If the Big 10 is "weak" then what is the ACC?

[Sox33OSU]

I don't know. Then why does Ohio State have 9 BCS appearances to Alabama's 5...think about that. Because, it's about bringing in $$ to the bowl, not Championships.

That makes no sense. Alabama has an enormous following and a more illustrious past. Why would that cost them $$? And what does $$ have to do with performance?

 

[osubuckeye89]

The past 5 years the ACC has produced more NFL talent than anyone, except the SEC. Think about that for a minute...I don't think the Big 10 calling "weak" is fair. They produce good football players, its just that most of them end up in Canada or the Arena Football league.

Next

NFL and college are 2 different things

lots of good college players never do anything in the NFL

using NFL success to measure college teams success is a dumb argument

 

[osubuckeye89]

prime example - Miami has a boatload of players in the NFL yet has been mediocre at best since after 2005

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

You brought up "big bowl games". FSU has done that in the past and present. You keep bringing up the ACC and guess what FSU was in the ACC at the times of those other big games. Those 3 bowl games you just listed. Let's go through them.

ND. Had NO starters on the OL. All 3rd string guys and 1 kid that had his redshirt removed by having to play. FSU lost their entire 2 deep on the OL that year. Then EJ Manuel broke his fibula in that game at the beginning of the 2nd half and still led them back.

WVU. FSU was 6-6. We were playing a FRESHMAN QB who had played exactly 1 other time that year. Beat that team pretty badly.

Scar. First year of JF era and FSu was a 10 point underdog. They still won that game.

All you have is your opinion which is NOT based on an analysis of the actual teams. It is based on a misguided idea of conferences. Let me give you a simple history lesson on FSU. What FSU is doing this year is BETTER than ANY other FSU team has done. That is including the 1993 and 1999 NC teams. This particular FSU team is allowing fewer points, scoring more points, and has more TOs than those two teams. Yet in your eyes because they are in the ACC they have no shot.

I have no doubt if FSU and Bama play that it will be very competitive. It will not be anything like ND or your Michigan team last year. For two reasons. The FSU offense is more explosive than BOTH of those teams and the FSU D is faster than either the ND and Michigan teams. When you look up the actual matchups of these teams. FSU plays 22 players on Defense every game. They rotate constantly. Which keeps them fresh. ND and Michigan could not do that. On the Offensive side we play 3 RBs all game. We play 5 WRs all game. We are not a spread or run first offense. FSU is a multi-faceted offense with better skill players around the offensive side than anything Michigan or ND could muster. ND in that game had 2 guys. FSU has 10(including QB and TE) at its disposal. Michigan had 3 players for Alabama to deal with. When you have that many offensive players to key in on it makes it difficult for the opposing team.

Remember your entire argument is based on the conference which has absolutely no bearing on how a individual team will fare in a single game. I just gave you the major differences between your team and ND. And here is the best part. Look at how many coaches at FSU are from the "Saban Line". HC, DC, DE Coach. 1 of them running the same offense that LSU ran with Saban as the HC. The other two were on the Alabama staff just very recently. You think that does not give some insight on what Saban does?

I think that I will conclude this BS debate because your only assertion is to play the conference card when I have shown that to be utter BS. And you are unwilling to actually analyze the teams and diagnose their weaknesses that can be exploited.

P.S. the funniest part is that if you ask BAma fans on here which of the top 5 teams worries them the most. Most if not all will state FSU. So what are they seeing that you are not? They know what conference FSU is in too. Think about that.

You are still talking about a bunch of team ranked 20ish, i.e. not a "big bowl game." It either has to be a BCS bowl (which yes there was that Orange Bowl victory last year, but that is tainted by the fact it was against an NIU team that had no business being there) or a highly ranked opponent, at least #15, preferably top 10.

Then again, even then that's just FSU, one team a conference does not make. We come back to the 3-13 BCS bowl record for the ACC (and one of the three is the aforementioned NIU). As I said before FSU hitched to the wrong wagon.

Because you talk about the FSU offensive being explosive, is that because they are that good, or is it because the ACC is that bad? Let me put it this way, let's say we have team A, that goes 12-0 scoring at least 60 points each game. At first glance you'd say they have an explosive offensive, but then you look at those 12 teams they beat, and they have the 108th, 109th, 110th, 111th, 112th, etc... ranked defenses. Does that change your perception of team A? I mean consider Oregon, no question they have an explosive offensive, but every time they have lined up against a team that will hit them in the mouth (Auburn, LSU, Stanford) they've lost. Why do you think FSU will be different?

As I've said before, yes, on any given Saturday team A can beat team B, and there is no way to 100% predict that until they match up. But we can take a good guess at looking how they do against similar teams. And FSU has face no team near the caliber of Alabama that will step up and hit them in the mouth. They have not been tested yet, and until they are I will question their ability to stand toe-to-toe with the lead program right now.

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

I don't know. Then why does Ohio State have 9 BCS appearances to Alabama's 5...think about that. Because, it's about bringing in $$ to the bowl, not Championships.

Because until Alabama brought in Nick Saban, they frankly weren't all that good and didn't qualify for many BCS bowls and there were more attractive teams like Ohio State.

 

[FSUmanager]

You are still talking about a bunch of team ranked 20ish, i.e. not a "big bowl game." It either has to be a BCS bowl (which yes there was that Orange Bowl victory last year, but that is tainted by the fact it was against an NIU team that had no business being there) or a highly ranked opponent, at least #15, preferably top 10.

Then again, even then that's just FSU, one team a conference does not make. We come back to the 3-13 BCS bowl record for the ACC (and one of the three is the aforementioned NIU). As I said before FSU hitched to the wrong wagon.

Because you talk about the FSU offensive being explosive, is that because they are that good, or is it because the ACC is that bad? Let me put it this way, let's say we have team A, that goes 12-0 scoring at least 60 points each game. At first glance you'd say they have an explosive offensive, but then you look at those 12 teams they beat, and they have the 108th, 109th, 110th, 111th, 112th, etc... ranked defenses. Does that change your perception of team A? I mean consider Oregon, no question they have an explosive offensive, but every time they have lined up against a team that will hit them in the mouth (Auburn, LSU, Stanford) they've lost. Why do you think FSU will be different?

As I've said before, yes, on any given Saturday team A can beat team B, and there is no way to 100% predict that until they match up. But we can take a good guess at looking how they do against similar teams. And FSU has face no team near the caliber of Alabama that will step up and hit them in the mouth. They have not been tested yet, and until they are I will question their ability to stand toe-to-toe with the lead program right now.

Do me a favor and tell me what conference FSU was in during 9 yes of the "dynasty" and tell me how significant what conference they play in matters. It does not matter. The conference then was worse than it is NOW. Automatically discounting a team because of conference affiliation is just stupid. Which you are doing that by the way which tells me you have not watched FSU enough to be objective. Let's leave it at that.

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

Do me a favor and tell me what conference FSU was in during 9 yes of the "dynasty" and tell me how significant what conference they play in matters. It does not matter. The conference then was worse than it is NOW. Automatically discounting a team because of conference affiliation is just stupid. Which you are doing that by the way which tells me you have not watched FSU enough to be objective. Let's leave it at that.

Yes, but they then validated those years through their OOC play, including those many bowl wins. Playing teams like Auburn and Miami (who was good and in the Big East during those years). This year? Their OOC schedule consists of the aforementioned Bethune-Cookman, Nevada (who has the 108th ranked scoring defense) and they will play a terrible Florida team. No where near the caliber of the competition during those dynasty years.

Let me put it this way, I did some quick research, and here are the scoring defense rankings of FSU opponenets so far this year:
Pitt - 61st - 27.2 ppg
Nevada - 108th - 37.8 ppg
BC - 74th - 28.9 ppg
Maryland - 54th - 26.4 ppg
Wake - 49th - 25.7 ppg
Clemson - 27th - 22.6 ppg
NC State - 73rd - 28.7 ppg
Syracuse - 78th - 29.4 ppg
Miami - 66th - 27.6 ppg
Bethune-Cookman - unranked, FCS

Almost all are in the bottom half of defenses, and none in the top 25. Now compare that to Alabama, with the top ranked defense, allowing only 10.2 ppg. What in those numbers will make me believe FSU can have success against Alabama?

You can point to whatever game you want for it's preformance, how they looked on the field, what the stats were, whatever, and my answer will be "yeah but, they was against a nobody." This FSU team needs to prove themselves before I am going to give them any crediblity because they haven't played anybody worth a damn, primarily because they play in the ACC. So until the line up against Alabama and prove otherwise (which they might) I have no reason to think they can respond when they get hit in the mouth by an elite defense.

 

[Sox33OSU]

Do me a favor and tell me what conference FSU was in during 9 yes of the "dynasty" and tell me how significant what conference they play in matters. It does not matter. 1.) The conference then was worse than it is NOW. 2.) Automatically discounting a team because of conference affiliation is just stupid. Which you are doing that by the way which tells me you have not watched FSU enough to be objective. Let's leave it at that.

1.) Is it really? FSU has looked incredibly dominant, Clemson has been decent but truly nothing amazing, and then you come to Duke squarely in 3rd with nobody else in the conference looking good.
2.) Is that not what has happened to Ohio State?

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

I think frankly the reason people are trying to pimp up FSU and ACC is because it symptom of "SEC fatigue." People are getting tired of the SEC dominating CFB, especially in the national title game and they are looking for somebody, anybody, to end that. The Big Ten had it's chance and failed, the Big 12, and the Pac 12 have also failed. So now they're trying to build up the ACC, because well FSU has some historical success and the ACC are in the same footprint as the SEC, that means they must be good.........right? All the while ignoring that huge warning sign of that 3-13 BCS bowl record.

 

[ericd7633]

What makes you think Miami and VT are on the same level as ND given what each has accomplished?

Because they all have basically the same resume? Yeah ND has good wins, as good as any team in the country. But they've also looked like crap in some of their other games and have 3 losses. ND has better wins than Ohio State, but you wouldn't suggest ND is better than Ohio State would you?

 

[ericd7633]

I think frankly the reason people are trying to pimp up FSU and ACC is because it symptom of "SEC fatigue." People are getting tired of the SEC dominating CFB, especially in the national title game and they are looking for somebody, anybody, to end that. The Big Ten had it's chance and failed, the Big 12, and the Pac 12 have also failed. So now they're trying to build up the ACC, because well FSU has some historical success and the ACC are in the same footprint as the SEC, that means they must be good.........right? All the while ignoring that huge warning sign of that 3-13 BCS bowl record.

Who's pimping the ACC? FSU is a great team this year, I'm not sure why you think they would get drilled by Alabama.

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

Who's pimping the ACC? FSU is a great team this year, I'm not sure why you think they would get drilled by Alabama.

The fine folks at ESPN.

And I'll agree that FSU is having a great year, not quite willing to say they are a great team yet. In the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king. Problem is Alabama has been king of the hawk-eyed. There is nothing in FSU's resume that gives me any reason to think they can stand toe-to-toe with Alabama.

 

[amszete]

You think Bama will beat FSU by 4 TD's?

If you're willing to give me FSU +27.5, I will gladly take that and bet the house.

Avy bets, money - I'm all in with this bet as well if he will stand behind the comment.

 

[Sox33OSU]

Because they all have basically the same resume? Yeah ND has good wins, as good as any team in the country. But they've also looked like crap in some of their other games and have 3 losses. ND has better wins than Ohio State, but you wouldn't suggest ND is better than Ohio State would you?

We're unbeaten, ND has 3 losses. There is no comparison.

Miami has 3 losses and VT 4, and neither of them has any kind of quality wins in the realm of what ND does.

There's the difference.

 

[ericd7633]

We're unbeaten, ND has 3 losses. There is no comparison.

Miami has 3 losses and VT 4, and neither of them has any kind of quality wins in the realm of what ND does.

There's the difference.

But ND has better wins than Ohio St, yet Ohio St is better. You're saying that despite the lack of quality wins Ohio St is better than ND. I can't use the same for the ND/Va Tech/Miami comparison.

Even if ND is slightly better, Michigan and Nebraska still only have one quality win. Duke has two. And back to my original stance that they could beat them.

 

[Sox33OSU]

But ND has better wins than Ohio St, yet Ohio St is better. You're saying that despite the lack of quality wins Ohio St is better than ND. I can't use the same for the ND/Va Tech/Miami comparison.

Even if ND is slightly better, Michigan and Nebraska still only have one quality win. Duke has two. And back to my original stance that they could beat them.

ND has 3 ranked wins, OSU has 1. Not gonna argue that. OSU is also unbeaten, which means a hell of a lot more considering ND has 3 losses. We also have the chance to not only beat Michigan (who dominated ND), but Michigan State, one of ND's wins, so we'll see what happens. However at this time, there is no case that ND is better, only that they've had the opportunity to beat teams that OSU would undoubtedly be favored to beat as well.

In regards to Miami, Duke and VT, go ahead and think what you want. This conversation is stale. Duke's "quality wins" are only Miami and VT, whom themselves are mediocre and have been for some time. Wisconsin had an off year last year but was a top 10 team the previous two years and would be this year if not for getting fucked in the desert, so I'd take that win over anything the 3 ACC teams have by a long shot. Michigan and Nebraska are both more proven and more talented than those ACC teams, but if you honestly think that Duke, who has no proven talent and no quality wins is somehow as good as them, then go right ahead.

 

[ericd7633]

ND has 3 ranked wins, OSU has 1. Not gonna argue that. OSU is also unbeaten, which means a hell of a lot more considering ND has 3 losses. We also have the chance to not only beat Michigan (who dominated ND), but Michigan State, one of ND's wins, so we'll see what happens. However at this time, there is no case that ND is better, only that they've had the opportunity to beat teams that OSU would undoubtedly be favored to beat as well.

In regards to Miami, Duke and VT, go ahead and think what you want. This conversation is stale. Duke's "quality wins" are only Miami and VT, whom themselves are mediocre and have been for some time. Wisconsin had an off year last year but was a top 10 team the previous two years and would be this year if not for getting fucked in the desert, so I'd take that win over anything the 3 ACC teams have by a long shot. Michigan and Nebraska are both more proven and more talented than those ACC teams, but if you honestly think that Duke, who has no proven talent and no quality wins is somehow as good as them, then go right ahead.

I'm not saying ND is better. I'm saying they are worse despite better wins than Ohio State.

And yes I will continue to think that. You've done nothing to convince me otherwise other than bring up history and more talent. Michigan is so talented they barely beat Akron and Uconn, two of the worst FBS teams this season.

And why did you bring Wisconsin into this? They're better than all 3 ACC teams. Never said anything about them.

 

[Sox33OSU]

I'm not saying ND is better. I'm saying they are worse despite better wins than Ohio State.

And yes I will continue to think that. You've done nothing to convince me otherwise other than bring up history and more talent. Michigan is so talented they barely beat Akron and Uconn, two of the worst FBS teams this season.

And why did you bring Wisconsin into this? They're better than all 3 ACC teams. Never said anything about them.

I was merely pointing out that you were criticizing OSU's resume in comparison to ND's, yet we have a far better win than anything those 3 ACC teams have done, even though you also said they have "basically the same resume" as ND. Can't have it both ways, eric.

 

[ericd7633]

I was merely pointing out that you were criticizing OSU's resume in comparison to ND's, yet we have a far better win than anything those 3 ACC teams have done, even though you also said they have "basically the same resume" as ND. Can't have it both ways, eric.

I never compared Ohio St to the teams in the ACC. I was saying just because one teams has better wins doesn't make that team automatically better. Hence the ND/Ohio St comparison.

 

[Sox33OSU]

I never compared Ohio St to the teams in the ACC. I was saying just because one teams has better wins doesn't make that team automatically better. Hence the ND/Ohio St comparison.

I know you didn't. You said OSU didn't have the resume of wins ND had, yet you said ND had "basically the same resume" as the ACC teams. I pointed out OSU has a far better win than any of those 3 teams have, so your logic is flawed.