CSNbbs

According to ESPN.

I don’t agree but wow ESPN seems to be fully on the P6 bandwagon geez.

According to one talking head on an AAC game. The other guy tried to real him back by saying maybe in the SEC East.

(09-19-2019 08:50 PM)zoocrew Wrote: [ -> ]According to ESPN.

I don’t agree but wow ESPN seems to be fully on the P6 bandwagon geez.

Saying UCF is good and saying the AAC is P6 are two different things.

(09-19-2019 08:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-19-2019 08:50 PM)zoocrew Wrote: [ -> ]According to ESPN.

I don’t agree but wow ESPN seems to be fully on the P6 bandwagon geez.

Saying UCF is good and saying the AAC is P6 are two different things.

Can we treat the ACC the same way at least? Acknowledge Clemson's greatness and the relative mediocrity of the rest of the conference.

(09-19-2019 09:02 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-19-2019 08:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-19-2019 08:50 PM)zoocrew Wrote: [ -> ]According to ESPN.

I don’t agree but wow ESPN seems to be fully on the P6 bandwagon geez.

Saying UCF is good and saying the AAC is P6 are two different things.

Can we treat the ACC the same way at least? Acknowledge Clemson's greatness and the relative mediocrity of the rest of the conference.

I think people are sleeping on UVA, we should know more about them next week when they play ND. They shut out a decent South Carolina team and have handle everyone so far.

The talking heads can claim they belong but the company they work for refuses to give them P5 money.

This UH vs Tulane game has been entertaining.

(09-19-2019 09:02 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote: [ -> ]Can we treat the ACC the same way at least? Acknowledge Clemson's greatness and the relative mediocrity of the rest of the conference.

The media already does that. Using that word, even. For example:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc...332015001/

Quote:Other than Clemson, the ACC is at best mediocre.

(09-19-2019 08:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-19-2019 08:50 PM)zoocrew Wrote: [ -> ]According to ESPN.

I don’t agree but wow ESPN seems to be fully on the P6 bandwagon geez.

Saying UCF is good and saying the AAC is P6 are two different things.

Hush child

You guys need to take a cold shower. UCF is very good, but they beat Stanford who has struggled and isn't ranked and they beat them in the heat and humidity of Central Florida. Pitt is another questionable team so we'll see how that goes.

Galloway was in hyperbole mode pushing the AAC game tonight.

And to another poster in this thread South Carolina lost to UNC not Virginia and this is a new season with different players.

The ACC is very likely Clemson and everyone else. The AAC may not be just UCF and everyone else. Temple has a pretty good D and Tulane is no slouch as Houston is finding out right now.

And once again the issue for the G5 is evident tonight. How many warm bodies do you see in the stands???

Attendance is important at the P5 level. Donations are important at the P5 level.

When 1/3rd of your total expense is offset by gate and concessions, and another 1/3rd is offset by donations, and the media contract covers the final 1/3rd then you can talk P5. And I'm not trying to be hard on you guys.

Right now I'd say the MWC is probably better on the field than the PAC as an average of conference play, and that the AAC is pushing the ACC hard in the same regard and other than Clemson might be in the lead.

But it's the other things that make you valuable to the Big 12 or another P conference.

(09-19-2019 09:02 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-19-2019 08:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-19-2019 08:50 PM)zoocrew Wrote: [ -> ]According to ESPN.

I don’t agree but wow ESPN seems to be fully on the P6 bandwagon geez.

Saying UCF is good and saying the AAC is P6 are two different things.

Can we treat the ACC the same way at least? Acknowledge Clemson's greatness and the relative mediocrity of the rest of the conference.

Yes, except .... the ACC isn't as bad as is being proclaimed. We won't have the real numbers until about week 6, because all the computers are still using last year's data, but I bet anything that when we do reach week 6, the ACC will still be comfortably within the P5 range, even if they are in last - heck someone has to be last.

P6 for the AAC is far more problematic, because even considering just results on the gridiron, the AAC clearly isn't separated from the MW, and never really has been. As long as the MW is basically on the AAC's hip, which it is, then P6 can't even begin to get off the ground.

(09-19-2019 09:52 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]You guys need to take a cold shower. UCF is very good, but they beat Stanford who has struggled and isn't ranked and they beat them in the heat and humidity of Central Florida. Pitt is another questionable team so we'll see how that goes.

Yes, sadly for UCF, they are again stuck in a position where there are likely no games on their schedule that gives them an opportunity to prove how good they are. They didn't schedule an Oklahoma or a Wisconsin or an Ohio State, like some other AAC teams have. Stanford got wiped out by USC so they clearly weren't such a test, and Pitt already has two losses and we are just three games in to the season.

And looking ahead, two of the AAC games that looked like big matchups, Cincy and Houston, have already lost their lustre. Really, as of now, the two biggest AAC games remaining for UCF look to be Temple and Tulane, and ..... well enough said.

Big win by Tulane, maybe go with UC/Tulane as long term projects for the Big 12 with Houston the odd man out, along with the Florida pair.

(09-20-2019 07:57 AM)RUScarlets Wrote: [ -> ]Big win by Tulane, maybe go with UC/Tulane as long term projects for the Big 12 with Houston the odd man out, along with the Florida pair.

Tulane has all the intangibles to be a big time athletic university - desirable urban location, great academics, and a name that everyone is aware of. Even deep history as a major athletics university.

So I agree, if Tulane football can be brought up to upper-crust G5 level, they would suddenly become maybe the #1 prospect for an expanding Big 12.

That's always going to be tough to do in LSU's shadow, but if ...

UCF @Pitt should be a good litmus test this week. Pitt played Penn State very close, if UCF can blow them out then they certainly should be ranked ahead of a Penn State

(09-20-2019 07:49 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-19-2019 09:02 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-19-2019 08:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-19-2019 08:50 PM)zoocrew Wrote: [ -> ]According to ESPN.

I don’t agree but wow ESPN seems to be fully on the P6 bandwagon geez.

Saying UCF is good and saying the AAC is P6 are two different things.

Can we treat the ACC the same way at least? Acknowledge Clemson's greatness and the relative mediocrity of the rest of the conference.

Yes, except .... the ACC isn't as bad as is being proclaimed. We won't have the real numbers until about week 6, because all the computers are still using last year's data, but I bet anything that when we do reach week 6, the ACC will still be comfortably within the P5 range, even if they are in last - heck someone has to be last.

P6 for the AAC is far more problematic, because even considering just results on the gridiron, the AAC clearly isn't separated from the MW, and never really has been. As long as the MW is basically on the AAC's hip, which it is, then P6 can't even begin to get off the ground.

I agree with this here. Yes, the ACC as a whole really has a bad record, but they have played a very challenging schedule so far. This will all work itself out like you mentioned.

UCF is good, but wouldn't be 4th best in SEC, maybe not even 2nd best in East. We would have to see what UCF would do week after week playing SEC teams and handle they would handle being beatup and injuries. Dan Mullen will turn things around for Florida, just look at what he did at Miss State playing in the SEC West. Don't sleep on Florida for this season. If Tulane has sustained success, then maybe the Big12 could take a look at them.

The was another thread about biggest loser in expansion, in my mind it has been UCF. If there is a team that should be in the B12, it should be UCF. If the AAC can get the new rule to pass for Division-less football CCG for over 10, B12 would be wise to come calling.

(09-20-2019 08:32 AM)msm96wolf Wrote: [ -> ]The was another thread about biggest loser in expansion, in my mind it has been UCF. If there is a team that should be in the B12, it should be UCF. If the AAC can get the new rule to pass for Division-less football CCG for over 10, B12 would be wise to come calling.

UCF hasn't been a loser at all. They got a step up from CUSA to a better AAC. They're playing better opponents than they were previously, just signed a solid TV contract, and are able to regularly schedule home/homes with P5s.

If they keep up this streak for the immediate future they're pretty much a lock to be the next call up by either the ACC or Big 12.

UCF and USF to the ACC:

Quad 1: BC, Pitt, Cuse, USF
Quad 2: UVA, UNC, Duke, Miami
Quad 3: VT, NC St, WF, UCF
Quad 4: L’ville, Clemson, GT, FSU

protected rivalries:
USF-UCF
Miami-FSU
VT-UVA
UNC-NC St
Duke-WF

Everyone gets an annual Florida trip

Don't see UCF ever getting a ACC bid. FSU and Miami will vote no. NC schools will vote no, the don't want to give up being the state with four schools in the conference. ACC knows that Division-less may be the best hope if they ever join a conference. ND would likely be willing to be the only school in the conference willing not to have a conference rival. So they only need add 3 ACC games to be in the conference. Again, I don't see it happening any where in the near future but it would make it easier just to add ND and no one else if that time would ever to happen.