Heather D. ranks the conferences

G

GiveEmHellJackets

Dodd-Like
Joined
Oct 21, 2008
Messages
10,704
Here's how Heather Dinich ranks the NCAA football conferences.

1. SEC
2. Big 12
3. Pac-10
4. Big 10
5. ACC
6. Mountain West
7. Big East
8. WAC

Dinich says:
The ACC has recruited better coaches. Many schools are recruiting better players. Last year, an NCAA-record 10 teams became bowl eligible. And in 2008, the ACC won the most nonconference games in league history, including a 17-14 record against the other BCS conferences and Notre Dame. So where does that rank the ACC in the grand scheme of college football? Nowhere without a legitimate national title contender.
Click to expand...

Full article at:

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/acc/0-6-446/Ranking-the-conferences.html
 
Big 10? Really? As bad as our bowl season was it wasn't as bad as theirs.
 
Top to bottom they are not as good, but they both have at least one powerhouse program that competes for a BCS title every year; ACC is definitely lacking that(for now.)
 
gth816f said:
Top to bottom they are not as good, but they both have at least one powerhouse program that competes for a BCS title every year; ACC is definitely lacking that(for now.)
Click to expand...

Yeah I knew that can be the only reason. However, I can see a few ACC teams that might be able to go toe-to-toe with Ohio and Penn St.
 
That's the type of stupid crap I expect from ESPN and the "pro" who covers our conference. Screw them. The SEC is the toughest conference top to bottom. After that, the ACC and Big 12 are in a tight race. Long after that, the Big 10 and Pac 10 are battling.
 
BuzzLaw said:
That's the type of stupid crap I expect from ESPN and the "pro" who covers our conference. Screw them. The SEC is the toughest conference top to bottom. After that, the ACC and Big 12 are in a tight race. Long after that, the Big 10 and Pac 10 are battling.
Click to expand...

Sorry but the ACC and Big 12 are not even close. They have two legit National titles contenders this year. Possibly three if Ok. St. performs like most think they will.
 
Legitimate title contenders come and go. There's plenty of parity in college football. How many "unbeatable" number ones have been beaten in the last 2 years? There is probably some logic to expecting the best conferences to be represented at the top, but this ignores the overall quality of the conference. I think the bias in this ranking is based on the decline of Miami and Florida State while it ignores the improvements in teams like Wake Forest and North Carolina. Top to bottom, I think the ACC is one of the best conferences, and the parity in the conference makes it hard to produce a team with 0 or 1 loss over the course of the season.
 
jacket67 said:
Legitimate title contenders come and go. There's plenty of parity in college football. How many "unbeatable" number ones have been beaten in the last 2 years? There is probably some logic to expecting the best conferences to be represented at the top, but this ignores the overall quality of the conference. I think the bias in this ranking is based on the decline of Miami and Florida State while it ignores the improvements in teams like Wake Forest and North Carolina. Top to bottom, I think the ACC is one of the best conferences, and the parity in the conference makes it hard to produce a team with 0 or 1 loss over the course of the season.
Click to expand...

I remember one person, when discussing the conferences, said that with the bowl record that the 10 bowl eligible teams was actually just a sign of mediocrity in the middle. Now I think that might be a bit harsh but even then, wouldn't of been because of **** in the middle 10-15 years ago? Florida St didn't bitch-own the ACC for some many years 'just' cause it was that damn good. The fact that almost any team from the ACC is a potential upset for 96% of the teams in FBS division football shows how far the conference has come. And there's no sign that its going to stop where it is either.
 
I keep telling you guys that Heather Dimwit knows next to nothing about football. The ACC is only behind the SEC in total strength, and that's only because the SEC has so many top teams. Team by team we're better than them. I'd place the SEC first, and second I'd put the Big 12, Pac 10 and ACC in a tie. I'd place the Big Ten third and the Big Least last of the BCS conferences.

Now one can say that if our tier is shaded Big 12, Pac 10 and then ACC, that she's only missed it by one, but I don't give her that much credit.
 
gth816f said:
Top to bottom they are not as good, but they both have at least one powerhouse program that competes for a BCS title every year; ACC is definitely lacking that(for now.)
Click to expand...

There are a few ACC teams who would be considered powerhouses if they got to play some of those Big "N" schedules.:wow:
 
When our blogger is rating us below the Pac10 and the Big Ten, thats pretty ****ed up.
 
Stop giving Heather's articles browser hits and her bosses will stop paying her money to slap the keyboard and see what comes out. Linking her articles just throws fuel on the fire of stupidity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top