(08-11-2016 11:09 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(08-11-2016 01:30 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-10-2016 09:33 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(08-10-2016 09:09 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-10-2016 08:49 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  NON League means outside of the ACC (BIG/SEC/BIG12/PAC12)....Not ACC OOC games.... NON LEAGUE!!
Looks like Wake and UNC will be voting for 9 game schedule, and I am guessing GT does also since that would mean their scheule would be complete thru 2026 except for a few FCS games and they are searching for an AD and will not have time to seek another P5 non league opponent until we have a new AD!!

I hate to be the bear of bad news!!! 9 game Conf schedule is coming!!

LINK
http://www.dailypress.com/sports/teel-bl...-post.html

Think of what you're writing, GTFletch... why would ESPN be ok with a 9th ACC game but not with 8 ACC games plus another ACC as non-conference game? From a TV perspective, it's exactly the same game!

So you think an ACC OOC game means as much or is the same thing as a Conference game?? Please let me have what you are smoking!!

I think NON League means Outside of the ACC...They want 9 conference games that mean something towards the standings....Or they want the ACC to put on Big Boy pants and take on NON League Mbrs from the SEC,BIG,PAC12, BIG12, or ND

That is what I think is being reported and if I am gambling I think we go to 9 Conference games because there are programs out in ACC land that will not be able to get two non league P5 games on the schedule year in and year out...

Like who?

For 2019 network Launch date?? Anyone not named Clemson, FSU, GT, Louisville or UNC...but specifically
BC
WF
Cuse
NC State
Duke
Miami
Pitt
UVA
VT

The ACC needs to tell ESPN that with it being over halfway through 2016 their 2019 goal is unreasonable unless they are A. going to help with scheduling or B. going to pony up additional money to cover the buyouts their unreasonable demand is going to cause.

Grow a set for once and stop letting the mouse dictate all the terms.

[quote][quote='ren.hoek' pid='13475888' dateline='1471345214']
[quote]That's what will drive us to 9+1: some schools will have trouble finding 2 P5 opponents every year. Clemson, FSU, GT, UNC, VT, and Miami will be ok, but BC, WF, Syracuse, and Duke might find it harder. Not throwing rocks, but it stands to reason. I like 8+2, but I would also like playing coastal teams more. For Clemson, I'd like to have a "good team" scheduled every year, something like
Year 1: Miami, UVa
Year 2: VT, Duke
Year 3: UNC, Pitt[/quote]


I dont know why this keeps getting repeated about SU potentially having trouble with ooc P5 schedules, but SU has NEVER had a problem scheduling multiple ooc P5 teams. I posted a link to CFB data warehouse which shows SU's schedule from 2010-2014. During that 5 year period, SU played twelve ooc P5 teams scheduled home and home. Since it has never been a problem in the past I dont foresee it being a problem in the future.

cfbdatawarehouse.com

(08-16-2016 09:02 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  I dont know why this keeps getting repeated about SU potentially having trouble with ooc P5 schedules, but SU has NEVER had a problem scheduling multiple ooc P5 teams. I posted a link to CFB data warehouse which shows SU's schedule from 2010-2014. During that 5 year period, SU played twelve ooc P5 teams scheduled home and home. Since it has never been a problem in the past I dont foresee it being a problem in the future.

cfbdatawarehouse.com

I don't doubt that they could get it done, but if 8+2 passes, they need to get to work very soon! Perhaps they are close to a deal with some schools already and are waiting on the final decision.

I also don't think Duke will have a difficult time with 8+2 since Northwestern is almost an annual game.

The ACC team which has struggled the most to schedule P5 OOC is BC.

Sent from my HTC Desire 626 using CSNbbs mobile app

The technical logistics involve squeezing these games into the B10's new 9 game conference schedule in addition to the desire that the B12 and P12 show regarding limited major OOC games after September. You don't have 12-13 open dates. In reality you have 5, perhaps 7.

Schools that present high risk and low reward have the toughest time scheduling and KEEPING their game. Arkansas just found that out with Michigan and LSU, Tennessee, and Oklahoma State have done that to NC State in the past decade.

If you an Athletic Director at P-5 school outside the ACC what are you looking for?

1. A game you can win
2. A game that will garner media attention
3. An appearance in a location your coach recruits
4. A game that if you lose, will not end your post season aspirations
5. Money, always looking for money

When you look at ACC schools what do you see?

For the sake of conversation I am defining risk as the risk of losing the games, and the reward as winning the game and ticking off the 5 points above:

High Risk - High Reward

Miami
FSU
Clemson

You can play these schools and if you win you boost your resume, and if you lose you are still in the hunt.

High Risk - Medium Reward

UNC
Louisville
Pitt
GT
VT

If you lose to one of these four, you remain in the hunt.

High Risk - Low Reward

NC State

If you win you gain nothing, however if you lose, you are out of the hunt.

Medium Risk - Medium Reward

Duke
UVa

You are expected to win and should win unless you are one of the P-5 bottom feeders. In some sense you are monetizing their academic name.

Medium Risk - Low Reward

Boston College

A few years ago I would have placed BC with Duke and UVa. However, other than a game, and a trip to Boston, what do you get in New England recruiting wise? You have to win the game.

Low Risk - Low Reward:

WF

I think this goes without saying.

Low Risk - Medium Reward:

Syracuse

The Syracuse program is not in great shape, but the name still has value, and it's the only game in town in the State of NY.


I think BC and NC State will have the most difficult time obtaining and keeping quality P-5 games and that any contract signed with them is questionable when they go on their inevitable periodic upswing. However, NC State faces the added competition from WF, Duke, and UNC in scheduling games with another program that might like to play in North Carolina and depending on their risk tolerance and the rewards they seek, NC State will be the least appealing option until and unless the program becomes an ACC contender and raises stadium capacity to between 67-70K.

At this point, I think the three biggest things could help with the push to 8+2 for the ACC would be as follows.

1. The Big 12 expands to 12 schools soon (like before the ACC has to make a final decision), moves back to an eight game schedule and also gets pressure from ESPN/Fox to go to an 8+2 model.
2a. ESPN applies similar pressure to the SEC to move to an 8+2 model.
2b. Vandy and Wake go back to facing one another more regularly.
3. ESPN allows one of the two P5 games in the ACC's 8-2 model to come from an expanded list, such as a few of the AAC schools, Army, Air Force, and Boise State, or something along those lines. There could even be a limit on how often you are allowed to do this within a certain number of years.

The Charlotte Sports Foundation could also help out by putting together some more Belk College Kickoff Games involving ACC teams.

I'm kind of surprised to see Pitt and VT listed as being keys to the ACC schedule changes in Andrea Adelson's latest piece.

If we start with 2019, which I'm assuming is the year that ESPN will begin enforcing the 8+2 or 9+1 change, then Pitt already has three years with two P5 teams on the schedule, with the potential for a fourth year and for one of those years to be three P5 based on what the Big 12 does with Cincinnati.

2022 - Tenn, WVu
2023 - Cincy*, @ WVu, @ ND
2024 - @ Cincy*, WVu
2025 - @ WVu, ND

Of course, you can't guarantee that Cincinnati will be going to the Big 12, so if you add 2024 to the following years in which they already have at least one P5 scheduled, I just don't see them as being a school that will have a difficult time adding the additional P5 games needed.

2019 - @ Penn State
2020 - ND
2021 - @ Tenn

As for VT, they already have five years with two P5, one of those years having three.

2020 - Penn State, @ Mich
2021 - Mich, @ WVu, ND
2023 - Purdue, @ Rutgers
2024 - @ Wisc, Rutgers
2025 - @ Penn State, Wisc
2029 - @ Arizona, Maryland

Every other year, they already have at least one P5. So, I also don't see them as a school that will have a difficult time with the 8+2 rule.

The only exception would be if playing schools from the Atlantic division is that important to them that it would cause them to vote for 9+1. For that, i say making it to Charlotte should be the goal for solving that problem.

(08-16-2016 10:37 AM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  I think BC and NC State will have the most difficult time obtaining and keeping quality P-5 games and that any contract signed with them is questionable when they go on their inevitable periodic upswing. However, NC State faces the added competition from WF, Duke, and UNC in scheduling games with another program that might like to play in North Carolina and depending on their risk tolerance and the rewards they seek, NC State will be the least appealing option until and unless the program becomes an ACC contender and raises stadium capacity to between 67-70K.

Will UConn continue to count as a P5 opponent? That seems like an easy series to maintain for BC. Army and Navy and possibly Rutgers seem like possibilities that would bring fans as well.

Would NC State be interested in scheduling Maryland? That seems like a natural match-up. On a side note, why was Penn State a yearly game for so long?

I don't see NC State as a high risk opponent. Maybe if the game is in Raleigh. So maybe they should play more neutral site games. Or schedule up (yeah, the Wolfpack might lose some OOC games, but that's a risk the other ACC teams already take).


Sent from my HTC Desire 626 using CSNbbs mobile app

(08-16-2016 01:42 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  I don't see NC State as a high risk opponent. Maybe if the game is in Raleigh. So maybe they should play more neutral site games. Or schedule up (yeah, the Wolfpack might lose some OOC games, but that's a risk the other ACC teams already take).


Sent from my HTC Desire 626 using CSNbbs mobile app

NC State is very high risk as they play to the level of the competition. Ask Penn State in the 1970's, Texas in 1999, Syracuse in 2000, Ohio State in 2003 and 2004, Florida State and Clemson.

Only if you catch State tired and physically outmatched at every position can you expect an easy win. We have ruined a lot of seasons for other folks, and turned around the next week and lost to Wake Forest. Who needs that when you can get a better risk-reward deal from WF, Duke, or UNC.

Playing NC State is like playing ECU, and as you know well, when ECU is up emotionally they are damn difficult to beat. Make it an ordinary game with Southern Miss or Tulsa, and they can struggle.

As for scheduling up, VT has to go out of conference or wait every third year in the conference for a top 15 or better league opponent. NC State gets two every single year. If we had you and Miami on our yearly schedule instead of FSU and Clemson, we might still play Ohio State, Penn State, and Alabama from time to time.

(08-16-2016 02:11 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(08-16-2016 01:42 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  I don't see NC State as a high risk opponent. Maybe if the game is in Raleigh. So maybe they should play more neutral site games. Or schedule up (yeah, the Wolfpack might lose some OOC games, but that's a risk the other ACC teams already take).


Sent from my HTC Desire 626 using CSNbbs mobile app

NC State is very high risk as they play to the level of the competition. Ask Penn State in the 1970's, Texas in 1999, Syracuse in 2000, Ohio State in 2003 and 2004, Florida State and Clemson.

Only if you catch State tired and physically outmatched at every position can you expect an easy win. We have ruined a lot of seasons for other folks, and turned around the next week and lost to Wake Forest. Who needs that when you can get a better risk-reward deal from WF, Duke, or UNC.

Playing NC State is like playing ECU, and as you know well, when ECU is up emotionally they are damn difficult to beat. Make it an ordinary game with Southern Miss or Tulsa, and they can struggle.

So my point is: NC State should schedule Alabama or Ohio State... On a neutral field... Do what it takes. VT did for many years, and still does (ex. Bristol)

Sent from my HTC Desire 626 using CSNbbs mobile app

(08-16-2016 12:58 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(08-16-2016 10:37 AM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  I think BC and NC State will have the most difficult time obtaining and keeping quality P-5 games and that any contract signed with them is questionable when they go on their inevitable periodic upswing. However, NC State faces the added competition from WF, Duke, and UNC in scheduling games with another program that might like to play in North Carolina and depending on their risk tolerance and the rewards they seek, NC State will be the least appealing option until and unless the program becomes an ACC contender and raises stadium capacity to between 67-70K.

Will UConn continue to count as a P5 opponent? That seems like an easy series to maintain for BC. Army and Navy and possibly Rutgers seem like possibilities that would bring fans as well.

Would NC State be interested in scheduling Maryland? That seems like a natural match-up. On a side note, why was Penn State a yearly game for so long?

Hell will freeze over before State willingly plays MD in any sport. Debbie Yow would have to be retired and dead before that happened. Duke and UNC have had the same general feelings, but they are likely to thaw first. UConn has a number of future games with ACC schools including State. East Carolina has games with you, State, and VT.

No one has spilled the beans on exactly what ESPN wants. P-5 quality and P-5 schools are not the same thing. Cincinnati, UConn, Army, Navy, BYU, San Diego State, Colorado State, Air Force, UCF, ECU, Boise State, etc., all these are probably more interesting to the public than a P-5 game with Kansas, Indiana, Purdue, or Vandy.

What does ESPN want from this game? Sure they would like a couple of premier matchups but they also need stuff they can stick into the B10 network footprint and screw Fox.

(08-16-2016 02:18 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-16-2016 02:11 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(08-16-2016 01:42 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  I don't see NC State as a high risk opponent. Maybe if the game is in Raleigh. So maybe they should play more neutral site games. Or schedule up (yeah, the Wolfpack might lose some OOC games, but that's a risk the other ACC teams already take).


Sent from my HTC Desire 626 using CSNbbs mobile app

NC State is very high risk as they play to the level of the competition. Ask Penn State in the 1970's, Texas in 1999, Syracuse in 2000, Ohio State in 2003 and 2004, Florida State and Clemson.

Only if you catch State tired and physically outmatched at every position can you expect an easy win. We have ruined a lot of seasons for other folks, and turned around the next week and lost to Wake Forest. Who needs that when you can get a better risk-reward deal from WF, Duke, or UNC.

Playing NC State is like playing ECU, and as you know well, when ECU is up emotionally they are damn difficult to beat. Make it an ordinary game with Southern Miss or Tulsa, and they can struggle.

So my point is: NC State should schedule Alabama or Ohio State... On a neutral field... Do what it takes. VT did for many years, and still does (ex. Bristol)

Sent from my HTC Desire 626 using CSNbbs mobile app

Hokie, we did that **** for 60 years. We played money games away from Raleigh as late as 1980. You know very well that the Bristol analogy is bogus. I-81 runs right through Bristol, and you can barely get there from North Carolina - dog **** 421, 321, Whitetop, Mt. Rogers, Roan Mt. I get car sick just thinking about it.

If Penn State wants to play in DC - fine. If Tennessee want to play in Charlotte - fine, but they don't. It's not in their interest.

It take two to tango.

Gosh you just can't complete a rant this time of year.

Anyway, NC State needs Carter Finley to seat 67-70K in order to fully monetize the value of top games because there is no freeboard in the current size. We brought in 800 or so bleacher seats this season and set a record for season ticket sales.

However, after shooting the basketball program in the head in the 90's and the hiring of a poor AD, who in turn hired an old fart coach, there is very little taste for risk at NC State. So you have the chicken and the egg.

Beamer didn't have a lot of direct in state competition for talent and as you know Blacksburg/Christiansburg is a place small enough for the coach to get some deference from the local police when talented but sometimes stupid male athletes screw up. NC State is a STEM under a microscope and as you know, NC State has even less autonomy than you or Clemson in regards to higher education politics in NC, VA, SC.

Put another way, the hole dug for NC State athletics was deeper than the bottom of the old biology pond that was excavated to build Carter Finley in 1966 by the time Yow was hired. But that's for another day.

(08-16-2016 02:28 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(08-16-2016 02:18 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-16-2016 02:11 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(08-16-2016 01:42 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  I don't see NC State as a high risk opponent. Maybe if the game is in Raleigh. So maybe they should play more neutral site games. Or schedule up (yeah, the Wolfpack might lose some OOC games, but that's a risk the other ACC teams already take).


Sent from my HTC Desire 626 using CSNbbs mobile app

NC State is very high risk as they play to the level of the competition. Ask Penn State in the 1970's, Texas in 1999, Syracuse in 2000, Ohio State in 2003 and 2004, Florida State and Clemson.

Only if you catch State tired and physically outmatched at every position can you expect an easy win. We have ruined a lot of seasons for other folks, and turned around the next week and lost to Wake Forest. Who needs that when you can get a better risk-reward deal from WF, Duke, or UNC.

Playing NC State is like playing ECU, and as you know well, when ECU is up emotionally they are damn difficult to beat. Make it an ordinary game with Southern Miss or Tulsa, and they can struggle.

So my point is: NC State should schedule Alabama or Ohio State... On a neutral field... Do what it takes. VT did for many years, and still does (ex. Bristol)

Sent from my HTC Desire 626 using CSNbbs mobile app

Hokie, we did that **** for 60 years. We played money games away from Raleigh as late as 1980. You know very well that the Bristol analogy is bogus. I-81 runs right through Bristol, and you can barely get there from North Carolina - dog **** 421, 321, Whitetop, Mt. Rogers, Roan Mt. I get car sick just thinking about it.

If Penn State wants to play in DC - fine. If Tennessee want to play in Charlotte - fine, but they don't. It's not in their interest.

It take two to tango.

Gosh you just can't complete a rant this time of year.

Anyway, NC State needs Carter Finley to seat 67-70K in order to fully monetize the value of top games because there is no freeboard in the current size. We brought in 800 or so bleacher seats this season and set a record for season ticket sales.

However, after shooting the basketball program in the head in the 90's and the hiring of a poor AD, who in turn hired an old fart coach, there is very little taste for risk at NC State. So you have the chicken and the egg.

Beamer didn't have a lot of direct in state competition for talent and as you know Blacksburg/Christiansburg is a place small enough for the coach to get some deference from the local police when talented but sometimes stupid male athletes screw up. NC State is a STEM under a microscope and as you know, NC State has even less autonomy than you or Clemson in regards to higher education politics in NC, VA, SC.

Put another way, the hole dug for NC State athletics was deeper than the bottom of the old biology pond that was excavated to build Carter Finley in 1966 by the time Yow was hired. But that's for another day.

In '66 it would have been just Finley.

(08-16-2016 08:18 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-16-2016 02:28 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(08-16-2016 02:18 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-16-2016 02:11 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(08-16-2016 01:42 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  I don't see NC State as a high risk opponent. Maybe if the game is in Raleigh. So maybe they should play more neutral site games. Or schedule up (yeah, the Wolfpack might lose some OOC games, but that's a risk the other ACC teams already take).


Sent from my HTC Desire 626 using CSNbbs mobile app

NC State is very high risk as they play to the level of the competition. Ask Penn State in the 1970's, Texas in 1999, Syracuse in 2000, Ohio State in 2003 and 2004, Florida State and Clemson.

Only if you catch State tired and physically outmatched at every position can you expect an easy win. We have ruined a lot of seasons for other folks, and turned around the next week and lost to Wake Forest. Who needs that when you can get a better risk-reward deal from WF, Duke, or UNC.

Playing NC State is like playing ECU, and as you know well, when ECU is up emotionally they are damn difficult to beat. Make it an ordinary game with Southern Miss or Tulsa, and they can struggle.

So my point is: NC State should schedule Alabama or Ohio State... On a neutral field... Do what it takes. VT did for many years, and still does (ex. Bristol)

Sent from my HTC Desire 626 using CSNbbs mobile app

Hokie, we did that **** for 60 years. We played money games away from Raleigh as late as 1980. You know very well that the Bristol analogy is bogus. I-81 runs right through Bristol, and you can barely get there from North Carolina - dog **** 421, 321, Whitetop, Mt. Rogers, Roan Mt. I get car sick just thinking about it.

If Penn State wants to play in DC - fine. If Tennessee want to play in Charlotte - fine, but they don't. It's not in their interest.

It take two to tango.

Gosh you just can't complete a rant this time of year.

Anyway, NC State needs Carter Finley to seat 67-70K in order to fully monetize the value of top games because there is no freeboard in the current size. We brought in 800 or so bleacher seats this season and set a record for season ticket sales.

However, after shooting the basketball program in the head in the 90's and the hiring of a poor AD, who in turn hired an old fart coach, there is very little taste for risk at NC State. So you have the chicken and the egg.

Beamer didn't have a lot of direct in state competition for talent and as you know Blacksburg/Christiansburg is a place small enough for the coach to get some deference from the local police when talented but sometimes stupid male athletes screw up. NC State is a STEM under a microscope and as you know, NC State has even less autonomy than you or Clemson in regards to higher education politics in NC, VA, SC.

Put another way, the hole dug for NC State athletics was deeper than the bottom of the old biology pond that was excavated to build Carter Finley in 1966 by the time Yow was hired. But that's for another day.

In '66 it would have been just Finley.

No in '66 it was just Carter. The Finley added to the Stadium itself, not the fieldhouse came in 80's or so.

(08-16-2016 09:19 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(08-16-2016 08:18 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-16-2016 02:28 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(08-16-2016 02:18 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-16-2016 02:11 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  NC State is very high risk as they play to the level of the competition. Ask Penn State in the 1970's, Texas in 1999, Syracuse in 2000, Ohio State in 2003 and 2004, Florida State and Clemson.

Only if you catch State tired and physically outmatched at every position can you expect an easy win. We have ruined a lot of seasons for other folks, and turned around the next week and lost to Wake Forest. Who needs that when you can get a better risk-reward deal from WF, Duke, or UNC.

Playing NC State is like playing ECU, and as you know well, when ECU is up emotionally they are damn difficult to beat. Make it an ordinary game with Southern Miss or Tulsa, and they can struggle.

So my point is: NC State should schedule Alabama or Ohio State... On a neutral field... Do what it takes. VT did for many years, and still does (ex. Bristol)

Sent from my HTC Desire 626 using CSNbbs mobile app

Hokie, we did that **** for 60 years. We played money games away from Raleigh as late as 1980. You know very well that the Bristol analogy is bogus. I-81 runs right through Bristol, and you can barely get there from North Carolina - dog **** 421, 321, Whitetop, Mt. Rogers, Roan Mt. I get car sick just thinking about it.

If Penn State wants to play in DC - fine. If Tennessee want to play in Charlotte - fine, but they don't. It's not in their interest.

It take two to tango.

Gosh you just can't complete a rant this time of year.

Anyway, NC State needs Carter Finley to seat 67-70K in order to fully monetize the value of top games because there is no freeboard in the current size. We brought in 800 or so bleacher seats this season and set a record for season ticket sales.

However, after shooting the basketball program in the head in the 90's and the hiring of a poor AD, who in turn hired an old fart coach, there is very little taste for risk at NC State. So you have the chicken and the egg.

Beamer didn't have a lot of direct in state competition for talent and as you know Blacksburg/Christiansburg is a place small enough for the coach to get some deference from the local police when talented but sometimes stupid male athletes screw up. NC State is a STEM under a microscope and as you know, NC State has even less autonomy than you or Clemson in regards to higher education politics in NC, VA, SC.

Put another way, the hole dug for NC State athletics was deeper than the bottom of the old biology pond that was excavated to build Carter Finley in 1966 by the time Yow was hired. But that's for another day.

In '66 it would have been just Finley.

No in '66 it was just Carter. The Finley added to the Stadium itself, not the fieldhouse came in 80's or so.

Wasn't Carter a rug merchant from Greensboro?

With all the handicaps facing NC State and the redundancy one has to start to wonder what exactly it is they bring to the table in the conference. I mean does the ACC need a 4th team in NC when it's the school according to some facing more handicaps than anybody else not just in the ACC or FBS but in the history of college athletics?

Or maybe what need to happen is NC State's fans, booster, admin, etc. need to quit looking for boogeymen and excuses and actually make an effort at improving the most mediocre athletic program top to bottom there is.

(08-17-2016 08:10 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  With all the handicaps facing NC State and the redundancy one has to start to wonder what exactly it is they bring to the table in the conference. I mean does the ACC need a 4th team in NC when it's the school according to some facing more handicaps than anybody else not just in the ACC or FBS but in the history of college athletics?

Or maybe what need to happen is NC State's fans, booster, admin, etc. need to quit looking for boogeymen and excuses and actually make an effort at improving the most mediocre athletic program top to bottom there is.

Ouch!

(08-17-2016 08:12 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-17-2016 08:10 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  With all the handicaps facing NC State and the redundancy one has to start to wonder what exactly it is they bring to the table in the conference. I mean does the ACC need a 4th team in NC when it's the school according to some facing more handicaps than anybody else not just in the ACC or FBS but in the history of college athletics?

Or maybe what need to happen is NC State's fans, booster, admin, etc. need to quit looking for boogeymen and excuses and actually make an effort at improving the most mediocre athletic program top to bottom there is.

Ouch!

Barbs from Newberry College don't hurt.

What hurts is having to cheat on US News Rankings by splitting classes up into three or four classes on paper so that you artificially decrease your average class size. After all athletics are just entertainment and education is the real thing. Not that academic dishonesty is a real issue for Clemson, is it?

Glass houses are really hot this time of year.

Perhaps the issue is one of eggs in the basket? If you put all your eggs in one basket and choke is that better than spreading your eggs around or is that mediocre. Yeah I guess that is mediocre.

http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/nacd...ndings.pdf

34th is mediocre. Of course that makes 45 more mediocre doesn't it? Or maybe not?

Hmm

UNC - 7
UVa - 8
ND - 16
Syr - 19
FSU - 24
NCSU - 34
VT - 37
Clem - 45
Miami - 46
BC - 54
WF - 69
Pitt - 88
GT - 100

The next time I see Woodson, I'll tell him we need to get rid of the Title IX **** and dump all the money into football and basketball, create a special major for the players, guarantee their eligibility, and guarantee a degree even if they can't read or write.

It's a shame to have to hide behind academics when your male revenue sports programs are failing. Some don't have that fig leaf.

(08-17-2016 11:53 AM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(08-17-2016 08:12 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-17-2016 08:10 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  With all the handicaps facing NC State and the redundancy one has to start to wonder what exactly it is they bring to the table in the conference. I mean does the ACC need a 4th team in NC when it's the school according to some facing more handicaps than anybody else not just in the ACC or FBS but in the history of college athletics?

Or maybe what need to happen is NC State's fans, booster, admin, etc. need to quit looking for boogeymen and excuses and actually make an effort at improving the most mediocre athletic program top to bottom there is.

Ouch!

Barbs from Newberry College don't hurt.

What hurts is having to cheat on US News Rankings by splitting classes up into three or four classes on paper so that you artificially decrease your average class size. After all athletics are just entertainment and education is the real thing. Not that academic dishonesty is a real issue for Clemson, is it?

Glass houses are really hot this time of year.

As always when you start to lose an argument you make a personal attack.

If ESPN were paying us what they were paying for academics you might have a point but they aren't and as usual you don't. NC State has brought absolutely nothing to the table athletically for the conference since the late 1980's. That's a fact that can't be denied. You aren't a football school, you aren't a basketball school and you aren't a baseball school. You don't bring a large contingent of fans on the road with you to help drive ticket sales and your overall mediocrity doesn't drive ticket prices. What besides another non-contributing mouth to feed does NC State bring to the table? Absolutely, positively nothing.