»
Topic: SEC VS ACC Not like they make it out to be lately. :)
Replies: 25   Last Post: Jul 1, 2019 10:26 PM by: Rw43
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 25  

SEC VS ACC Not like they make it out to be lately. :)

[1]
Posted: Jun 30, 2019 6:51 PM
 

BY DECADE
W L T Win % PFPG PAPG
2010's 49 40 0 55.1 29.2 26.4
2000's 47 32 0 59.5 24.2 20.4
1990's 33 26 1 55.8 24.4 22.6
1980's 37 21 2 63.3 22.9 18.5
1970's 46 21 1 68.4 22.1 14.4
1960's 62 11 4 83.1 22.7 9.6
1950's 37 16 2 69.1 18.9 10.8

BY YEAR
W L T Win % PFPG PAPG
2018 6 4 0 60.0 35.5 24.5
2017 7 5 0 58.3 28.0 27.3
2016 4 10 0 28.6 24.2 32.6
2015 6 4 0 60.0 27.0 26.5
2014 3 5 0 37.5 30.0 29.8
2013 7 4 0 63.6 29.4 26.1
2012 6 2 0 75.0 34.6 21.3
2011 5 2 0 71.4 29.0 19.6
2010 5 4 0 55.6 28.2 24.8
2009 5 4 0 55.6 25.7 26.0
2008 6 6 0 50.0 25.1 18.5
2007 6 3 0 66.7 28.3 19.3
2006 7 1 0 87.5 25.5 20.9
2005 4 2 0 66.7 22.5 12.2
2004 3 2 0 60.0 14.4 19.0
2003 4 5 0 44.4 22.6 22.1
2002 3 5 0 37.5 21.1 26.9
2001 5 1 0 83.3 32.7 18.7
2000 4 3 0 57.1 20.6 16.9

http://mcubed.net/ncaaf/tvc/sec/acc.shtml


2019 student level member

The entire debate is just noise by the SEC apologists.

[3]
Posted: Jun 30, 2019 7:32 PM
 

Clemson crushes Alabama last year and they know there is a very good chance it’ll happen this year, so they have to find someway to feed their enormous superiority complex. So they create this false narrative that Alabama plays this much tougher schedule and it wears them down. When the truth is if they are worn down it’s due to coaching style not their schedule. Let’s look at Alabama last year they won all 12 regular season games by 3 plus touchdowns. Now let’s compare Alabama and Clemson on the 3rd Saturday in October, Alabama beat Tennessee 58-21 and played 48 players for the game, Clemson beat NCState 41-7, and played 70 plus players in the 1st half. So if Alabama is beat up and worn out in game 15 it’s all on the coach.


Not really. They've done it for the last

[1]
Posted: Jun 30, 2019 8:32 PM
 

15 years or so. It just didn't start recently.

And, they usually are the toughest conference, but not always.

Still, who cares? It doesn't diminish our titles.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


Re: The entire debate is just noise by the SEC apologists.


Posted: Jun 30, 2019 10:06 PM
 

I have no doubt that if Saban said he needed 8 weeks for his 45-player rotation to get healthy after the season, some advocates would want to push back the CFP chip game until the end of Feb to 'make it fair.'

So what?

If you spend 12 weeks beating the best competition you can schedule, and then are helpless as a kitten facing the Clemson Tigers, you don't get a do over.

I have no idea what PF is saying that drives you guys crazy, but saying that the SEC had a great regular season and the ACC did not is an absolutely true statement...

that has absolutely no bearing on the result of the CFP.

If PF said the CFP was irrelevant, or fraudulent or based on cheating or corruption, you guys would ignore him for being a fool. So what is he saying--i really don't care, but obviously you do--that makes you take him seriously?


Re: The entire debate is just noise by the SEC apologists.


Posted: Jul 1, 2019 4:56 PM
 

Nobody anywhere cares much about the majority of games played.

Only KY and SC care about the game between those 2 teams. No one cares about Ga vs Tx game other than Ga and TX fa

I do not care about GA vs Fl and neither do most others in the US.

Lots of people care about Clemson games because they matter. People care about Bama, OK, TOSU, Clemson, ND games. 95% of other games are mediocre teams wasting time.

Fans of leagues are crazy.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

Re: The entire debate is just noise by the SEC apologists.


Posted: Jul 1, 2019 7:03 PM
 

The tv ratings for Florida and Georgia were higher than any Clemson regular season game last year, and it’s honestly not even close.


their rankings were way over inflated though


Posted: Jul 1, 2019 6:19 PM
 

Always makes them seem better because they lose to each other and stay ranked way too high

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: SEC VS ACC Not like they make it out to be lately. :)

[1]
Posted: Jun 30, 2019 10:12 PM
 

The SEC is much better than the ACC, but who cares? Why does any Clemson fan care? We are winning National Titles.

2019 white level member

In the 5 years of the playoff era, the SEC is 26-28 against


Posted: Jun 30, 2019 11:08 PM
 

the ACC, so explain how the SEC is much better than the ACC

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: In the 5 years of the playoff era, the SEC is 26-28 against

[1]
Posted: Jun 30, 2019 11:15 PM
 

I think there are about 6 teams in the SEC better than our 2nd best team.
Bama
LSU
Georgia
Auburn
Gators
Texas A&M

2019 white level member

Re: In the 5 years of the playoff era, the SEC is 26-28 against

[2]
Posted: Jul 1, 2019 6:36 AM
 

I don't know why posters here cannot admit this AND agree that it doesn't diminish anything Clemson is doing.


Re: In the 5 years of the playoff era, the SEC is 26-28 against


Posted: Jul 1, 2019 6:47 AM
 

I dont know. Its odd.

2019 white level member

What is there to admit? Over the past 5 years, the SEC has a


Posted: Jul 1, 2019 4:46 PM
 

losing record against the ACC in football!!

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: In the 5 years of the playoff era, the SEC is 26-28 against


Posted: Jul 1, 2019 4:53 PM
 

AFDAWG said:

I don't know why posters here cannot admit this AND agree that it doesn't diminish anything Clemson is doing.


I agree. I think Clemson would have reached elite status even if F$U would have maintained it. A few years ago Louisville and VT have flirted with becoming relevant, but couldn't sustain it. That's their problem, not Clemson's.


Re: In the 5 years of the playoff era, the SEC is 26-28 against


Posted: Jul 1, 2019 12:48 AM
 

The most definitive answer i can give you is that 5 years from now you'll be saying, "The ACC is 40-60 vs the SEC over the last 10 years. That's not so bad. What's the big deal?"

And i will say, "No, the ACCBC* is 20-56. Clemson alone is 20-4."

*ACCBC=ACC Besides Clemson

If you think the track both conferences are on will NOT be what i predicted, just keep on quoting historical data that makes you feel good. Because ACC programs are literally in a different league from the SEC.

Dabo is a great ambassador for the ACC. But i can honestly tell you that without Dabo at Clemson their would be zero interest in an ACC Network.


Re: In the 5 years of the playoff era, the SEC is 26-28 against


Posted: Jul 1, 2019 6:24 AM
 

So what would be the SECBA record vs the ACC?


Re: In the 5 years of the playoff era, the SEC is 26-28 against


Posted: Jul 1, 2019 8:11 AM
 

Right now, it's 22-26.
In 5 years, i figure 55-35.

I project the SEC goes 3-1 on rivalry weekend for the next 5 years.
Clemson goes 10-1 vs the SEC, beating Texas A&M, LSU, SoCar 8-0 in regular season and 2-1 vs the SEC rep during the CFP.

Right now Bama is 4-2 vs ACC. My projection would have them 5-4, with 7 of the games against Clemson.

ACCBC and SECBA 5-year record= SEC 21-18
ACCBC and SECBA 10-year projection= SEC 55-20

Of course, we ACC fans can always hope that Syracuse starts adding SEC schools to their OOC schedule (not likely.)
Or that UVA can add the necessary depth to defeat quality SEC foes (greater than SoCar) in bowl games.
Or that SEC teams coaches to ruin their remarkable seasons by failing to prepare and motivate their players adequately in bowl games.
Hope, hope, hope.
Cross your fingers.

But don't count on the coaches and ADs of the ACCBC.


Re: In the 5 years of the playoff era, the SEC is 26-28 against***


Posted: Jul 1, 2019 4:46 PM
 



2019 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

Re: In the 5 years of the playoff era, the SEC is 26-28 against***


Posted: Jul 1, 2019 5:37 PM
 

When the CFP was introduced, Petrino and Louisville were new to the ACC and had his most talented team ever.
Jimbo was coming off a Natty.
Even Paul Johnson was in a good spot.
And Dabo had a freshman QB named DW4.

Stoops at UK was still laying a foundation. McIlwain was underachieving at FL.
Richt at GA was in a downward spiral of low expectations.
Spurrier was running out of gas, if it even mattered, and Connor Shaw was gone, which did.

So is it any wonder that the ACC swept the SEC 4-0 on rivalry weekend, and kept up the momentum going 3-1 for a few more years (both causing coaching changes, as well as taking advantage of them.)

That 13-3 run on Rivalry weekend from 2014-17 was very impressive. It will also never be repeated.

Now it is the ACC programs dealing with new head coaches, and the jury is still out on all 3.

Meanwhile, FL and GA and UK had enough resources--the real difference between the conferences other than W/L--to get their programs back on track immediately after the coaching changes.

In the ACC, new coaches practically have to rebuild from scratch. Fuentes at VT lost to Old Dominion last year, a school with an FBS program only 5 years old.
Meanwhile, the average SEC team could go 6-6 with a football novice as head coach (and sometimes do).

That's why i projected elsewhere on this thread that Louisville, GT and FSU would not win another rivalry game against the SEC for 5 more years.


Re: In the 5 years of the playoff era, the SEC is 26-28 against


Posted: Jul 1, 2019 10:20 AM
 

How many of those ACC wins were A)not by Clemson, and B) over Georgia, Florida, Bama, LSU, Auburn, or A&M?

Yeah, the overall record over that time goes against the extreme narrative that some fans like to make in that the SEC doesn't have any garbage teams, and the ACC never has any decent teams outside of Clemson.

However, if Clemson were playing any of the teams I just named above next year(and we are playing A&M) then we'd have that game circled as our biggest regular season game of the year. What ACC game besides Clemson, and possibly FSU(if they're not down like they currently are) would be considered a big game for Bama to play next year?


For me, I wish there was a way to leave the ACC

[1]
Posted: Jul 1, 2019 9:00 AM
 

we dominate (as of late) this conference because few ACC schools put a premium of being a football power. I cringe whenever these comparisons between the SEC and the ACC because honestly we don’t compare well. The revenues of ACC are chump change compared to most other conferences. Thank goodness for IPTAY and generous supporters, they keep us ahead of the curve. When I look at ACC football, I’m almost ashamed to admit we are associated with such a weak conference. However, it doesn’t or at least shouldn’t diminish our accomplishments. Teams like Alabama and Clemson transcend their conferences. We are simply bigger than the others. I’ve always hated this SEC, SECC!! Crap because it’s like socialism, take from the rich that work hard, play right and strive for more and give to those that don’t, won’t or can’t earn their own way. I’m sure this won’t be a popular post but yes, the ACC has been, at least the last few years, a joke.


Re: For me, I wish there was a way to leave the ACC


Posted: Jul 1, 2019 11:34 AM
 

I agree with you on all but 1 point and 1 detail.

Detail: the ACC is more socialist than the SEC, in that the school that earns the big payout doesn't get a dime more (after expenses) than the schools that stayed home.

So if Louisville (for instance) never again put a quality football team on the field, they will still get equal money from the postseason pool as the team that played 2 games to earn it. (After expenses.) This is supposed to allow the more deficient programs some opportunity to 'level the playing field', but has heretofore been ineffective.

The SEC awards the team that earned it a larger share than all the others. This allows the king to stay on the throne.

However, i do not want to leave the ACC. I want the other schools to make the commitment to compete with us.

If Mendenhall and Babers say they have 30-35 ACC caliber players (Mendenhall last year said "25-30"), they need to be adding 5 per year. When healthy, UVA can play with anybody but us and Bama. But ACC teams are not deep enough to endure the rigorous league schedule, so they lose silly games when they miss key players.

Once they accumulate 50 good players, their personnel management will also need an upgrade. This is where Dabo excels and many SEC types fail. What good foes it do you to have 60 3*/4*/5* players when you can't coach, teach, motivate and manage them all? Gus Malzahn, for example, is a terrible personnel manager and squanders more great athletes than any coach since John Wooden.

Once the ACC coach has recruited enough good players, developed enough personnel and scheduled enough quality opponents, he will be ready to go head-to-head with the top programs in the SEC.

Of course, that all takes money, and if they're only drawing 30,000 fans to their home games i don't know where they're going to get it.


Re: SEC VS ACC Not like they make it out to be lately. :)

[1]
Posted: Jul 1, 2019 11:58 AM
 

I read that when the Tigers played Bama in the Kick-Off Classic in 2008, that Dabo noticed the type of athletes that Bama had compared to the Tigers. When he took over, his mission was to get the better athletes to be able to compete with the likes of Bama. He has accomplished this.

Until the other ACC schools figure out how to do it, then the ACC (non-Clemson) are only going to compete with the lower tier SEC like Uof5C.

Right now, to me, Clemson is in their own league that has to play ACC schools.

2019 white level member

Re: SEC VS ACC Not like they make it out to be lately. :)


Posted: Jul 1, 2019 5:44 PM
 

So your stats show that the SEC "only" won 57% of the games this century.

But the ACC only won the season series in 4 years out of 19.

In spite of 3 of the last 6 Natties, and going 13-3 on rivalry week over 4 years running, and currently fielding the best team in the history of college football. That's all?

That's the best the ACCBC can do?

I still say the ACCBC sucks.


SEC apologist. Question 4 you.


Posted: Jul 1, 2019 7:44 PM
 

So What?
Let's say the teams in the SEC was deemed better and everyone agreed! Which we don't agree on that; because you can't say Clemson has a favorable match up and it skews the numbers w/o mentioning some favorable SEC match ups!

Ga. Tech and Georgia come to mind! Alabama and Duke having a home and home a few years ago. Come on now! Cuse and LSU. It wasn't like it was FSU(when they were good) against Vandy and the ACC racked up wins. All the non-sec-apologist get the gist of what I am saying.

But, so what?

What does that do for you?
Will Sa'ka-lina all of a sudden get to share the NC trophy Alabama has been routinely getting? Answer: NO!
So, for what? Why do you care enough to come to a Clemson board and post that propaganda? So we can get it right? Well, several numbers or what people use as facts have been given out and you SEC-apologist simply ignore it! 23 - 23 in the last 46 does not suggest the ACC is as far back as you all have been brainwashed into believing. In 2016, the ACC had a better head to head record and a much better bowl season. 9-3 and a NC versus 6-5. No title.
Last year the ACC was 7-5 the SEC was 6-7.

Not that it matters what other ACC teams did. But, trying to understand what you all "believe it does for you"?
I think you have people who can think for themselves and have an opinion and you have "others" who get told what to think. SEC-apologist are others! ESPN is a business. SEC fan bases tend to be really passionate(which I give you that). Stadiums bigger. Interest bigger. So, it's good business to feed the beast when it comes to giving it what it wants. Noise about "their team"! Good stories and coverage about their program that they be love. Example: not many Duke fans will raise an eyebrow over it's football program not getting a lot of positive ink. But, Su-wee, Razorbacks fans will raise cain! So this business, to draw more advertising dollars keeps up the programming that keeps advertisers wanting to use that platform. Simple.
But, none of that helps you on the football field! Including FSU the ACC is 3 - 3 versus the SEC during this modern era(*BCS by FSU). But, Cuse, Boston College, Miami, none of them helped Clemson spank Alabama by 28 points or 4 touchdowns however fits best for you on the football field. None of them!
So, why so much energy to make sure we know, what way you have been brainwashed into believing?


Re: SEC apologist. Question 4 you.


Posted: Jul 1, 2019 10:26 PM
 

1) To be brainwashed, i have to hear what they're saying. I don't. I don't care what the PFs of the world say. Why do you? But you think I'm the one who is brainwashed, while you continue to pretend the bottom 13 teams of the ACC are level with the bottom 13 of the SEC, just so you can refute someone else's bad logic. Why can't you just call PF's bad logic what it is--BS-- and go back to being a happy Tiger that allows us all to enjoy thumping our SEC opponents? That's what Tiger fans usually do.

2) Not sure what all your quoted statistics were in reference to or the point you tried to make with them. The big picture comparison was quoted by the OP. I quoted the specific rivalry weekend records for 5 years and projected them for the next 5 based on current lack of progress in the ACC programs. If you're trying to cite some other examples that you find more relevant than either of those, please try harder to make your point.

3) You stumbled into one truth: it's all business. That's why here on Tigrrnet Hoodie is always posting updates about how Clemson has been publicly disrespected--again--by PF. Or (God forbid) the AD from Notre Dame. And guess what? Over 100 posts later, the guy still hadn't said a disrespectful word! But Disrespect is the coin of the realm on Tigernet, so every body get your shovel ready, they're talking about the SEC again!

4) I'm glad that you acknowledge the passion of SEC fans, but on that detail, i think you're wrong. But that's my whole point. The average Clemson fan is far more passionate than the average SEC fan, but there are so many more of them than us. Do you realize that even the SEC schools in states with small population have over twice as many students and over 3x as many fans as Clemson?
The SEC bathes in money. Yet as the 4th smallest school to win a natty in the last 38 years, we've now won 3. And 8 larger SEC schools have not, and only 1 has more than us.
But it is unreasonable to expect our ACC brethren to raise their game performance as the SEC recently has--again--without first upgrading their expectations.
So long as you and other Tiger fans are loudly blurting out how competitive Nancy St and the Tarholes, or maybe BC and Pitt would be against LSU and Miss St, why should their fans care that they can't compete?

So long as they beat Holy Cross by 3 TDs, they can lose by 40 to Penn St and still make it to the ACCCG.

Why can't we raise some expectations around the league?


Replies: 25  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Boston College
FOR SALE: I have the following tickets for the Boston College game. Venmo, ApplePay, Zelle, and PayPal friendl...

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
1854 people have read this post