(11-12-2016 01:21 AM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  ...regarding transitions.

Georgia- 1st year head coach.
SC- 1st year head coach.
Missouri- 1st year head coach.
Tennessee- Butch Jones??? (He said it takes 5 years to build a championship team.. So I guess Tennessee turns the corner next season?) (Sarcasm)
Florida- 2nd year head coach.
Vanderbilt- They aren't a football power, but they have improved. This is just Mason's third season.
Kentucky- Has shown decent improvement, will they continue is the question.

The SEC East is going through a lot of transition at the moment.

Agreed. However, that same logic applies to the ACC, especially the Coastal division:
VT - 1st year head coach at P5 level
Miami - new coach, bare cupboard
UVA - new coach, bare cupboard
Syracuse - 1st year head coach at P5 level

Also, UNC lost to UGA... yeah, I got nothing for them.

(11-12-2016 09:14 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(11-12-2016 01:21 AM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  ...regarding transitions.

Georgia- 1st year head coach.
SC- 1st year head coach.
Missouri- 1st year head coach.
Tennessee- Butch Jones??? (He said it takes 5 years to build a championship team.. So I guess Tennessee turns the corner next season?) (Sarcasm)
Florida- 2nd year head coach.
Vanderbilt- They aren't a football power, but they have improved. This is just Mason's third season.
Kentucky- Has shown decent improvement, will they continue is the question.

The SEC East is going through a lot of transition at the moment.

Agreed. However, that same logic applies to the ACC, especially the Coastal division:
VT - 1st year head coach at P5 level
Miami - new coach, bare cupboard
UVA - new coach, bare cupboard
Syracuse - 1st year head coach at P5 level

Also, UNC lost to UGA... yeah, I got nothing for them.

Well, we lost to Georgia too .

It's a huge rivalry game. I'm not even gonna make excuses about injuries. Our coaching staff blew it period.

My point wasn't to knock the ACC teams because they lost to SEC schools. When you have good programs like Tennessee, Florida, Georgia, and so on. The talent to beat anyone will always be on the roster. All it takes is one game. That's the biggest issue I have with the way most fans think about the playoff. Losing to Georgia isn't the same as losing to Duke. Losing to Tennessee, isn't the same as losing to UVA.

Those programs have top 10-15 talent on the roster. When you play them, you do so in stadiums that have 90k-102k fans in them. It's just different. A lot of college football fans do get it, most of them don't though. Which is why I think if SOS goes out of the door, then the SEC will be at a disadvantage. We have too many deep teams all throughout the league and that's been the point of my discussion in a lot of these threads. Most of those programs issues are coaching because the talent is always 100% there.

The thing with other P5 conferences is none can provide that kind of depth year in and year out. You can have a very very strong top 3-5 but no conference can go 8-9 deep like the SEC has done. (Might sound biased but I've actually posted things in the past (On SECRant) with facts to back it up, I just don't feel like going through getting all the facts again.)

That's why I personally wish we would move to a champions playoff system. Doesn't matter what your record is, as long as you win your conference you're in. I think the highest rated G5 champ should be included and then 2 At-Large spots.

I just think it needs to be based on more than record. If you're 11-1 or 10-2 but you didn't beat any top 25 teams or only beat 1 and you're getting in over other 2 loss teams or 3 loss teams who played 6 top 25 opponents it's a flawed system in my opinion. The team that challenged itself and still had a great season at 9-3 3 top 25 losses, 3 top 25 wins. A SOS in the top 10, and so on.

Compared to a 60-70 SOS with 1 top 25 win. It needs to be extremely in depth. Who did you beat, what are you opponents records, who did your opponents beat. They may be 6-6 but those 6 wins came against an FCS, the bottom of the conference and 2 down G5 programs. Versus someone else who is 6-6 with a top 25 win, 3 other top 40 wins with an FCS and a middle G5 program.

The best example I can use is basketball. The ACC clearly has the best collection of teams. Say UNC has a down year and goes 19-11 and loses in the first round of the ACC Tourney. Does that same UNC team go 19-11 in the SEC? Do they go 19-11 in the Big 12? Probably not, we're not as deep.

I don't think Clemson would be undefeated in the SEC, I don't think Louisville would have only 1 loss in the SEC, I don't think Michigan or Ohio State would have just 1 loss in the SEC.

I'd like to hear your take on this 100% though.

Lastly, I may just be a rambling fool. These are my thoughts so don't be too harsh .

Not a good model. Make it simple with Pitt and Louisville switching divisions

(11-14-2016 09:08 AM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  

(11-12-2016 09:14 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(11-12-2016 01:21 AM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  ...regarding transitions.

Georgia- 1st year head coach.
SC- 1st year head coach.
Missouri- 1st year head coach.
Tennessee- Butch Jones??? (He said it takes 5 years to build a championship team.. So I guess Tennessee turns the corner next season?) (Sarcasm)
Florida- 2nd year head coach.
Vanderbilt- They aren't a football power, but they have improved. This is just Mason's third season.
Kentucky- Has shown decent improvement, will they continue is the question.

The SEC East is going through a lot of transition at the moment.

Agreed. However, that same logic applies to the ACC, especially the Coastal division:
VT - 1st year head coach at P5 level
Miami - new coach, bare cupboard
UVA - new coach, bare cupboard
Syracuse - 1st year head coach at P5 level

Also, UNC lost to UGA... yeah, I got nothing for them.

Well, we lost to Georgia too .

It's a huge rivalry game. I'm not even gonna make excuses about injuries. Our coaching staff blew it period.

My point wasn't to knock the ACC teams because they lost to SEC schools. When you have good programs like Tennessee, Florida, Georgia, and so on. The talent to beat anyone will always be on the roster. All it takes is one game. That's the biggest issue I have with the way most fans think about the playoff. Losing to Georgia isn't the same as losing to Duke. Losing to Tennessee, isn't the same as losing to UVA.

Those programs have top 10-15 talent on the roster. When you play them, you do so in stadiums that have 90k-102k fans in them. It's just different. A lot of college football fans do get it, most of them don't though. Which is why I think if SOS goes out of the door, then the SEC will be at a disadvantage. We have too many deep teams all throughout the league and that's been the point of my discussion in a lot of these threads. Most of those programs issues are coaching because the talent is always 100% there.

The thing with other P5 conferences is none can provide that kind of depth year in and year out. You can have a very very strong top 3-5 but no conference can go 8-9 deep like the SEC has done. (Might sound biased but I've actually posted things in the past (On SECRant) with facts to back it up, I just don't feel like going through getting all the facts again.)

That's why I personally wish we would move to a champions playoff system. Doesn't matter what your record is, as long as you win your conference you're in. I think the highest rated G5 champ should be included and then 2 At-Large spots.

I just think it needs to be based on more than record. If you're 11-1 or 10-2 but you didn't beat any top 25 teams or only beat 1 and you're getting in over other 2 loss teams or 3 loss teams who played 6 top 25 opponents it's a flawed system in my opinion. The team that challenged itself and still had a great season at 9-3 3 top 25 losses, 3 top 25 wins. A SOS in the top 10, and so on.

Compared to a 60-70 SOS with 1 top 25 win. It needs to be extremely in depth. Who did you beat, what are you opponents records, who did your opponents beat. They may be 6-6 but those 6 wins came against an FCS, the bottom of the conference and 2 down G5 programs. Versus someone else who is 6-6 with a top 25 win, 3 other top 40 wins with an FCS and a middle G5 program.

The best example I can use is basketball. The ACC clearly has the best collection of teams. Say UNC has a down year and goes 19-11 and loses in the first round of the ACC Tourney. Does that same UNC team go 19-11 in the SEC? Do they go 19-11 in the Big 12? Probably not, we're not as deep.

I don't think Clemson would be undefeated in the SEC, I don't think Louisville would have only 1 loss in the SEC, I don't think Michigan or Ohio State would have just 1 loss in the SEC.

I'd like to hear your take on this 100% though.

Lastly, I may just be a rambling fool. These are my thoughts so don't be too harsh .

I agree that all P5 champs should get auto bids to an 8-team playoff. Mainly to remove the opinion elements.

I think some SEC bias is showing when you say losing to Georgia is not like losing to Duke. Most ACC teams have plenty of talent, just smaller stadiums. Look at NFL rosters. Tons of ACC alumni, and not just from a few teams.


Sent from my HTC Desire 626 using CSNbbs mobile app

(11-14-2016 10:04 AM)bluesox Wrote:  Not a good model. Make it simple with Pitt and Louisville switching divisions

I would absolutely hate losing FSU and Clemson every year but that move would do the least damage to rivalries and have the most impact in evening out the divisions.

The divisions are fine how they are it is just a bad luck year for Louisville sos. 3/4 The schedule is flat out set Acc and UK SEC ACC rivalry week and Marshall and Houston are usually pretty good OOC games. I still think Houston is actually, they have a win against OU Ohio State gets credit but somehow the world forgot Houston did..

(11-14-2016 05:05 PM)MHSCard Wrote:  The divisions are fine how they are it is just a bad luck year for Louisville sos. 3/4 The schedule is flat out set Acc and UK SEC ACC rivalry week and Marshall and Houston are usually pretty good OOC games. I still think Houston is actually, they have a win against OU Ohio State gets credit but somehow the world forgot Houston did..

What is Ohio State sos rank?

(11-14-2016 01:52 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(11-14-2016 09:08 AM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  

(11-12-2016 09:14 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(11-12-2016 01:21 AM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  ...regarding transitions.

Georgia- 1st year head coach.
SC- 1st year head coach.
Missouri- 1st year head coach.
Tennessee- Butch Jones??? (He said it takes 5 years to build a championship team.. So I guess Tennessee turns the corner next season?) (Sarcasm)
Florida- 2nd year head coach.
Vanderbilt- They aren't a football power, but they have improved. This is just Mason's third season.
Kentucky- Has shown decent improvement, will they continue is the question.

The SEC East is going through a lot of transition at the moment.

Agreed. However, that same logic applies to the ACC, especially the Coastal division:
VT - 1st year head coach at P5 level
Miami - new coach, bare cupboard
UVA - new coach, bare cupboard
Syracuse - 1st year head coach at P5 level

Also, UNC lost to UGA... yeah, I got nothing for them.

Well, we lost to Georgia too .

It's a huge rivalry game. I'm not even gonna make excuses about injuries. Our coaching staff blew it period.

My point wasn't to knock the ACC teams because they lost to SEC schools. When you have good programs like Tennessee, Florida, Georgia, and so on. The talent to beat anyone will always be on the roster. All it takes is one game. That's the biggest issue I have with the way most fans think about the playoff. Losing to Georgia isn't the same as losing to Duke. Losing to Tennessee, isn't the same as losing to UVA.

Those programs have top 10-15 talent on the roster. When you play them, you do so in stadiums that have 90k-102k fans in them. It's just different. A lot of college football fans do get it, most of them don't though. Which is why I think if SOS goes out of the door, then the SEC will be at a disadvantage. We have too many deep teams all throughout the league and that's been the point of my discussion in a lot of these threads. Most of those programs issues are coaching because the talent is always 100% there.

The thing with other P5 conferences is none can provide that kind of depth year in and year out. You can have a very very strong top 3-5 but no conference can go 8-9 deep like the SEC has done. (Might sound biased but I've actually posted things in the past (On SECRant) with facts to back it up, I just don't feel like going through getting all the facts again.)

That's why I personally wish we would move to a champions playoff system. Doesn't matter what your record is, as long as you win your conference you're in. I think the highest rated G5 champ should be included and then 2 At-Large spots.

I just think it needs to be based on more than record. If you're 11-1 or 10-2 but you didn't beat any top 25 teams or only beat 1 and you're getting in over other 2 loss teams or 3 loss teams who played 6 top 25 opponents it's a flawed system in my opinion. The team that challenged itself and still had a great season at 9-3 3 top 25 losses, 3 top 25 wins. A SOS in the top 10, and so on.

Compared to a 60-70 SOS with 1 top 25 win. It needs to be extremely in depth. Who did you beat, what are you opponents records, who did your opponents beat. They may be 6-6 but those 6 wins came against an FCS, the bottom of the conference and 2 down G5 programs. Versus someone else who is 6-6 with a top 25 win, 3 other top 40 wins with an FCS and a middle G5 program.

The best example I can use is basketball. The ACC clearly has the best collection of teams. Say UNC has a down year and goes 19-11 and loses in the first round of the ACC Tourney. Does that same UNC team go 19-11 in the SEC? Do they go 19-11 in the Big 12? Probably not, we're not as deep.

I don't think Clemson would be undefeated in the SEC, I don't think Louisville would have only 1 loss in the SEC, I don't think Michigan or Ohio State would have just 1 loss in the SEC.

I'd like to hear your take on this 100% though.

Lastly, I may just be a rambling fool. These are my thoughts so don't be too harsh .

I agree that all P5 champs should get auto bids to an 8-team playoff. Mainly to remove the opinion elements.

I think some SEC bias is showing when you say losing to Georgia is not like losing to Duke. Most ACC teams have plenty of talent, just smaller stadiums. Look at NFL rosters. Tons of ACC alumni, and not just from a few teams.


Sent from my HTC Desire 626 using CSNbbs mobile app

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000...h-51-picks

SEC: 51

ACC: 26

This is for the previous draft.

Here is the NFL total.

Total players: SEC 309, ACC 239, Big Ten 224, Pac-12 220, Big 12 132, American 98, Mountain West 68, Conference USA 56, MAC 51, Sun Belt 31.

Yes, every team/conference has good to great players.

However, I really hope you aren't trying to compare Duke to Georgia in football and calling me biased because I see a difference. I used those 2 as a point because UNC lost to both.

http://www.winsipedia.com/georgia/vs/duke

It's literally not even close.

I do get why you'd feel I am biased, but this isn't just about NFL talent. Tim Tebow was one of the best QB's/Leaders in college but he wasn't great in the NFL as a QB. I never gauge it with that. College and the NFL are 100% different games.

I don't want to see us switch divisions at all. I would like to see the ACC to correct the permanent cross rival game between Louisville and Virginia. I understand we came into the league as Marylands replacement basically just picking up their schedule, but we have ties to Virginia Tech, and they are out closes conference mate. Why is it so hard to see by the ACC that this move would benefit not just Louisville but the other three schools as well as the conference. In making this switch it gives BC an opponent on a much even playing field and vice versa for Virginia. Also with the switch it gives the ACC another premier game to showcase.

Now stacking the division to mirror the SEC West is probably going a little to far, but this would give a better layout of the conference letting it to move to a North and South divisions. The South consisting of FSU, Clemson, Louisville, Wake Forrest, Georgia Tech, VT and Miami. In the North you would have UNC, Virginia, Duke, NC State, Pitt, Syracuse, BC. It looks lopsided and it very well maybe, but the North I propose has 4 very good teams and 2 on the rise with only BC lagging them down. I know it's not going to happen, but I think it could work givi
En the opportunity.

As said in another thread by another Pitt fan - prefer the status quo vs the ideas in this and the UL/VT crossover proposal. All these fan moves ultimately screw over Pitt. No thanks.