ACC_HOKIES
4 ACC Championships
- 1,258
- 1
- 0
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2010
- Location
- Richmond Area
- Hoopla Cash
- $ 1,000.00
- Fav. Team #1
- Fav. Team #2
Don't fret that blog post. It's poorly prepared and designed to promote a preconceived agenda. Example: "as far as the Directors Cup is concerned, the expansion did nothing to bolster the conference's overall athletics profile... the consecutive Boston College - Virginia Tech football championships could already tell you that." The ACC-CG obviously has nothing to do with the analysis.
The blog is another bitch-fest about the good ole days. The extra VT related venom is a clear indicator of excessive butt hurt. I personally get a kick out of that. The expansion wasn't about the Director's Cup and the ACC wouldn't even exist now without expansion then. That's accepted by virtually everyone now.
The blogger does not provide the old guard ACC members in the year-by-year DC analysis. If the data was complete you'd plainly see a few old guard members sinking. UNC, Duke, FSU, and UVa (although they're in a mini-down turn right now) support and excel at the DC system of scoring athletic departments, while other members have different priorities. Look no further than Louisville's accomplishments with the BCS, Final Four, Women's Final Four, and the College World Series. They're behind programs like Tennessee, Auburn, NC State, and us in the rankings. Kudos to us, but Louisville tore it up like no program ever has. Simply, it's not a good metric for overall athletic excellence.
Speaking specifically of Tech, we've passed and are building over the top of the ACC pack, by the DC metric and virtually any other. Note the ACC championships and winning percentages over that time period also show Virginia Tech is progressing through the pack of our ACC peers. It's been a fine mix of sustained program building and surges, which is tough to accomplish in a conference where the same teams tend to win specific sports virtually every year, relatively unchallenged. Only two peers have more ACC championships this past year, and that's no fluke. Even some here would be surprised at just how competitive Tech has been in the ACC.
Go Hokies!
The blog is another bitch-fest about the good ole days. The extra VT related venom is a clear indicator of excessive butt hurt. I personally get a kick out of that. The expansion wasn't about the Director's Cup and the ACC wouldn't even exist now without expansion then. That's accepted by virtually everyone now.
The blogger does not provide the old guard ACC members in the year-by-year DC analysis. If the data was complete you'd plainly see a few old guard members sinking. UNC, Duke, FSU, and UVa (although they're in a mini-down turn right now) support and excel at the DC system of scoring athletic departments, while other members have different priorities. Look no further than Louisville's accomplishments with the BCS, Final Four, Women's Final Four, and the College World Series. They're behind programs like Tennessee, Auburn, NC State, and us in the rankings. Kudos to us, but Louisville tore it up like no program ever has. Simply, it's not a good metric for overall athletic excellence.
Speaking specifically of Tech, we've passed and are building over the top of the ACC pack, by the DC metric and virtually any other. Note the ACC championships and winning percentages over that time period also show Virginia Tech is progressing through the pack of our ACC peers. It's been a fine mix of sustained program building and surges, which is tough to accomplish in a conference where the same teams tend to win specific sports virtually every year, relatively unchallenged. Only two peers have more ACC championships this past year, and that's no fluke. Even some here would be surprised at just how competitive Tech has been in the ACC.
Go Hokies!
