(06-24-2013 01:48 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 01:02 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 12:45 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 12:14 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 11:17 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Don't create a strawman: I've always maintained that the ACC is clearly a P5 conference. I've only maintained that structurally, the ACC is in the weakest position within the P5, and because of the Sugar Bowl deal, it is.

Eventually you'll stop saying this as it's beginning to make zero sense. Obviously, the B1G and SEC want to increase their presence with the ACC. Otherwise, they'd be treated like the G5 conferences. ACC has more matchups with the Big Two than the Pac or Big 12. Doesn't sounds like #5 structurally to me. Sugar Bowl is ONE bowl, and yes it's one of the biggies. However, if the Sugar loses its luster because the Big 12 gets their teeth kicked in every year, how good will it be then?

Couldn't the same be said for any league in any bowl? Of course league have to perform in bowls.

As far as the ACC bowls, I think it is important to recognize every one of them is against a team at least a half rung down the ladder from the ACC rep slot. Orange- #1 ACC versus #2 Big 10/SEC. Capital One (the years it plays) #2 ACC vs #3 SEC. RA- #2 or 3 ACC (2.5 or so avg) vs #3 Big 12. Every other one of the PAC-12, Big 12, SEC and Big 10 play every one of their top two games against teams on the same or lesser "rung", and that is true for the top 3 bowls for the SEC, Big 10 and Big 12. The ACC has a good lineup, but if it was a fantasy bowl "draft", and I had the choice of selecting the different lineups, I'd actually pick the SECs #1, Big 10 #2, Big 12 #3, PAC-12 #4 and ACC #5. They are all fine lineups, but I just couldn't pass up a slot in the Rose or Sugar for the Orange, and the .5 or 1 rung down matchups the ACC has would dissuade me.

Because of the playoffs and access bowls that will never happen. You will always get a misalignment of pairings which is why I don't get too caught up in it. I'm more interested in the match ups. The Chick Fil A bowl is #2 ACC vs #5 SEC right now and it's one of the best bowls out there. Why? Because the #5 SEC team is as good as the #2 SEC team most years. If you look at last year, you don't think LSU was as good as Georgia or Florida?

Yeah, there will be misalignments year to year, but if you are starting out with misalignments, it isn't going to get better in the wash.

And I think you are rationalizing a bit with #5 versus #2 SEC team example. Sure some years that is true, but most years it is not.

That's one of the reasons why I don't worry about it. There's no consistency when it comes to misalignments. I for one don't care if it's SEC (or whatever conference) #2 or #4 as long as it's a good match up.

(06-24-2013 02:15 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 01:48 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 01:02 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 12:45 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 12:14 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  Eventually you'll stop saying this as it's beginning to make zero sense. Obviously, the B1G and SEC want to increase their presence with the ACC. Otherwise, they'd be treated like the G5 conferences. ACC has more matchups with the Big Two than the Pac or Big 12. Doesn't sounds like #5 structurally to me. Sugar Bowl is ONE bowl, and yes it's one of the biggies. However, if the Sugar loses its luster because the Big 12 gets their teeth kicked in every year, how good will it be then?

Couldn't the same be said for any league in any bowl? Of course league have to perform in bowls.

As far as the ACC bowls, I think it is important to recognize every one of them is against a team at least a half rung down the ladder from the ACC rep slot. Orange- #1 ACC versus #2 Big 10/SEC. Capital One (the years it plays) #2 ACC vs #3 SEC. RA- #2 or 3 ACC (2.5 or so avg) vs #3 Big 12. Every other one of the PAC-12, Big 12, SEC and Big 10 play every one of their top two games against teams on the same or lesser "rung", and that is true for the top 3 bowls for the SEC, Big 10 and Big 12. The ACC has a good lineup, but if it was a fantasy bowl "draft", and I had the choice of selecting the different lineups, I'd actually pick the SECs #1, Big 10 #2, Big 12 #3, PAC-12 #4 and ACC #5. They are all fine lineups, but I just couldn't pass up a slot in the Rose or Sugar for the Orange, and the .5 or 1 rung down matchups the ACC has would dissuade me.

Because of the playoffs and access bowls that will never happen. You will always get a misalignment of pairings which is why I don't get too caught up in it. I'm more interested in the match ups. The Chick Fil A bowl is #2 ACC vs #5 SEC right now and it's one of the best bowls out there. Why? Because the #5 SEC team is as good as the #2 SEC team most years. If you look at last year, you don't think LSU was as good as Georgia or Florida?

Yeah, there will be misalignments year to year, but if you are starting out with misalignments, it isn't going to get better in the wash.

And I think you are rationalizing a bit with #5 versus #2 SEC team example. Sure some years that is true, but most years it is not.

That's one of the reasons why I don't worry about it. There's no consistency when it comes to misalignments. I for one don't care if it's SEC (or whatever conference) #2 or #4 as long as it's a good match up.

I get what you are saying, but still all things equal, I don't think it is a stretch to say that the #1 SEC is a better opponent than the #2 SEC team when you are comparing potential matchups. Some years those teams may be back to back in the top 25 rankings and six one, half dozen the other. Other years they could be 10 spots away from each other in the ranks.

(06-24-2013 11:28 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 11:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 11:18 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 11:13 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 10:27 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  I think the CapOne piece puts the ACC ahead of the Big 12 in terms of bowl tie ins.

IIRC, the Orange does not host a playoff game 8 out of the 12 years of this playoff cycle. So the B1G will have a team in the Orange Bowl a minimum of 3 times (that's in their contract) and a maximum of 5 times (because the SEC is also guaranteed a minimum of 3 appearances). So that would mean the ACC would have a team in the Cap One a minimum of 3 times and maximum of 5 times as well, a very nice feather in the ACC cap.

I think this proves that the Cap One loves them some Notre Dame. still a win for the ACC--that sort of thing is why the ACC wanted Notre Dame in their lineup.

How do the Irish have access to the Cap One Bowl?

Assuming that the report holds to be true, the Irish have access to all ACC bowl tie-ins besides the Orange Bowl (which would include the Capital One in this case).

Thanks.

(06-24-2013 12:14 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 11:17 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 10:32 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 10:27 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  I think the CapOne piece puts the ACC ahead of the Big 12 in terms of bowl tie ins.

Probably...but in reality the Big XII did a good job in their own right...no losers in this...it just makes some that want to use the "Power Four"/ACC the "Runt" argument look really dumb...

Don't create a strawman: I've always maintained that the ACC is clearly a P5 conference. I've only maintained that structurally, the ACC is in the weakest position within the P5, and because of the Sugar Bowl deal, it is.

Eventually you'll stop saying this as it's beginning to make zero sense. Obviously, the B1G and SEC want to increase their presence with the ACC. Otherwise, they'd be treated like the G5 conferences. ACC has more matchups with the Big Two than the Pac or Big 12. Doesn't sounds like #5 structurally to me. Sugar Bowl is ONE bowl, and yes it's one of the biggies. However, if the Sugar loses its luster because the Big 12 gets their teeth kicked in every year, how good will it be then?

As long as the Big 12 has the Sugar deal with the SEC, it will make perfect sense.

(06-24-2013 03:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 12:14 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 11:17 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 10:32 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 10:27 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  I think the CapOne piece puts the ACC ahead of the Big 12 in terms of bowl tie ins.

Probably...but in reality the Big XII did a good job in their own right...no losers in this...it just makes some that want to use the "Power Four"/ACC the "Runt" argument look really dumb...

Don't create a strawman: I've always maintained that the ACC is clearly a P5 conference. I've only maintained that structurally, the ACC is in the weakest position within the P5, and because of the Sugar Bowl deal, it is.

Eventually you'll stop saying this as it's beginning to make zero sense. Obviously, the B1G and SEC want to increase their presence with the ACC. Otherwise, they'd be treated like the G5 conferences. ACC has more matchups with the Big Two than the Pac or Big 12. Doesn't sounds like #5 structurally to me. Sugar Bowl is ONE bowl, and yes it's one of the biggies. However, if the Sugar loses its luster because the Big 12 gets their teeth kicked in every year, how good will it be then?

As long as the Big 12 has the Sugar deal with the SEC, it will make perfect sense.

We should institute a drug testing policy on this board. Obviously, you've been sampling something.

ACC will have 3 to 4 bowls each year with both the SEC and B1G. That maybe even more important than the SB. Sugar Bowl is just one game. I don't hear the Pac 12 folks touting the Rose as validation for their existence. Most Big 12 folks aren't doing that either. Just you and you don't have a dog in the fight.

(06-24-2013 02:51 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 02:15 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 01:48 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 01:02 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 12:45 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Couldn't the same be said for any league in any bowl? Of course league have to perform in bowls.

As far as the ACC bowls, I think it is important to recognize every one of them is against a team at least a half rung down the ladder from the ACC rep slot. Orange- #1 ACC versus #2 Big 10/SEC. Capital One (the years it plays) #2 ACC vs #3 SEC. RA- #2 or 3 ACC (2.5 or so avg) vs #3 Big 12. Every other one of the PAC-12, Big 12, SEC and Big 10 play every one of their top two games against teams on the same or lesser "rung", and that is true for the top 3 bowls for the SEC, Big 10 and Big 12. The ACC has a good lineup, but if it was a fantasy bowl "draft", and I had the choice of selecting the different lineups, I'd actually pick the SECs #1, Big 10 #2, Big 12 #3, PAC-12 #4 and ACC #5. They are all fine lineups, but I just couldn't pass up a slot in the Rose or Sugar for the Orange, and the .5 or 1 rung down matchups the ACC has would dissuade me.

Because of the playoffs and access bowls that will never happen. You will always get a misalignment of pairings which is why I don't get too caught up in it. I'm more interested in the match ups. The Chick Fil A bowl is #2 ACC vs #5 SEC right now and it's one of the best bowls out there. Why? Because the #5 SEC team is as good as the #2 SEC team most years. If you look at last year, you don't think LSU was as good as Georgia or Florida?

Yeah, there will be misalignments year to year, but if you are starting out with misalignments, it isn't going to get better in the wash.

And I think you are rationalizing a bit with #5 versus #2 SEC team example. Sure some years that is true, but most years it is not.

That's one of the reasons why I don't worry about it. There's no consistency when it comes to misalignments. I for one don't care if it's SEC (or whatever conference) #2 or #4 as long as it's a good match up.

I get what you are saying, but still all things equal, I don't think it is a stretch to say that the #1 SEC is a better opponent than the #2 SEC team when you are comparing potential matchups. Some years those teams may be back to back in the top 25 rankings and six one, half dozen the other. Other years they could be 10 spots away from each other in the ranks.

But that's the thing, all things aren't equal. With large conferences and unbalanced schedules, it's much harder today to differentiate between teams in the conference. Was FSU that much better than Clemson last year? Wisconsin really 30+ points better than Nebraska? How many close games did we see ND play and yet they were undefeated and playing for the national title, only to get crushed by Bama who almost lost to Georgia.

For argument sake, let's say FSU gets into the OB and their opponent could either be Georgia (SEC #3), Nebraska (B1G #3), or Notre Dame. The following year it could be Clemson vs Texas A&M, Michigan, or ND. I don't think anyone will complain about those match ups regardless of where the teams fall in the order.

(06-24-2013 04:41 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 02:51 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 02:15 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 01:48 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 01:02 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  Because of the playoffs and access bowls that will never happen. You will always get a misalignment of pairings which is why I don't get too caught up in it. I'm more interested in the match ups. The Chick Fil A bowl is #2 ACC vs #5 SEC right now and it's one of the best bowls out there. Why? Because the #5 SEC team is as good as the #2 SEC team most years. If you look at last year, you don't think LSU was as good as Georgia or Florida?

Yeah, there will be misalignments year to year, but if you are starting out with misalignments, it isn't going to get better in the wash.

And I think you are rationalizing a bit with #5 versus #2 SEC team example. Sure some years that is true, but most years it is not.

That's one of the reasons why I don't worry about it. There's no consistency when it comes to misalignments. I for one don't care if it's SEC (or whatever conference) #2 or #4 as long as it's a good match up.

I get what you are saying, but still all things equal, I don't think it is a stretch to say that the #1 SEC is a better opponent than the #2 SEC team when you are comparing potential matchups. Some years those teams may be back to back in the top 25 rankings and six one, half dozen the other. Other years they could be 10 spots away from each other in the ranks.

But that's the thing, all things aren't equal. With large conferences and unbalanced schedules, it's much harder today to differentiate between teams in the conference. Was FSU that much better than Clemson last year? Wisconsin really 30+ points better than Nebraska? How many close games did we see ND play and yet they were undefeated and playing for the national title, only to get crushed by Bama who almost lost to Georgia.

For argument sake, let's say FSU gets into the OB and their opponent could either be Georgia (SEC #3), Nebraska (B1G #3), or Notre Dame. The following year it could be Clemson vs Texas A&M, Michigan, or ND. I don't think anyone will complain about those match ups regardless of where the teams fall in the order.

But there are always gaps in a top to bottom list of teams from a conference. Sometimes there are two clear leaders, then a big gap to #3. Sometimes between 1 and 2; sometimes 4 and 5. While it may not be a big deal some years, in other years a lower tie-in means the opponent you face a significantly lesser opponent).

Using the Big 12 #3/4 in the Russel athletic bowl as a barometer, that team could be a ranked team that was in the mix for the B-12 championship like 2011 (9-3 Oklahoma or Baylor). Or it could be the best of a bunch of 7-5 teams like it was last year (prob would have been unranked 7-5 OSU). One rung up would have made a big difference in the quality of the opponent.

(06-24-2013 04:33 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 03:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 12:14 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 11:17 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 10:32 AM)Maize Wrote:  Probably...but in reality the Big XII did a good job in their own right...no losers in this...it just makes some that want to use the "Power Four"/ACC the "Runt" argument look really dumb...

Don't create a strawman: I've always maintained that the ACC is clearly a P5 conference. I've only maintained that structurally, the ACC is in the weakest position within the P5, and because of the Sugar Bowl deal, it is.

Eventually you'll stop saying this as it's beginning to make zero sense. Obviously, the B1G and SEC want to increase their presence with the ACC. Otherwise, they'd be treated like the G5 conferences. ACC has more matchups with the Big Two than the Pac or Big 12. Doesn't sounds like #5 structurally to me. Sugar Bowl is ONE bowl, and yes it's one of the biggies. However, if the Sugar loses its luster because the Big 12 gets their teeth kicked in every year, how good will it be then?

As long as the Big 12 has the Sugar deal with the SEC, it will make perfect sense.

We should institute a drug testing policy on this board. Obviously, you've been sampling something.

ACC will have 3 to 4 bowls each year with both the SEC and B1G. That maybe even more important than the SB. Sugar Bowl is just one game. I don't hear the Pac 12 folks touting the Rose as validation for their existence. Most Big 12 folks aren't doing that either. Just you and you don't have a dog in the fight.

dude, this isn't complicated: all of the P5 will be playing other P5 in their bowl games so the ACC playing SEc and B1G is not significant. What is significant is that the Big 12 has a better bowl for its champ than does the ACC. The ACC is the odd P5 out in that regard. That is just the way it is.

(06-24-2013 05:08 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 04:41 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 02:51 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 02:15 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 01:48 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Yeah, there will be misalignments year to year, but if you are starting out with misalignments, it isn't going to get better in the wash.

And I think you are rationalizing a bit with #5 versus #2 SEC team example. Sure some years that is true, but most years it is not.

That's one of the reasons why I don't worry about it. There's no consistency when it comes to misalignments. I for one don't care if it's SEC (or whatever conference) #2 or #4 as long as it's a good match up.

I get what you are saying, but still all things equal, I don't think it is a stretch to say that the #1 SEC is a better opponent than the #2 SEC team when you are comparing potential matchups. Some years those teams may be back to back in the top 25 rankings and six one, half dozen the other. Other years they could be 10 spots away from each other in the ranks.

But that's the thing, all things aren't equal. With large conferences and unbalanced schedules, it's much harder today to differentiate between teams in the conference. Was FSU that much better than Clemson last year? Wisconsin really 30+ points better than Nebraska? How many close games did we see ND play and yet they were undefeated and playing for the national title, only to get crushed by Bama who almost lost to Georgia.

For argument sake, let's say FSU gets into the OB and their opponent could either be Georgia (SEC #3), Nebraska (B1G #3), or Notre Dame. The following year it could be Clemson vs Texas A&M, Michigan, or ND. I don't think anyone will complain about those match ups regardless of where the teams fall in the order.

But there are always gaps in a top to bottom list of teams from a conference. Sometimes there are two clear leaders, then a big gap to #3. Sometimes between 1 and 2; sometimes 4 and 5. While it may not be a big deal some years, in other years a lower tie-in means the opponent you face a significantly lesser opponent).

Using the Big 12 #3/4 in the Russel athletic bowl as a barometer, that team could be a ranked team that was in the mix for the B-12 championship like 2011 (9-3 Oklahoma or Baylor). Or it could be the best of a bunch of 7-5 teams like it was last year (prob would have been unranked 7-5 OSU). One rung up would have made a big difference in the quality of the opponent.

True. Some years that will happen...just like Wisconsin ended up in the Rose last year at 7-5. I expect the Big 12's 2-4 teams to be roughly interchangeable. If that's not the case then the Big 12 will have a bigger problem.

(06-24-2013 05:10 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 04:33 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 03:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 12:14 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 11:17 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Don't create a strawman: I've always maintained that the ACC is clearly a P5 conference. I've only maintained that structurally, the ACC is in the weakest position within the P5, and because of the Sugar Bowl deal, it is.

Eventually you'll stop saying this as it's beginning to make zero sense. Obviously, the B1G and SEC want to increase their presence with the ACC. Otherwise, they'd be treated like the G5 conferences. ACC has more matchups with the Big Two than the Pac or Big 12. Doesn't sounds like #5 structurally to me. Sugar Bowl is ONE bowl, and yes it's one of the biggies. However, if the Sugar loses its luster because the Big 12 gets their teeth kicked in every year, how good will it be then?

As long as the Big 12 has the Sugar deal with the SEC, it will make perfect sense.

We should institute a drug testing policy on this board. Obviously, you've been sampling something.

ACC will have 3 to 4 bowls each year with both the SEC and B1G. That maybe even more important than the SB. Sugar Bowl is just one game. I don't hear the Pac 12 folks touting the Rose as validation for their existence. Most Big 12 folks aren't doing that either. Just you and you don't have a dog in the fight.

dude, this isn't complicated: all of the P5 will be playing other P5 in their bowl games so the ACC playing SEc and B1G is not significant. What is significant is that the Big 12 has a better bowl for its champ than does the ACC. The ACC is the odd P5 out in that regard. That is just the way it is.

ACC champ will be in the playoff so it's moot

A 12-1 ACC Champion will be hard to keep out of the CFP...I would not be all surprised that a 12-1 FSU goes to the CFP & a 10-2 Virginia Tech goes to the Orange Bowl...the way FSU is recruiting it would not surprise me @ all.

(06-24-2013 06:41 PM)Maize Wrote:  A 12-1 ACC Champion will be hard to keep out of the CFP...I would not be all surprised that a 12-1 FSU goes to the CFP & a 10-2 Virginia Tech goes to the Orange Bowl...the way FSU is recruiting it would not surprise me @ all.

FSU's recruiting has never really fallen off and yet they've been mediocre for over a decade now. Coaching.

(06-24-2013 07:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 06:41 PM)Maize Wrote:  A 12-1 ACC Champion will be hard to keep out of the CFP...I would not be all surprised that a 12-1 FSU goes to the CFP & a 10-2 Virginia Tech goes to the Orange Bowl...the way FSU is recruiting it would not surprise me @ all.

FSU's recruiting has never really fallen off and yet they've been mediocre for over a decade now. Coaching.

This is true. Bowden held on way too long. Jimbo is going into his 4th year after finishing 12-2 and ACC/OB champs. I see no reason that FSU will now win double digit games every year.

(06-24-2013 07:58 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 07:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 06:41 PM)Maize Wrote:  A 12-1 ACC Champion will be hard to keep out of the CFP...I would not be all surprised that a 12-1 FSU goes to the CFP & a 10-2 Virginia Tech goes to the Orange Bowl...the way FSU is recruiting it would not surprise me @ all.

FSU's recruiting has never really fallen off and yet they've been mediocre for over a decade now. Coaching.

This is true. Bowden held on way too long. Jimbo is going into his 4th year after finishing 12-2 and ACC/OB champs. I see no reason that FSU will now win double digit games every year.

No, the recruiting fell off the last years under Bowden...the trend lines for them & Clemson are upward...

(06-24-2013 08:57 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 07:58 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 07:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 06:41 PM)Maize Wrote:  A 12-1 ACC Champion will be hard to keep out of the CFP...I would not be all surprised that a 12-1 FSU goes to the CFP & a 10-2 Virginia Tech goes to the Orange Bowl...the way FSU is recruiting it would not surprise me @ all.

FSU's recruiting has never really fallen off and yet they've been mediocre for over a decade now. Coaching.

This is true. Bowden held on way too long. Jimbo is going into his 4th year after finishing 12-2 and ACC/OB champs. I see no reason that FSU will now win double digit games every year.

No, the recruiting fell off the last years under Bowden...the trend lines for them & Clemson are upward...

Using ESPN's rankings, I saw only one class since 2006 that didn't finish in the top 15 (2007)

True...but in 2011 they finished 1st, 2012 they finished 2nd and last year it was 9th...sitting @ 5th currently...trend line is higher under Fisher hen under Bowden.

(06-24-2013 09:46 PM)Maize Wrote:  True...but in 2011 they finished 1st, 2012 they finished 2nd and last year it was 9th...sitting @ 5th currently...trend line is higher under Fisher hen under Bowden.

Even with that, FSU had no business going off the deep end the way they did. They still should have dominated.

(06-24-2013 09:53 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 09:46 PM)Maize Wrote:  True...but in 2011 they finished 1st, 2012 they finished 2nd and last year it was 9th...sitting @ 5th currently...trend line is higher under Fisher hen under Bowden.

Even with that, FSU had no business going off the deep end the way they did. They still should have dominated.

True...but with that 12 win season it appears they are fixing that...

(06-24-2013 09:54 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 09:53 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 09:46 PM)Maize Wrote:  True...but in 2011 they finished 1st, 2012 they finished 2nd and last year it was 9th...sitting @ 5th currently...trend line is higher under Fisher hen under Bowden.

Even with that, FSU had no business going off the deep end the way they did. They still should have dominated.

True...but with that 12 win season it appears they are fixing that...

We'll see. I've always been a fan of FSU but I'm still not sold on Jimbo. Hopefully he'll prove me wrong.

(06-24-2013 05:10 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 04:33 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 03:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 12:14 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 11:17 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Don't create a strawman: I've always maintained that the ACC is clearly a P5 conference. I've only maintained that structurally, the ACC is in the weakest position within the P5, and because of the Sugar Bowl deal, it is.

Eventually you'll stop saying this as it's beginning to make zero sense. Obviously, the B1G and SEC want to increase their presence with the ACC. Otherwise, they'd be treated like the G5 conferences. ACC has more matchups with the Big Two than the Pac or Big 12. Doesn't sounds like #5 structurally to me. Sugar Bowl is ONE bowl, and yes it's one of the biggies. However, if the Sugar loses its luster because the Big 12 gets their teeth kicked in every year, how good will it be then?

As long as the Big 12 has the Sugar deal with the SEC, it will make perfect sense.

We should institute a drug testing policy on this board. Obviously, you've been sampling something.

ACC will have 3 to 4 bowls each year with both the SEC and B1G. That maybe even more important than the SB. Sugar Bowl is just one game. I don't hear the Pac 12 folks touting the Rose as validation for their existence. Most Big 12 folks aren't doing that either. Just you and you don't have a dog in the fight.

dude, this isn't complicated: all of the P5 will be playing other P5 in their bowl games so the ACC playing SEc and B1G is not significant. What is significant is that the Big 12 has a better bowl for its champ than does the ACC. The ACC is the odd P5 out in that regard. That is just the way it is.

A point of reference...if the CFP was in effect last year the Orange Bowl would have been Florida State vs. #8 LSU...the Sugar Bowl Kansas State vs. #7 Georgia...just a hunch the Orange Bowl would have higher viewership...