(06-30-2020 04:07 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 09:57 PM)deb025 Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 09:41 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Forde was channeling DavidSt there. Clearly.

Great article by Pat Forde. The most realistic realignment article I've seen these last few months. In this scenario Georgia Tech would probably finish 9th in the Deep South conference. That's being generous though so they would probably be the 10th or 11th best team in that conference.

Somebody is still feeling salty about their paddlin'.

Just doing a little ribbing.

(06-30-2020 12:24 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(06-30-2020 12:17 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  Within the G5 we often debate which conference is at the bottom. Forte's formula (5 year average Sagerin Rating, 2020 US News and World Report National University Rankings, & 2018-19 Learfield Cup all sports ranking) seems to lay out a pecking order.

Number of teams per conference demoted to the FCS in Forte's article...

1- MWC (San Jose State)
1- MAC (Bowling Green)... the MAC should have lost 2 or 3
2- C-USA (UTEP & UTSA)
2- Independents (New Mexico State & Liberty) ... Liberty has too much money to be sent down
5- Sun Belt (Texas State, UL- Monroe, South Alabama, Troy, & Coastal Carolina)

In Forte's realignment plan, half of the Sun Belt would be sent down to the FCS.

I could see sending down all of those Sun Belt teams except Troy. Probably not the 2 CUSA teams or NMSU. Trade those 4 for UConn, UMass, EMU, and either Akron or Kent State?

I'm sure Troy had a good Sagerin Rating. They have certainly done well on the football field in most of the last five years. But, I think the lack of overall respect for their academics (US News Ranking), and their lack of success in other sports (Learfield Cup Ranking), is why they got left out in favor of other programs.

(06-29-2020 01:19 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  It's not gonna happen, but if it ever does, it would finally put Houston back in a conference with old SWC foes Baylor, UT, TCU, Rice, and TAMU. And it would revive the old SWC name.

Sign me up, sparky!

I agree with you on this. Your scenario would be a fantastic conference (IDK about Tulsa in there though). Also, it'd essentially put the original ACC back together (with App replacing Maryland). Sign me up too

IF something like this ever happened, and it were allowed 10-15 years to gel, it'd be fantastic conferences. The problem is too many people looking at RIGHT NOW and not the distant future.

Some folks will never be happy with any scenario. For example:

• A GaState poster is upset about being lumped with FSU/Miami/Florida/UGa/GaTech/UCF/USF.
• A Clemson poster saying "no thanks" even though it's an original version of the same conference they're in RIGHT NOW.
  

(07-02-2020 10:42 AM)TheOriginalBigApp Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 01:19 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  It's not gonna happen, but if it ever does, it would finally put Houston back in a conference with old SWC foes Baylor, UT, TCU, Rice, and TAMU. And it would revive the old SWC name.

Sign me up, sparky!

I agree with you on this. Your scenario would be a fantastic conference (IDK about Tulsa in there though). Also, it'd essentially put the original ACC back together (with App replacing Maryland). Sign me up too

IF something like this ever happened, and it were allowed 10-15 years to gel, it'd be fantastic conferences. The problem is too many people looking at RIGHT NOW and not the distant future.

Some folks will never be happy with any scenario. For example:

• A GaState poster is upset about being lumped with FSU/Miami/Florida/UGa/GaTech/UCF/USF.
• A Clemson poster saying "no thanks" even though it's an original version of the same conference they're in RIGHT NOW.
  

When were VT, ECU, Charlotte, and ODU in the original ACC?

These conferences could be together for 50 years and they wouldn't be fantastic.

(07-02-2020 01:46 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  When were VT, ECU, Charlotte, and ODU in the original ACC?

These conferences could be together for 50 years and they wouldn't be fantastic.

You don't know the history of the conference you're a charter member of? I'll remind you:

ACC Charter (i.e. Original) members:

• Clemson
• Duke
• Maryland
• North Carolina
• NC State
• South Carolina
• Virginia
  

(07-02-2020 08:08 PM)TheOriginalBigApp Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 01:46 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  When were VT, ECU, Charlotte, and ODU in the original ACC?

These conferences could be together for 50 years and they wouldn't be fantastic.

You don't know the history of the conference you're a charter member of? I'll remind you:

ACC Charter (i.e. Original) members:

• Clemson
• Duke
• Maryland
• North Carolina
• NC State
• South Carolina
• Virginia
  

Wake Forest would like to have a word with you.

(07-02-2020 08:08 PM)TheOriginalBigApp Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 01:46 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  When were VT, ECU, Charlotte, and ODU in the original ACC?

These conferences could be together for 50 years and they wouldn't be fantastic.

You don't know the history of the conference you're a charter member of? I'll remind you:

ACC Charter (i.e. Original) members:

• Clemson
• Duke
• Maryland
• North Carolina
• NC State
• South Carolina
• Virginia
  

LOL Obviously you can't fix stupid.


Virginia wasn't a charter member, and Wake Forest was.

App State, Virginia Tech, ECU, Charlotte, and ODU also weren't charter members, so half of this proposed conference wasn't our "original conference". Maybe before you preach about history of another poster's conference you should do a little research yourself so you don't look stupid.

(07-02-2020 09:03 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 08:08 PM)TheOriginalBigApp Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 01:46 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  When were VT, ECU, Charlotte, and ODU in the original ACC?

These conferences could be together for 50 years and they wouldn't be fantastic.

You don't know the history of the conference you're a charter member of? I'll remind you:

ACC Charter (i.e. Original) members:

• Clemson
• Duke
• Maryland
• North Carolina
• NC State
• South Carolina
• Virginia
  

LOL Obviously you can't fix stupid.


Virginia wasn't a charter member, and Wake Forest was.

App State, Virginia Tech, ECU, Charlotte, and ODU also weren't charter members, so half of this proposed conference wasn't our "original conference". Maybe before you preach about history of another poster's conference you should do a little research yourself so you don't look stupid.

Virginia wasn't a charter football member, but they were a charter member, no?

(07-02-2020 09:03 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 08:08 PM)TheOriginalBigApp Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 01:46 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  When were VT, ECU, Charlotte, and ODU in the original ACC?

These conferences could be together for 50 years and they wouldn't be fantastic.

You don't know the history of the conference you're a charter member of? I'll remind you:

ACC Charter (i.e. Original) members:

• Clemson
• Duke
• Maryland
• North Carolina
• NC State
• South Carolina
• Virginia
  

LOL Obviously you can't fix stupid.


Virginia wasn't a charter member, and Wake Forest was.

App State, Virginia Tech, ECU, Charlotte, and ODU also weren't charter members, so half of this proposed conference wasn't our "original conference". Maybe before you preach about history of another poster's conference you should do a little research yourself so you don't look stupid.

Oh, you got me. I left Wake Forest off the list. Huh. UVa joined like 2 months after the others, the ACC has never competed without UVa. I guess that invalidates my original statement which you've obviously chosen to ignore:

Quote:it'd essentially put the original ACC back together.

Also, i never said App/ODU/UNCC were original members. Your ability to understand implied statements is lacking.

Enjoy your Independence Day.