A few thoughts:

-Lipstick on a pig fits. The schedule is UGLY. To get an objective look, I quickly glanced at UNC's SOS number on a few computer ratings that were used for the BCS calculations. SOS was #71, #73, & #88 on three sites. Opponents include 2 FCS, you missed the top 3 in the Atlantic, you played the SEC East cellar dweller. We all agree the ACC is down this year, and the computers would rate Illinois 11th if you placed them in the ACC. It's rough when the Illini are the top OOC win. Not to mention a maximum of 6 UNC opponents will be bowl eligible, and it could be as low as 4 opponents.

-The above point is disappointing because I think UNC is better than they've been able to show competition wise the last month. It's hard to say for sure due to the weak competition, but there aren't a ton of teams I'd pick straight up over the Heels at the moment.

-In regards to lumber's comment about NC State perhaps going 10-0 with UNC's schedule up to the moment, that claim is highly dubious. The Wolfpack failed to play a top 100 team out of conference. Think of it like this, as bad as UNC's schedule is, the Heels have 6 wins (Pitt, Duke, Miami, GA Tech, Illinois, & UVA) that are all better than NC State's best win (3-7 Wake Forest) up to this point.

(11-16-2015 06:24 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 06:16 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 05:04 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

OP in graphic form.

Yo mama. Yes I'm breaking out the yo mama jokes.

ACC schools shouldn't be playing FCS teams. They should be playing P5 and higher level G5 programs.

(11-16-2015 08:05 PM)CollegeCard Wrote:  A few thoughts:

-Lipstick on a pig fits. The schedule is UGLY. To get an objective look, I quickly glanced at UNC's SOS number on a few computer ratings that were used for the BCS calculations. SOS was #71, #73, & #88 on three sites. Opponents include 2 FCS, you missed the top 3 in the Atlantic, you played the SEC East cellar dweller. We all agree the ACC is down this year, and the computers would rate Illinois 11th if you placed them in the ACC. It's rough when the Illini are the top OOC win. Not to mention a maximum of 6 UNC opponents will be bowl eligible, and it could be as low as 4 opponents.

-The above point is disappointing because I think UNC is better than they've been able to show competition wise the last month. It's hard to say for sure due to the weak competition, but there aren't a ton of teams I'd pick straight up over the Heels at the moment.

-In regards to lumber's comment about NC State perhaps going 10-0 with UNC's schedule up to the moment, that claim is highly dubious. The Wolfpack failed to play a top 100 team out of conference. Think of it like this, as bad as UNC's schedule is, the Heels have 6 wins (Pitt, Duke, Miami, GA Tech, Illinois, & UVA) that are all better than NC State's best win (3-7 Wake Forest) up to this point.

You completely missed the point of my post. I know the schedule isn't epic, but it's not as bad as people claim. We are handling teams in a manner that only the best teams are able to do. It's not like we're just barely getting by. These teams have played other really good schools in and outside of the conference. Compare our games and how our opponents have done with other teams.

(11-16-2015 09:11 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 08:05 PM)CollegeCard Wrote:  A few thoughts:

-Lipstick on a pig fits. The schedule is UGLY. To get an objective look, I quickly glanced at UNC's SOS number on a few computer ratings that were used for the BCS calculations. SOS was #71, #73, & #88 on three sites. Opponents include 2 FCS, you missed the top 3 in the Atlantic, you played the SEC East cellar dweller. We all agree the ACC is down this year, and the computers would rate Illinois 11th if you placed them in the ACC. It's rough when the Illini are the top OOC win. Not to mention a maximum of 6 UNC opponents will be bowl eligible, and it could be as low as 4 opponents.

-The above point is disappointing because I think UNC is better than they've been able to show competition wise the last month. It's hard to say for sure due to the weak competition, but there aren't a ton of teams I'd pick straight up over the Heels at the moment.

-In regards to lumber's comment about NC State perhaps going 10-0 with UNC's schedule up to the moment, that claim is highly dubious. The Wolfpack failed to play a top 100 team out of conference. Think of it like this, as bad as UNC's schedule is, the Heels have 6 wins (Pitt, Duke, Miami, GA Tech, Illinois, & UVA) that are all better than NC State's best win (3-7 Wake Forest) up to this point.

You completely missed the point of my post. I know the schedule isn't epic, but it's not as bad as people claim. We are handling teams in a manner that only the best teams are able to do. It's not like we're just barely getting by. These teams have played other really good schools in and outside of the conference. Compare our games and how our opponents have done with other teams.

Kentucky beat South Carolina.

(11-16-2015 09:14 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 09:11 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 08:05 PM)CollegeCard Wrote:  A few thoughts:

-Lipstick on a pig fits. The schedule is UGLY. To get an objective look, I quickly glanced at UNC's SOS number on a few computer ratings that were used for the BCS calculations. SOS was #71, #73, & #88 on three sites. Opponents include 2 FCS, you missed the top 3 in the Atlantic, you played the SEC East cellar dweller. We all agree the ACC is down this year, and the computers would rate Illinois 11th if you placed them in the ACC. It's rough when the Illini are the top OOC win. Not to mention a maximum of 6 UNC opponents will be bowl eligible, and it could be as low as 4 opponents.

-The above point is disappointing because I think UNC is better than they've been able to show competition wise the last month. It's hard to say for sure due to the weak competition, but there aren't a ton of teams I'd pick straight up over the Heels at the moment.

-In regards to lumber's comment about NC State perhaps going 10-0 with UNC's schedule up to the moment, that claim is highly dubious. The Wolfpack failed to play a top 100 team out of conference. Think of it like this, as bad as UNC's schedule is, the Heels have 6 wins (Pitt, Duke, Miami, GA Tech, Illinois, & UVA) that are all better than NC State's best win (3-7 Wake Forest) up to this point.

You completely missed the point of my post. I know the schedule isn't epic, but it's not as bad as people claim. We are handling teams in a manner that only the best teams are able to do. It's not like we're just barely getting by. These teams have played other really good schools in and outside of the conference. Compare our games and how our opponents have done with other teams.

Kentucky beat South Carolina.

What did the first two points of my post say? Read it again Kap.

(11-16-2015 05:59 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 05:52 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  If NC State had your schedule we would be no worse than 8-2, perhaps 10-0.

I couldn't get past this part to read the rest of the post. This is ridiculous. Doeren has a 5-17 ACC record. Only 6 of those losses are to FSU and Clemson. What about the other 11? You would not have won at GT. You wouldn't have won at Pitt. Both Miami and Duke are tossups and you could have lost both of them. I'm not so sure you would have beaten Illinois. It's hard to say because you didn't play a P5 team OOC.

In Doeren's first year he was left with no Division one QB and the worst talent in the ACC buy Tom O'Brien. In that first year of the nine losses, FSU was ranked 1, Clemson 8, Duke 23, and ECU has 10 wins that year.

In his second year out of an 8-5 record four of the losses were to ranked schools - FSU 5, GT 8, Clemson 15, Louisville 24.

This year we have had Clemson 1, FSU 16, and UNC is now around 12.

9 of the 17 losses were to ranked ACC teams and in an interesting twist one of our cross over games has involved a ranked team. When you have little talent to start playing 3 and 4 highly ranked teams is a tall order.

If you look at the CBS 128 they currently have State's schedule as follows:

Troy 107, WF 100, ODU, 98, Syr 97, BC 95, South Alabama 90, Louisville 69, VT 62, FSU 18, UNC 13, and Clemson 1. We should have beaten Louisville but we choked after a fluke play created a 14 point turnaround. We played one FCS. State's average game has been against an average rank of 68. The best win is only 90, but the worst loss is only 69.

Here is your schedule not including your two FCS:

WF 100, South Carolina 86, UVa 84, GT 82, Ill 66, VT 62, UM 60, Duke 50, NC State 46, Pitt 39. Your average D-1 game has been against an average rank of 68. Your best win against 39, you worst loss against 86.

Now Carolina has wins against 39, 50, 60, 66, 82, 84, but hasn't played anyone better than 39. On the other hand State has already played 1 and 18, and UNC will likely be anywhere from 10-18 next week.

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.

But you will have a chance if you win out to play a team that is ranked nearly 40 spots ahead of your best win. (Although I think Pitt is really a 23-30 team)

it wouldn't surprised me if UNC lost at Va tech and at NC state

and Pit won their last two, at home vs Lville and Miami.

then Pitt gets into Acc title game

I don't think UNC has been blowing most teams out, Pitt, UVA, G Tech were all close off top of my head. Miami obviously has some issues.

(11-16-2015 09:11 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  You completely missed the point of my post. I know the schedule isn't epic, but it's not as bad as people claim. We are handling teams in a manner that only the best teams are able to do. It's not like we're just barely getting by. These teams have played other really good schools in and outside of the conference. Compare our games and how our opponents have done with other teams.

Oh no, I got it. Disagreement doesn't mean someone missed the point. The SOS is key, because it is mediocre and beating sub-.500 teams by large margins only tells you so much.

As I mentioned above though, that doesn't mean I'm down on UNC's potential. They just don't get a chance to show it before the conference title game.

i'm surprised NC State doesn't have a better record, that qb is tough to take down

(11-16-2015 11:52 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  We should have beaten Louisville but we choked after a fluke play created a 14 point turnaround.

That's quite the one-sided view. A fluke play creating a 14 point turnaround would seem to imply a team's going into score and throws a 90 yard pick six for example. What actually happened is NC State fumbled in the UofL red zone, and then the Cards scored a TD more than three and a half minutes later.

I find the word "choke" interesting as well considering the Cards never trailed and led NC State for the final 49 minutes of the game. They also outgained NC State, holding the Pack to only 228 total yards of offense. When you can only manage 45 yards rushing on 30 rush attempts at home, that's called getting beat, not losing on a fluke play.

(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.

I've probably read this comment that you've shared at least 5 times on this board, but haven't seen it elsewhere. I understand the concept in theory but honestly it comes off as an excuse and makes it appear as if State simply needs to recruit better depth.

Louisville is only two years into the league and is 4-0 in games following a match-up vs. Clemson/FSU. Even if you discount that 1 subsequent opponent was FCS, the other 3 were all ACC games where the Cards won by an average of 11 points a contest.

(11-17-2015 12:55 AM)CollegeCard 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.

I've probably read this comment that you've shared at least 5 times on this board, but haven't seen it elsewhere. I understand the concept in theory but honestly it comes off as an excuse and makes it appear as if State simply needs to recruit better depth.

Louisville is only two years into the league and is 4-0 in games following a match-up vs. Clemson/FSU. Even if you discount that 1 subsequent opponent was FCS, the other 3 were all ACC games where the Cards won by an average of 11 points a contest.

That's because like most of Lumber's posts it's a fairytale he's posted so much he's even starting to believe it.

In the past 10 years (counting this year) NCSU has a winning record in the games following FSU & Clemson even with two of the losses being 2010 & 2014 when Clemson was the game following FSU.

(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.

(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?

(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.

Good analysis. Clemson and FSU are definitely the top teams in the ACC, but the Coastal is more competitive top-to-bottom than the Atlantic. I'm tired of people trashing the Coastal division just because it doesn't have a national championship contender (yet).

(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.

An alternative analysis:

Delware hung around until late.

Illinois is terrible. They beat the worst or 2nd worst Nebraska team since .... well you probably have to go all the way back into the 80's.

The worst Georgia Tech team since 1996. Injury plague particularly at A-Back making things worse. Both defensive leaders also out. So bad the offensive line has been partially abandoned mid-season. Starting WR quit the team. The beat FSU partially on a fluke play and partially on some really flat and uninspired play out of the FSU offense.

Wake Forest and Virginia are the ACC's doormat. Plain and simple. "But GTS, you lost to Virginia?" Yes, the Curse of Scott Scisson is alive and well. GT has only won once or twice in Charlottesville since 1990. Even Joe Hamilton didn't win up there.

Pitt: Scrappy, but mediocre.

Duke: Surprisingly good defense. But absolutely no depth to it. Offense has seriously regressed under Sirk.

Miami: This year's version of the Canes is worse than all of Larry Coker's teams. Is it worse than all of Randy Shannon's too? It's possible.

Sagarin ranks your strength of schedule as #73 in the country. The only teams with a lower strength of schedule in the Top 50 are Houston (#103) and Wisconsin (#77).

RPI ranks your strength of schedule as #83.

Your team has gotten the ACC's version of the B1G West in scheduling. No truly hideous teams .... but nobody who would finish better than 5th in the SEC West. And you took a very soft OOC schedule to go with it. And you couldn't even take care of that, courtesy of the worst team fielded by Steve Spurrier since his first year at Duke.

Your strength of schedule if comparable to Iowa. There's a reason Iowa is 10-0 and only just NOW starting to get highly ranked.

My prediction? Iowa and UNC both get waxed in their championship games.

You too have lost the spirit of my post. I wasn't focused on teams W-L records. I was focused on how competitive they are in their games not involving us.

So Illinois is terrible, yet they the beat Nebraska. Nebraska has lost 5 games by 5 or fewer points. Then they turned around and beat Michigan State. So don't tell me they're not competitive. Illinois was also competitive in games against Iowa and Wisconsin.

So the worst GT team since 1996 still has the athletes and competitiveness to beat FSU. Ok.

Wake Forest and UVA are doomats, but both teams made Notre Dame sweat. Ok.

The combined W-L record for teams that beat Pitt is 28-2. Ok.

So you say Duke has a surprisingly good defense yet we hung 66 on them. Ok.

This year's Canes aren't world beaters but only two teams have been able to take them to the woodshed. One of them is the#1 team in the country. The other is us. Ok.


Yeah we might get crushed by Clemson in the ACCCG. I will take comfort in the fact we've beaten the Jackets two years in a row.

UNC has played a extremely soft schedule but with the exception of SC they have beat the teams they should beat period. They have more talent from top to bottom then everybody in the division except maybe Miami.

(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.