FSU vs The ACC

[hoopsupstate]

It’s ironic that our three losses came from teams ranked below us. Duke beat expectations too.

 

[Cusefan95]

Beat Texas twice with a far tougher schedule. BTW didn’t they also paste Michigan in the big house? B1G is comically overrated just like at the conference matchups. If you compare OOCs of each conference vs other P4s it ranks as follows:

SEC
ACC
B1G
B12

And didn’t Clemson lose to the #4 team in the SEC? Not nearly lose but actually lose. Fact is the SEC is the best but this B1G love is stupid it’s an overrated conference.

Comparing just OOC records amongst the P4 is a terrible way to assess conference relative strength. Its the metric that people will go to when trying to fabricate a narrative that doesn't align with reality - then hope your crap teams beat their crap teams to overcome the lack of strength at the top of your conference.

How Sagarin ranked conferences this year was SEC-----big drop----Big 12, Big 10-----big drop-----ACC. If any conference has reason to complain they are undervalued, its the Big 12. I don't think the Big 10 is overrated - four teams are in Sagarin's top 11. The problem is the bottom of the conference is hot garbage and drags them way down. That impacted their OOC since the garbage teams all lost...I don't see how Purdue losing to Oregon St and UCLA losing to LSU tells us anything about how good Penn State, Ohio State, Oregon and Indiana are.

ACC was not great this year - it needs to get much better to be viewed as a true peer power conference to the other three. Right now the ACC is where the old Big East was- at the table due to history and politics, not due to on the field performance.

 

[dasher]

Didn’t Georgia win the SEC?

forget it. He is on a roll. Same as the Germans and Pearl Harbor

 

[FRANKIEFAN]

In articles and coverage that claims the ACC got two teams in who should not be in and who played nobody.

If we had one less loss can you imagine the outrage wed have over Clemson and SMU playing each other for a bid but both missing us entirely and having no shot at an at large?

Wed basically be FSU from a year ago if you switch the Stanford game to a W.

9-3 SEC schools were rejected for the ACC runner up. There's no bias.

 

[FRANKIEFAN]

Comparing just OOC records amongst the P4 is a terrible way to assess conference relative strength. Its the metric that people will go to when trying to fabricate a narrative that doesn't align with reality - then hope your crap teams beat their crap teams to overcome the lack of strength at the top of your conference.

How Sagarin ranked conferences this year was SEC-----big drop----Big 12, Big 10-----big drop-----ACC. If any conference has reason to complain they are undervalued, its the Big 12. I don't think the Big 10 is overrated - four teams are in Sagarin's top 11. The problem is the bottom of the conference is hot garbage and drags them way down. That impacted their OOC since the garbage teams all lost...I don't see how Purdue losing to Oregon St and UCLA losing to LSU tells us anything about how good Penn State, Ohio State, Oregon and Indiana are.

ACC was not great this year - it needs to get much better to be viewed as a true peer power conference to the other three. Right now the ACC is where the old Big East was- at the table due to history and politics, not due to on the field performance.

ACC was much better than the Big 12.

Only reason it's close is BYU knocking off SMU before they went to Jennings.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Comparing just OOC records amongst the P4 is a terrible way to assess conference relative strength. Its the metric that people will go to when trying to fabricate a narrative that doesn't align with reality - then hope your crap teams beat their crap teams to overcome the lack of strength at the top of your conference.

How Sagarin ranked conferences this year was SEC-----big drop----Big 12, Big 10-----big drop-----ACC. If any conference has reason to complain they are undervalued, its the Big 12. I don't think the Big 10 is overrated - four teams are in Sagarin's top 11. The problem is the bottom of the conference is hot garbage and drags them way down. That impacted their OOC since the garbage teams all lost...I don't see how Purdue losing to Oregon St and UCLA losing to LSU tells us anything about how good Penn State, Ohio State, Oregon and Indiana are.

ACC was not great this year - it needs to get much better to be viewed as a true peer power conference to the other three. Right now the ACC is where the old Big East was- at the table due to history and politics, not due to on the field performance.

B1G IMO was the worst of the P4s. Penn State and Indiana played no one. The teams below them all stunk. The ACC didn't have an Oregon or Ohio State but 3-17 IMO the ACC was better.

I think the ACC and B12 were on par. The B12 had a slightly larger top and slightly larger bottom.

It really is the SEC and everyone else but the B1G gets away with the illusion.

 

[Pyle]

ACC was not great this year - it needs to get much better to be viewed as a true peer power conference to the other three. Right now the ACC is where the old Big East was- at the table due to history and politics,money and money, not due to on the field performance.

FIFY. I have zero evidence but my gut tells me that the school that has so many big fat Texas oil money boosters that they bought enough of a football team to get the death penalty, most likely bought their way past the Bamabillies during some good ole' boy happy hour.

 

[Cusefan95]

FIFY. I have zero evidence but my gut tells me that the school that has so many big fat Texas oil money boosters that they bought enough of a football team to get the death penalty, most likely bought their way past the Bamabillies during some good ole' boy happy hour.

The ACC is part of the Power 4 because of SMU's money? The Big East was part of the BCS because of "money"? Whose money?

SMU booster support might have swung a bid for the in this year's playoffs...I'd agree that still a use of money to buy political influence if that's true. But the idea the ACC is where it is, or the Big East was where it was in the BCS system due to money is patently absurd.

 

[Pyle]

The ACC is part of the Power 4 because of SMU's money? The Big East was part of the BCS because of "money"? Whose money?

SMU booster support might have swung a bid for the in this year's playoffs...I'd agree that still a use of money to buy political influence if that's true. But the idea the ACC is where it is, or the Big East was where it was in the BCS system due to money is patently absurd.

I thought you were referring to them getting the bid over Bama. Nothing else.
However, If you're saying the ACC is the old Big East well that's a stretch. Clemson has made the NC twice in the past 6 years. Miami was ranked #6 until we beat them and FSU has been historically top 10/15 with a few exceptions. Maybe not the SEC but is the B10 really that much better before poaching the PAC12?

 

[longtimefan]

It’s ironic that our three losses came from teams ranked below us. Duke beat expectations too.

So did SMU. Which is why Lashlee got the award.

 

[All4SU]

Actually, no. No it's not.

Yes, um. Yes it is.

I can do this all day.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

I agree. But I also think the ACC had better hire some clever, resourceful PR experts to combat the SEC/B1G bias out there. They have to change the narrative on college football.

Clemson or SMU winning the CFP would be great

 

[DoctorBombay]

Yes, um. Yes it is.

I can do this all day.

 

[Toga]

Comparing just OOC records amongst the P4 is a terrible way to assess conference relative strength. Its the metric that people will go to when trying to fabricate a narrative that doesn't align with reality - then hope your crap teams beat their crap teams to overcome the lack of strength at the top of your conference.

How Sagarin ranked conferences this year was SEC-----big drop----Big 12, Big 10-----big drop-----ACC. If any conference has reason to complain they are undervalued, its the Big 12. I don't think the Big 10 is overrated - four teams are in Sagarin's top 11. The problem is the bottom of the conference is hot garbage and drags them way down. That impacted their OOC since the garbage teams all lost...I don't see how Purdue losing to Oregon St and UCLA losing to LSU tells us anything about how good Penn State, Ohio State, Oregon and Indiana are.

ACC was not great this year - it needs to get much better to be viewed as a true peer power conference to the other three. Right now the ACC is where the old Big East was- at the table due to history and politics, not due to on the field performance.

What does the Dunkel Index say?

 

[sufandu]

Clemson or SMU winning the CFP would be great

It would be, but the the reputation of the conference needs more than that.

Next year:
Clemson needs to beat LSU
Miami needs to beat Florida
We need to beat Tennessee
Georgia Tech needs to beat Georgia

Do that and don't crap the bed against bad teams, and then the good teams can beat each other up, brag about the strength of the conference, and lobby to get 3 teams in the playoff.

 

[SmilinBob]

Clemson or SMU winning the CFP would be great

If SMU can avoid turnovers they'll have a shot.

 

[orangenauburn]

Clemson winning a title this year would torpedo their argument they are being held back by the conference.

Actually could argue that they made the conference championship and playoff, so that too could weaken their argument.

 

[HtownOrange]

Clemson winning a title this year would torpedo their argument they are being held back by the conference.

Actually could argue that they made the conference championship and playoff, so that too could weaken their argument.

Winning the ACC weakens the argument. Winning it all proves the ACC’s point. However, they will portray it as a loss, I mean, Clemson did lose a few games. FSU will claim they lost because they had no money for NIL while ignoring big raises for the AD, HC and staff. The joys to toddler tantrums…[Heavy sigh]…

Until cooler heads at FSU and Clemson prevail, the drama will continue. Mean while, the SEC and B1G will sit back and be thankful that they avoided the petulant children.

 

[SmilinBob]

Winning the ACC weakens the argument. Winning it all proves the ACC’s point. However, they will portray it as a loss, I mean, Clemson did lose a few games. FSU will claim they lost because they had no money for NIL while ignoring big raises for the AD, HC and staff. The joys to toddler tantrums…[Heavy sigh]…

Until cooler heads at FSU and Clemson prevail, the drama will continue. Mean while, the SEC and B1G will sit back and be thankful that they avoided the petulant children.

It seemed to me Clemson let FSU stamp their feet like a spoiled brat at a toy store and took notes while waiting to see what happened.

 

[HtownOrange]

It seemed to me Clemson let FSU stamp their feet like a spoiled brat at a toy store and took notes while waiting to see what happened.

Agreed. Clemson is going low profile, and was not nearly as abusive to the ACC. I am not sure Clemson wants to leave, other than a dozen or so years, Clemson dominated the ACC in football. It appears that Clemson wants more money and is more hedging their bets than Alford-led FSU.

 

[richmondcuse03]

Winning helps only if it leads to higher payouts from media networks. The issue is the economic gap keeps growing and growing each year. The entire acc is essentially a group of small market teams regardless of brand and where they are because of media payouts.

 

[All4SU]

 

[NJCuse97]

If we had one less loss can you imagine the outrage wed have over Clemson and SMU playing each other for a bid but both missing us entirely and having no shot at an at large?

Wed basically be FSU from a year ago if you switch the Stanford game to a W.

9-3 SEC schools were rejected for the ACC runner up. There's no bias.

There is a bias. There was also finally a pretty substantial stink made of it in the media. That is why the 9-3 SEC schools who didn’t play in the SEC championship (like us in your example scenario above) were left behind for a 10-2 ACC Championship runner up (they realized how horrible a precedent they would have set at the absolute last minute).

The point here however is that all teams in our conference are incorrectly assessed in the preseason due to that bias, (including overvalued in the case of FSU) and it hurts us and our perception at the end of the year without any game having been played.

 

[FRANKIEFAN]

There is a bias. There was also finally a pretty substantial stink made of it in the media. That is why the 9-3 SEC schools who didn’t play in the SEC championship (like us in your example scenario above) were left behind for a 10-2 ACC Championship runner up (they realized how horrible a precedent they would have set at the absolute last minute).

The point here however is that all teams in our conference are incorrectly assessed in the preseason due to that bias, (including overvalued in the case of FSU) and it hurts us and our perception at the end of the year without any game having been played.

I agree but those conferences are also much better. You can attribute it of course to picking the cream of the crop from the P12 but it's not debatable the SEC is better than the ACC. Sad thing is the gap between the two in basketball might be bigger right now than football.

Take Oregon out and the Big Ten is still better. With them it's miles better than the ACC.

Big 12 sucks and ASU went from worst team in the P12 to best team in Big 12. Kind of embarrassing for that league honestly.

7/12 from SEC and Big Ten is a perfectly fine number. I'd prefer 6 and hope it's not 8-9 but that easily happens if Bama and Ole Miss don't lose late.

 

[OrangePA]

I agree. But I also think the ACC had better hire some clever, resourceful PR experts to combat the SEC/B1G bias out there. They have to change the narrative on college football.

I think Belichick will help