The ACC Thread

[Sox33OSU]

How are 'players in the NFL' or 'Number of All-Pros' qualitative in nature? That is about as quantitative as it gets.

And both leagues have 12 teams.

We only got to 12 teams two seasons ago. The topic of conversation is judging the quality of a conference based on the number of guys they send to the pros. That's what I meant, sorry I wasn't clear.

 

[Edisto_Tiger]

Good Lord!! I can't wait for football to start. Same ol shit every year during the offseason.

 

[WhiteMamba]

It's absolutely undeniable. In the BCS era, only Indiana (0-5), Minny (0-2), Michigan State (0-1) and Purdue (1-2) have a losing record vs. the ACC. Not sure why you brought up Northwestern, Illinois and Iowa. They are a combined 10-2 vs. the ACC in the BCS era.

The undeniable proof is on the field. We are 6 games over .500 against you in the BCS era (with 1/2 of your wins coming against Indiana, Purdue and Minny, arguably the 3 shittiest teams in our conference). We put more teams in the BCS, we win a hell of a lot more in BCS games, and one thing Geneh seems to refuse to acknowledge is that, on a per school basis, we put more players in the NFL. So, how is the ACC in any way, shape, or form better?

You argued that the B1G was better than the PAC also. PAC 45 B1G 33 / Bowls PAC 12 B1G 7 in BCS era.

Last 5 Years PAC 15 B1G 10 / Bowls PAC 3 B1G 2

Last Year PAC 4 B1G 1... OSU 10 Wisky 7 / UCLA 36 Neb 30 / ASU 45 Ill 14 / Stanford 20 Wisky 14

* B1Gs lone win Ohio St by 7 @ Home vs CAL 9th place PAC.

So by using ur above argument does the same apply to PAC vs B1G?

 

[geneh_33]

SU's gonna do you. The ACC will be Orange and Blue by December. Everyone will want to get on the jonviwagon now. There's lots of room at the moment. Get your sideline seats while there's some for the getting.

Come November....the jonviwagon will be full and I'll be doing roundrobins to pickup those that didn't see the light. But by the time we get there....only 3rd level seats will remain though. So get on now so you can party firstclass on the jonviwagon.

Go Jonvi!

 

[geneh_33]

I have pretty much decided that this Sox33OSU fellow is pretty much an asshat. He's on my ignore list to stay if he doesn't change the fact that he just chooses to ignore facts and just post what suits him.

 

[Edisto_Tiger]

I have pretty much decided that this Sox33OSU fellow is pretty much an asshat. He's on my ignore list to stay if he doesn't change the fact that he just chooses to ignore facts and just post what suits him.

Welcome to the Hoop bro.

 

[geneh_33]

Welcome to the Hoop bro.

There are a lot of posters like him but most are good, (somewhat) honest down-to-earth kind of guys with a bias for their team. Everybody has a bias for their team but when a poster shows you and proves to you that he is telling you the truth

IT'S TIME TO BACK OFF! AND

 

[WhiteMamba]

There are a lot of posters like him but most are good, (somewhat) honest down-to-earth kind of guys with a bias for their team. Everybody has a bias for their team but when a poster shows you and proves to you that he is telling you the truth

IT'S TIME TO BACK OFF! AND

I wonder if the dewd is Buckshave7 trying to be normal? If so he is failing miserably.

 

[geneh_33]

I wonder if the dewd is Buckshave7 trying to be normal? If so he is failing miserably.

 

[Sox33OSU]

You argued that the B1G was better than the PAC also. PAC 45 B1G 33 / Bowls PAC 12 B1G 7 in BCS era.

Last 5 Years PAC 15 B1G 10 / Bowls PAC 3 B1G 2

Last Year PAC 4 B1G 1... OSU 10 Wisky 7 / UCLA 36 Neb 30 / ASU 45 Ill 14 / Stanford 20 Wisky 14

* B1Gs lone win Ohio St by 7 @ Home vs CAL 9th place PAC.

So by using ur above argument does the same apply to PAC vs B1G?

I never said that the B1G had done better than the Pac in past years, I was saying I thought they would be better this year. That was based off more matchups and also returning players between the top teams. Purely opinion.

 

[Sox33OSU]

I have pretty much decided that this Sox33OSU fellow is pretty much an asshat. He's on my ignore list to stay if he doesn't change the fact that he just chooses to ignore facts and just post what suits him.

Ha! Give me a fuckin break, dude. You're the one arguing against every single measurable statistic when it comes to comparing the ACC and B1G. Sorry you can't handle the truth as backed by facts. You say I just post what suits me? You tried saying the ACC was better based off of the fact they had more players drafted to the NFL, despite the fact that the conference has the worst BCS bowl record among the 6 BCS conferences and hasn't had a legit national title contender in ages. For crying out loud, you've had 2 teams finish in the top 10 over the last 5 years, considerably less than the B1G, and we routinely average more ranked teams.

Seriously, how am I wrong in saying the B1G is tougher than the ACC?

 

[uncfan103]

If we are cheating we aren't doing very well, according to our recruiting rankings.

LOL. Our record didn't indicate any cheating...

 

[redlegs@hokies]

Not saying the ACC is a better conference in any stretch, but it has sent more players to the NFL than the big 10.

 

[Sox33OSU]

Not saying the ACC is a better conference in any stretch, but it has sent more players to the NFL than the big 10.

Overall, yes. I'm not arguing that fact at all. However, as I mentioned, don't forget we only had 11 schools until 2011.

Also, that stat means very little when it comes to how tough a conference is. Many, many great college players flame out of the NFL quickly or never make it at all.

 

[redlegs@hokies]

so? we are talking about the bcs era. acc didnt expand until 2004. Also, im not arguing how tough a conference is, you asserted that the big put more players in the league. Im saying they did not.

 

[Sox33OSU]

so? we are talking about the bcs era. acc didnt expand until 2004. Also, im not arguing how tough a conference is, you asserted that the big put more players in the league. Im saying they did not.

No, I asserted that per school, the B1G put more kids in the school (and then I posted a link that backed me up).

Also, the original conversation began in another thread where Geneh was saying how tough the ACC was and how, after the SEC, it was the hardest conference to do well in because of all the NFL players you faced every week. I merely pointed out that, on an average week, the B1G team you face will have more future NFLers than the average ACC team, which is technically correct. After that, he went ballistic and told me how the stats I posted were merely my opinion and how the ACC was better than the B1G no matter what and that I had some delusional mindset about the B1G.

 

[redlegs@hokies]

not gonna argue, but thats what you said to ckhokie on page 9 of this thread i think. feel free to check it out.

 

[Sox33OSU]

not gonna argue, but thats what you said to ckhokie on page 9 of this thread i think. feel free to check it out.

I've been crystal clear the entire time that I meant on a per-team basis. I have no idea what else I can do to get that through to you guys.

 

[redlegs@hokies]

say on a per team basis. you did not do that on the exchange i am referring to. you said point blank that the big puts more players in the league and that is false.

 

[Uman5]

I've been crystal clear the entire time that I meant on a per-team basis. I have no idea what else I can do to get that through to you guys.

OK your facts support your argument and our facts support our argument.