Lsu

[midatlantech]

I sure hope PJ continues to prove that he can get the team ready to play because just about every tradtional signal for an upcoming Tech failure are peaking right now:

Tech is the favorite.
Overconfident fans.
Peach Bowl.
Down but not out good opponent.
Fans focused on Miami, UGA, FSU just one day before the game against last years' NC LSU.
ACC hasn't looked very good so far in the bowls.
AJC ready to pounce over the winter, particularly after UGA wins easily over way over ranked MSU.
"Tech athletes are smart"...
Four weeks preparation for the option.
Rhythm offense shut down for four weeks.

"Hold That Tiger!" coming to Atlanta.

 

[The Jacket]

One signal to ignore all of that garbage:

Paul ****ing Johnson

 

[ramblin_man]

Good thing the outcome of the game depends on the way our players execute on offense/defense and not on how the fish wrapper writes their headlines and paranoid fans perceive (not directed towards you specifically) the outcome to left up to "fate or some sort of jinx"...
I say GO JACKETS and trust that the players are focused and that a solid foundation of discipline/confidence has been instilled in them since day one of CPJ's arrival. CPJ and the Jackets will be ready...Are you ready to stand by our team?

 

[midatlantech]

Good thing the outcome of the game depends on the way our players execute on offense/defense and not on how the fish wrapper writes their headlines and paranoid fans perceive (not directed towards you specifically) the outcome to left up to "fate or some sort of jinx"...
I say GO JACKETS and trust that the players are focused and that a solid foundation of discipline/confidence has been instilled in them since day one of CPJ's arrival. CPJ and the Jackets will be ready...Are you ready to stand by our team?

I'm ready coach, just checking. I'm flying in from Baltimore tomorrow morning (but my arms might be a little tired).

 

[BuzzCzar]

I'm ready coach, just checking. I'm flying in from Baltimore tomorrow morning (but my arms might be a little tired).

 

[JOJATK]

ACC hasn't looked very good so far in the bowls.

I'm not so sure I agree with that statement. I think we've not looked that bad so far.

- Miami, a young team in our conference that had an OC nobody hear thought could get the job done (who was fired yesterday) yet they stuck with a decent Cal team with one of the best running backs in the country (oh, and Miami suspended 5 players for the game - good for Randy Shannon - including their top QB - though it could be argued this wasn't a huge loss since Jacory Harris has looked better than Marve at times)

- UNC, another young team playing against West Virginia, a team that knows how to win the close, tough games and certainly knows how to win bowl games. They have a fabulous QB who is incredibly difficult to defend and were all really up to win the game for Pat White. The game came down to the final possession and UNC couldn't get it done (some bad clock mgt in this game AND the Miami game)

- NCSU, a team with a frosh QB (who has looked brilliant) who got injured in the first half but still came out in the second despite the sprain, playing a VERY experienced Rutgers team that was even hotter than NCSU over the second half of the season and again, a close game

Sure the pundits will say the ACC sucks because we've lost 3 bowls so far and only won 2 but considering how bad the ACC was supposed to be and considering these have been good opponents and some of the more interesting bowls to watch, all coming down to the final few minutes, I'd say the ACC is showing up to play and setting itself up for a much better year next year.

By the way, the Cliff notes for this post are available at the B&N bookstore on campus

 

[midatlantech]

JOJATK,
Good teams would win every one of those bowl games. All three showed a lack of mental toughness; sometimes that toughness comes from development through the regular season. If the ACC doesn't require mental toughness to win, then the whole conference is weaker than I thought.

Rutgers just is not very good.
UNC had WVU and quit playing.
All three had incredibly stupid special teams moments. (actually I may be confusing the Northwestern game here.)

I did predict that the ACC would not do any better than .500 mainly because of very poor matchups for us this year. So it wasn't that unexpected to me; however I was hoping that we could shut the friggin biased media up about our conference.

Next year, we will have four or five very stout teams I think. Finishing off this year would only help their early reputation for next year. Nobody really cares about non BCS Navy, so in games that matter, we're 1-3. Not a good start so far IMO.

 

[hdtvfan]

JOJATK,
Good teams would win every one of those bowl games. All three showed a lack of mental toughness; sometimes that toughness comes from development through the regular season. If the ACC doesn't require mental toughness to win, then the whole conference is weaker than I thought.

Rutgers just is not very good.
UNC had WVU and quit playing.
All three had incredibly stupid special teams moments. (actually I may be confusing the Northwestern game here.)

I did predict that the ACC would not do any better than .500 mainly because of very poor matchups for us this year. So it wasn't that unexpected to me; however I was hoping that we could shut the friggin biased media up about our conference.

Next year, we will have four or five very stout teams I think. Finishing off this year would only help their early reputation for next year. Nobody really cares about non BCS Navy, so in games that matter, we're 1-3. Not a good start so far IMO.

Some good points, I am also dissappointed with the ACC teams so far other than FSU of course.

However, most of the conference's better teams are still to play, including GT, BC and VT and I think Clemson can handle Nebraska. Of course competition will be tougher overall as well but I think that there is a decent chance for the conference to finish with 5 or 6 wins in the bowls.

 

[JWE37]

I sure hope PJ continues to prove that he can get the team ready to play because just about every tradtional signal for an upcoming Tech failure are peaking right now:

Everyone knows the outcome is going to be determined by jersey color (gold or navy???). Game prep, coaching, skill, play calling, and previous years superstitions have nothing to do with who wins.

 

[jacket67]

Only half of the ACC bowl games have been played. The 3 losses were all close. Judging the ACC based on this is like all the people who blasted the ACC after week 1 or 2 earlier in the season. Ten ACC teams are playing in bowl games this year. How can you judge the conference on losses by bowl-eligible teams that finished in the bottom half of the conference, especially when those games were close enough to go either way?

 

[H-town]

Only half of the ACC bowl games have been played. The 3 losses were all close. Judging the ACC based on this is like all the people who blasted the ACC after week 1 or 2 earlier in the season. Ten ACC teams are playing in bowl games this year. How can you judge the conference on losses by bowl-eligible teams that finished in the bottom half of the conference, especially when those games were close enough to go either way?

Umm..because they lost. It doesn't matter if you think they're good or not. Did they win on the field against similar conferences?

 

[midatlantech]

Only half of the ACC bowl games have been played. The 3 losses were all close. Judging the ACC based on this is like all the people who blasted the ACC after week 1 or 2 earlier in the season. Ten ACC teams are playing in bowl games this year. How can you judge the conference on losses by bowl-eligible teams that finished in the bottom half of the conference, especially when those games were close enough to go either way?

First off, all I said was that the ACC wasn't looking good so far. I did not put a final judgement on the conference. However:

I am very worried about Maryland. They are so Jekyl and Hyde and are poorly supported by the fanbase right now. Nevada is happy to be there and has a star QB. I just don't see MD scoring enough points. Their offense always self destructs.

I am worried about VPI. They and their fan base are feeling down, Cinn and their fan base are excited. Additionally, VPI has done a poor job representing the ACC (all the BCS ACC teams have).

I am worried about BC. They are a good football team and would normally destroy Vanderbilt. BUT, they lost their quarterback and are not anywhere near as good with the backup. (With a QB, they roll through VPI at the ACCCG, without they lost.)

Clemson and Tech are really hard for me to predict. I think we will beat LSU, but I think it will be very close. Clemson, is just impossible to predict right now. They certainly have the talent to beat Nebraska.

I hope I am wrong, but I don't see the ACC rolling through the last games.

p.s. Our lower tier teams were playing lower tier teams from other conferences.
p.p.s. The ACC is 0-2 against the Big East.

 

[JOJATK]

JOJATK,
Good teams would win every one of those bowl games. All three showed a lack of mental toughness; sometimes that toughness comes from development through the regular season. If the ACC doesn't require mental toughness to win, then the whole conference is weaker than I thought.

"Good teams would win every one of those games." Aha. So the definition of a good team is winning every game they SHOULD win? And if I'm reading you correctly, only one team on the field at a time can be a good team. Up until now I've thought the New York Giants were a good team but now I know they are not because a GOOD team would have beaten the Browns instead of gotten run off the field on MNF earlier this season. I also had thought that USC was good but I see that I'm mistaken because they lost a game they should have won to Oregon State. Similarly Penn State who lost to Iowa.

Look, nobody really thought that the NYG would win the Super Bowl last year but they got hot and played some great football at the right time. Rutgers, despite your dismissal (which I think is incorrect having seen Rutgers play a number of times), has been extremely good over the second half of the season.

I don't disagree with you that the ACC teams in those games gave away opportunities to win and we also agree that at key times those teams lacked mental toughness. This year was not a great year in the ACC, no doubt about that. But my point wasn't that the ACC is playing great ball. My point was that the ACC isn't completely stinking up the joint when you look at the actual game and not just the result. Yes, the result, in the end, is the only thing that matters. But the play on the field matters when you're trying to figure out what might be in store for the conference next year and I think some of our younger teams haven't been as bad as you say.

Another point on which we agree is that the rest of the games, with the hopeful exception of ours, may not be much better.

As always, Cliff Notes are available...

 

[gsu_paintballer]

JOJATK is it your son that's the puker?

 

[jacket67]

Umm..because they lost. It doesn't matter if you think they're good or not. Did they win on the field against similar conferences?

Don't get me wrong. It's ultimately about who wins and loses. But presumably, the bowls try to match teams that are competitive, so the game is exciting and people will watch on TV and want to buy tickets. If the ACC teams perform well in those games, the conference has delivered what was hoped for, even if they come up short in the W/L department. I'd love to see the ACC dominate every bowl game, because next year the reputation of the conference puts us in higher profile games. On the other hand, if the ACC teams all get blown out, the conference would be seen as a disappointment and next year be viewed as less competitive. That has certainly not been the case this year. In fact, I don't think any of the bowl organizers would regret the invitation, unless it was for ticket sales. That is probably the bigger concern for the ACC rather than the performance of the teams.