georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:I'm not talking out of my ass here -- my senior computer science project is a formula ranking of college football teams and conferences.

Then you should be familiar with the term GIGO.

Watch out for those core dumps. Feeding garbage in always leads to a dump...

The ACC is actually doing fine overall as a conference this year, probably the third best conference top to bottom after the Big 12 and the SEC.

They simply lack a title contender.

Cheers,
Neil

Wayne & Garth: We're not worthy either.

I think Tom Dienhart nails it:

From the Sporting News:

The ACC and Big East don't deserve BCS bids. It's a shame the champions from the Big East and ACC will get BCS bids. Cincinnati? Pitt? West Virginia? I'm sorry, I am not buying the notion any of these Big East squads is the peer of the third-place team in the Big 12 South or even would be the third-best team in either division of the SEC. Ditto for Miami, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia Tech or any other team in a bumbling ACC race that seemingly nobody wants to win. If the college football world was just, BCS bids would be doled out based on the BCS standings - not automatically given to champions from weak conferences.

MichaelSavage Wrote:I think Tom Dienhart nails it:

From the Sporting News:

The ACC and Big East don't deserve BCS bids. It's a shame the champions from the Big East and ACC will get BCS bids. Cincinnati? Pitt? West Virginia? I'm sorry, I am not buying the notion any of these Big East squads is the peer of the third-place team in the Big 12 South or even would be the third-best team in either division of the SEC. Ditto for Miami, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia Tech or any other team in a bumbling ACC race that seemingly nobody wants to win. If the college football world was just, BCS bids would be doled out based on the BCS standings - not automatically given to champions from weak conferences.

Wrong!

He does not "nail it". If UC or Pitt wins the Big East they deserve it.

If UC wins their last 3 games they will finish at 11-2 and most likely be ranked at or very near the top 10.

Tell me why they would not be deserving of a BCS bid if that happens.

If the BCS does not like their own system then they should do something about it. UC or Pitt will not make nor will they owe anyone an apology for going to a BCS game.

MichaelSavage Wrote:I think Tom Dienhart nails it:

From the Sporting News:

The ACC and Big East don't deserve BCS bids. It's a shame the champions from the Big East and ACC will get BCS bids. Cincinnati? Pitt? West Virginia? I'm sorry, I am not buying the notion any of these Big East squads is the peer of the third-place team in the Big 12 South or even would be the third-best team in either division of the SEC. Ditto for Miami, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia Tech or any other team in a bumbling ACC race that seemingly nobody wants to win. If the college football world was just, BCS bids would be doled out based on the BCS standings - not automatically given to champions from weak conferences.

The Sporting News has always preferred a smaller pot for all the money. They've always thought the SEC, Big Tin, Pac Tin, and Big XII are the only conferences of consequence, and the ACC was merely Florida State, and the Big East was Miami, up until the split. But since FSU and Miami have been down, the ACC no longer deserves any credit. Screw this moron. He's the same guy who stated that WVU stood no chance against either UGA or Oklahoma in the BCS bowl games too. I pay no attention to him, and I'd advise everyone else to do likewise.

Anyone who takes his writings seriously is a moron...

bitcruncher Wrote:

MichaelSavage Wrote:I think Tom Dienhart nails it:

From the Sporting News:

The ACC and Big East don't deserve BCS bids. It's a shame the champions from the Big East and ACC will get BCS bids. Cincinnati? Pitt? West Virginia? I'm sorry, I am not buying the notion any of these Big East squads is the peer of the third-place team in the Big 12 South or even would be the third-best team in either division of the SEC. Ditto for Miami, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia Tech or any other team in a bumbling ACC race that seemingly nobody wants to win. If the college football world was just, BCS bids would be doled out based on the BCS standings - not automatically given to champions from weak conferences.

The Sporting News has always preferred a smaller pot for all the money. They've always thought the SEC, Big Tin, Pac Tin, and Big XII are the only conferences of consequence, and the ACC was merely Florida State, and the Big East was Miami, up until the split. But since FSU and Miami have been down, the ACC no longer deserves any credit. Screw this moron. He's the same guy who stated that WVU stood no chance against either UGA or Oklahoma in the BCS bowl games too. I pay no attention to him, and I'd advise everyone else to do likewise.

Anyone who takes his writings seriously is a moron...

The simple fact that the BE champion has won its BCS game against the past three BS champs the BE played proves that the BE deserves its BCS autobid. The ACC is another matter. We don't need to be tied to the ACC in any way shape or form.

bearcatfan Wrote:

MichaelSavage Wrote:I think Tom Dienhart nails it:

From the Sporting News:

The ACC and Big East don't deserve BCS bids. It's a shame the champions from the Big East and ACC will get BCS bids. Cincinnati? Pitt? West Virginia? I'm sorry, I am not buying the notion any of these Big East squads is the peer of the third-place team in the Big 12 South or even would be the third-best team in either division of the SEC. Ditto for Miami, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia Tech or any other team in a bumbling ACC race that seemingly nobody wants to win. If the college football world was just, BCS bids would be doled out based on the BCS standings - not automatically given to champions from weak conferences.

Wrong!

He does not "nail it". If UC or Pitt wins the Big East they deserve it.

If UC wins their last 3 games they will finish at 11-2 and most likely be ranked at or very near the top 10.

Tell me why they would not be deserving of a BCS bid if that happens.

If the BCS does not like their own system then they should do something about it. UC or Pitt will not make nor will they owe anyone an apology for going to a BCS game.

The ACC & Big East both suck this year. Everybody knows it. Sad state of affairs when teams from the MWC, WAC & MAC are rated higher than the top ranked teams from BCS conferences.

MichaelSavage Wrote:The ACC & Big East both suck this year. Everybody knows it. Sad state of affairs when teams from the MWC, WAC & MAC are rated higher than the top ranked teams from BCS conferences.

Emphasis on "this year", BE fans. The pollsters aren't giving charity votes to three MWC teams and one school each from the MAC & WAC.

The Big East and the ACC will certainly get their champions to BCS bowls by rule, but let's not pretend anyone outside of their fans have any reason to be excited about it. Pitt 'deserved' it's BCS spot in the 2005 Fiesta Bowl because someone had to go, and we know what happened when matched up against a hot Utah team with all of the media buzz. History could repeat itself.

bearcatfan Wrote:

MichaelSavage Wrote:I think Tom Dienhart nails it:

From the Sporting News:

The ACC and Big East don't deserve BCS bids. It's a shame the champions from the Big East and ACC will get BCS bids. Cincinnati? Pitt? West Virginia? I'm sorry, I am not buying the notion any of these Big East squads is the peer of the third-place team in the Big 12 South or even would be the third-best team in either division of the SEC. Ditto for Miami, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia Tech or any other team in a bumbling ACC race that seemingly nobody wants to win. If the college football world was just, BCS bids would be doled out based on the BCS standings - not automatically given to champions from weak conferences.

Wrong!

He does not "nail it". If UC or Pitt wins the Big East they deserve it.

If UC wins their last 3 games they will finish at 11-2 and most likely be ranked at or very near the top 10.

Tell me why they would not be deserving of a BCS bid if that happens.

If the BCS does not like their own system then they should do something about it. UC or Pitt will not make nor will they owe anyone an apology for going to a BCS game.

Furthermore, his notion which compares Pitt, UC, and WVU to the third-place teams in each SEC division is way off base. He’s basically stating that Vandy and Ole Miss are better than those three? I’m not even sure you can say that about Georgia (barely beat an AU team that WVU smoked) or LSU (comeback W vs. Troy).

Not exactly “nailing it” when you have to stretch facts to support it.

georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:I thought we had already established that Rivals is full of morons?

Look who's #2 in the Sagarin Rankings by conference:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbc08.htm

Over 75% of the ACC has had head coach changes in the last 4 years. And it's paying off. There are no more doormats in the conference. It will be interesting to see how GT, UNC, and Miami progress. All three teams are overwhelmingly Fr and So. GT is, to the best of my knowledge, the youngest team that has been ranked this year. Tech plays 20 true Fr or RS Fr. We're on the way back.

The only bad thing is that the divisions are horribly unbalanced. Just about as bad as the Big 12 is not balanced.

Coastal: UNC, GT, Miami, VT, UVA, Dook (don't laugh, they don't suck anymore)
Those first three teams will be a nighmare to play in another year or two. Beamer must be blessed by the Pope given how many games he wins where his team has been completely outplayed. Cutcliffe took Dook from doormat to possibly bowling in one season. They beat Vandy. They were a precious few from beating Northwestern. The lone suck is Groh up at Virginia. He'll be the next coach to go.

Atlantic: WF, NCST, BC, FSU, UMD, Clemson
Fridge can never find a good QB in Maryland. NCST is woeful. WF is coming back down to Earth. FSU isn't even close to how they were in the 90's. Clemson will need time to de-Tommy their program.

Watch out for NC State, as they are getting healthy at the absolute wrong time -- they can actually beat Carolina and Miami, become bowl-eligible and muddy the championship picture even further than they did by beating Wake Forest.

As a quasi Carolina fan, I'm kinda nervous about Saturday's game.

MichaelSavage Wrote:The ACC & Big East both suck this year. Everybody knows it. Sad state of affairs when teams from the MWC, WAC & MAC are rated higher than the top ranked teams from BCS conferences.

All those teams would have at least two losses vs. a BE or ACC schedule.

This is stupid, why can't a conference be competitive and balanced? Isn't that the freakin idea? Why does there have to be a juggernaut? As much as the losses we had this year sicken me, I can't cry on Ramses shoulder! So what if the ACC and Big East are well balanced!

I am starting to think Krocker is on to something by you guys adding Temple back in the mix for football only. Attendance would go up there and the Big East would have a much better conference schedule. ECU has come along way to find a secure home, maybe they shouldn't jeopardize that even though they have a better football program.

Jose_Jalapeno_on_a_Stick Wrote:

MichaelSavage Wrote:The ACC & Big East both suck this year. Everybody knows it. Sad state of affairs when teams from the MWC, WAC & MAC are rated higher than the top ranked teams from BCS conferences.

All those teams would have at least two losses vs. a BE or ACC schedule.

All this talk is stupid. It always has been...