More smart a$$ comments from Dinich

cajunjacket

Dodd-Like
Joined
Dec 5, 2007
Messages
11,704
Take note of the title of the smart ass's article from yesterday. You think she is being positive for once, but then she had to add a smart ass comment.

ACC defenses take the lead again (yawn)
September 24, 2009 3:30 PM

Posted by ESPN.com’s Heather Dinich


The ACC has earned a reputation -– and deservedly so –- for being a defensive conference. Heading into the fourth Saturday of the season, it looks like that trend will continue, despite the return of nine starting quarterbacks and numerous starting running backs throughout the league.

Four teams -– No. 2 NC State, No. 4 Boston College, No. 6 North Carolina and No. 19 Clemson –- are ranked among the top 20 teams in the nation this week in total defense. As we get deeper into conference play, this could obviously change, considering that among the four schools, only two ACC games have been played, and that includes the game between Clemson and BC.

While the elite defenses are great for the conference’s image, it’s also a rather ho-hum start, considering nine starting quarterbacks returned from last year, and for the first time, the ACC expected three returning 1,000-yard rushers. Well, that changed once Darren Evans was lost for the season at Virginia Tech, but Jonathan Dwyer and Maryland’s Da’Rel Scott were expected to highlight a conference loaded with running backs and veteran offensive lines. Instead, Dwyer and Clemson’s C.J. Spiller have barely made it through four quarters this season without getting dinged up, slowed down or resting against a lesser opponent.

It’s no wonder there’s such a buzz about Miami. The Canes have an offense. They have a quarterback. They have a coordinator. And the entire conference has been starving for that. If Miami keeps this up –- and does it against these stingy ACC defenses -– the Canes will prove why those three ingredients are keys in making any sort of a run at the national title.

A top 10 defense is one thing. A top 10 team is another.
I don't understand the animosity. Did she lose a bet on the ACC or something??
 
*sigh* i've stopped reading her stuff. Even after the Clemson win, it was all about how bad we looked (we put up almost 9x the amount of yardage that BC did against them). It's like they had to draw conferences out of a bag and she got stuck with the ACC...
 
ACC doesn't really have any great offenses either. Miami looks good, but it's only been two games.
 
If it looks like a pig, smells like pig, and acts like a pig, it must be a pig. Heather Dimwit is another ESPN lackie.
 
ACC doesn't really have any great offenses either. Miami looks good, but it's only been two games.

If Miami does dominate the rest of the season, I'd like to see them get matched up against a strong SEC team. A win in that situation would be great for the ACC, but a loss would satisfy my extreme dislike of all things UMiami.
 
If Miami does dominate the rest of the season, I'd like to see them get matched up against a strong SEC team. A win in that situation would be great for the ACC, but a loss would satisfy my extreme dislike of all things UMiami.

Do they play Florida this year?

EDIT: Answer is no they don't. They play FSU, UCF, USF and FAMU, but not UF.
 
Take note of the title of the smart ass's article from yesterday. You think she is being positive for once, but then she had to add a smart ass comment.

I don't understand the animosity. Did she lose a bet on the ACC or something??

Maybe she's bitter from having to always write about mediocre teams who never live up to the hype on the big stage. This conference needs a signature win like nothing else, and all we do is blow it on the big stage time and time again(thanks, Chik-Fil-A!)
 
Where is my perception? I've been wondering for 15 minutes what the problem was with her article, then I finally noticed the title of her article.
 
What exactly did she write that was incorrect? Everything she said was true. We, and the rest of the conference other than Miami, look pretty bad so far. Maybe things will change. Maybe teams in the conference won't lose to Div 2 opponents anymore. That's great if it happens, but through the first 3 weeks the conference overall looks like crap.
 
This is college football we are talking about. Lets look at the major conferences:

1. SEC
2. Big 12
3. ACC
4. Big 10
5. Pac 10
6. Big East

Now, relative to those other conferences, I think the ACC ranks 3rd. The ACC isn't as atrocious as she makes us sound.

She turns a great stat of being excellent at defense into a bad thing. Honestly, Miami could win the National Championship, VT or us could win the Orange Bowl and she would probably talk about the other teams that sucked instead of the teams doing well.

I read the NFC-South blog and the ACC blog. The NFC-South blogger is much more positive even when half the teams in the NFC-South have yet to win. Dinich acts like she is on a continuous menstrual cycle that will never end.
 
What leads you to believe the Pac 10 is worse than the ACC? Or the Big 10?

I wasn't ranking them. I was listing them. I think the Pac 10 is worse than the ACC because their best team just lost to Washington. I would prefer to play Pac 10 than ACC any day. You get a shot at knocking off the inflated Trojans that always fail somehow each season, and then you only have to worry about Cal and Oregon. Big 10 is probably worse than Pac 10, but it depends on the year.
 
I really don't think they could. They'll drop at least two games this year.

I was speaking in a hypothetical. Read the rest of the sentence. Don't pull a part of my sentence and claim that is what I was saying.
 
Do they play Florida this year?

EDIT: Answer is no they don't. They play FSU, UCF, USF and FAMU, but not UF.


Not sure I understand what your point is? You answered your own question and tagged that quote which didn't have anything to do with your question

Just confusing and wanted to make sure I was following ya.
 
What leads you to believe the Pac 10 is worse than the ACC? Or the Big 10?


Not that it is the definitive measure of conferences, but Sagarin's conference ratings central mean weighted for 2008 were (simple mean yields the same order): (The 2009 ratings are kinda meaningless at this point since we don't have enough games played.)

CONFERENCE CENTRAL MEAN SIMPLE AVERAGE TEAMS

1 SOUTHEASTERN (A) = 78.31 79.08 ( 1) 12
2 BIG 12 (A) = 77.86 77.80 ( 2) 12
3 ATLANTIC COAST (A) = 77.70 77.67 ( 3) 12
4 PAC-10 (A) = 76.14 75.39 ( 4) 10
5 BIG EAST (A) = 75.23 74.11 ( 5) 8
6 BIG TEN (A) = 73.21 73.49 ( 6) 11
7 MOUNTAIN WEST (A) = 70.90 71.72 ( 7) 9
8 CONFERENCE USA (A) = 65.88 65.75 ( 8) 12
 
Back
Top