volnation thread acc vs big ten

Well, some of them have half-way decent avatars:
avatar23596_9.gif
avatar2070_74.gif
avatar21159_3.gif


Others have such figures as John Wayne, and.... Bruce Springsteen?!? WTF!
 
"I think on any given day Georgia Tech beats OSU"
"I'm not sure Ohio state and Penn State beat Georgia Tech or Virginia Tech"

Wow...the Tech program has definitely come a long way in the last few years.
 
I suppose that it what you talk about when a "mighty SEC" team lost a home game to UCLA. I see too many SEC teams latching on to the success of Florida and LSU. Notice how I am not mentioning Alabama because they were humiliated by Utah.
 
cajunjacket said:
I suppose that it what you talk about when a "mighty SEC" team lost a home game to UCLA. I see too many SEC teams latching on to the success of Florida and LSU. Notice how I am not mentioning Alabama because they were humiliated by Utah.
Click to expand...
Most SEC fans have a canned response for this type of logic:

"Team XYZ would go undefeated in the ACC"

I can't tell you how many times I've heard people defend SEC teams like Vandy, UK, MSU, OM, and USCe by using this line(even though they consistently lose to ACC teams...that's b/c they were beat up from their SEC schedule)
 
TechinItEasy said:
Most SEC fans have a canned response for this type of logic:

"Team XYZ would go undefeated in the ACC"

I can't tell you how many times I've heard people defend SEC teams like Vandy, UK, MSU, OM, and USCe by using this line(even though they consistently lose to ACC teams...that's b/c they were beat up from their SEC schedule)
Click to expand...

Yeah, last I checked you play a team, not a conference. It's so overused in college football. Basketball may be slightly conference centric, but you never see us clinging on to Duke and UNC's success when we are having a bad season. SEC football is a different story though.

Also, I hate how the parity conversation hasn't been struck up in the ESPN newroom. There is a ton of parity in college football.
 
<Insert name of conference here> is overrated and <Insert name of SEC/Big12/Pac10> is vastly superior. The only reason people have these arguments is because ESPN seems to think it really matters. Lets run down the list:

ACC - The A stands for a "A bunch of mediocre teams."

Big 10 - If you look at the the Big 10 logo, there's a hidden 11. Sadly, there's no hidden talent.

Big 12 - Where defense is optional

Big East - Sucks

Pac 10 - You've got USC and ... a bunch of complete ****.

SEC - See above, replace USC with Florida, think about adding LSU.
 
And you know why this is? Because of the BCS. If college football were run on a tournament system, a conference being carried by 1 or 2 teams would be a thing of the past. Teams like Utah, who was really good last year, could quit their bitching and have a chance to prove they are good. It would be much more conducive to football. A great team that loses a game because a key player is injured (happens all the time) wouldn't be screwed out of the championship game, they would just be seeded lower in the playoffs. It makes perfect sense, but not enough money.
 
cajunjacket said:
And you know why this is? Because of the BCS. If college football were run on a tournament system, a conference being carried by 1 or 2 teams would be a thing of the past. Teams like Utah, who was really good last year, could quit their bitching and have a chance to prove they are good. It would be much more conducive to football. A great team that loses a game because a key player is injured (happens all the time) wouldn't be screwed out of the championship game, they would just be seeded lower in the playoffs. It makes perfect sense, but not enough money.
Click to expand...
I'm calling shenanigans on this one. An eight, and probably even sixteen team playoff would still result in pointless conference strength pissing contests for a few reasons.

#1 - ESPN has a product to sell us. That product is the SEC.

#2 - It's easy enough to pick the top few teams, the USCs and the UFs of the season to play in the tournament. It's not so easy to pick the rest of the teams, and people would cling to their conference strength as proof.

#3 - I can't comment on the lunacy of other conference fans, but does anyone honestly believe that an SEC fan will simply disregard all logic and rationale when mindlessly pointing to their team and conference superiority? SEC teams can't win in a playoff because of their grueling schedule...
 
Allen Koholic said:
I'm calling shenanigans on this one. An eight, and probably even sixteen team playoff would still result in pointless conference strength pissing contests for a few reasons.

#1 - ESPN has a product to sell us. That product is the SEC.

Ok, but that doesn't nullify the playoffs.

#2 - It's easy enough to pick the top few teams, the USCs and the UFs of the season to play in the tournament. It's not so easy to pick the rest of the teams, and people would cling to their conference strength as proof.

Just as hard as it is to put fill the "at large" spots for BCS games.

#3 - I can't comment on the lunacy of other conference fans, but does anyone honestly believe that an SEC fan will simply disregard all logic and rationale when mindlessly pointing to their team and conference superiority? SEC teams can't win in a playoff because of their grueling schedule...

Oh well, if they want to complain in that scenario, I wouldn't care at all. So long as they can't use that argument to always usher a team in to the BSC NC game.
Click to expand...
.
 
I'm not saying playoffs are or aren't a good idea, that's another discussion. I'm simply saying that playoffs do not change the pointless conference strength bickering, nor will it even slightly impact the irrationality of SEC fans. ESPN will still spend the entire season hyping whatever conference they stand to make money on, SEC fans will still maintain their delusions, and people will still say that ACC and Big East are mediocre, even if a team from there wins the national title.
 
Allen Koholic said:
I'm not saying playoffs are or aren't a good idea, that's another discussion. I'm simply saying that playoffs do not change the pointless conference strength bickering, nor will it even slightly impact the irrationality of SEC fans. ESPN will still spend the entire season hyping whatever conference they stand to make money on, SEC fans will still maintain their delusions, and people will still say that ACC and Big East are mediocre, even if a team from there wins the national title.
Click to expand...

Oh I see. My bad. Yeah, you have a point there. I guess I was just getting at the fact that if they are still complaining and being irrational, it wouldn't bother me so much because everything would be determined on the field. In the current system, it isn't determined on the field, I don't care what anyone says, it isn't. If you believe it is, then go write Roger Goodell and tell him to switch the NFL's system because it is pointless, and after 16 games you should know who the two best teams are.

But, back to the point, I think that playoffs would at least illegitimize their claims. I didn't hear any Alabama fans complaining that they lost to Utah because of the hard SEC schedule. That's because it was fought on the field.
 
TechinItEasy said:
Most SEC fans have a canned response for this type of logic:

"Team XYZ would go undefeated in the ACC"

I can't tell you how many times I've heard people defend SEC teams like Vandy, UK, MSU, OM, and USCe by using this line(even though they consistently lose to ACC teams...that's b/c they were beat up from their SEC schedule)
Click to expand...
actually vandy beat bc last year in the bowl game
and usce beat nc state... just food for thought
 
DeRRtyTree said:
actually vandy beat bc last year in the bowl game
and usce beat nc state... just food for thought
Click to expand...
Vandy lost to Duke
USCe gets beat down every year by Clemson

My argument was not "These SEC teams would get beat by every ACC team", it was poking at the SEC homers that say the low level SEC teams would still go undefeated in the ACC.
 
BC was the runner up in the ACC last year and lost to Vandy... which is kind of sad considering Vandy lost to Duke.. Oh well

I guess Parity is all over college football, even in the SEC
 
Last edited:
DeRRtyTree said:
BC was the runner up in the ACC last year and lost to Vandy... which is kind of sad considering Vandy lost to Duke.. Oh well

I guess Parody is all over college football, even in the SEC
Click to expand...

I think you mean parity, but you're probably right either way! :D
 
DeRRtyTree said:
BC was the runner up in the ACC last year and lost to Vandy... which is kind of sad considering Vandy lost to Duke.. Oh well

I guess Parody is all over college football, even in the SEC
Click to expand...

Not only did Vandy lose to Duke, they also lost to Wake....and Mississippi St...and a 5-7 Tennessee team. However, Vandy also finished 5th in the SEC.

Their worst loss during the year was to Florida, their second worst loss was to Wake (23-10). Their other 4 losses were by 10 pts or less.

I'm not really sure what you can say about Vandy and how it relates to the SEC and ACC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top