(11-17-2015 11:26 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-17-2015 11:16 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  I will take comfort in the fact we've beaten the Jackets two years in a row.

And one of the two years the victory was even meritorious. Good for you. Blind squirrel finding the occasional nut and all that.

Two years in a row is no longer occasional. Hopefully we can keep it going.

Georgia Tech has beaten U(sic)GA 5 times since 1998. UNC has beaten GT 3 times since 1998. One of those wins you've since vacated.

I don't think anybody would say Georgia Tech is beating UGAg anything more than very occasionally. You're doing almost twice as bad as that low bar.

(11-17-2015 01:19 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Georgia Tech has beaten U(sic)GA 5 times since 1998. UNC has beaten GT 3 times since 1998. One of those wins you've since vacated.

I don't think anybody would say Georgia Tech is beating UGAg anything more than very occasionally. You're doing almost twice as bad as that low bar.

So you went all the way back to 1998. What if we win the next two years which would be four in a row? It's only four years, but is it still occasionally??

(11-17-2015 02:05 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  So you went all the way back to 1998. What if we win the next two years which would be four in a row? It's only four years, but is it still occasionally??

If ifs and butts were candy and nuts.....

(11-17-2015 02:09 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-17-2015 02:05 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  So you went all the way back to 1998. What if we win the next two years which would be four in a row? It's only four years, but is it still occasionally??

If you go back to the 50's Dodd was whoopin' those mutts!

You're talking almost a full generation ago. Giving you the four minus the vacated one means you're still doing just as poorly as GT is against U(sic)GA.

You're not answering my question. When is it no longer occasionally?

(11-17-2015 02:10 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-17-2015 02:09 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-17-2015 02:05 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  So you went all the way back to 1998. What if we win the next two years which would be four in a row? It's only four years, but is it still occasionally??

If ifs and butts were candy and nuts....

You're not answering my question. When is it no longer occasionally?

A minimum of 1 out of 3 established over a decade. With consistency. You can't win 1, lose 8 straight, then win 2.

(11-17-2015 10:12 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-17-2015 09:52 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(11-17-2015 08:24 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 11:52 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Life is much easier when you don't play Clemson or FSU. What's really easier is the next weekend. Two perennial top 15 teams in your division is going to cost you those two games most of the time and one or two games the week after those games.

Going back to my earlier post. Doeren is 5-17 in the ACC. Only 6 of those games were against FSU/Clemson. That means he's still 5-11 against everyone else.

GT was able to beat Clemson last year and FSU this year. So it can be done.

In addition to having to play Clem/FSU every year, you also get the benefit of playing Syracuse, BC, and Wake every year. There aren't three teams like that in the Coastal. They are 0-5 in their cross division matchups (Wake still has to play Duke). The worst team in the Coastal this year, GT, would most likely beat all three of them. State is 1-4 in cross division matchups under Doeren (State plays UNC next week). So I don't understand how you can even say life is easier or State would be able to manage that side better.

If GT is worse than UVA, then SU beats GT (to the extent that football is transitive). We lost at UVA in overtime after a UVA comeback. Aside from actually winning, it's harder to get closer to a win that that. We also played Pitt (the other Coastal game on our schedule) really, really close (I want to say Pitt won with under 10 seconds in the game), so it's not like we were hopelessly outgunned.

I would also argue that BC has been markedly better than UNC, Pitt, Miami, Duke, and UVA over the last decade. Sure, they've been up and down, but which one of those schools hasn't?

You're going too far back in time. A decade ago neither Clemson or FSU were national title contenders. We're really talking about the last 3 years. As for Syracuse beating GT, the Cuse haven't won a cross division game since they came into the ACC.

So you want to cherry pick a 3 year window where deviations above or below that timeframe blow up your point?

(11-17-2015 03:47 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(11-17-2015 10:12 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-17-2015 09:52 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(11-17-2015 08:24 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 11:52 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Life is much easier when you don't play Clemson or FSU. What's really easier is the next weekend. Two perennial top 15 teams in your division is going to cost you those two games most of the time and one or two games the week after those games.

Going back to my earlier post. Doeren is 5-17 in the ACC. Only 6 of those games were against FSU/Clemson. That means he's still 5-11 against everyone else.

GT was able to beat Clemson last year and FSU this year. So it can be done.

In addition to having to play Clem/FSU every year, you also get the benefit of playing Syracuse, BC, and Wake every year. There aren't three teams like that in the Coastal. They are 0-5 in their cross division matchups (Wake still has to play Duke). The worst team in the Coastal this year, GT, would most likely beat all three of them. State is 1-4 in cross division matchups under Doeren (State plays UNC next week). So I don't understand how you can even say life is easier or State would be able to manage that side better.

If GT is worse than UVA, then SU beats GT (to the extent that football is transitive). We lost at UVA in overtime after a UVA comeback. Aside from actually winning, it's harder to get closer to a win that that. We also played Pitt (the other Coastal game on our schedule) really, really close (I want to say Pitt won with under 10 seconds in the game), so it's not like we were hopelessly outgunned.

I would also argue that BC has been markedly better than UNC, Pitt, Miami, Duke, and UVA over the last decade. Sure, they've been up and down, but which one of those schools hasn't?

You're going too far back in time. A decade ago neither Clemson or FSU were national title contenders. We're really talking about the last 3 years. As for Syracuse beating GT, the Cuse haven't won a cross division game since they came into the ACC.

So you want to cherry pick a 3 year window where deviations above or below that timeframe blow up your point?

No. Too much has changed in the last 10 years. Pitt and Syracuse weren't even in the ACC. I picked a timeframe that's easier to compare.

Here's a comparison of UNC's versus NC State's road in the Atlantic versus the Coastal looking at league games against teams that were ranked at year's end with 2015 to date:

NC State UNC
2015 1/12/16 0 (1) if they win out in the coastal

2014 5/8/15/24 8

2013 1/8/23 23

2012 10/11 0

2011 22/23 21/22

2010 17/16/23 16/24

2009 10/24 10/13/19

2008 21 15/22

2007 10/21 9
2006 18/20 18/19


For the decade NC State has played 2.4 conference games a year against final ranked top 25 teams.
For the decade UNC has played just 1.4 such games a year.

For the decade we have faced 11 top 15 games or 1.1 a year.
UNC has faced just 6 such games.

In the top 10 it's NC State playing 8 such games and UNC only 3.

There was some parity until 2011, but in the last 4 years NC State has averaged 3 such games, while UNC has averaged less than one. To measure the schedule strength you have to look at the top teams you play not the scrubs. Team A might average play schools with an average of 50 by playing 12 games against schools ranked 45-55. Team B might have the same mathematical average by playing 4 plus 80 teams, and 4 sub 20 teams.

Team A has a much better chance of winning in all it's games, while team B is behind the 8 Ball for half it's schedule despite being a prohibitive favorite in the other half.

Now if you look at who NC State had to play in the Atlantic and our crossovers the past three years we have played 10 top 25 in conference games and will have played 7 top 15. In 2013 we didn't have an P-5 quarterback. In 2014 we lost to the four top 25 ranked ACC opponents we played and a BC team that was redshirt senior laden. We choked the Louisville game and to a lesser extent the VT game. Considering that DD took over a team that had the 12/13/14 ranked talent (depending on whose ranking you use) what would you expect. UNC continued to have top 35 recruiting class despite the cheating scandal, probation, and new looming sanctions.

For any team recruiting at the national average of 50 or better, the Coastal is much easier division to win and a much easier division in which to dominate for a year or two. Teams in the Coastal don't start the year with 2 nearly guaranteed conference losses.

Pack we get it. You don't want to have to play Clemson and FSU every year. The problem is you guys are the only ones complaining about it. I don't hear Cuse complaining, or the Ville, or BC, or even Wake. They tend to see it as more of a challenge. Here is your problem...that's only two games. There are SIX other conference games a year. What are you doing with those? This year you lost at home to Louisville and at Va Tech so far... neither were ranked.

Last year you lost to BC, Louisville, and GT. GT was the only ranked one of the bunch. You make it sound like you guys would go 6-2 against the rest of the ACC schedule every year when you haven't even come close.

As for the talent you were left with, Tom O'Brien never had an 0-fer season. His last three State teams went 5-3, 4-4, 4-4 in conference. With that talent you are complaining about, he beat FSU twice and Clemson once in his last three years. For some reason now, Doeren can't get it done and you make it sound impossible. Tom O'Brien was able to do it and you fired him.

(11-17-2015 10:12 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  Pack we get it. You don't want to have to play Clemson and FSU every year. The problem is you guys are the only ones complaining about it. I don't hear Cuse complaining, or the Ville, or BC, or even Wake. They tend to see it as more of a challenge. Here is your problem...that's only two games. There are SIX other conference games a year. What are you doing with those? This year you lost at home to Louisville and at Va Tech so far... neither were ranked.

Last year you lost to BC, Louisville, and GT. GT was the only ranked one of the bunch. You make it sound like you guys would go 6-2 against the rest of the ACC schedule every year when you haven't even come close.

As for the talent you were left with, Tom O'Brien never had an 0-fer season. His last three State teams went 5-3, 4-4, 4-4 in conference. With that talent you are complaining about, he beat FSU twice and Clemson once in his last three years. For some reason now, Doeren can't get it done and you make it sound impossible. Tom O'Brien was able to do it and you fired him.

Louisville was ranked 5 of the 7 weeks the playoff committee issued rankings, including their final 3 weeks. Your overall point still stands of course.

(11-18-2015 08:53 AM)CollegeCard Wrote:  

(11-17-2015 10:12 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  Pack we get it. You don't want to have to play Clemson and FSU every year. The problem is you guys are the only ones complaining about it. I don't hear Cuse complaining, or the Ville, or BC, or even Wake. They tend to see it as more of a challenge. Here is your problem...that's only two games. There are SIX other conference games a year. What are you doing with those? This year you lost at home to Louisville and at Va Tech so far... neither were ranked.

Last year you lost to BC, Louisville, and GT. GT was the only ranked one of the bunch. You make it sound like you guys would go 6-2 against the rest of the ACC schedule every year when you haven't even come close.

As for the talent you were left with, Tom O'Brien never had an 0-fer season. His last three State teams went 5-3, 4-4, 4-4 in conference. With that talent you are complaining about, he beat FSU twice and Clemson once in his last three years. For some reason now, Doeren can't get it done and you make it sound impossible. Tom O'Brien was able to do it and you fired him.

Louisville was ranked 5 of the 7 weeks the playoff committee issued rankings, including their final 3 weeks. Your overall point still stands of course.

At the time they played Louisville was not ranked. State got them right before the FSU game. I believe beating State got them into the rankings.

http://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2015/1...-race.html

If UNC wins out, should they jump Notre Dame? They'd have 5 common opponents and UNC would have the better record against them.

(11-17-2015 10:12 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  Pack we get it. You don't want to have to play Clemson and FSU every year. The problem is you guys are the only ones complaining about it. I don't hear Cuse complaining, or the Ville, or BC, or even Wake. They tend to see it as more of a challenge. Here is your problem...that's only two games. There are SIX other conference games a year. What are you doing with those? This year you lost at home to Louisville and at Va Tech so far... neither were ranked.

Last year you lost to BC, Louisville, and GT. GT was the only ranked one of the bunch. You make it sound like you guys would go 6-2 against the rest of the ACC schedule every year when you haven't even come close.

As for the talent you were left with, Tom O'Brien never had an 0-fer season. His last three State teams went 5-3, 4-4, 4-4 in conference. With that talent you are complaining about, he beat FSU twice and Clemson once in his last three years. For some reason now, Doeren can't get it done and you make it sound impossible. Tom O'Brien was able to do it and you fired him.

No, TOB's recruitment his last three years dropped into the high 50's all the way down to the 70's. He could hide it as long as he had Glennon at QB. The reason "he could do it" is that he had two NFL QB's for 5 of his 7 seasons. And as far as doing it goes - DD put an ass-whippin' on UNC last year didn't he?

Now I supposed UNC is due to win this year and on paper should win but the fact that you play in a division that is easier to win is fact and that you have had a much easier schedule the last half decade is also fact.

Good analysis Mark. I just turned on ESPN and their discussion was so close you'd think they had just read your blog. I agree with you that ND would still be in on name and current ranking difference, even though a deeper look would be warranted.

Trevor Matich was making the UNC argument, claiming a win over Clemson and a 12-1 record should get them in the playoff. McShay asked what if you have a 12-1 UNC, 11-1 ND, and 11-1 OU for the final spot. Matich hung with his UNC choice and the host made the point of UNC having the better head to head comparison over ND on common opponents.

If you ask me and I look at McShay's 3 team scenario above, I think I'd take 11-1 OU for the final spot if only one spot was available.

(11-18-2015 02:24 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(11-17-2015 10:12 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  Pack we get it. You don't want to have to play Clemson and FSU every year. The problem is you guys are the only ones complaining about it. I don't hear Cuse complaining, or the Ville, or BC, or even Wake. They tend to see it as more of a challenge. Here is your problem...that's only two games. There are SIX other conference games a year. What are you doing with those? This year you lost at home to Louisville and at Va Tech so far... neither were ranked.

Last year you lost to BC, Louisville, and GT. GT was the only ranked one of the bunch. You make it sound like you guys would go 6-2 against the rest of the ACC schedule every year when you haven't even come close.

As for the talent you were left with, Tom O'Brien never had an 0-fer season. His last three State teams went 5-3, 4-4, 4-4 in conference. With that talent you are complaining about, he beat FSU twice and Clemson once in his last three years. For some reason now, Doeren can't get it done and you make it sound impossible. Tom O'Brien was able to do it and you fired him.

No, TOB's recruitment his last three years dropped into the high 50's all the way down to the 70's. He could hide it as long as he had Glennon at QB. The reason "he could do it" is that he had two NFL QB's for 5 of his 7 seasons. And as far as doing it goes - DD put an ass-whippin' on UNC last year didn't he?

Now I supposed UNC is due to win this year and on paper should win but the fact that you play in a division that is easier to win is fact and that you have had a much easier schedule the last half decade is also fact.

Didn't O'Brien recruit Glennon? So the recruiting couldn't have been that bad.

Yes DD put it on us last year and that's my point. You can beat us like a drum then lose to BC. Play like world beaters against FSU and Clemson, then can't beat Virginia Tech or Louisville.

(11-18-2015 03:08 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-18-2015 02:24 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(11-17-2015 10:12 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  Pack we get it. You don't want to have to play Clemson and FSU every year. The problem is you guys are the only ones complaining about it. I don't hear Cuse complaining, or the Ville, or BC, or even Wake. They tend to see it as more of a challenge. Here is your problem...that's only two games. There are SIX other conference games a year. What are you doing with those? This year you lost at home to Louisville and at Va Tech so far... neither were ranked.

Last year you lost to BC, Louisville, and GT. GT was the only ranked one of the bunch. You make it sound like you guys would go 6-2 against the rest of the ACC schedule every year when you haven't even come close.

As for the talent you were left with, Tom O'Brien never had an 0-fer season. His last three State teams went 5-3, 4-4, 4-4 in conference. With that talent you are complaining about, he beat FSU twice and Clemson once in his last three years. For some reason now, Doeren can't get it done and you make it sound impossible. Tom O'Brien was able to do it and you fired him.

No, TOB's recruitment his last three years dropped into the high 50's all the way down to the 70's. He could hide it as long as he had Glennon at QB. The reason "he could do it" is that he had two NFL QB's for 5 of his 7 seasons. And as far as doing it goes - DD put an ass-whippin' on UNC last year didn't he?

Now I supposed UNC is due to win this year and on paper should win but the fact that you play in a division that is easier to win is fact and that you have had a much easier schedule the last half decade is also fact.

Didn't O'Brien recruit Glennon? So the recruiting couldn't have been that bad.

Yes DD put it on us last year and that's my point. You can beat us like a drum then lose to BC. Play like world beaters against FSU and Clemson, then can't beat Virginia Tech or Louisville.

It was damn bad the last three years. Glennon was the last player TOB "Got" and the controversy between allowing Wilson to play his fourth season versus giving the QB spot is what finally dried up TOB's recruiting.

TOB was and OLD OLD marine. That's why we had no QB in 2013. If Brissett could have played in 2013, we would have won 2-4 ACC games.

But the real disparity is the defensive secondary, offensive line, and receivers. We don't have a single player that would start at FSU or Clemson - not a single one.

We have 3-4 that might start at UNC. As bad as a head cased MW was last year, he or Chizik or the Hat has turned him around. Without a P-5 level QB, no team is going to be able to compete at the P-5 level on just a running back and the defensive line.

Jamin -

TOB last three years of recruiting were ranked 48/75/61
UNC at the same time and despite the scandal was 33/21/41

You averaged 32nd, TOB averaged 61st. That means 29 schools between the two's recruiting (yes some leave, some develop, some do not)

In DD first year his recruiting was 54, then 26
At the same time UNC was 29 and 31

DD has brought our average to 40, while you have been 30 for the last two years.

The inability to recruit is what cost TOB his job, his age, his manner, and how he handled Russell Wilson all played a part. None of that means that Doeren is the next Lou Holtz or Dick Sheridan for NC State. But TOB left the cupboard damn bare.

I just have a hard time believing that the cupboard was so bare that you no longer were competitive in conference. TOB's troops sucked so bad that he beat FSU twice, Clemson, UNC twice in his last three years. His 2010 team came within one game of winning the Atlantic.

Doesn't matter now. DD is here. Hopefully you guys will not screw it up and lose to Cuse this weekend. We need as many good wins on our resume as possible.