I think it would be a bad move for Smart to jump to the South Carolina job. With so many high profile jobs either open or becoming open in the next few weeks, there is no need for him to rush. If Georgia, Florida State and LSU lose or fire their head coach, their hires would create still more openings. The Smart move would be to wait.

(11-27-2015 09:40 AM)JRsec Wrote:  You guys been keeping up with the sports talk on radio? If not you might be surprised. I didn't make up any of the current conjecture that I posted. Mullen has been mentioned in some circles for V.T. He's not been talked in the South to be interested in Maryland. The first name on Georgia's list was Jimbo Fisher. If Richt had lost to Auburn, which certainly could have happened as neither team played well in that game, then there would be no over his leaving. A loss to Georgia Tech could bring the same outcome. But, if he beats Tech then he might stay, might. We'll see.

As for L.S.U. I'll say this, if they didn't already have an ace lined up for head coach, then I doubt they would have been talking about Les being gone so publicly. Smoke that over.

You're probably right about LSU. If Jimbo abandons FSU then you think Mullen would be in line for that job? I've heard a little talk of that.

(11-27-2015 08:40 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(11-27-2015 09:40 AM)JRsec Wrote:  You guys been keeping up with the sports talk on radio? If not you might be surprised. I didn't make up any of the current conjecture that I posted. Mullen has been mentioned in some circles for V.T. He's not been talked in the South to be interested in Maryland. The first name on Georgia's list was Jimbo Fisher. If Richt had lost to Auburn, which certainly could have happened as neither team played well in that game, then there would be no over his leaving. A loss to Georgia Tech could bring the same outcome. But, if he beats Tech then he might stay, might. We'll see.

As for L.S.U. I'll say this, if they didn't already have an ace lined up for head coach, then I doubt they would have been talking about Les being gone so publicly. Smoke that over.

You're probably right about LSU. If Jimbo abandons FSU then you think Mullen would be in line for that job? I've heard a little talk of that.

So LSU decided to keep Miles...only because Jimbo said no.

(11-29-2015 09:48 AM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(11-27-2015 08:40 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(11-27-2015 09:40 AM)JRsec Wrote:  You guys been keeping up with the sports talk on radio? If not you might be surprised. I didn't make up any of the current conjecture that I posted. Mullen has been mentioned in some circles for V.T. He's not been talked in the South to be interested in Maryland. The first name on Georgia's list was Jimbo Fisher. If Richt had lost to Auburn, which certainly could have happened as neither team played well in that game, then there would be no over his leaving. A loss to Georgia Tech could bring the same outcome. But, if he beats Tech then he might stay, might. We'll see.

As for L.S.U. I'll say this, if they didn't already have an ace lined up for head coach, then I doubt they would have been talking about Les being gone so publicly. Smoke that over.

You're probably right about LSU. If Jimbo abandons FSU then you think Mullen would be in line for that job? I've heard a little talk of that.

So LSU decided to keep Miles...only because Jimbo said no.

No, but close. L.S.U. decided to keep Miles because of how they would look if Jimbo did say no and because of the mounting pressure on social media to keep Miles.

The distinction is important because Jimbo's agent (Sexton) had not played his cards yet. He was in negotiations with L.S.U.. The way he works is he would get their offer and then give F.S.U. a chance to one up it. If they did and Jimbo wanted to stay he would accept F.S.U.'s offers. If Jimbo didn't want to stay he would secretly contact L.S.U. with the offer they must beat to get him. If L.S.U. says no then Jimbo stays at F.S.U. and makes it look like that's what he wanted. If L.S.U. says yes then Jimbo moves.

The A.D. and president at L.S.U. couldn't afford to risk letting it play out. They had an initial offer on the table. If the F.S.U. counter offer was higher and it appeased Jimbo and they had let Miles go already then they look like fools (which they do now anyway because of how they handled Les). The twitter & facebook pressure to keep Miles also created a public relations nightmare for them.

It is my understanding that F.S.U. had not yet been approached for the counter offer and the L.S.U. pulled out because they feared Fisher accepting the counteroffer.

Now there are two really pissed off people. Sexton is pissed with the L.S.U. leadership because they have hurt his chances to get Jimbo a decent raise at worst and a big boost from a move at best. And less Miles is pissed with the administration and boosters who were trying to do him in.

Actually there are others pissed as well. The boosters that wanted Les gone are now pissed becuase they now look like the meddling villains that their ilk is at every school. And, Booger McFarland who broke the story and framed it for the SECN is pissed because he put his reputation on the line to speak for the A.D. and those boosters.

I predict the sacrificial lamb for these characters will be the A.D. Also Jimbo may be pissed that the muddle will likely cost him a bigger raise as Sexton's tactics are usually successful.

(11-29-2015 11:32 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-29-2015 09:48 AM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(11-27-2015 08:40 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(11-27-2015 09:40 AM)JRsec Wrote:  You guys been keeping up with the sports talk on radio? If not you might be surprised. I didn't make up any of the current conjecture that I posted. Mullen has been mentioned in some circles for V.T. He's not been talked in the South to be interested in Maryland. The first name on Georgia's list was Jimbo Fisher. If Richt had lost to Auburn, which certainly could have happened as neither team played well in that game, then there would be no over his leaving. A loss to Georgia Tech could bring the same outcome. But, if he beats Tech then he might stay, might. We'll see.

As for L.S.U. I'll say this, if they didn't already have an ace lined up for head coach, then I doubt they would have been talking about Les being gone so publicly. Smoke that over.

You're probably right about LSU. If Jimbo abandons FSU then you think Mullen would be in line for that job? I've heard a little talk of that.

So LSU decided to keep Miles...only because Jimbo said no.

No, but close. L.S.U. decided to keep Miles because of how they would look if Jimbo did say no and because of the mounting pressure on social media to keep Miles.

The distinction is important because Jimbo's agent (Sexton) had not played his cards yet. He was in negotiations with L.S.U.. The way he works is he would get their offer and then give F.S.U. a chance to one up it. If they did and Jimbo wanted to stay he would accept F.S.U.'s offers. If Jimbo didn't want to stay he would secretly contact L.S.U. with the offer they must beat to get him. If L.S.U. says no then Jimbo stays at F.S.U. and makes it look like that's what he wanted. If L.S.U. says yes then Jimbo moves.

The A.D. and president at L.S.U. couldn't afford to risk letting it play out. They had an initial offer on the table. If the F.S.U. counter offer was higher and it appeased Jimbo and they had let Miles go already then they look like fools (which they do now anyway because of how they handled Les). The twitter & facebook pressure to keep Miles also created a public relations nightmare for them.

It is my understanding that F.S.U. had not yet been approached for the counter offer and the L.S.U. pulled out because they feared Fisher accepting the counteroffer.

Now there are two really pissed off people. Sexton is pissed with the L.S.U. leadership because they have hurt his chances to get Jimbo a decent raise at worst and a big boost from a move at best. And less Miles is pissed with the administration and boosters who were trying to do him in.

Actually there are others pissed as well. The boosters that wanted Les gone are now pissed becuase they now look like the meddling villains that their ilk is at every school. And, Booger McFarland who broke the story and framed it for the SECN is pissed because he put his reputation on the line to speak for the A.D. and those boosters.

I predict the sacrificial lamb for these characters will be the A.D. Also Jimbo may be pissed that the muddle will likely cost him a bigger raise as Sexton's tactics are usually successful.

My theory is that the family factor ultimately decided the outcome. There are pros and cons of each job that can be debated back and forth, but having a child with an incurable disease is one of the more nightmarish things in this world. Everyone is attached to their children, but that gets magnified by several orders of magnitude in special needs parents (we have a special needs child). given that the disease will take the child before 30, I would think he wants to be close and savor every second with him.

(11-26-2015 12:02 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-25-2015 05:06 PM)XLance Wrote:  Maybe they can bring Lou Holtz back.

Actually the job at South Carolina reminds me of NC State.
Loud, boisterous fans that are delusional.
When a coach takes either job, he knows that his ceiling is third place in this own division and won't be able to dominate recruiting in his own state.
It's a crappy job and South Carolina will have a hard time finding a young energetic coach, so they will probable have to resort to an old guy that is past the prime of his career that just wants a retirement paycheck.

Ehh

South Carolina had the best program in the East from 2010-13. It was honestly Spurrier that led us into the toilet from there, absolutely no reason we couldn't have sustained that with the right staff hires.

South Carolina is a good job, you can win here

(11-29-2015 09:41 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(11-26-2015 12:02 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-25-2015 05:06 PM)XLance Wrote:  Maybe they can bring Lou Holtz back.

Actually the job at South Carolina reminds me of NC State.
Loud, boisterous fans that are delusional.
When a coach takes either job, he knows that his ceiling is third place in this own division and won't be able to dominate recruiting in his own state.
It's a crappy job and South Carolina will have a hard time finding a young energetic coach, so they will probable have to resort to an old guy that is past the prime of his career that just wants a retirement paycheck.

Ehh

South Carolina had the best program in the East from 2010-13. It was honestly Spurrier that led us into the toilet from there, absolutely no reason we couldn't have sustained that with the right staff hires.

South Carolina is a good job, you can win here

All of the ACC fanboys are sweating bb's. The average total revenue of an SEC school exceeded the ACC's average total revenue per school by 27.5 million last year. Yep, that number is correct. It just takes one good hire to utilize that difference correctly and Dabo will be wanting an SEC job, if he doesn't take one this go around.

We needed a seed change. Complacency had taken over and coaches like Spurrier, Miles, and Richt had grown comfortable making close to, or over, 5 milliion a year to just keep their teams in bowls. I know it will take a couple of years now to return to form but we will all be better for it. Tennessee and Florida will return to form shortly. Having a strong Georgia means an even weaker Tech. Ditto for So. Carolina and Clemson, Florida and Florida State. If Kentucky ever gets its crap together on the gridiron then Louisville will slowly sink back into mediocrity.

5 years ago only F.S.U. might (and I mean might) have been considered a destination job for football in the ACC. All other positions were stepping stones.

The SEC got too distracted with the SECN and realignment and all of those crystal footballs to realize they were losing their edge. But, nobody adores the game like we do so we'll be back in form shortly. Alabama could restore some luster this year if they win out now. I like their diversity against Michigan State, Iowa, and Clemson/U.N.C.. Oklahoma is the team they will have to out coach and out play. But then they should have some motivation if they get to that game. We'll see.

(11-29-2015 11:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-29-2015 09:41 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(11-26-2015 12:02 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-25-2015 05:06 PM)XLance Wrote:  Maybe they can bring Lou Holtz back.

Actually the job at South Carolina reminds me of NC State.
Loud, boisterous fans that are delusional.
When a coach takes either job, he knows that his ceiling is third place in this own division and won't be able to dominate recruiting in his own state.
It's a crappy job and South Carolina will have a hard time finding a young energetic coach, so they will probable have to resort to an old guy that is past the prime of his career that just wants a retirement paycheck.

Ehh

South Carolina had the best program in the East from 2010-13. It was honestly Spurrier that led us into the toilet from there, absolutely no reason we couldn't have sustained that with the right staff hires.

South Carolina is a good job, you can win here

All of the ACC fanboys are sweating bb's. The average total revenue of an SEC school exceeded the ACC's average total revenue per school by 27.5 million last year. Yep, that number is correct. It just takes one good hire to utilize that difference correctly and Dabo will be wanting an SEC job, if he doesn't take one this go around.

We needed a seed change. Complacency had taken over and coaches like Spurrier, Miles, and Richt had grown comfortable making close to, or over, 5 milliion a year to just keep their teams in bowls. I know it will take a couple of years now to return to form but we will all be better for it. Tennessee and Florida will return to form shortly. Having a strong Georgia means an even weaker Tech. Ditto for So. Carolina and Clemson, Florida and Florida State. If Kentucky ever gets its crap together on the gridiron then Louisville will slowly sink back into mediocrity.

5 years ago only F.S.U. might (and I mean might) have been considered a destination job for football in the ACC. All other positions were stepping stones.

The SEC got too distracted with the SECN and realignment and all of those crystal footballs to realize they were losing their edge. But, nobody adores the game like we do so we'll be back in form shortly. Alabama could restore some luster this year if they win out now. I like their diversity against Michigan State, Iowa, and Clemson/U.N.C.. Oklahoma is the team they will have to out coach and out play. But then they should have some motivation if they get to that game. We'll see.

It is true that most acc jobs wouldn't carry the destination job label. Miami has lost a great deal of luster over the past 10 years. As for FSU, I would call them a recent nation championship program whose coach makes a top 5 salary and just turned down LSU (yes, he did for football and non football reasons). Bottom line: he could have gone, but he didn't. As for Clemson, Swinney is making it his own and he is being paid accordingly. Clemson has not had a coach willingly leave since Pell in the late 70s. Bama made a run at Bowden in 2000, but he played it for a raise. Bama also ended up with their 5th choice that year, something LSU was likely eager to avoid this year. At that time, nobody wanted the Bama job. I doubt anyone will be too eager to follow Saban given that it's such a tough act to follow.

As for the revenue difference, it is real and one would think that the presidents and ADs are well aware of it. It all goes back to whether ESPN wants the acc to survive as a P5. If they do, then they will find a way to keep them "competitive" in tv revenue. If they don't, then there will be defections after the GOR. My feeling is that ESPN likes having the best football and basketball content for good ratings year round. The acc will never be like the sec in football, but neither will any other P5. The sec will never be like the acc in basketball. Nothing wrong with either of those. All acc football needs is for VT to get back to normal, Miami to get competitive and UNC to decide they want a good football program. UNC has never been hurting financially, but they have always invested heavily in basketball rather than football for obvious reasons. FSU and Clemson will anchor the other division with Louisville making things interesting. By the way, there are 3 acc teams in the most recent top 10. Not too shabby even with the rest being mediocre to bad.

(11-30-2015 07:37 AM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(11-29-2015 11:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-29-2015 09:41 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(11-26-2015 12:02 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-25-2015 05:06 PM)XLance Wrote:  Maybe they can bring Lou Holtz back.

Actually the job at South Carolina reminds me of NC State.
Loud, boisterous fans that are delusional.
When a coach takes either job, he knows that his ceiling is third place in this own division and won't be able to dominate recruiting in his own state.
It's a crappy job and South Carolina will have a hard time finding a young energetic coach, so they will probable have to resort to an old guy that is past the prime of his career that just wants a retirement paycheck.

Ehh

South Carolina had the best program in the East from 2010-13. It was honestly Spurrier that led us into the toilet from there, absolutely no reason we couldn't have sustained that with the right staff hires.

South Carolina is a good job, you can win here

All of the ACC fanboys are sweating bb's. The average total revenue of an SEC school exceeded the ACC's average total revenue per school by 27.5 million last year. Yep, that number is correct. It just takes one good hire to utilize that difference correctly and Dabo will be wanting an SEC job, if he doesn't take one this go around.

We needed a seed change. Complacency had taken over and coaches like Spurrier, Miles, and Richt had grown comfortable making close to, or over, 5 milliion a year to just keep their teams in bowls. I know it will take a couple of years now to return to form but we will all be better for it. Tennessee and Florida will return to form shortly. Having a strong Georgia means an even weaker Tech. Ditto for So. Carolina and Clemson, Florida and Florida State. If Kentucky ever gets its crap together on the gridiron then Louisville will slowly sink back into mediocrity.

5 years ago only F.S.U. might (and I mean might) have been considered a destination job for football in the ACC. All other positions were stepping stones.

The SEC got too distracted with the SECN and realignment and all of those crystal footballs to realize they were losing their edge. But, nobody adores the game like we do so we'll be back in form shortly. Alabama could restore some luster this year if they win out now. I like their diversity against Michigan State, Iowa, and Clemson/U.N.C.. Oklahoma is the team they will have to out coach and out play. But then they should have some motivation if they get to that game. We'll see.

It is true that most acc jobs wouldn't carry the destination job label. Miami has lost a great deal of luster over the past 10 years. As for FSU, I would call them a recent nation championship program whose coach makes a top 5 salary and just turned down LSU (yes, he did for football and non football reasons). Bottom line: he could have gone, but he didn't. As for Clemson, Swinney is making it his own and he is being paid accordingly. Clemson has not had a coach willingly leave since Pell in the late 70s. Bama made a run at Bowden in 2000, but he played it for a raise. Bama also ended up with their 5th choice that year, something LSU was likely eager to avoid this year. At that time, nobody wanted the Bama job. I doubt anyone will be too eager to follow Saban given that it's such a tough act to follow.

As for the revenue difference, it is real and one would think that the presidents and ADs are well aware of it. It all goes back to whether ESPN wants the acc to survive as a P5. If they do, then they will find a way to keep them "competitive" in tv revenue. If they don't, then there will be defections after the GOR. My feeling is that ESPN likes having the best football and basketball content for good ratings year round. The acc will never be like the sec in football, but neither will any other P5. The sec will never be like the acc in basketball. Nothing wrong with either of those. All acc football needs is for VT to get back to normal, Miami to get competitive and UNC to decide they want a good football program. UNC has never been hurting financially, but they have always invested heavily in basketball rather than football for obvious reasons. FSU and Clemson will anchor the other division with Louisville making things interesting. By the way, there are 3 acc teams in the most recent top 10. Not too shabby even with the rest being mediocre to bad.

I agree with most of what you say here. The exception is Fisher. I heard that the only reason he would like to leave is a personal reason. We'll see. Remember this however. Once again the ACC has three ranked because there were only 3 competitive programs in your conference this year and the rest were weaker than normal even by ACC standards. That's a lot more wins to spread around. Couple that with the abysmal shape of things in the SEC East where most of your in state rivals reside and it gives those traditionally strong ACC programs an even bigger boost. Muschamp and Urban's last two years were a disaster at Florida. Spurrier stayed too long, and Kentucky has historically been one of our worst 3 programs except for Bear's time there and a small run in the early 70's.

There will be a leveling out in the next few years between Florida, South Carolina, and Georgia. Stoops has tried at Kentucky but the culture just isn't there for football.

As for ESPN they assembled the present ACC. So the question is why? Was it their plan to have the best hoops conference (a concept that I first posted and Hokie Mark asked permission to put in his blog) or did they use the only conference that they had 100% control over to stockpile properties that they knew the Big 10 and SEC would be interested in (a concept that I discussed at the same time I posited the other)?

It was ESPN in 1991 that put the bug in the ACC's ear about Florida State and the SEC. They wanted our product but didn't want to pay too much for it. It was the Big 10 that told ESPN to pound sand that they would produce their own network and it was ESPN that immediately responded by taking the best of the Big East and placing them in the ACC. My thoughts right now are that the ACC exists to land Notre Dame. If you do that you survive. If N.D. only uses you as they did the Big East (to garner a leg up on bowls or now the CFP) then you won't last.

There is another game being played right now as well. Will football last or under the threat of long term health issues will it finally fail sometime mid century? The Big 12 and SEC are one side of that issue, the ACC and Big 10 are somewhat on the other. The PAC seems to be more on the fence. If football at some point looks threatened the Big 10 will quickly swing its interest in that direction. The SEC will have to spend its money to do the same and voila the ACC is right back in the crosshairs again if they don't stay financially competitive (that is if you have survived that long).

I probably won't be around for the last issue. But you'll see.

(11-29-2015 11:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-29-2015 09:41 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(11-26-2015 12:02 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-25-2015 05:06 PM)XLance Wrote:  Maybe they can bring Lou Holtz back.

Actually the job at South Carolina reminds me of NC State.
Loud, boisterous fans that are delusional.
When a coach takes either job, he knows that his ceiling is third place in this own division and won't be able to dominate recruiting in his own state.
It's a crappy job and South Carolina will have a hard time finding a young energetic coach, so they will probable have to resort to an old guy that is past the prime of his career that just wants a retirement paycheck.

Ehh

South Carolina had the best program in the East from 2010-13. It was honestly Spurrier that led us into the toilet from there, absolutely no reason we couldn't have sustained that with the right staff hires.

South Carolina is a good job, you can win here

All of the ACC fanboys are sweating bb's. The average total revenue of an SEC school exceeded the ACC's average total revenue per school by 27.5 million last year. Yep, that number is correct. It just takes one good hire to utilize that difference correctly and Dabo will be wanting an SEC job, if he doesn't take one this go around.

We needed a seed change. Complacency had taken over and coaches like Spurrier, Miles, and Richt had grown comfortable making close to, or over, 5 milliion a year to just keep their teams in bowls. I know it will take a couple of years now to return to form but we will all be better for it. Tennessee and Florida will return to form shortly. Having a strong Georgia means an even weaker Tech. Ditto for So. Carolina and Clemson, Florida and Florida State. If Kentucky ever gets its crap together on the gridiron then Louisville will slowly sink back into mediocrity.

5 years ago only F.S.U. might (and I mean might) have been considered a destination job for football in the ACC. All other positions were stepping stones.

The SEC got too distracted with the SECN and realignment and all of those crystal footballs to realize they were losing their edge. But, nobody adores the game like we do so we'll be back in form shortly. Alabama could restore some luster this year if they win out now. I like their diversity against Michigan State, Iowa, and Clemson/U.N.C.. Oklahoma is the team they will have to out coach and out play. But then they should have some motivation if they get to that game. We'll see.

Sweating bb's?
The bloom came off of the SEC rose this year and it was exposed as a one team conference, while the leagues to the east and west keep getting stronger.

(11-30-2015 08:41 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-29-2015 11:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  All of the ACC fanboys are sweating bb's. The average total revenue of an SEC school exceeded the ACC's average total revenue per school by 27.5 million last year. Yep, that number is correct. It just takes one good hire to utilize that difference correctly and Dabo will be wanting an SEC job, if he doesn't take one this go around.

We needed a seed change. Complacency had taken over and coaches like Spurrier, Miles, and Richt had grown comfortable making close to, or over, 5 milliion a year to just keep their teams in bowls. I know it will take a couple of years now to return to form but we will all be better for it. Tennessee and Florida will return to form shortly. Having a strong Georgia means an even weaker Tech. Ditto for So. Carolina and Clemson, Florida and Florida State. If Kentucky ever gets its crap together on the gridiron then Louisville will slowly sink back into mediocrity.

5 years ago only F.S.U. might (and I mean might) have been considered a destination job for football in the ACC. All other positions were stepping stones.

The SEC got too distracted with the SECN and realignment and all of those crystal footballs to realize they were losing their edge. But, nobody adores the game like we do so we'll be back in form shortly. Alabama could restore some luster this year if they win out now. I like their diversity against Michigan State, Iowa, and Clemson/U.N.C.. Oklahoma is the team they will have to out coach and out play. But then they should have some motivation if they get to that game. We'll see.

Sweating bb's?
The bloom came off of the SEC rose this year and it was exposed as a one team conference, while the leagues to the east and west keep getting stronger.

The money is better than ever and the gap is growing.

You can't judge a league on one season's worth of results. I don't understand why people do that. Short memories, I suppose. You add up all the championships from the other leagues combined in recent years and it doesn't come out even.

BCS era:

SEC: 9 championships and 1 additional appearance
everyone else: 7 and I'll be generous and count USC's AP title in 2003 for a total of 8.

Playoff era:

SEC: 1 appearance thus far
B1G: 1 championship

That and I wouldn't say the league was exposed this year at all, we just haven't been dominant this year. Bowl season isn't here yet, but here are some of our OOC wins.

Bama over Wisconsin, Auburn over Louisville, A&M over Arizona St, LSU over Syracuse, Georgia over GT, Mizzou over BYU, South Carolina over UNC...same South Carolina that had a horrible season nearly beat the ACC's top team in Clemson.

There were plenty of OOC losses this year, of course, but is that the slate of a league on its way down? No.

(11-30-2015 10:59 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 08:41 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-29-2015 11:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  All of the ACC fanboys are sweating bb's. The average total revenue of an SEC school exceeded the ACC's average total revenue per school by 27.5 million last year. Yep, that number is correct. It just takes one good hire to utilize that difference correctly and Dabo will be wanting an SEC job, if he doesn't take one this go around.

We needed a seed change. Complacency had taken over and coaches like Spurrier, Miles, and Richt had grown comfortable making close to, or over, 5 milliion a year to just keep their teams in bowls. I know it will take a couple of years now to return to form but we will all be better for it. Tennessee and Florida will return to form shortly. Having a strong Georgia means an even weaker Tech. Ditto for So. Carolina and Clemson, Florida and Florida State. If Kentucky ever gets its crap together on the gridiron then Louisville will slowly sink back into mediocrity.

5 years ago only F.S.U. might (and I mean might) have been considered a destination job for football in the ACC. All other positions were stepping stones.

The SEC got too distracted with the SECN and realignment and all of those crystal footballs to realize they were losing their edge. But, nobody adores the game like we do so we'll be back in form shortly. Alabama could restore some luster this year if they win out now. I like their diversity against Michigan State, Iowa, and Clemson/U.N.C.. Oklahoma is the team they will have to out coach and out play. But then they should have some motivation if they get to that game. We'll see.

Sweating bb's?
The bloom came off of the SEC rose this year and it was exposed as a one team conference, while the leagues to the east and west keep getting stronger.

The money is better than ever and the gap is growing.

You can't judge a league on one season's worth of results. I don't understand why people do that. Short memories, I suppose. You add up all the championships from the other leagues combined in recent years and it doesn't come out even.

BCS era:

SEC: 9 championships and 1 additional appearance
everyone else: 7 and I'll be generous and count USC's AP title in 2003 for a total of 8.

Playoff era:

SEC: 1 appearance thus far
B1G: 1 championship

That and I wouldn't say the league was exposed this year at all, we just haven't been dominant this year. Bowl season isn't here yet, but here are some of our OOC wins.

Bama over Wisconsin, Auburn over Louisville, A&M over Arizona St, LSU over Syracuse, Georgia over GT, Mizzou over BYU, South Carolina over UNC...same South Carolina that had a horrible season nearly beat the ACC's top team in Clemson.

There were plenty of OOC losses this year, of course, but is that the slate of a league on its way down? No.

I would like to think that I'm a realist on acc football. Any year we get 3 teams in the top 10 (including #1) and a top 10 matchup for the ccg is something about which to smile, even with the rest of the conference being mediocre to bad. My hope is that VT gets back to where they were in Beamer's prime and that Miami breaks out of their funk. I've always thought that UNC was a potential perennial top 10 team with their financial resources, academic prestige, etc. If those 3 can do those things, the coastal division will be fine. Clemson, FSU and Louisville can make the Atlantic division interesting. We don't need to be like the sec because nobody is.

As for the Clemson - USC game, I've neve been so disappointed with a rivalry win. The offense dominated when they didn't turn the ball over. The fumbles came from guys that didn't fumble all year. Rivalry games can be goofy like that. To their credit, it was a two score game except for a few minutes in the 2nd half. They pulled to within 3 after a fumble and Watson proceeded to march them down field for a TD and then a FG. That kid is a machine. He just doesn't get rattled. USC's last TD came with 1 second left. It was disappointing that the defense didn't slam the door. I'm more than a little nervous about UNC. My hope is that the turnovers go away and Clemson uses the talent edge to put them away. Giving up big plays has been a problem at times and does not bode well for a team like UNC.

All in all, it's a great title game matchup that should be exciting to watch.

(11-30-2015 10:59 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 08:41 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-29-2015 11:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  All of the ACC fanboys are sweating bb's. The average total revenue of an SEC school exceeded the ACC's average total revenue per school by 27.5 million last year. Yep, that number is correct. It just takes one good hire to utilize that difference correctly and Dabo will be wanting an SEC job, if he doesn't take one this go around.

We needed a seed change. Complacency had taken over and coaches like Spurrier, Miles, and Richt had grown comfortable making close to, or over, 5 milliion a year to just keep their teams in bowls. I know it will take a couple of years now to return to form but we will all be better for it. Tennessee and Florida will return to form shortly. Having a strong Georgia means an even weaker Tech. Ditto for So. Carolina and Clemson, Florida and Florida State. If Kentucky ever gets its crap together on the gridiron then Louisville will slowly sink back into mediocrity.

5 years ago only F.S.U. might (and I mean might) have been considered a destination job for football in the ACC. All other positions were stepping stones.

The SEC got too distracted with the SECN and realignment and all of those crystal footballs to realize they were losing their edge. But, nobody adores the game like we do so we'll be back in form shortly. Alabama could restore some luster this year if they win out now. I like their diversity against Michigan State, Iowa, and Clemson/U.N.C.. Oklahoma is the team they will have to out coach and out play. But then they should have some motivation if they get to that game. We'll see.

Sweating bb's?
The bloom came off of the SEC rose this year and it was exposed as a one team conference, while the leagues to the east and west keep getting stronger.

The money is better than ever and the gap is growing.

You can't judge a league on one season's worth of results. I don't understand why people do that. Short memories, I suppose. You add up all the championships from the other leagues combined in recent years and it doesn't come out even.

BCS era:

SEC: 9 championships and 1 additional appearance
everyone else: 7 and I'll be generous and count USC's AP title in 2003 for a total of 8.

Playoff era:

SEC: 1 appearance thus far
B1G: 1 championship

That and I wouldn't say the league was exposed this year at all, we just haven't been dominant this year. Bowl season isn't here yet, but here are some of our OOC wins.

Bama over Wisconsin, Auburn over Louisville, A&M over Arizona St, LSU over Syracuse, Georgia over GT, Mizzou over BYU, South Carolina over UNC...same South Carolina that had a horrible season nearly beat the ACC's top team in Clemson.

There were plenty of OOC losses this year, of course, but is that the slate of a league on its way down? No.

Your league is starting to eat their own young in hopes of catching a "white whale".
LSU hatched an unsuccessful plot to rid themselves of a coach that has delivered his whole career and at the moment holds the #1 recruiting class in the country and was willing to spend 15 Million dollars to do so. Smart use of all of those dollars.
Georgia fires a coach that can deliver 9 to 10 wins a year and is generally regarded as on of the finest people in the coaching profession and a developer of men. Another smart move in hopes of "winning" a championship.
Money has corrupted the SEC and the league is rotting from the inside out. This is not a one year phenomenon, but something that has been building as the money has risen.
Not sweating bb's, but as a fan I am saddened by what your league is doing to college football.

(11-26-2015 12:02 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-25-2015 05:06 PM)XLance Wrote:  Maybe they can bring Lou Holtz back.

Actually the job at South Carolina reminds me of NC State.
Loud, boisterous fans that are delusional.
When a coach takes either job, he knows that his ceiling is third place in this own division and won't be able to dominate recruiting in his own state.
It's a crappy job and South Carolina will have a hard time finding a young energetic coach, so they will probable have to resort to an old guy that is past the prime of his career that just wants a retirement paycheck.

Well, I was wrong....not about the job being crappy or the recruiting or the delusional fans. South Carolina did find a young guy with lots of energy...too much energy and misplaced aggression.

(12-07-2015 03:29 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-26-2015 12:02 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-25-2015 05:06 PM)XLance Wrote:  Maybe they can bring Lou Holtz back.

Actually the job at South Carolina reminds me of NC State.
Loud, boisterous fans that are delusional.
When a coach takes either job, he knows that his ceiling is third place in this own division and won't be able to dominate recruiting in his own state.
It's a crappy job and South Carolina will have a hard time finding a young energetic coach, so they will probable have to resort to an old guy that is past the prime of his career that just wants a retirement paycheck.

Well, I was wrong....not about the job being crappy or the recruiting or the delusional fans. South Carolina did find a young guy with lots of energy...too much energy and misplaced aggression.

XLance you are wrong about a great many things. The Big 10 and ACC both had three top 10 schools. Why? They never played anyone else except each other. Two FCS schools for North Carolina and a loss to South Carolina and Clemson. Clemson played Notre Dame OOC. Wofford and Applachian State aren't exactly all of that and a bag nuts now are they? Florida State was a decent opponent in conference. Ohio State played nobody until the last three weeks of the season. Michigan State did beat Oregon, who while decent was not the Oregon of old and they managed to lose to a woeful Nebraska team. Iowa had a good year but only played Michigan State. That much incest in two conferences whose bottom was 50% of their conference makes it tough to judge how good or weak they may be.

Bowls will help but will not be absolutely definitive.

The PAC killed itself. We don't know how good they are either.

The SEC and Big 12 had some decent wins OOC against P5 schools with winning records. F.S.U. beat Florida. That's about it for you guys. So hike on back over to the ACC board and try to come up with something a bit more impressive.

(12-07-2015 05:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-07-2015 03:29 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-26-2015 12:02 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-25-2015 05:06 PM)XLance Wrote:  Maybe they can bring Lou Holtz back.

Actually the job at South Carolina reminds me of NC State.
Loud, boisterous fans that are delusional.
When a coach takes either job, he knows that his ceiling is third place in this own division and won't be able to dominate recruiting in his own state.
It's a crappy job and South Carolina will have a hard time finding a young energetic coach, so they will probable have to resort to an old guy that is past the prime of his career that just wants a retirement paycheck.

Well, I was wrong....not about the job being crappy or the recruiting or the delusional fans. South Carolina did find a young guy with lots of energy...too much energy and misplaced aggression.

XLance you are wrong about a great many things. The Big 10 and ACC both had three top 10 schools. Why? They never played anyone else except each other. Two FCS schools for North Carolina and a loss to South Carolina and Clemson. Clemson played Notre Dame OOC. Wofford and Applachian State aren't exactly all of that and a bag nuts now are they? Florida State was a decent opponent in conference. Ohio State played nobody until the last three weeks of the season. Michigan State did beat Oregon, who while decent was not the Oregon of old and they managed to lose to a woeful Nebraska team. Iowa had a good year but only played Michigan State. That much incest in two conferences whose bottom was 50% of their conference makes it tough to judge how good or weak they may be.

Bowls will help but will not be absolutely definitive.

The PAC killed itself. We don't know how good they are either.

The SEC and Big 12 had some decent wins OOC against P5 schools with winning records. F.S.U. beat Florida. That's about it for you guys. So hike on back over to the ACC board and try to come up with something a bit more impressive.

Well JR, how thoughtful of you to change direction of the conversation away from the OP.
It seems that South Carolina is ready to settle back into it's traditional place in the college football world after having to settle for their 4th choice coach.
And while I do enjoy your pontificating, maybe next time you can keep it within the framework of the topic at hand.

(12-08-2015 08:21 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(12-07-2015 05:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-07-2015 03:29 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-26-2015 12:02 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-25-2015 05:06 PM)XLance Wrote:  Maybe they can bring Lou Holtz back.

Actually the job at South Carolina reminds me of NC State.
Loud, boisterous fans that are delusional.
When a coach takes either job, he knows that his ceiling is third place in this own division and won't be able to dominate recruiting in his own state.
It's a crappy job and South Carolina will have a hard time finding a young energetic coach, so they will probable have to resort to an old guy that is past the prime of his career that just wants a retirement paycheck.

Well, I was wrong....not about the job being crappy or the recruiting or the delusional fans. South Carolina did find a young guy with lots of energy...too much energy and misplaced aggression.

XLance you are wrong about a great many things. The Big 10 and ACC both had three top 10 schools. Why? They never played anyone else except each other. Two FCS schools for North Carolina and a loss to South Carolina and Clemson. Clemson played Notre Dame OOC. Wofford and Applachian State aren't exactly all of that and a bag nuts now are they? Florida State was a decent opponent in conference. Ohio State played nobody until the last three weeks of the season. Michigan State did beat Oregon, who while decent was not the Oregon of old and they managed to lose to a woeful Nebraska team. Iowa had a good year but only played Michigan State. That much incest in two conferences whose bottom was 50% of their conference makes it tough to judge how good or weak they may be.

Bowls will help but will not be absolutely definitive.

The PAC killed itself. We don't know how good they are either.

The SEC and Big 12 had some decent wins OOC against P5 schools with winning records. F.S.U. beat Florida. That's about it for you guys. So hike on back over to the ACC board and try to come up with something a bit more impressive.

Well JR, how thoughtful of you to change direction of the conversation away from the OP.
It seems that South Carolina is ready to settle back into it's traditional place in the college football world after having to settle for their 4th choice coach.
And while I do enjoy your pontificating, maybe next time you can keep it within the framework of the topic at hand.

The implication here is that South Carolina will be fine in the long run, is better positioned for future success in the SEC than there ACC neighbors, and then I explained why, as opposed to your assumptions in an earlier post, the ACC and Big 10 had 3 rated in the top 10. Soft, and in some cases extremely soft, schedules will do that for several schools when 50% of their conference slate includes bottom feeders. I think that is germane.