Recent Comments
Aw darn, I had just changed my shorts....
Hey, at leat they're bein all macho and manly and not prancing around like little girls. First thing I thought of when I saw this was the art of manliness logo. Not a bad way to go for offensive linemen.
Great response, which I upvoted. However, I would argue a few things. While they are dog matchups, they'll probably be more competitive games given the relative strength (or lack there of). ESPN owns the rights to all the ACC games, so at the very least they'll drop ESPN3, or regional coverage on the branded "ACC Network". Teams like Maryland, Wake Forest, (Duke, and Pitt in our own division) don't sell out when Tech goes there now, so that's on their fans and lack of support.
I think the reason the SEC is perceived to be so dominant is because they win all their bowl games and non-conference games. There have been many battle worn SEC teams to come out and thump a non-SEC team in a bowl. Not only that, but dominant SEC teams still are able to rise to the top and make it the MNC. With the playoff right around the corner, tougher schedules will be come more important.
+1 for hot chick, because always +1 for hot chicks.
Couldn't resist
First off - as a fan I totally agree that scheduling sucks and there has to be a better solution to see better match-ups more often.
However, if I was the commissioner this approach probably creates two big issues that work against some of my business objectives. First, while it forces better match-ups for the top teams, it creates more dog match-ups for the Duke-Wake or BC-uva schedule which will most likely hurt ticket sales for those teams and keep them off of television for much of the season - hurting revenue, exposure and possibly recruiting. This rich get richer approach may due more harm to the bottom members than good for the whole (and remember many of those bottom members are charter members in NC). Swofford probably can't afford to create such a caste system.
Second, by putting the strong teams up against one another each year, inevitably they will beat each other up and create multiple 8-4 / 7-5 teams versus creating three or four 10-2 / 9-3 teams. Conference strength is judged by the top 20% allowing two to three strong teams have an opportunity to take some of the premier bowl spots leading to more $$$. The reason the SEC is so dominate has to do with the top 3-4 teams each year -certainly not the Ole Miss, Kentucky, Tennessee, Miss State garbage. I'd think Swofford would prefer to have 3-5 teams ranked in the top 25 with inflated records versus a "balanced conference" top to bottom. This approach probably won't deliver may national champions but 5 teams ranked at the end of the season with a few in the top 10 is better alternative for the conference (business-wise).
Just a different perspective on why there may not be a big push for change by the powers that be.
Heisman winners get the girl
Ok, ok,...
|
13 years 1 month
# | Bitter blog - An admittedly impractical suggestion for solving the ACC’s football scheduling problem Andy, this is fantastic. Maybe if we just bombard Swofford's office with phone calls and emails about this idea, he'll break eventually and at least bring it up in a meeting somewhere? Who's with me?
I'm late to the party but thanks for the great read!
Hopefully our hypotenuses will have a similar effect on opposing defenses this season...
When I read this I think... wow if we averaged top 8 in recruiting like FSU we would have 8+ ACC titles and a couple natty championships
You're correct, mistake fixed.
|
13 years 1 month
# | Bitter blog - An admittedly impractical suggestion for solving the ACC’s football scheduling problem A few days ago I posted this in another thread here and on David Teel's blog:
I would swap Duke and North Carolina with Florida State and Syracuse and drop crossover rivalries in favor of two rotating crossovers in an 8 game schedule. .
That gives these divisions:
Atlantic: Duke, Wake Forest, North Carolina, NC State, Clemson, Boston College, & Louisville.
Coastal: Florida State, Miami, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, Virginia, Pittsburgh, & Syracuse.
Advantages: Maintains most of the meaningful rivalry games, North Carolina schools play each other every year, Virginia tech plays rivalries with Miami, Georgia Tech, and Virginia every year. Florida State and Miami, continue to play every year. 4-3 balance of what I would consider top 7 ACC teams (Fl St, Miami, VT, GT vs. NC, Clem, Louisville
Disadvantages: Coastal deeper than Atlantic, with a stronger lower half. Atlantic teams loose annual games against a Florida team, hurts recruiting for those teams.
After a little further consideration, I would think that it would be preferable to also swap Pitt and Cuse. This would put BC and Cuse in the same division, giving them a geographically close matchup anually. I also think this change to my earlier attempt is slightly more balanced.
That would leave give us these divisions, no regular crossover oponents, and seeing every cross division team home and away every seven years.
Atlantic: Duke, Wake Forest, North Carolina, NC State, Clemson, Pittsburgh, & Louisville.
Coastal: Florida State, Miami, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, Virginia, Boston College, & Syracuse.
If set up correctly you would see every school at least once every 4 years (Play a team at home, then go through a complete rotation before playing them away with one home and away crossover each year):
While that's true that Wake won the ACC...they did it once. During the stretch when FSU and Clemson were being dragged down by Bowdens. They haven't come close to repeating that success despite following the same game plan. BC had Matt Ryan in 2007. An elite QB can paper over other holes in the offense. You need talent to compete with talent, assuming both teams have competent coaching.
I also think that things have changed that make those standings somewhat obsolete. FSU, Miami, UNC and Clemson have different coaches now than the ones they had for the bulk of the time period being analyzed, and they've all shown an ability to not only recruit but utilize talent. The ACC has never lacked for player talent, as evidenced by the number of players drafted. Now though schools have found coaches that may not be clueless and it's going to be a problem.
Amen to that
PUBLISHER
|
13 years 1 month
# | Analysis: How much do recruiting rankings correlate to winning in the ACC Interesting read, thanks for sharing. Player development obviously correlates to success too, but the more talented the athlete, the better he can be developed. You also have to consider recruiting rankings are an inexact science. I was going to cite Boston College's appearances in consecutive ACCCG's, but they hauled in pretty good classes in 2003 and 2005 that feature a lot of familiar names. Although, they don't come close to matching the FSU classes over the same timespan.
Wake Forest actually winning the ACC in 2006 is probably the best example of player development and team chemistry trumping raw talent in the ACC. From 2002-06, according to Rivals.com, they had one 4-star and he was listed as "Committed - Not Yet Signed". The rest of their signees were one- to three-stars, the majority being two-stars.
Imagine, if we could just land 2 out of the 3 guys. LOLUVA wouldn't be able to just double-team Hand, Nnadi, or Brown, and it'd basically be a field day for them getting to the QB.
FALSE. The only person that would look better in Antone Exum's uniform is Antone Exum.
I do believe you mean "we can't rely on our defense and our special teams" in the second to last sentence, correct?
#BEATBAMA bandannas!
|
13 years 1 month
# | Bitter blog - A closer look at the proposed sites for VT's indoor practice facility Wake isn't exactly a powerhouse, and Miami hardly needs any type of indoor facility.
Pssh. Webb would look good in Antone Exum's uniform.
*Collective shrug from Hokie Nation* All the best to the kid. Hope he finds a good school for him.