BC ground and pound would give MIZZOU problems too IMO.

Cuse and BC being better than Vandy and Tenn is your opinion. They're probably fairly even overall. UL this year was better than all but UL won't be as good next year. And regardless of them being down, Tenn is the best program of the 5.

But Cuse and BC giving Mizzou problems? No. Mizzou's been a solid program for awhile now under Pinkel. And I'm sure you're using Mizzou's performance against Auburn to make your claim that they'd struggle with Cuse and BC. Only problem is Auburn runs an entirely different offense than those teams (plays, formations, tempo). Mizzou would've had a field day against those teams this year.

Just last season Syracuse beat Missouri in Columbia. I agree with the rest of your post, just wanted to pick on this part.

Go for it. Like NC State and UMD in recent years and UGA and UF this year, Mizzou had injury issues last year to hugely important players. Maybe it made a difference. Maybe not.

Either way, it doesn't change my opinion that Mizzou likely would've done to you this year what Clemson did to you this year on the scoreboard. That's what I was intending to say.

(01-08-2014 03:36 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 02:48 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 01:03 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 12:29 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 12:25 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  Now all we need is for Mack Brown to return to UNC.

Nah. I'm interested to see what Fedora can do in the next couple of years. Jimbo started coaching at FSU and won the national title in 4 years. I'm not saying Fedora will do that but by year 4, you should have a good idea.

To be honest, we had a good idea in Fisher's first year that he was a good coach. He completely overhauled the "infrastructure" of the program and took a team that went 7-6 three times in the previous 4 years to 10-4 (6-2) and a spot in the ACC CG. However, through his first 3 years, many fans weren't sure he was the guy. It looked as if he might be like Richt and UGA - always near the top but never at the top.

(01-08-2014 10:21 AM)Maize Wrote:  I am loving the future of the ACC Football with the Defending National Champion, Clemson, Miami, Virginia Tech, UNC and Louisville...

Not sure why UNC is listed with the other schools.

On pure potential...no reason why they shouldn't be a Top 20 program

You know what potential means don't you? It means you have never really accomplished anything and looked good doing it. It's also something you can say about at least 50 FBS teams both P5 and G5.

Well, Louisville could beat West Virginia. Let's talk about how Clemson handled West Virginia!

(01-08-2014 03:56 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 03:36 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 02:48 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 01:03 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 12:29 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  Nah. I'm interested to see what Fedora can do in the next couple of years. Jimbo started coaching at FSU and won the national title in 4 years. I'm not saying Fedora will do that but by year 4, you should have a good idea.

To be honest, we had a good idea in Fisher's first year that he was a good coach. He completely overhauled the "infrastructure" of the program and took a team that went 7-6 three times in the previous 4 years to 10-4 (6-2) and a spot in the ACC CG. However, through his first 3 years, many fans weren't sure he was the guy. It looked as if he might be like Richt and UGA - always near the top but never at the top.

(01-08-2014 10:21 AM)Maize Wrote:  I am loving the future of the ACC Football with the Defending National Champion, Clemson, Miami, Virginia Tech, UNC and Louisville...

Not sure why UNC is listed with the other schools.

On pure potential...no reason why they shouldn't be a Top 20 program

You know what potential means don't you? It means you have never really accomplished anything and looked good doing it. It's also something you can say about at least 50 FBS teams both P5 and G5.

Well, Louisville could beat West Virginia. Let's talk about how Clemson handled West Virginia!

Clemson is 1-1 against WVU, Louisville is 3-10.

And that has about as much to do with the subject at hand as the fact that it looked like the Packers and 49ers were playing on a burlap sack Sunday.

Perhaps cut down on the amount of Old Crow you cut your coffee with next time.

When did this become a Louisville vs Clemson thread? C'mon Wilkie stop picking fights, dude!

(01-08-2014 04:10 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 03:56 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 03:36 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 02:48 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 01:03 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  To be honest, we had a good idea in Fisher's first year that he was a good coach. He completely overhauled the "infrastructure" of the program and took a team that went 7-6 three times in the previous 4 years to 10-4 (6-2) and a spot in the ACC CG. However, through his first 3 years, many fans weren't sure he was the guy. It looked as if he might be like Richt and UGA - always near the top but never at the top.


Not sure why UNC is listed with the other schools.

On pure potential...no reason why they shouldn't be a Top 20 program

You know what potential means don't you? It means you have never really accomplished anything and looked good doing it. It's also something you can say about at least 50 FBS teams both P5 and G5.

Well, Louisville could beat West Virginia. Let's talk about how Clemson handled West Virginia!

Clemson is 1-1 against WVU, Louisville is 3-10.

And that has about as much to do with the subject at hand as the fact that it looked like the Packers and 49ers were playing on a burlap sack Sunday.

Perhaps cut down on the amount of Old Crow you cut your coffee with next time.

(01-08-2014 04:33 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 04:10 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 03:56 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 03:36 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 02:48 PM)Maize Wrote:  On pure potential...no reason why they shouldn't be a Top 20 program

You know what potential means don't you? It means you have never really accomplished anything and looked good doing it. It's also something you can say about at least 50 FBS teams both P5 and G5.

Well, Louisville could beat West Virginia. Let's talk about how Clemson handled West Virginia!

Clemson is 1-1 against WVU, Louisville is 3-10.

And that has about as much to do with the subject at hand as the fact that it looked like the Packers and 49ers were playing on a burlap sack Sunday.

Perhaps cut down on the amount of Old Crow you cut your coffee with next time.

http://www.aa.org/?Media=PlayFlash

http://www.alcoholfacts.org/MarinInstitute.html

So this isn't even really about the two divisions?

(01-08-2014 04:29 PM)krux Wrote:  When did this become a Louisville vs Clemson thread? C'mon Wilkie stop picking fights, dude!

Better question... when did this become its own thread? I posted this reply in the thread about us hiring Petrino and now it is its own thread? There's some voodoo magic going on around here!

(01-08-2014 01:58 AM)PusherT Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 01:03 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  I don't get the dislike for Petrino as a coach.

The ACC Atlantic is not better than the SEC East.

And UL going 10-2 next year? Seems similar to the UL will go 12-0 talk for 2013.

The ACC Atlantic will be strong. Wake and NCSU still look to be the bottom. FSU will be tops again with Clemson an unknown with a new QB, but the tigers maybe strong defense next year. SU,BC,and UL are better then Tennessee,Vandy. SU/BC ground and pound would give MIZZOU problems too IMO.

NC State had no qb's last year that would start at any FBS school. Supposedly Brissett is decent - if he doesn't get hurt. If you rated them 1-10 with 10 being great and 1 being FCS bad, I get the following for next year:


ACC Atlantic 2014

1. FSU a 10
2. Clemson a 9
3. Louisville a 7
4. BC a 6
5. Syracuse a 6
6. NC State a 5
7. WF a 4

SEC East 2014

1. Mizzou a 9
2. South Carolina a 8
3. Florida a 7
4. Tennessee a 7
5. Georgia a 7
6. Vandy a 6
7. Kentucky a 5

Top to bottom I think the SEC East should be better than the ACC Atlantic next year unless Florida continues to stink. Petrino may come back to Louisville but who do they have at QB? Wake is real question mark.

Discussion purposes:

Clemson - Loses QB and top 2 WR and maybe their overrated DE. An 8 is fair.
BC - Loses its top QB, RB and WR, I believe. I'd bump them to a 4.
NCSU - I don't think they go from a 1 to a 5. Brissett was an "ok" QB at UF but is relatively immobile for the spread that Doeren apparently likes to run. Another 4.

Mizzou - Loses its top RB and QB and DE(?). Probably more like a 7.
S Car - Loses Clowney and its QB (backup wasn't anything special when Shaw was out). Benefit of the doubt though, 8.
Tenn - A 7? I guess it might happen but they haven't been that good in some time. I say 6.
UGA - They lose Murray but they return their top 2 RB and I assume some of those injured WR will be back. I'd think their defense would be improved. I say 8.
UK - More like a 4 until they prove otherwise. I'd like to see Stoops succeed.

Gives the ACC 10/8/7/6/4/4/4 (AVG: 6.14) and the SEC 8/8/7/7/6/6/4 (AVG: 6.57). SEC appears to probably not have a national title contender next year but an overall grouping of good/solid teams. ACC appears to have the best team, some good/solid as well, but more poor teams. Imo.

Syracuse returns our QB, returns 4/5 offensive line now that Hickey is returning. We have proven RB in Guelly, FSU didn't see but ask NCSU about him. I think we return Broyle and Estieme at WR/slot. Syracuse should be strong on offense. Defense my better a little weaker with the loses at Linebacker. I like that UofL and Clemson are losing QBs and neither runs like Pittsburgh or Boston College I think we can split UofL and Clemson. Don't know too much about BC and Wake is an enigma. NCSU doesn't frieghten me and Wolfies come to the dome.

The problem with both Syracuse and Boston College is the perception that they can't win big-time non-conference games.

Syracuse 17, Penn St 23
Syracuse 27, Northwestern 48

Boston College 7, USC 35

Perhaps we should add to that Syracuse always starts slow - precisely when they are playing these OOC games.

BC had no business beating USC in LA. Then again UVa had no business beating BYU. Must be why you play the game. :)

Though they aren't perfect, recruiting class rankings are a pretty reliable indicator of future success. If you take the past four years' classes (2011-14), look at the teams that are ranked among the top 15 each year. If you give a team one point for each top 15 ranking, you see that 13 schools got either 3 or 4 points. The SEC had six such schools, the ACC had three, The B1G had two, and no one else had more than one.

Adding up total points, the SEC West had 16, and the SEC East had 11 - for a total of 27. The ACC Atlantic had 7, while the league as a whole had 10, putting them in second place, followed by the PAC (7), B1G (7), Big XII (5) and Independent Notre Dame (4).

If these were a perfect indicator, you would expect that these 13 schools would be near the top of the rankings: Alabama, FSU, Georgia, Ohio State, Florida, LSU, Notre Dame, Auburn, Clemson, Texas, Michigan, Texas A&M, Southern Cal and Miami. USC is the only PAC school with more than one top 15 ranking, which could indicate that this year's high conference power rank could be fleeting.

(01-09-2014 07:05 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  The problem with both Syracuse and Boston College is the perception that they can't win big-time non-conference games.

Syracuse 17, Penn St 23
Syracuse 27, Northwestern 48

Boston College 7, USC 35

Perhaps we should add to that Syracuse always starts slow - precisely when they are playing these OOC games.

we have maryland, nova, some Mac/cusa team and ND OOC. We won't start slow this upcoming year at best 3-1 heading into ACC Atlantic play.