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

[FSUmanager]

pretty sure alabama's only FCS opponent is UT-Chattanooga this week. Not that 0-10 Georgia State is any better, but they also opened with a traditionally strong team on a neutral field. Never mind their road games against Auburn, Texas A&M, and home games against Ole Miss and LSU... plus a potential SEC CG.

You are correct. I forgot that GA State moved to FBS this year.

 

[ericd7633]

Really, why do SEC fans continue to try and pimp up Ole Miss? I am going to start claiming Indiana as a quality win for Michigan State if guys don't stop trying to convince us that a team that has not won a division or a conference title in 50 years and is 13-24 over the last three seasons. You are the best conference in football, there is no need to blow smoke up our asses with that bullshit.

Ole Miss is the 6th/7th best team in the SEC, however, they are still in the top 25 in both polls and have a top 20 computer ranking. In fact they are one spot ahead of Wisconsin in the computers. If you can't see the difference between Indiana and Ole Miss this season, I'm forever done conversing with you.

 

[7Samurai13]

they are undefeated against unranked teams, killed texas in austin, beat LSU, and all the teams they have lost to currently sit in the top 15 of the BCS. and the games were competitive.

it's not pimping them... but they are a legit top 25 team. ~19th in the computers i believe.

Just like Mississippi State was a legit top 15 team last year before they got blasted by Bama? I am going to start claiming Nebraska are quality win. Since three loss teams are awesome and quality wins or because they aren't in the SEC it doesn't count. Why do they even bother with the top 16 teams they should just start with 17 for everyone else because everyone knows that they worst team in the SEc would own every other conference? Sakau, no need to drop to your knees for fucking Ole Miss, it's embarrassing for a top 10 team to try and convince us that a three loss Ole Miss who has no great win is a team that should be in the same breath as Auburn, Alabama, A&M and LSU.

 

[ericd7633]

Just like Mississippi State was a legit top 15 team last year before they got blasted by Bama? I am going to start claiming Nebraska are quality win. Since three loss teams are awesome and quality wins or because they aren't in the SEC it doesn't count. Why do they even bother with the top 16 teams they should just start with 17 for everyone else because everyone knows that they worst team in the SEc would own every other conference? Sakau, no need to drop to your knees for fucking Ole Miss, it's embarrassing for a top 10 team to try and convince us that a three loss Ole Miss who has no great win is a team that should be in the same breath as Auburn, Alabama, A&M and LSU.

"Quality" is a subjective term. Is Nebraska a quality win? I would say it is, especially on the road. Is Ole Miss a quality win? I would say that it is. Now that that is out of the way, lets see who has more quality wins in terms of Nebraska and Ole Miss. Ole Miss has beaten Texas and LSU, two quality wins. Nebraska has one quality win over Michigan. You could argue Michigan and Texas cancel out, but Nebraska has nothing else that is of quality. This is why Ole Miss is better in the computers, despite the same record, and this is why Ole Miss SHOULD be deemed as more of a quality win.

 

[sakau2007]

Just like Mississippi State was a legit top 15 team last year before they got blasted by Bama? I am going to start claiming Nebraska are quality win. Since three loss teams are awesome and quality wins or because they aren't in the SEC it doesn't count. Why do they even bother with the top 16 teams they should just start with 17 for everyone else because everyone knows that they worst team in the SEc would own every other conference? Sakau, no need to drop to your knees for fucking Ole Miss, it's embarrassing for a top 10 team to try and convince us that a three loss Ole Miss who has no great win is a team that should be in the same breath as Auburn, Alabama, A&M and LSU.

mississippi state last year was like texas tech this year. 7-0 because their schedule was severely backloaded.

go ahead and claim nebraska as a quality win if you want. the difference is they haven't beaten any good teams and have lost to teams that are outside the top 15. you can't say that about ole miss.

and i'm not putting ole miss in the same breath as alabama. they played competitive games against auburn (road) and a&m (home) and actually beat LSU, as well as texas. do they have any great wins? not really. but they have a couple decent ones. wisconsin doesn't have any great wins either. neither does oregon. just because you don't have any great wins doesn't mean you aren't one of the 25 best teams in the nation. ole miss is a pretty decent team with an opportunity against missouri to notch another quality win. that's why they are an average of 18 spots ahead of nebraska in the computers.

 

[sakau2007]

"Quality" is a subjective term. Is Nebraska a quality win? I would say it is, especially on the road. Is Ole Miss a quality win? I would say that it is. Now that that is out of the way, lets see who has more quality wins in terms of Nebraska and Ole Miss. Ole Miss has beaten Texas and LSU, two quality wins. Nebraska has one quality win over Michigan. You could argue Michigan and Texas cancel out, but Nebraska has nothing else that is of quality. This is why Ole Miss is better in the computers, despite the same record, and this is why Ole Miss SHOULD be deemed as more of a quality win.

and the teams that ole miss has lost to are better than the ones nebraska has lost to.

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

Eh, better argument than I expected, but I still don't think it 'proves' anything, it's compelling evidence though, you'd have to do more analysis on who each of them played. And extend that to non-BCS games as well.

And here is your look up. Here is the bowl data since the inception of the BCS (1998 season)
ACC:
Overall: 47-57 (0.452)
VS SEC: 9-18 (0.333)
VS Big Ten: 5-5 (0.500)
VS PAC: 5-5 (0.500)
VS Big 12: 2-6 (0.250)
VS AAC: 14-15 (0.483)
VS MAC: 1-0 (1.000)
VS C-USA: 1-0 (1.000)
VS MWC: 0-2 (0.000)
VS WAC: 6-4 (0.600)
VS IND: 5-1 (0.833) [ND 3-1 / Navy 2-0]

Big Ten:
Overall: 47-59 (0.443)
VS SEC: 19-22 (0.463)
VS ACC: 5-5 (0.500)
VS PAC: 7-12 (0.368)
VS Big 12: 11-17 (0.393)
VS AAC: 1-0 (1.000)
VS MAC: 2-1 (0.667)
VS C-USA: 0-1 (0.000)
VS MWC: 0-1 (0.000)
VS WAC: 1-0 (1.000)
VS IND: 1-0 (1.000) [ND]


So basically the same overall record, but the Big Ten has faced off against 100 AQ schools for a combined record of 44-56 (0.440) while the ACC has 89 matchups with a record of 39-50 (0.438). And is of course ignoring that of those the Big Ten only played one AAC (formerly the Big East) school while the ACC face 29, and they are least least the second worse conference. And even then the only AQ conference they have a better percentage against than the Big Ten is the PAC-12, and that is primarily due to the relationship among the Big Ten, PAC-12 and the Rose Bowl (so don't get me started on the distance/footprint data, because I have that too).

So while slightly better for the ACC to including all the bowl match ups, it still isn't quite as good as the Big Ten's

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

I think FSU has more then met your bowl requirements. Take a look at their history. Also for the 4th time analyze the actual teams. Your idea that the conference dictates a one time game is itself a deflection by your definition. Answer my question please and then we can move forward.

Get over the idea that Clemson, Wake, BC, GT, or VT and their losses in the BCS having any bearing on a game between FSU and Bama. Because it has NONE.

Did I mention bowl requirements? Man are you deflecting left and right.

I get it, it sucks for FSU that they are basically the one good team in a shitty conference. But because they play in a shitty conference I am going to question their body of work in that conference until it becomes less shitty. Sorry, but FSU hitch their ride to the wrong conference wagon.

Because here's where all those losses by Clemson, VT et al come into the equation when comparing FSU vs Alabama. Until they play, we have to do our best estimating against similarly capable teams. And because FSU hasn't really played any, it's hard to say how they will do against a team of the caliber of Alabama. While Alabama has been down that road many times before in the recent years, and pretty much always comes out the winner. So forgive me for going with the team that has a much better volume of work, mostly because they play in a vastly superior conference than the ACC.

 

[FSUmanager]

Did I mention bowl requirements? Man are you deflecting left and right.

I get it, it sucks for FSU that they are basically the one good team in a shitty conference. But because they play in a shitty conference I am going to question their body of work in that conference until it becomes less shitty. Sorry, but FSU hitch their ride to the wrong conference wagon.

Because here's where all those losses by Clemson, VT et al come into the equation when comparing FSU vs Alabama. Until they play, we have to do our best estimating against similarly capable teams. And because FSU hasn't really played any, it's hard to say how they will do against a team of the caliber of Alabama. While Alabama has been down that road many times before in the recent years, and pretty much always comes out the winner. So forgive me for going with the team that has a much better volume of work, mostly because they play in a vastly superior conference than the ACC.

YOu really need to remember what you have posted already. TO the bold. No deflection. YOu are the one that brought up the ACC winning big bowl games. Is FSU in the ACC? Yes they are. Has FSU been in the ACC since 1992? Yes they have. Has FSU been in "big bowl games" and performed well and won more than a couple of times? Why most certainly. Now before you state that I am making this up I refer to your post #176 paragraph #3 where you set the bowl game requirements. And I am quoting you.

"As for analysis, as Woody Paige from Around the Horn would say "look at the schedule!" Beating up a bunch of crap teams doesn't mean anything. And playing in the ACC that's all FSU has faced. So again, for the umpteenth million time, until the ACC starts winning some big bowl games, I will always default to the non-ACC team in big bowl match-ups."

Look at the underlined portion of you very post. Notice where you state ACC teams in big bowl games. You set forth the "requirements" and I am pointing out to you that FSU has MET your requirements in "big bowl games".

Man you do not need to go work for NOAA after your commission is up. YOu need to be a politician because you can run around in circles when asked a straight forward question. For the 5th time. Analyze the two teams strengths and weaknesses and inform me of where Bama has a clear advantage and why? FSU has proven over the years while being in the ACC that they play well in "big bowl games". Maybe you need to do some more research before continuing.

 

[Sox33OSU]

Duke. For fuck's sake, Duke.

 

[LawDawg]

the SEC is weak this year let me know when it sinks in

If having 7 of the top 25 teams, and 5 of the top 12 teams means the SEC is weak this year, I'm guessing most conferences are wishing they were weak this year. Keep in mind that this is with 3 of the SEC's traditional powerhouses having down years for one reason or another - UGa, UF and UT, and Arky also being down.

If we are weak this year, I'd be interested to know who is strong.

 

[amszete]

This thread is hilarious. BIG fans trying to shit on the ACC by stating why the BIG is so much better THIS year when historical data is being presented since the inception of ther BCS.

Look, like it or not - Duke is a very good team this year and Cut is a damn good coach. He would pretty much own 85% if not more of the teams in the BIG. That's just the deal. Is VT & Miami down this year? Yes. But that should not detract from other good teams such as FSU, Clemson (and believe it or not - Duke) who are doing some great things in the ACC.

 

[Sox33OSU]

This thread is hilarious. BIG fans trying to shit on the ACC by stating why the BIG is so much better THIS year when historical data is being presented since the inception of ther BCS.

Look, like it or not - Duke is a very good team this year and Cut is a damn good coach. He would pretty much own 85% if not more of the teams in the BIG. That's just the deal. Is VT & Miami down this year? Yes. But that should not detract from other good teams such as FSU, Clemson (and believe it or not - Duke) who are doing some great things in the ACC.

Dude, I really want some of whatever drug you're on. Duke would be nothing better than 7th in the B1G. They didn't suddenly get an influx of talent, and Cut hasn't done shit there since he's arrived. They're having a "good" season because they haven't had to face FSU or Clemson and didn't play anyone at all OOC. They have no recent history of any kind of success so stop with this bullshit already. It's worse than if I were to try and act like Minnesota is some great team.

 

[GreenNickle]

If having 7 of the top 25 teams, and 5 of the top 12 teams means the SEC is weak this year, I'm guessing most conferences are wishing they were weak this year. Keep in mind that this is with 3 of the SEC's traditional powerhouses having down years for one reason or another - UGa, UF and UT, and Arky also being down.

If we are weak this year, I'd be interested to know who is strong.

the SEC is soft as baby shit this year
what they have going for them is media types that will continue to pimp their teams over everyone else to keep the lie alive

if 6 of those teams were not in the SEC they wouldn't even be ranked

Alabama is the only quality team in the SEC this year the rest are average at best

 

[ericd7633]

Dude, I really want some of whatever drug you're on. Duke would be nothing better than 7th in the B1G. They didn't suddenly get an influx of talent, and Cut hasn't done shit there since he's arrived. They're having a "good" season because they haven't had to face FSU or Clemson and didn't play anyone at all OOC. They have no recent history of any kind of success so stop with this bullshit already. It's worse than if I were to try and act like Minnesota is some great team.

Give Duke, MSU's B1G schedule and they have 0 or 1 losses. Michigan and Nebraska are basically Va. Tech and Miami both quality wins.

 

[GreenNickle]

Give Duke, MSU's B1G schedule and they have 0 or 1 losses. Michigan and Nebraska are basically Va. Tech and Miami both quality wins.

are you trolling the same water as me or are you serious?

 

[ericd7633]

are you trolling the same water as me or are you serious?

I'm serious. You think there is a lot of difference between Michigan/Nebraska and Miami/VT. I just don't.

 

[GreenNickle]

I'm serious. You think there is a lot of difference between Michigan/Nebraska and Miami/VT. I just don't.

two of them used kerosene to light the dumpster fire
the other two just doused themselves with gasoline and lit a match

 

[ericd7633]

two of them used kerosene to light the dumpster fire
the other two just doused themselves with gasoline and lit a match

 

[LawDawg]

the SEC is soft as baby shit this year
what they have going for them is media types that will continue to pimp their teams over everyone else to keep the lie alive

if 6 of those teams were not in the SEC they wouldn't even be ranked

Alabama is the only quality team in the SEC this year the rest are average at best

Yawn ... citing the media is a weak minded attempt to justify your own inadequacies ... "if I can convince myself that the SEC really sucks, I won't feel so bad about how bad we suck."

You can't have a discussion with someone who is so delusional that they think that teams like TAMU, USCe, Auburn would not be ranked top 25 but for media bias.