http://cfn.scout.com/2/766659.html
This guy is a hack. First off, he has no clue what he's talking about when it comes to net bowl revenue. Per Omnicarrier yesterday:
SEC - $2,415,977 average per team
Big 10 - $2,217,664 average per team
Big 12 - $1,808,869 average per team
Big East - $1,774,628 average per team
Pac 10 - $1,764,701 average per team
ACC - $1,605,304 average per team
You'll see that the ACC is the clear bottom-feeder. Thus, contrary to Elliot's point, the BE and their five bowl teams did plenty to earn money, which not only exceeded the ACC, but was comparable to the Pac-10 and Big 12.
As far as the variety of conference champions, Elliot seems to selectively point out the teams that "push" (not BEAT) USC over in the Pac-10, while he completely ignores Rutgers pushing WVU in 2006, and both UC and UConn pushing WVU in 2007. In fact, completely lost on him is the fact that UConn TIED WVU for the conference championship, losing out on the BCS bowl due to a tie-breaker.
The returning all-Americans argument is also loudly laughable. Elliot states that the Big Ten has 5, the BE 4, and the ACC 3. He considers the 4 vs. 3 comparison in the BE and ACC "negligible", while the 5 vs. 4 for the B10 over the BE "dramatically more". Sounds like fuzzy math to me.
Taking it one step further, the Big Ten averages .455 returning AA's per school, while the ACC returns .250. The BE returns .500, wiping away both the B10 and ACC.
He may have a point about recruiting, but, really, doesn't it boil down to what you do with them? Despite the recruiting success over the past few years, the ACC's on the field performance has not stacked up. They've not won a BCS bowl since 1999, by the way.
Coaching analysis, again selective. While going out of his way to praise the "upcoming star" from Wisconsin, he doesn't even acknowledge Edsall, Leavitt, and Kelly of the BE. Those three aren't rising stars?? Also, what have JoPa and Bowden done lately?
Yeah, I'd say Tressel and Beamer are trump cards, but the difference in coaching isn't as significant as Elliot portrays.
All in all, a very opinionated analysis backed with selective facts.