(11-04-2019 08:55 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 08:15 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-03-2019 10:09 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  (OT) Bowden really screwed up not going to the SEC.

Yes, that’s the problem here. Because the ACC hasn’t produced three champions this decade, including FSU.

Come on. The ACC didn't "produce" those champions. ACC football isn't like ACC basketball, where when a Virginia or Duke wins the national title you can say the ACC "produced" them, because competing in the rigorous ACC made them razor-sharp for competing in the NCAA tournament.

The only way one can say that the ACC helped FSU in the 1990s and in 2013, and Clemson the past 5 years, is in making it easy, via soft competitition, to have great records that made them well-rested for the playoffs. Not that they necessarily needed that, because they are very good teams, but it probably helped. But there was nothing along the lines of the conference schedule tempering their iron in to steel like it does in basketball.

The ACC does not 'produce' football national champions. FSU and Clemson produce their own championships, it's sheer coincidence they are based in the ACC.

You can literally say that about any conference

I think the Big 10 has 3 titles since 1980

Does the SEC produce champions? Saban has produced most of the SEC national
championships

Urban Meyer produced a couple of SEC natties and a Big 10 title

(11-04-2019 08:55 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 08:15 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-03-2019 10:09 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  (OT) Bowden really screwed up not going to the SEC.

Yes, that’s the problem here. Because the ACC hasn’t produced three champions this decade, including FSU.

Come on. The ACC didn't "produce" those champions. ACC football isn't like ACC basketball, where when a Virginia or Duke wins the national title you can say the ACC "produced" them, because competing in the rigorous ACC made them razor-sharp for competing in the NCAA tournament.

The only way one can say that the ACC helped FSU in the 1990s and in 2013, and Clemson the past 5 years, is in making it easy, via soft competitition, to have great records that made them well-rested for the playoffs. Not that they necessarily needed that, because they are very good teams, but it probably helped. But there was nothing along the lines of the conference schedule tempering their iron in to steel like it does in basketball.

The ACC does not 'produce' football national champions. FSU and Clemson produce their own championships, it's sheer coincidence they are based in the ACC.

Those teams were in the ACC, therefore that conference produced them. They certainly didn’t “create” them, which is what you’re talking about.

Is it possible to win a national championship in football while being a member of the ACC? Yes, three times this decade, in fact.

Does ACC membership hinder the ability to field national championship caliber teams? No.

So no, it was not a mistake made by Bobby Bowden. ACC membership has done more for FSU than just allow them to win football titles.

(11-04-2019 09:26 AM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 08:55 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 08:15 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-03-2019 10:09 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  (OT) Bowden really screwed up not going to the SEC.

Yes, that’s the problem here. Because the ACC hasn’t produced three champions this decade, including FSU.

Come on. The ACC didn't "produce" those champions. ACC football isn't like ACC basketball, where when a Virginia or Duke wins the national title you can say the ACC "produced" them, because competing in the rigorous ACC made them razor-sharp for competing in the NCAA tournament.

The only way one can say that the ACC helped FSU in the 1990s and in 2013, and Clemson the past 5 years, is in making it easy, via soft competitition, to have great records that made them well-rested for the playoffs. Not that they necessarily needed that, because they are very good teams, but it probably helped. But there was nothing along the lines of the conference schedule tempering their iron in to steel like it does in basketball.

The ACC does not 'produce' football national champions. FSU and Clemson produce their own championships, it's sheer coincidence they are based in the ACC.

You can literally say that about any conference

Nah. In basketball, the ACC is a very strong conference, so competing in the ACC helps a Duke or UNC get stronger for the tournament. Competing in the ACC does nothing for Clemson in that regard just as it didn't for FSU twenty years ago - here's Bowden in 1999 or Dabo last year - "yeah, beating NC State 45-7 really helped us, whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger!", LOL.

This year is another example - the ACC has clearly been the worst conference so far, but Clemson is still the favorite to win the national title. And that's because the ACC is so soft they have easily the best chance to make the playoffs.

The ACC does not produce football champions, it hosts them. The SEC produces** football champions, as does the Big 10 and the Big 12 when they manage to win them. The PAC has too. I don't think the ACC ever has, not since 1960 at least.


** "produces" is a strong word, probably too strong. Titles are always mostly a product of the team itself. But when Alabama wins, the SEC can at least credibly claim to have contributed to it.

(11-04-2019 08:15 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-03-2019 10:09 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  (OT) Bowden really screwed up not going to the SEC.

Yes, that’s the problem here. Because the ACC hasn’t produced three champions this decade, including FSU.

Yeah I've never understood this line of thinking either. Things worked out quite well for FSU! FSU certainly doesn't win as many SEC titles as they did ACC titles. Does FSU win 4 or more national titles? I'm skeptical.

(11-04-2019 08:22 AM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 06:22 AM)kurtrundell Wrote:  I'd really like to see how Mike Leach would do at a school with the money and recruiting grounds that FSU has. He'd win 10 games a year there, with the only impediment being Clemson.

Meh...Idk

FSU sorely needs a disciplinarian

Think more along the lines of Bob Stoops, Mark Stoops, Kirby Smart, Narduzzi

I don't want offensive gurumanship. I want to see fundamentals, Football basics 101, physical football

Mike Leach loses two games personally every year. He's creative, but he's just not that smart.

(11-04-2019 08:22 AM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 06:22 AM)kurtrundell Wrote:  I'd really like to see how Mike Leach would do at a school with the money and recruiting grounds that FSU has. He'd win 10 games a year there, with the only impediment being Clemson.

Meh...Idk

FSU sorely needs a disciplinarian

Think more along the lines of Bob Stoops, Mark Stoops, Kirby Smart, Narduzzi

I don't want offensive gurumanship. I want to see fundamentals, Football basics 101, physical football

FSU needs someone who will bring in about 6-7 OL and at least one QB who can immediately contribute because as it stands right now you don't have either of those things in 2020.

Matt Campbell would be a great hire but it cost him $6 million buyout to leave Iowa state. Maybe copy Arizona state and hire tony dungy

(11-04-2019 10:55 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

This would not be a bad hire in my opinion. Couldn't be any worse than the Taggert hire which I never understood in the first place.

(11-04-2019 09:33 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 08:55 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 08:15 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-03-2019 10:09 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  (OT) Bowden really screwed up not going to the SEC.

Yes, that’s the problem here. Because the ACC hasn’t produced three champions this decade, including FSU.

Come on. The ACC didn't "produce" those champions. ACC football isn't like ACC basketball, where when a Virginia or Duke wins the national title you can say the ACC "produced" them, because competing in the rigorous ACC made them razor-sharp for competing in the NCAA tournament.

The only way one can say that the ACC helped FSU in the 1990s and in 2013, and Clemson the past 5 years, is in making it easy, via soft competitition, to have great records that made them well-rested for the playoffs. Not that they necessarily needed that, because they are very good teams, but it probably helped. But there was nothing along the lines of the conference schedule tempering their iron in to steel like it does in basketball.

The ACC does not 'produce' football national champions. FSU and Clemson produce their own championships, it's sheer coincidence they are based in the ACC.

Those teams were in the ACC, therefore that conference produced them.

That makes no sense. You have to look at how good the conference was independent of the national champ, and e.g. last year the ACC was the #4 conference, and that was with Clemson's results, which included wins in two NY6 bowl games. Take out Clemson (and the top teams from the other conferences) and they were surely last.

In 2013 when FSU won, the ACC finished last among the P5 conferences including FSU winning the BCS title game.

The ACC doesn't produce football champs, it hosts them. Or maybe it does, by being a very easy launching pad for a very good team to go undefeated and thus play for the title.

(11-04-2019 11:19 AM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 10:55 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

This would not be a bad hire in my opinion. Couldn't be any worse than the Taggert hire which I never understood in the first place.

Wouldn't he have the possibility to be Taggart 2.0?

Personally I like Matt Rhule the more I see on him

(11-04-2019 11:11 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 08:22 AM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 06:22 AM)kurtrundell Wrote:  I'd really like to see how Mike Leach would do at a school with the money and recruiting grounds that FSU has. He'd win 10 games a year there, with the only impediment being Clemson.

Meh...Idk

FSU sorely needs a disciplinarian

Think more along the lines of Bob Stoops, Mark Stoops, Kirby Smart, Narduzzi

I don't want offensive gurumanship. I want to see fundamentals, Football basics 101, physical football

FSU needs someone who will bring in about 6-7 OL and at least one QB who can immediately contribute because as it stands right now you don't have either of those things in 2020.

Good observation Captain Obvious

(11-04-2019 12:54 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 11:11 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 08:22 AM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 06:22 AM)kurtrundell Wrote:  I'd really like to see how Mike Leach would do at a school with the money and recruiting grounds that FSU has. He'd win 10 games a year there, with the only impediment being Clemson.

Meh...Idk

FSU sorely needs a disciplinarian

Think more along the lines of Bob Stoops, Mark Stoops, Kirby Smart, Narduzzi

I don't want offensive gurumanship. I want to see fundamentals, Football basics 101, physical football

FSU needs someone who will bring in about 6-7 OL and at least one QB who can immediately contribute because as it stands right now you don't have either of those things in 2020.

Good observation Captain Obvious

I still think FSU fired Taggart too fast. Taggart's mode has been to take a year or two before turning things around.

Plus, not every great coach is an instant hit. E.g., Dabo was hired by Clemson during the 2008 season, and went 4-3. Then in 2009, he went 9-5, but in 2010, he went 6-7, capped by a loss to USF in a minor bowl.

So after 34 games, Dabo was 19-15, and 1-2 in minor bowls.

FSU probably would have fired him right then and there ...

(11-04-2019 12:51 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 09:33 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 08:55 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 08:15 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-03-2019 10:09 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  (OT) Bowden really screwed up not going to the SEC.

Yes, that’s the problem here. Because the ACC hasn’t produced three champions this decade, including FSU.

Come on. The ACC didn't "produce" those champions. ACC football isn't like ACC basketball, where when a Virginia or Duke wins the national title you can say the ACC "produced" them, because competing in the rigorous ACC made them razor-sharp for competing in the NCAA tournament.

The only way one can say that the ACC helped FSU in the 1990s and in 2013, and Clemson the past 5 years, is in making it easy, via soft competitition, to have great records that made them well-rested for the playoffs. Not that they necessarily needed that, because they are very good teams, but it probably helped. But there was nothing along the lines of the conference schedule tempering their iron in to steel like it does in basketball.

The ACC does not 'produce' football national champions. FSU and Clemson produce their own championships, it's sheer coincidence they are based in the ACC.

Those teams were in the ACC, therefore that conference produced them.

That makes no sense. You have to look at how good the conference was independent of the national champ, and e.g. last year the ACC was the #4 conference, and that was with Clemson's results, which included wins in two NY6 bowl games. Take out Clemson (and the top teams from the other conferences) and they were surely last.

In 2013 when FSU won, the ACC finished last among the P5 conferences including FSU winning the BCS title game.

The ACC doesn't produce football champs, it hosts them. Or maybe it does, by being a very easy launching pad for a very good team to go undefeated and thus play for the title.

Can you name an SEC team that was somehow produced by the rigors of the conference schedule and not by incredible coaching? Do you have an example?

(are you Paul Finebaum? You can tell us, we will keep it secret! )

(11-04-2019 12:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 12:54 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 11:11 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 08:22 AM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 06:22 AM)kurtrundell Wrote:  I'd really like to see how Mike Leach would do at a school with the money and recruiting grounds that FSU has. He'd win 10 games a year there, with the only impediment being Clemson.

Meh...Idk

FSU sorely needs a disciplinarian

Think more along the lines of Bob Stoops, Mark Stoops, Kirby Smart, Narduzzi

I don't want offensive gurumanship. I want to see fundamentals, Football basics 101, physical football

FSU needs someone who will bring in about 6-7 OL and at least one QB who can immediately contribute because as it stands right now you don't have either of those things in 2020.

Good observation Captain Obvious

I still think FSU fired Taggart too fast. Taggart's mode has been to take a year or two before turning things around.

Plus, not every great coach is an instant hit. E.g., Dabo was hired by Clemson during the 2008 season, and went 4-3. Then in 2009, he went 9-5, but in 2010, he went 6-7, capped by a loss to USF in a minor bowl.

So after 34 games, Dabo was 19-15, and 1-2 in minor bowls.

FSU probably would have fired him right then and there ...

You don't get it....which is fine, nothing wrong with that

(11-04-2019 12:52 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 11:19 AM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 10:55 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

This would not be a bad hire in my opinion. Couldn't be any worse than the Taggert hire which I never understood in the first place.

Wouldn't he have the possibility to be Taggart 2.0?

Sure, but the noisy Kiffin implosion would be far more entertaining than Taggart's team quietly getting stomped by every opponent FSU fans care about.

(11-04-2019 12:54 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 11:11 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 08:22 AM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 06:22 AM)kurtrundell Wrote:  I'd really like to see how Mike Leach would do at a school with the money and recruiting grounds that FSU has. He'd win 10 games a year there, with the only impediment being Clemson.

Meh...Idk

FSU sorely needs a disciplinarian

Think more along the lines of Bob Stoops, Mark Stoops, Kirby Smart, Narduzzi

I don't want offensive gurumanship. I want to see fundamentals, Football basics 101, physical football

FSU needs someone who will bring in about 6-7 OL and at least one QB who can immediately contribute because as it stands right now you don't have either of those things in 2020.

Good observation Captain Obvious

Well if you are going to fire one coach because he hadn't fixed the issues that had been evident at FSU since at least 2014 in one and a half recruiting classes what is going to stop you from firing the next coach when he can't fix them in a season and a half either?


Just goes to show that geography is often wrong. I always thought that the Tennessee River downstream of Knoxville flowed into the Ohio River near Paducha, Kentucky but obviously they are getting their water supply from it somehow in Tallahassee.

(11-04-2019 01:27 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 12:52 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 11:19 AM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 10:55 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

This would not be a bad hire in my opinion. Couldn't be any worse than the Taggert hire which I never understood in the first place.

Wouldn't he have the possibility to be Taggart 2.0?

Sure, but the noisy Kiffin implosion would be far more entertaining than Taggart's team quietly getting stomped by every opponent FSU fans care about.

Lol

I know Mark Richt retired last year, and that he recently had a heart attack, but he has FSU ties. Wonder if there'd be any interest there.

(11-04-2019 12:51 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 09:33 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 08:55 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-04-2019 08:15 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-03-2019 10:09 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  (OT) Bowden really screwed up not going to the SEC.

Yes, that’s the problem here. Because the ACC hasn’t produced three champions this decade, including FSU.

Come on. The ACC didn't "produce" those champions. ACC football isn't like ACC basketball, where when a Virginia or Duke wins the national title you can say the ACC "produced" them, because competing in the rigorous ACC made them razor-sharp for competing in the NCAA tournament.

The only way one can say that the ACC helped FSU in the 1990s and in 2013, and Clemson the past 5 years, is in making it easy, via soft competitition, to have great records that made them well-rested for the playoffs. Not that they necessarily needed that, because they are very good teams, but it probably helped. But there was nothing along the lines of the conference schedule tempering their iron in to steel like it does in basketball.

The ACC does not 'produce' football national champions. FSU and Clemson produce their own championships, it's sheer coincidence they are based in the ACC.

Those teams were in the ACC, therefore that conference produced them.

That makes no sense. You have to look at how good the conference was independent of the national champ, and e.g. last year the ACC was the #4 conference, and that was with Clemson's results, which included wins in two NY6 bowl games. Take out Clemson (and the top teams from the other conferences) and they were surely last.

In 2013 when FSU won, the ACC finished last among the P5 conferences including FSU winning the BCS title game.

The ACC doesn't produce football champs, it hosts them. Or maybe it does, by being a very easy launching pad for a very good team to go undefeated and thus play for the title.

So basically you’re arguing with me over the definition of the word “produce”, which has multiple definitions. I’ve already clarified I’m not using it to say the ACC created those elite programs.

From the dictionary:

to bring forward; present to view or notice; exhibit:
to produce one's credentials.

“The ACC sucks at football and has done detriment to football programs.”

“So the ACC produced FSU and Clemson as an answer.”

My main point was to say the ACC did nothing to hinder national championship winning football programs. In fact, the ACC brought in Miami and Virginia Tech to foster the football culture and they both fell off the map more or less! It goes two ways, let’s not blame the ACC for a program’s shortcomings.