I Wouldn't Be Surprised To Get An Acc Invite In The Next Week

[huskyrob1]

In prestige, history, name recognition, etc... the BE doesn't stack up. In actual on field results it did.

Now, all this being said, I really hope we get into either the ACC or B1G.

If you want to go back 4 years, maybe you have an argument for a draw. That is of course when the Big East was a strong conf, we still had Cuse and Pitt, WVU had Pat White and Slaton, USF was ranked as high as 2 or 3 IRC, Louisville was ranked very high also. Keep in mind that my original beef was with BL's assertion that the Big East TODAY, even NOW with the loss of WVU, Cuse and Pitt is a stronger football conf than the ACC. That is just a crazy assertion IMO. Since then, Edsall bolted for Maryland, Petrino left Louisville, Leavitt was fired for hitting a player, Rich Rod left for Michigan. Things change.

 

[huskyrob1]

Winning games makes you a good team. Doesn't matter if you have players with more next level potential or not. But always glad to know I couldn't be more wrong. At least you have my wife backing you up.

LOL! I hope you take her to the games.

 

[SAMCRO]

If you want to go back 4 years, maybe you have an argument for a draw. That is of course when the Big East was a strong conf, we still had Cuse and Pitt, WVU had Pat White and Slaton, USF was ranked as high as 2 or 3 IRC, Louisville was ranked very high also. Keep in mind that my original beef was with BL's assertion that the Big East TODAY, even NOW with the loss of WVU, Cuse and Pitt is a stronger football conf than the ACC. That is just a crazy assertion IMO. Since then, Edsall bolted for Maryland, Petrino left Louisville, Leavitt was fired for hitting a player, Rich rod left for Michigan. Things change.

It's not 4 years ago, it's the average over the last 5 years. Want to go year by year (per Sagarins), okay: 2010 advantage ACC, 2009 advantage BE, 2008 advantage ACC, 2007 and 2006 advantage BE.Shoot, Cinci was 1 second away from playing for a NC in 2009. wVU was a choke job away from playing for a NC in 2007. Everybody rips on the BE in the media b/c it's an easy target. When you remove all the bias and "historical relevance" from the argument, the BE is on par with the ACC. It sounds crazy, ridiculous, and unbelievable because the mouth pieces at ESPN keep telling you it is. Computers have no bias.

 

[huskyrob1]

It's not 4 years ago, it's the average over the last 5 years. Want to go year by year (per Sagarins), okay: 2010 advantage ACC, 2009 advantage BE, 2008 advantage ACC, 2007 and 2006 advantage BE.Shoot, Cinci was 1 second away from playing for a NC in 2009. wVU was a choke job away from playing for a NC in 2007. Everybody rips on the BE in the media b/c it's an easy target. When you remove all the bias and "historical relevance" from the argument, the BE is on par with the ACC. It sounds crazy, ridiculous, and unbelievable because the mouth pieces at ESPN keep telling you it is. Computers have no bias.

Don't forget 2011, seasons almost over.

 

[mattp]

What neigborhood do you live in? Or does it matter? Does it matter if you go to an Ivy League (Conference) School?

Does it matter if Herbst is trying to partner with Yale as a regional on some projects? Does she aspire to look down stream for academic partners? What social circles do you travel in? Does it matter?

I think you miss the conceit completely. The BiG and PAC-12 and ACC and now the SEC can point to themselves as the best conferences there are for Div I Academics and Athletics. Ivy League? Closer to the Ivy than the Big Sprawl.

so what you're saying is, no, you don't have any examples of a school's academics being impacted by a change in athletic conference. you could have just said that instead of asking about what neighborhood i live in. there's no causal relationship between the two. has Tulane taken a step back academically since leaving the SEC? of course not. FSU will still admit a potato even though they're in the ACC. there's basically no relationship between athletic conference and academics. just b/c a university president says so for a PR move doesn't mean there's any merit to it.

 

[businesslawyer]

Don't forget 2011, seasons almost over.

It is clear by now that you have no interest in what others are saying, but that post proves my, and others, point as well as I ever could.

The whole fact that you want to add a partial year's result to help you make an argument that the ACC has in fact been superior over the last six or seven years makes it clear that there is no appreciable difference in the on field product. If the product is close enough that adding a partial year's results to a multi-year period is even relevant, your point is already disproved.

 

[upstater]

http://www.teamspeedkills.com/2010/4/26/1444886/sec-dominates-bcs-automatic

(1) The ranking of the highest-ranked team in the final BCS Standings each year.
This looks at where your best team stacks up. If a conference doesn't have a team in the top 25, then the team with the best computer average takes this role. A non-AQ conference needs to be no lower than sixth in this to get a guaranteed bid automatically, and it must be no lower than seventh (while being fifth or higher in Criterion 2) in order to petition the Presidential Oversight Committee for an auto bid.
Here's how the top leagues stack up since 2006:

1. SEC, average finish of 1.75
2. Big 12, 4.25
3. Big Ten, 4.5
4. Pac-10, 6.0
5. Big East, 7.5
6. WAC, 8.25
7. ACC, 10.0
8. MWC, 11.75

As you can see, the WAC is actually in better shape in this category over the past four seasons than the MWC. That's because Boise State has been consistently up there (and Hawaii was in '07 when the Broncos were not), while the MWC has only had teams in the top 10 the past two seasons. It's no surprise seeing the ACC so far down there though, given the lack of any recent national title contenders from the league.
Here's how they look in the current evaluation period (since '08):

1. SEC, 1.5
2. Big 12, 1.5
3. MWC, 5.0
4. Pac-10, 6.0
5. Big East, 7.5
6. WAC, 7.5
7. Big Ten, 8.0
8. ACC, 11.5

I know there are a couple of ties there, but HTML ordered lists don't allow for ties. Anyway, things are a lot more bunched up with the MWC surging and the Big Ten falling. We can also see that the MWC has cleared the bar for automatic inclusion in this criterion, though it is by no means safe. If, for instance, the highest ranked MWC team next season is 20th, its average falls to 10, and it is in risk of not qualifying.
Either way you look at it, the SEC is doing great. Of course, it's the home of the last four national champions, and a team must be ranked either No. 1 or No. 2 to play for the honor. It makes sense.

 

[huskyrob1]

It is clear by now that you have no interest in what others are saying, but that post proves my, and others, point as well as I ever could.

The whole fact that you want to add a partial year's result to help you make an argument that the ACC has in fact been superior over the last six or seven years makes it clear that there is no appreciable difference in the on field product. If the product is close enough that adding a partial year's results to a multi-year period is even relevant, your point is already disproved.

Come on counselor, show me where I ever said the ACC has been superior to the Big East OVER THE LAST 6 OR 7 YEARS? Your original assertion a few days ago that the present Big East (This year, OK?) even now after losing Pitt, WVU, and Cuse is superior to the ACC in football, is what I took exception to and YOU KNOW THAT VERY WELL, but you have refused to admit that your crazy assertion was in error and have instead chose to blanket our debate with BS courtesy of BL.

 

[businesslawyer]

Come on counselor, show me where I ever said the ACC has been superior to the Big East OVER THE LAST 6 OR 7 YEARS? Your original assertion a few days ago that the present Big East (This year, OK?) even now after losing Pitt, WVU, and Cuse is superior to the ACC in football, is what I took exception to and YOU KNOW THAT VERY WELL, but you have refused to admit that your crazy assertion was in error and have instead chose to blanket our debate with BS courtesy of BL.

Well, that was a good, calm, analytical, non-personal response. Thank you for your contribution.

 

[huskyrob1]

Well, that was a good, calm, analytical, non-personal response. Thank you for your contribution.

You're welcome. Have a nice day.

 

[SAMCRO]

Come on counselor, show me where I ever said the ACC has been superior to the Big East OVER THE LAST 6 OR 7 YEARS?

Not that BL needs anyone to back him on this, but I'll take the bait. You implied it in your post that I copied below. The fact that you reference NC's won by Miami, FSU, Clemson, Syracuse, Pitt, and GT can only be talking many, many about years ago, b/c those teams haven't done squat in some time. When you refer to UNC and NCSU as strong programs year in and year out, you lose all credibility.

The ACC is not a better football conf than the Big East???? Are you crazy? Miami, Pitt, Syracuse, FSU, Clemson, and Georgia Tech have all won multiple NC's in football and don't forget very strong programs like Virgina Tech, NC State, and North Carolina year in and year out. All these schools have extremely strong and entrenched alumni and booster support and recruit circles around the Big East or what's left of it. In terms of scholastic ranking...well don't even go there.

BL and most here are talking about recent (post 2003 raid) on the field performance that the BE stacks up just fine v. the ACC in the actual on the field performance. I've shown you computer rankings to support this. Upstater has linked real data to show this. It's not even debatable. Where you are correct, is the NNBE doesn't stack up in prestige or history, or reputation. But where you're wrong is when you get in to discussing on the field results looked at by the unbiased computer rankings.

 

[huskyrob1]

Not that BL needs anyone to back him on this, but I'll take the bait. You implied it in your post that I copied below. The fact that you reference NC's won by Miami, FSU, Clemson, Syracuse, Pitt, and GT can only be talking many, many about years ago, b/c those teams haven't done squat in some time. When you refer to UNC and NCSU as strong programs year in and year out, you lose all credibility.

BL and most here are talking about recent (post 2003 raid) on the field performance that the BE stacks up just fine v. the ACC in the actual on the field performance. I've shown you computer rankings to support this. Upstater has linked real data to show this. It's not even debatable. Where you are correct, is the NNBE doesn't stack up in prestige or history, or reputation. But where you're wrong is when you get in to discussing on the field results looked at by the unbiased computer rankings.

huskyrob1 Active Member

businesslawyer said: ↑​

No. UConn would and should take it. The ACC is not a better football conference than the reconstituted Big East, but it will have more geographic cohesion, much better hoops, more prestige and more stability.​

 

[Mr. Hand]

I would be shocked if UConn got an ACC invite anytime prior to 2014.

 

[gars44]

gotta bottom line this issue. ACC has look/feel of being better than big east to the average consumer. The sophisticated consumer doesn't see a huge difference, nor do they care much about either conference.

 

[CTFootball]

We all know why the Big East was raided and what the intended consequences were. The BE was supposed to lose its BCS AQ status, be relegated to a minor TV contract, and die on the vine. It would eliminate competition for the other BCS conferences and ESPN.

The problem is that somehow the Big East has found a way to survive yet again. However, not only is the Big East surviving...but I would argue that they have strengthened for the future. While we may have lost some 'prestige' schools, we have added some huge TV markets and have added some teams with huge potential if given an opportunity and resources. This is starting to backfire huge for those that set out to kill the BE.

If this BE expansion goes through, not only will it arguably actually improve the BE in football...it will also firmly establish them as a BCS conference going forward. Once some of these teams establish themselves, combined with the service academies...there is no way they are going to lose the BCS AQ. Instead of minimizing competition, this raid will significantly increase the number of mouths to feed with the BCS and provide increased competition for many established programs.

The timeline has been set now...the BE will expand in a week. Part of me feels like those that intended to kill the BE are going to go for the kill shot while they still can. If they allow BE expansion to go forward, I don't think they will be able to kill off the BE in the future. I would not be surprised to see the ACC invite UConn and Rutgers and the B12 invite Louisville and Cincinnati. While I have not seen any increased activity or reports of this...I just have a feeling that this is spinning out of control for the interested parties and they are going to have to take the kill shot before it is too late!

Where is the invite - did I miss it?