(02-03-2012 08:09 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  Commissioner Swofford explains ACC's new football, basketball schedules

To paraphrase:

Quote:Swofford -In typical ACC fashion we took a look at what would be the best for football in general (8 conference games, spreading the wealth regarding trips up north in recruiting wastelands) and we did the opposite

Swofford wears sissy blue clown shoes.

(02-04-2012 09:57 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

(02-03-2012 08:09 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  Commissioner Swofford explains ACC's new football, basketball schedules

To paraphrase:

Quote:Swofford -In typical ACC fashion we took a look at what would be the best for football in general (8 conference games, spreading the wealth regarding trips up north in recruiting wastelands) and we did the opposite

Swofford wears sissy blue clown shoes.

New York

Pennsylvania - Has more four/five star recruits than SC.

Massachusetts

South Carolina - Looks just like NY and MA...

These are recruiting wastelands...

Connecticut

Kansas

Iowa

West Virginia

Notice how 3 of them are in the mighty XII, that you want so badly to be in. Even Oklahoma is comparable to NY, MA, and SC...

(02-04-2012 10:06 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  

(02-04-2012 09:57 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

(02-03-2012 08:09 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  Commissioner Swofford explains ACC's new football, basketball schedules

To paraphrase:

Quote:Swofford -In typical ACC fashion we took a look at what would be the best for football in general (8 conference games, spreading the wealth regarding trips up north in recruiting wastelands) and we did the opposite

Swofford wears sissy blue clown shoes.

New York

Pennsylvania

Massachusetts

Pennsylvania isn't a recruiting wasteland and considering the fact that they aren't in the Atlantic, the point still stands.

Eight total four star players between NY and Mass. Maryland produced two five stars and six 4 stars by itself. This was a horrible year in SC as far as the crop of prospects and we still produced a 5 star and four 5 stars. In 2011 SC produced two 5 stars and six four stars by itself with nowhere near the population of just NY, much less NY and Mass.

(02-04-2012 10:16 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  Pennsylvania isn't a recruiting wasteland and considering the fact that they aren't in the Atlantic, the point still stands.

Eight total four star players between NY and Mass. Maryland produced two five stars and six 4 stars by itself. This was a horrible year in SC as far as the crop of prospects and we still produced a 5 star and four 5 stars. In 2011 SC produced two 5 stars and six four stars by itself with nowhere near the population of just NY, much less NY and Mass.

NY and MA are far better recruiting states than most of the XII. Only Texas is considerably better than NY and MA...

Kansas, Iowa, and West Virginia are fare below NY and MA. Oklahoma is equal.

If New York sucks so bad, then you can hand over Kelly to us. He'll be a huge bust since he's from a recruiting wasteland...

(02-04-2012 10:20 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  NY and MA are far better recruiting states than most of the XII. Only Texas is considerably better than NY and MA...

Kansas, Iowa, and West Virginia are fare below NY and MA. Oklahoma is equal.

If New York sucks so bad, then you can hand over Kelly to us. He'll be a huge bust since he's from a recruiting wasteland...

NY and Mass produced this year combined the same amount of high profile talent that South Carolina produced in the worst year recruiting wise we have had in 20+ years despite the fact that between the two states there are almost 21 million more people. That's an awful lot of garbage to have to sift through to find 8 players worth the travel.


Kelly is from PA. He only went to Buffalo when he got kicked off the Red Lion football team.

(02-04-2012 10:41 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  NY and Mass produced this year combined the same amount of high profile talent that South Carolina produced in the worst year recruiting wise we have had in 20+ years despite the fact that between the two states there are almost 21 million more people. That's an awful lot of garbage to have to sift through to find 8 players worth the travel.


Kelly is from PA. He only went to Buffalo when he got kicked off the Red Lion football team.

He still played against awful NY competition.

You never responded to the awful recruiting areas in the XII. It's literally just Texas. NY and MA are far superior to Kansas, Iowa, and West Virginia. NY and MA are equal with Oklahoma.

Why are you okay with visiting states like those, but not NY and MA? Our football programs, overall, have been equal, except for WVU (Which we absolutely destroyed this past year).

The ACC is superior to the XII in everything. Except right now the XII has better play on the field. Times change, "shift happens". You're willing to harm your favorite university, to be in a better football conference at the moment. Clemson has a tremendous home in the ACC, and you can't see it. You'd rather throw it away for a conference that just lost 4 key members.

I guess coming from an unstable conference, the Big East, I have a different perspective.

(02-04-2012 09:29 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  I have honestly yet to find a Clemson fan that thinks this is a good idea. I have only found a few that even have a neutral opinion. The vast majority are upset because they know that we are essentially trading an assured sellout each year from a high profile OOC game for an additional game against a conference team that will not travel.

This is a prime example as to why the ACC sucks in football. The rot starts at the top. When you have piss poor leadership nothing good is going to come of any venture you attempt to make.

If you want to play another BCS team in addition to USC then get your AD to do it. Stop being so melodramatic. Most other teams schedule another BCS team too. The ACC isn't telling you that you can't. It really isn't a lot different than when we had 11 games a year and 8 conference games. VT has Cincy, Wisconsin, Ohio State, and Alabama on upcomming schedules. Nobody expects us to drop them. We are all looking forward to dropping App State and Austin Pea. Our AD doesn't like to pay the high guarantees that are the norm these days. So we will all be saving at minimum 500k a year. You could take that money and put it towards getting a higher profile team for the remaining two slots you have.

I would suggest we wait until Syracuse makes its first trip to Clemson before judging if they will travel.

If anything, the most recent NC State/Syracuse basketball game in Raleigh bears out the fact there are a great deal of transplanted Syracuse fans living in the Triangle area alone, let alone across NC. Another thing -- when ECU and Syracuse played FB on the regular, Orange fans traveled in great numbers to Greenville.

So, while I understand CDs' frustrations, I look forward to seeing how the Orange travel to Clemson. God forbid they attempt to disprove CDaddys' claims by pulling the "stamped" dollar trick the Clemson fans did to prove their fans traveled well, some 20 years ago. That would be some delicious irony.

(02-04-2012 09:29 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  I have honestly yet to find a Clemson fan that thinks this is a good idea. I have only found a few that even have a neutral opinion. The vast majority are upset because they know that we are essentially trading an assured sellout each year from a high profile OOC game for an additional game against a conference team that will not travel.

This is a prime example as to why the ACC sucks in football. The rot starts at the top. When you have piss poor leadership nothing good is going to come of any venture you attempt to make.

That's odd since the decision was made by a committee made up of faculty representatives from EVERY school in the ACC and ALL of their athletic directors.
Evidently the Clemson Athletic department though it was a good idea.

(02-05-2012 03:52 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-04-2012 09:29 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  I have honestly yet to find a Clemson fan that thinks this is a good idea. I have only found a few that even have a neutral opinion. The vast majority are upset because they know that we are essentially trading an assured sellout each year from a high profile OOC game for an additional game against a conference team that will not travel.

This is a prime example as to why the ACC sucks in football. The rot starts at the top. When you have piss poor leadership nothing good is going to come of any venture you attempt to make.

That's odd since the decision was made my a committee made up of faculty representatives from EVERY school in the ACC and ALL of their athletic directors.
Evidently the Clemson Athletic department though it was a good idea.

My thinking also XLance. And while I initially thought SU would be in the Coastal; I am warming up to the idea of SU in the Atlantic.

(02-04-2012 11:19 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  If you want to play another BCS team in addition to USC then get your AD to do it.

Easy to say, impossible to do.

Unlike the majority of the ACC we make a ton of money off of a home game regardless of the opponent. It works out because football pays the bills for the sports we have to have because the NCAA mandates athletic welfare, but to pay the bills in the rest of the athletic department we have to play 7 home games a year unless the payout is close to #2 million. In the years we play 5 conference games on the road we have to play all three OOC games at home to make this happen. That means the years we have to play 5 conference road games need to be the even numbered years so that we get South Carolina at home. FSU is in the same boat in that they play @ UF odd years and home vs UF in even years. (Of course if it is like anything else football related the ACC does look for them to screw us with 5 conference road games and South Carolina on the road in a season.)

Find us a top level BCS opponent to play that will not require a return game at their stadium and we will be more than happy to play them.

(02-05-2012 09:58 AM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  I would suggest we wait until Syracuse makes its first trip to Clemson before judging if they will travel.

If anything, the most recent NC State/Syracuse basketball game in Raleigh bears out the fact there are a great deal of transplanted Syracuse fans living in the Triangle area alone, let alone across NC. Another thing -- when ECU and Syracuse played FB on the regular, Orange fans traveled in great numbers to Greenville.

So, while I understand CDs' frustrations, I look forward to seeing how the Orange travel to Clemson. God forbid they attempt to disprove CDaddys' claims by pulling the "stamped" dollar trick the Clemson fans did to prove their fans traveled well, some 20 years ago. That would be some delicious irony.

Well, other than Clemson, FSU, GT, and VT it's not like the ACC has set the bar really high when it comes to bringing visiting fans, plus to hear any of the NC school's fanbases talk 2k fans on the road is a "great crowd".

I'll be willing to put good money on the fact that the first trip Syracuse makes doesn't come close to the amount of fans that the series against Georgia, Ole Miss, and Oklahoma State would bring.

(02-05-2012 03:52 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-04-2012 09:29 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  I have honestly yet to find a Clemson fan that thinks this is a good idea. I have only found a few that even have a neutral opinion. The vast majority are upset because they know that we are essentially trading an assured sellout each year from a high profile OOC game for an additional game against a conference team that will not travel.

This is a prime example as to why the ACC sucks in football. The rot starts at the top. When you have piss poor leadership nothing good is going to come of any venture you attempt to make.

That's odd since the decision was made my a committee made up of faculty representatives from EVERY school in the ACC and ALL of their athletic directors.
Evidently the Clemson Athletic department though it was a good idea.

You show me proof that Clemson voted for it and I'll be glad to use that with the rest of the ammunition we have on Terry Don Phillips and James Barker to get rid of their asses and get some leadership in there with the gonads to tell Chapel Hill's pet monkey Swofford to go piss up a rope.

Catdaddy's fit got me to wondering if other schools were dodging big name schools as he claims.

So here is some research.

Clemson's OOC sched for reference:
USC, Auburn, Troy, FCS
USC, Auburn, No TX, FCS
USC, TCU, MTSU, FCS
USC, Alabama, 2 FCS
USC, Cent Michigan, La-Monroe, FCS
USC, Temple, LA Tech, FAU
USC, TAMU, Temple

Looking back into the early 2000’s when there were 11 games Clemson played UGA, VT, and Missouri

UNC:
Lville, Rutgers, ECU, FCS
LSU, Rutgers, ECU, FCS
UConn, ECU, 2 FCS
UConn, Rutgers, ND, FCS
USCe, USF, ECU, FCS
ND, USF, Rutgers, FCS
L'ville, Wisconsin, Utah

VT:
ECU, Marshall, Ark St, FCS
Boise, ECU, CMU, FCS
Alabama, Nebraska, ECU, Marshall
Nebraska, ECU, WKU, FCS
LSU, ECU, Ohio, FCS
Cincy, So Miss, Kent St, FCS
WVU, Marshall, Ohio

UVA:
Indiana, So Miss, Idaho, FCS
So Cal, EMU, 2 FCS
Indiana, TCU, So Miss, FCS
So Cal, UConn, ECU, FCS
Pitt, UConn, Wyoming, FCS
Pitt, WMU, ECU, Wyoming
Cuse, Temple, WMU

Maryland:
ND, WVU, Temple, FCS
WVU, Navy, FIU, FCS
Rutgers, Cal, MTSU, FCS
Rutgers, WVU, FIU, FCS
WVU, FIU, 2FCS
WVU, Temple, Navy

NCSU:
Cincy, CMU, 2FCS
Cincy, UCF, ECU, FCS
Pitt, USC, 2FCS
USF, USC, ECU, FCS
Lville, ECU, UCF, FCS
ECU, So Miss, Akron, FCS
So Miss, 2FCS

Miami:
OSU, KSU, USF, FCS
OSU, Pitt, USF, FCS
OU, USF, UCF, FCS
TAMU, UF, UCF, FCS
TAMU, OU, Marshall, FIU
Lville, Houston, FIU, FCS
Colorado, USF, Temple

Florida State:
UF, OU, La Monroe, FCS
UF, OU, BYU, FCS
UF, USF, BYU, FCS
UF, Colorado, 2FCS
UF, Alabama, Colorado, UAB
UF, Rice, WMU, Troy
UF, Cuse, FCS

GT:
UGA, Kansas, MTSU, FCS
UGA, Kansas, MTSU, FCS
UGA, Vandy, Miss St, FCS
UGA, Miss St, 2FCS
UGA, ND, Army, FCS
UGA, ND, Troy, FCS
UGA, Auburn, UConn

Wake:
Vandy, ND, Cuse, FCS
Vandy, Stanford, Navy, FCS
Stanford, Navy, Baylor, FCS
Vandy, Navy, Ol Miss, Baylor
Nebraska, Vandy, Navy, Army
UConn, Cuse, Ol Miss, FCS
Nebraska, Vandy, ECU

BC:
ND, Northwestern, UCF, FCS
ND, Cuse, Kent St, FCS
ND, CMU, Kent, FCS
ND, UCF, Kent St, FCS
ND, Army, Bowling Green, FCS
BYU, CMU, Buffalo, FCS
BYU, Army, Ball St

Duke:
Stanford, Tulane, FIU, FCS
Alabama, Navy, Army, FCS
Kansas, Army, 2FCS
Vandy, Northwestern, Navy, FCS
ND, Northwestern, UConn, Navy
Alabama, Vandy, Navy, FCS
ECU, Navy, FCS

I don't think you could expect anymore from Duke. Wake, BC, UNC and Maryland all have good schedules. Miami, FSU, and GT have great schedules. NCSU, VT, and UVA have a couple of bad years. I'd put Clemson's schedule between the great and the good groups.

I'm not seeing the huge scheduling disparity conspiracy.

The facts are that when there were 11 games Clemson was playing ooc BCS schools in addition to USC most years. If you look at nearly everyone's schedules prior to the expansion you will find BC, Miami, VT, Cuse, and Pitt on them. The fact is that the ACC teams were already playing 8 games plus frequent games against these new ACC teams. So having them as a 9th conference game isn't much different than what has been occurring. FSU was playing both UF and Miami ooc for a while when there were only 11 games and also scheduling big time schools in addition.

(02-05-2012 10:31 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

(02-04-2012 11:19 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  If you want to play another BCS team in addition to USC then get your AD to do it.

Easy to say, impossible to do.

Unlike the majority of the ACC we make a ton of money off of a home game regardless of the opponent. It works out because football pays the bills for the sports we have to have because the NCAA mandates athletic welfare, but to pay the bills in the rest of the athletic department we have to play 7 home games a year unless the payout is close to #2 million. In the years we play 5 conference games on the road we have to play all three OOC games at home to make this happen. That means the years we have to play 5 conference road games need to be the even numbered years so that we get South Carolina at home. FSU is in the same boat in that they play @ UF odd years and home vs UF in even years. (Of course if it is like anything else football related the ACC does look for them to screw us with 5 conference road games and South Carolina on the road in a season.)

Find us a top level BCS opponent to play that will not require a return game at their stadium and we will be more than happy to play them.

Call Boise State. They'll play an away game without requiring a return game.

(02-06-2012 12:44 AM)4x4hokies Wrote:  Catdaddy's fit got me to wondering if other schools were dodging big name schools as he claims.

So here is some research.

Clemson's OOC sched for reference:
USC, Auburn, Troy, FCS
USC, Auburn, No TX, FCS
USC, TCU, MTSU, FCS
USC, Alabama, 2 FCS
USC, Cent Michigan, La-Monroe, FCS
USC, Temple, LA Tech, FAU
USC, TAMU, Temple

Looking back into the early 2000’s when there were 11 games Clemson played UGA, VT, and Missouri

UNC:
Lville, Rutgers, ECU, FCS
LSU, Rutgers, ECU, FCS
UConn, ECU, 2 FCS
UConn, Rutgers, ND, FCS
USCe, USF, ECU, FCS
ND, USF, Rutgers, FCS
L'ville, Wisconsin, Utah

VT:
ECU, Marshall, Ark St, FCS
Boise, ECU, CMU, FCS
Alabama, Nebraska, ECU, Marshall
Nebraska, ECU, WKU, FCS
LSU, ECU, Ohio, FCS
Cincy, So Miss, Kent St, FCS
WVU, Marshall, Ohio

UVA:
Indiana, So Miss, Idaho, FCS
So Cal, EMU, 2 FCS
Indiana, TCU, So Miss, FCS
So Cal, UConn, ECU, FCS
Pitt, UConn, Wyoming, FCS
Pitt, WMU, ECU, Wyoming
Cuse, Temple, WMU

Maryland:
ND, WVU, Temple, FCS
WVU, Navy, FIU, FCS
Rutgers, Cal, MTSU, FCS
Rutgers, WVU, FIU, FCS
WVU, FIU, 2FCS
WVU, Temple, Navy

NCSU:
Cincy, CMU, 2FCS
Cincy, UCF, ECU, FCS
Pitt, USC, 2FCS
USF, USC, ECU, FCS
Lville, ECU, UCF, FCS
ECU, So Miss, Akron, FCS
So Miss, 2FCS

Miami:
OSU, KSU, USF, FCS
OSU, Pitt, USF, FCS
OU, USF, UCF, FCS
TAMU, UF, UCF, FCS
TAMU, OU, Marshall, FIU
Lville, Houston, FIU, FCS
Colorado, USF, Temple

Florida State:
UF, OU, La Monroe, FCS
UF, OU, BYU, FCS
UF, USF, BYU, FCS
UF, Colorado, 2FCS
UF, Alabama, Colorado, UAB
UF, Rice, WMU, Troy
UF, Cuse, FCS

GT:
UGA, Kansas, MTSU, FCS
UGA, Kansas, MTSU, FCS
UGA, Vandy, Miss St, FCS
UGA, Miss St, 2FCS
UGA, ND, Army, FCS
UGA, ND, Troy, FCS
UGA, Auburn, UConn

Wake:
Vandy, ND, Cuse, FCS
Vandy, Stanford, Navy, FCS
Stanford, Navy, Baylor, FCS
Vandy, Navy, Ol Miss, Baylor
Nebraska, Vandy, Navy, Army
UConn, Cuse, Ol Miss, FCS
Nebraska, Vandy, ECU

BC:
ND, Northwestern, UCF, FCS
ND, Cuse, Kent St, FCS
ND, CMU, Kent, FCS
ND, UCF, Kent St, FCS
ND, Army, Bowling Green, FCS
BYU, CMU, Buffalo, FCS
BYU, Army, Ball St

Duke:
Stanford, Tulane, FIU, FCS
Alabama, Navy, Army, FCS
Kansas, Army, 2FCS
Vandy, Northwestern, Navy, FCS
ND, Northwestern, UConn, Navy
Alabama, Vandy, Navy, FCS
ECU, Navy, FCS

I don't think you could expect anymore from Duke. Wake, BC, UNC and Maryland all have good schedules. Miami, FSU, and GT have great schedules. NCSU, VT, and UVA have a couple of bad years. I'd put Clemson's schedule between the great and the good groups.

I'm not seeing the huge scheduling disparity conspiracy.

The facts are that when there were 11 games Clemson was playing ooc BCS schools in addition to USC most years. If you look at nearly everyone's schedules prior to the expansion you will find BC, Miami, VT, Cuse, and Pitt on them. The fact is that the ACC teams were already playing 8 games plus frequent games against these new ACC teams. So having them as a 9th conference game isn't much different than what has been occurring. FSU was playing both UF and Miami ooc for a while when there were only 11 games and also scheduling big time schools in addition.

If you consider ECU, USF and UCF as BCS calibre competition, then a lot of those schedules are stacked when combined with the other opponents. I think they all look pretty respectable. NCSTate does need to learn to not schedule 2 FCS games. They'll have 6 wins and not be bowl elligible one of these years because of it.

Hall of Famers by College


Southern California (11)
Notre Dame (10)
Michigan (8)
Ohio State (8)
Pittsburgh (8)
Alabama (7)
Syracuse (7)

Coughlin, Freeney, Harrison, and McNabb all have a case for the HOF. I think at least 2 get in.

Then horrible, horrible, Syracuse will be in 3rd place.

Miami (5)
Virginia (3)
Duke (3)
Boston College (2)
Florida State (2)
Georgia Tech (2)
Maryland (2)
North Carolina (2)
Virginia Tech (1)
Wake Forest (1)

North Carolina State (0)
Clemson (0)

(02-03-2012 12:48 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  

(02-03-2012 12:46 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  The '03-'04 expansion saw the first round of de-emphasizing the "Big 4" by ending the annual home-home games between NC State/Duke, and UNC/Wake Forest.

This expansion has completely buried the "Big 4" now that NC State/UNC will no longer play home-home annually.

Never. Thought. I'd. See. This. Day. Coming.

It's beautiful, isn't it?

No. Swofford sold out the tradition & history of this conference. He deserves to be flogged, then drawn & quartered, then set on fire, then fired.

Just a comparison

Trips over 600 miles that UNC has to make to visit their Coastal Division foes: 1 ( Miami 805 miles)

Trips over 600 miles that NC state has to make to visit their Atlantic Division foes: 3 (BC 695 miles, Syracuse 635 miles, FSU 615 miles)

Trips under 200 miles UNC has to make for divisional games: 3
Trips under 200 miles NC State has to make for divisional games: 1

Average UNC divisional trip : 337 miles
Average NC State divisional trip: 435 miles

Pure coincidence I am sure.

(02-06-2012 12:40 PM)Lucy Wrote:  

(02-03-2012 12:48 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  

(02-03-2012 12:46 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  The '03-'04 expansion saw the first round of de-emphasizing the "Big 4" by ending the annual home-home games between NC State/Duke, and UNC/Wake Forest.

This expansion has completely buried the "Big 4" now that NC State/UNC will no longer play home-home annually.

Never. Thought. I'd. See. This. Day. Coming.

It's beautiful, isn't it?

No. Swofford sold out the tradition & history of this conference. He deserves to be flogged, then drawn & quartered, then set on fire, then fired.

If he had not expanded the Acc, the Acc would be currently occupying the position that the BE currently occupies. You think you are unhappy now?