|
Replies: 16
| visibility 1
|
110%er [7173]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6879
Joined: 1/25/17
|
Why No PAC 12 or Big 10 Weak Discussions?
Jul 7, 2019, 1:21 PM
|
|
@jjstone D329 You raised this question in another thread. I wanted to bring it out to maybe get more eyes and opinions on the subject.
I wonder the same thing: "as weak as the Pac 12 has been the narrative of the ACC being just the pit of college football strength in the P5 is confusing! 3 of the last 4 years if I am not mistaken the conference has posted two national championships or winning bowl records! Including 9 - 3 in 2016 season and head to head win over the SEC-ond conference.
The Big 10(I refuse to use their little play on words) has Ohio State and that's it! Michigan State has made the playoffs, Wisconsin gets ranked and then loses a head stratcher late. Meat Chicken - Michigan - has been steady building; but mostly a yawner besides Don Brown's defense. Nebraska - who? Rutgers - ? Maryland -? Northwestern - P. Fitzgerald would fit well on the CU staff b/c he doesn't make excuses and has a solid program and wins with 3 star and the occassional 4 or 5 star kid. Hoping H. Johnson can play well for the Wildcats. But, nationally, no one is scared of the Big 10 either! Penn State under Franklin has been better; but yawn!
Are these conferences and programs getting credit for: "time served" if you will? Meaning; what they did way, waaaaaaay back in the day is carrying the burden and speaking for them now? Certainly isn't their football prowess. Two ACC teams including Clemson having won two of the last three have won NC. FSU just 5 or 6 years ago won another NC and did so by beating another SEC-ond team(Auburn). Yet, the narrative is all about: "The Weak ACC"!
Parody and someone other than say: Oregon for the Pac 12( oh wait, they have never won one) or Southern Cal(what year was that 04) or Ohio State if you are the Big 10 has gone to the championship game and won it. That's called parody!
With the recruits Miami and FSU gets it's just a matter of time before it goes back to how it should be. Remember those teams and VT being in the Big East? Florida was about the only team from the SEC-ond you heard about under Spurrier(quitter). Routinely Miami was ranked 1st. Followed by FSU. Florida would be in the mix. FFWD to now and those teams are in the ACC. Clemson is in the ACC.
It's going to be great!
Although I must say: "the weak ACC sure did help us prepare for the team that went through the weak(er) SEC-ond conference"! And it showed on the football field. The grid iron. In between those painted lines if you will at the tune of: 44 - 16 or 28 pt beat down! Which ever you prefer!
Somebody tell me or explain to me why the narrative about those conferences isn't in the same boat given bowl records and NC teams?
|
|
|
|
 |
Legend [16240]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12779
Joined: 11/14/09
|
I enjoy how Wake and BC are tossed about compared to
Jul 7, 2019, 1:29 PM
|
|
LSU and Auburn with no mention of Ole Miss and Arky.
Sour grapes are sour.
Go Tigers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7173]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6879
Joined: 1/25/17
|
Re: I enjoy how Wake and BC are tossed about compared to
Jul 7, 2019, 2:43 PM
|
|
Exactly right!
If you are going to compare you have to not look for favorable match ups!
That being said, the SEC-ond conference will of course have more teams that get ranked and get "high praise"! Last year at one point Nancy St. and Cuse were 1 loss or no loss teams and didn't crack the top 20. Had they simply had an SEC-ond patch on their jerseys you can believe they would have been top 10 or close to it. So, you can't go by rankings in my opinion, because they are unfairly biased. Side Note: the fact saker-lina can't do more is very telling b/c of the ease in which SEC-ond teams get over-hyped!
I will concede the SEC-ond gets really good players and puts those players in the NFL. And, they have big stadiums and large fan bases far greater on average than ACC schools. But, the polls are supposed to be about what happens on the field. Not about how large your fan base is or stadium or interest to talk show host!
Looking at teams that have won it: regardless of if they were in the ACC at the time or not - the ACC has as many teams who have won it all as does the SEC - ond conference.
Syracuse
Pittsburgh
Clemson - multiple times
FSU - multiple times
Miami - multiple times
Georgia Tech
Boston College has an unrecognized championship in 1940.
There is history in other words in the ACC - Clemson can hang with anybody considered the Big Dawgs of the sport regarding traditions and winning!
I think the "tide" will change sooner or later to where Miami gets it together! FSU pulls it back together. Syracuse and Pitt become the teams they were in the 70's early 80's. VT and believe it or not UVA have opportunities to be really good in football. UVA has been knocking at the door and I read somewhere where they have committed more to football. They already have an un-ACC like Stadium that holds 73, 000 I believe. The conference is coming around and it's all being driven by the pursuit of The Clemson Tigers!
Go Tigers! Pulling the conference w/us as a by product!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3615]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 3791
Joined: 1/21/16
|
Re: Why No PAC 12 or Big 10 Weak Discussions?
Jul 7, 2019, 2:35 PM
|
|
While i think your question is valid, you are missing the money trail.
Please DO NOT compare the ACC to the PAC12 (NO representaion in the CFP since its inception).
Please DO NOT compare the ACC to the Big Ten (no representation in the CFP in 2 of 5 years).
The recurring thought must be that a 1-loss ACC team still deserves to be in the CFP. Remember that 5 conferences--and Notre Dame--are vying for 4 spots.
CFP payout money is huge, and the same conferences keep getting left out. So the powers that be are trying to balance the till without hurting their biggest customer--the SEC.
You do not prove our worthiness for the playoff by saying that the ACC is no weaker than the conferences that have been left out. The ACC and SEC are the only conferences not to be omitted in the last 5 years, but the ACC's current overall strength cannot get us a spot. It can only be represented by an outstanding team who doesn't need a conference resume, like a 12-0 Clemson team.
If the ACC is no weaker than those other guys, but our league champ is only 11-1, just like theirs, then it will probably be our turn to stay home.
BTW, the Big 10 success is not just "history". The Big 10 is relevant because 1) student bodies, endowments, attendance and resources are huge (rivalling or exceeding those of the SEC schools, in spite of the aging population in the Rust Belt) and 2) many of the best sports journalists--especially the ones who are trained as journalists, not just ex-jocks--have degrees from Big 10 universities. Or Syracuse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [666]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 780
Joined: 8/7/17
|
Re: Why No PAC 12 or Big 10 Weak Discussions?
Jul 7, 2019, 2:42 PM
|
|
Not true.
Washington has been in the cfp
Big ten should get more flak. The last two times they were in the cfp they didn’t even score one point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3615]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 3791
Joined: 1/21/16
|
Re: Why No PAC 12 or Big 10 Weak Discussions?
Jul 9, 2019, 12:06 AM
|
|
Sorry to overlook Washington's boring contribution to CFP history.
Not sure how I did that, since my SIL is a rabid Husky fan.
I guess I was only 80% correct. PAC12 has only been omitted 4 out of 5 years.
In spite of their insistence on only scheduling FBS schools, their schedules are terrible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7173]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6879
Joined: 1/25/17
|
Re: Why No PAC 12 or Big 10 Weak Discussions?
Jul 7, 2019, 3:34 PM
[ in reply to Re: Why No PAC 12 or Big 10 Weak Discussions? ] |
|
Rw43 That's your POV. What my question was; "why aren't they getting any flak about being not so great either"? I said a bunch of other stuff that supports the fact; the ACC is weak argument is overblown! But, my question is solely about why not!
I am not trying to say, "well the other conferences are weak too, so leave us alone" as I think you are suggesting. I feel there is compelling evidence to suggest the narrative about how weak the ACC is a weak narrative and false.
Start 5 to 6 ACC schools ranked at the beginning of the season. They will play the typical cupcakes and win. They get in conference and play some bad ACC schools but then face off with 3 of the ranked ones. They get a better perception b/c they "ONLY LOST TO RANKED OPPONENTS"! Those ranked opponents increase their SOS - unjustifiably so. It's pretty simple - especially b/c bowl season except for the very best in some years(which Clemson has proven) can come from a conference that isn't so good. Alabama has proven it too! RW43 - the story going into the NC game was that if you can "roll SEC-ond teams then even a top flight ACC school has no chance. W/O question Clemson proved that a false narrative.
So, I am not worried about, making the argument for if the ACC has a 1 loss champ or not.
I am asking why those conferences aren't catching as much flak? The Pac 12 does a bit; but no where near as much as it should. They have been horrible( coming from a fan of a school in the ACC ). The big 10 as you said, "has large endowments" so that must be it. But, besides Ohio State, there is not one team in that conference that makes you say, "oh we might be in trouble here now, we are going to have to be on our A-game"! Nobody! SEC-ond fans will tell you the same thing! To be honest - what has the Big 12 done to get away from the scrutiny?
Besides Oklahoma who else has made noise on the national level to the point Alabama was threatened? Iowa St? Kansas? Oh wait, the Art Brile - less Baylor Bears? Texas Tech? It's unreal how the media has zeroed in on the ACC in other words despite 3 national championships over the last 6 years!
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [57049]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 39674
Joined: 11/12/04
|
Because neither the Pac12 or B1G are scaring the crap out of the SEC
Jul 7, 2019, 3:07 PM
|
|
right now. Just the ACC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20884]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4483
Joined: 6/27/05
|
BINGO!
Jul 7, 2019, 5:34 PM
|
|
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3639]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5124
Joined: 4/23/19
|
Re: Why No PAC 12 or Big 10 Weak Discussions?
Jul 7, 2019, 3:09 PM
|
|
The Pac 12? Seriously?
Everyone admits the Pac 12 is complete garbage. The commission (Larry Scott) gets ripped left and right because of how pathetic the conference is. Nobody disputes they are the bottom of the barrel. They get no respect whatsoever. Perhaps it's because you don't follow news outside of the ACC, but the Pac 12 has been dumped on the last couple of years more times than I can count. IMO, we've now reached the point that nobody in the rest of the country even cares.
Regarding the Big Ten:
Here are the last 4 CFP Championship Game matchups: SEC/ACC, ACC/SEC, SEC/SEC, ACC/SEC. The Big Ten doesn't even show up. Since no Big Ten team is found there is no point to make about the conference.
There are only two football conferences worth comparing: ACC and SEC. If OU had beaten Alabama last year, SEC partisans like Finebaum would be trashing the Big 12 too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7173]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6879
Joined: 1/25/17
|
Re: Why No PAC 12 or Big 10 Weak Discussions?
Jul 7, 2019, 3:46 PM
|
|
MoCity I watch more than just the ACC. Trust me; I get what you are saying.
The thing is: "they seem to come at the ACC with a different level of intensity than they come at those other conferences"!
3 National Championships from 2 different teams over the past 6 - 7 years suggest they need to really evaluate "who is weak" or not!
Perhaps everyone besides Alabama in the SEC-ond is weak! They certainly were last year as that conference line up did not prepare the baby elephants. Straight from Tua Turn the ball over's mouth; not me! So, who's weak?
I think the analyst and other people get caught up as Rw43 said, "in the money" generated from interest in SEC-ond teams.
The fact the ACC is putting players in the NFL and get their players from the same high schools as does the SEC-ond schools tells me - the talent is there. Maybe the team itself struggles b/c the better coaches want to coach at a school with a bigger stadium and more fan base. I can see that. But, talent speaking(check the numbers).
The PAC 12 - has been considered rubbish since the Trojans took 4 steps back! Oregon had a flash in the pan with Chip Kelly and all the fancy uniforms and Autzen stadium and all - but really aren't hitting on anything.
Big 10 schools for years had justifiably so gained the reputation as the Big "slow"! The speed disparity in bowl games was night and day. They have done better over the last few years since Urban Meyer got there really. Snatching Florida and Georgia players. Harbough even had the nerve to set up a football camp in the south. He knows what's up! They aren't that good and they don't get called out on it with the same fever/tone/intensity as they call out the ACC!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3639]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5124
Joined: 4/23/19
|
Re: Why No PAC 12 or Big 10 Weak Discussions?
Jul 7, 2019, 4:34 PM
|
|
The difference in intensity is due to Clemson beating Alabama twice. Simple as that. The media would not hold the ACC to special scrutiny otherwise. This is what comes with winning two CFPs, the last one being a demolition nobody saw coming.
There has to be some rationalization for 44-16 because it can't be as simple as Clemson was much better prepared, TL did not choke, Justyn Ross is a monster, etc, etc.
For the record, I don't give a care about how much the media respects other ACC teams. The one and only thing that matters is Clemson Tigers football! In my opinion (and many others here obviously differ), calling the rest of the ACC a "clown show" is something to laugh at.
The preseason 4th or 5th best team in the SEC at Death Valley is considered our toughest game of the season. What that may or may not say about the ACC vs SEC doesn't matter one iota to me. All I care about is the players staying healthy and reaching the CFP again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7173]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6879
Joined: 1/25/17
|
Re: Why No PAC 12 or Big 10 Weak Discussions?
Jul 7, 2019, 7:35 PM
|
|
The 4th or 5th best is interesting! Why did they get that rep? What have they done "recently"? They get it simply b/c they are in the SEC-ond conference?
See that's the problem. Start every unranked then after say 4 weeks - then you rank them! Nobody knows what teams will truly look like until the pads get to popping! And, they are going against other teams with different colored jerseys!
The perception continues - b/c of hype like that. Who knew the year UCF went undefeated and looked like world beaters they would have that type season? Duke a few seasons ago? Syracuse? For that matter any PAC 12 or Big 10 school not named Southern California or Ohio State - when they have good years! We'll see if that is our toughest game or not. Seems to me the ACC has been our toughest opponents the last few years besides Alabama!
Nancy St. was within a missed FG.
Syracuse beat us.
And nearly beat us again.
Pittsburgh beat us.
I can give one iota either! But, the discussion was: why no conversation about the Pac 12 and Big 10; I never mentioned the SEC-ond.
The Alabama conference has proven worthy; so I don't totally get nausea when they praise them so much. You just wish they would recognize some fairly clear and obvious double standards is all. But, again, this conversation isn't about SEC-ond conference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7173]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6879
Joined: 1/25/17
|
Re: Why No PAC 12 or Big 10 Weak Discussions?
Jul 7, 2019, 4:00 PM
|
|
p.s. An ACC school in 16 season beat us(Pittsburgh) during the regular season. Nobody in the SEC-ond could beat Alabama that same season. Yet, the so called weaker conference champion went on the beat the so called best conference team. Just like this past season; SEC-ond don't pass the smell test in bowl games 6-7. ACC conversely was 7-5.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22127]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5026
Joined: 2/25/13
|
Re: Why No PAC 12 or Big 10 Weak Discussions?
Jul 7, 2019, 4:15 PM
|
|
The king and his minions don't worry about anyone except those who are a threat to his kingdom.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7173]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6879
Joined: 1/25/17
|
Re: Why No PAC 12 or Big 10 Weak Discussions?
Jul 7, 2019, 4:28 PM
|
|
@jJoe21® Good point!
Didn't know Pitt has a total of 9 National Championships! 4 "unclaimed". That's up there with the leaders.
I hate yet respect the "giving teams/schools credit for past accomplishments"! It's bad b/c the team taking the field in the modern era did zilch to "earn the rep"! Too bad the ghost of the past can't help some of these squads now!
Good football in that part of the world and I can see a resurgence by the Panthers with the right coach! The potential in the ACC is huge and people are sleeping on it. Sleeping on the history of the teams and sleeping on it's current most dominant team! Let'em sleep! Maybe somebody will hoist a few more trophies up and get tired and drop it with a glancing blow to their heads to wake them up!
https://www.225.pitt.edu/story/pitt-football-nine-titles
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4104]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4371
Joined: 10/22/14
|
Re: Why No PAC 12 or Big 10 Weak Discussions?
Jul 3, 2023, 12:38 PM
|
|
Pitt had a rich football history that many younger folks are not aware of. Players like Tony Dorsett, Hugh Green, and Mr Laces out himself Dan Marino are but a few of the great players they have had. I think Pitts Downfall is like much of the Midwest's, in that so many left as industry dried up in the rust belt and other places they pulled recruins from, many moving down south to GA and FL. Still, the ACC has more than its share of solid football members that are on equal footing with the Pacific 12, who outside of USC and UCLA have a lot of nada imo. Big10.. Take out Ohio St and Mich St and when have any of them won anything? Anyone really wanna discuss those Minnesota National Championships from what, the 30s?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 16
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
