More smart a$$ comments from Dinich

lonestarjacket said:
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
Click to expand...


In case anyone cares, the current Sagarin ratings YTD for 2009, which would NOT be well received at ESPN.;)

CONFERENCE CENTRAL MEAN SIMPLE AVERAGE TEAMS

1 PAC-10 (A) = 79.41 78.44 ( 1) 10
2 ATLANTIC COAST (A) = 78.34 78.12 ( 2) 12
3 SOUTHEASTERN (A) = 76.18 76.46 ( 3) 12
4 BIG EAST (A) = 76.11 76.03 ( 4) 8
5 BIG 12 (A) = 75.18 74.76 ( 6) 12
6 BIG TEN (A) = 74.90 74.91 ( 5) 11
7 I-A INDEPENDENTS (A) = 70.45 69.45 ( 8) 3
8 MOUNTAIN WEST (A) = 70.05 69.62 ( 7) 9
9 WESTERN ATHLETIC (A) = 66.11 66.56 ( 9) 9
10 CONFERENCE USA (A) = 63.71 63.99 ( 10) 12
 
Those rankings have us currently ranked as #8 in the country, and there are 6 ACC schools in the top 13. He should do himself a favor and not release these rankings until six weeks in or so, like the BCS.
 
gth816f said:
East Coast bias and gold colored glasses.
Click to expand...

Sagarin's computer has no east coast or west coast bias. It only has a "who did you play and how did you do relative to them" bias.

Maybe you have bought a little too readily into ESPN's subliminal suggestions and indoctrination. :D


FTR, I think Sagarin's 2009 ratings are a little misleading and will shake out as we have more meaningful games, but I hope not.
 
gth816f said:
Those rankings have us currently ranked as #8 in the country, and there are 6 ACC schools in the top 13. He should do himself a favor and not release these rankings until six weeks in or so, like the BCS.
Click to expand...

Amen, dude you and I are on a roll. We actually seem to be on the same wavelink
 
gth816f said:
Those rankings have us currently ranked as #8 in the country, and there are 6 ACC schools in the top 13. He should do himself a favor and not release these rankings until six weeks in or so, like the BCS.
Click to expand...


But that has nothing to do with 2008 which takes into account actual results of all games for all teams in all conferences. (As opposed to using just film highlight perceptions from ESPN Game Day, which is where most fans form opinions of relative team strength.)
 
My main point of bringing up the Dinich article is that she can turn any positive for the ACC into a negative. Yes, Heather, we already know the ACC is a disappointment for the amount of potential we have each year. But when you're going to report one of the FEW positive stats, you don't have to be a big smart ass about it and remind us of how we don't live up to expectations. She is a "glass is half empty" type of person when she looks at the ACC, when she could be a "glass is half full" person. That was my only complaint.
 
GT65_UGA89 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Thank you. The conference deserves exactly this kind of review until we do something to change perceptions. In fact, I don't think she was harsh at all. Who, other than Miami and FSU, has shown any offense so far this year?
 
cajunjacket said:
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.
Click to expand...
But we're really not excellent at defense in the ACC. We're just excellent against each other. Until we knock off or shut down some name teams from other conferences, we're getting exactly the reputation we deserve. Don't be so sensitive. If we win we'll get our props.
 
The OP's issue with the article was the title. I know the AJC writers don't make write their own headlines. I wonder if HD does either. If not, the beef shouldn't be with her.
 
GTWannaBee said:
The OP's issue with the article was the title. I know the AJC writers don't make write their own headlines. I wonder if HD does either. If not, the beef shouldn't be with her.
Click to expand...
Given that it's a blog, I seriously doubt ESPN contrives the headlines.
 
ncjacket said:
But we're really not excellent at defense in the ACC. We're just excellent against each other. Until we knock off or shut down some name teams from other conferences, we're getting exactly the reputation we deserve. Don't be so sensitive. If we win we'll get our props.
Click to expand...

2008 ACC vs:

Big 12: 4-1
SEC: 6-6
Big 11: 1-1
BE: 3-4
P10: 1-2

15-14 OOC record

Big East OOC: 9-15
Big 11 OOC: 6-11
Big 12 OOC: 11-11
Pac10 OOC: 17-6
SEC: 11-10

Not only did we play more OOC games vs "the big 6" by a margin of 6, we had essentially the same record as the SEC, and only the PAC10 was siginificantly ahead of anyone.

Yet from ESPN, blogs, fans...you would think that the ACC might as well be CUSA or something.

The fact is, the ACC is competitive in AND OUT of conference, but until we get a Nat'l title contender we WILL NOT have any respect....regardless of how many games we win otherwise.
 
Why do I care what she writes? I only care about what the Georgia Tech football team does tomorrow. Then I will care about the next week's game.
 
TechinItEasy said:
2008 ACC vs:

Big 12: 4-1
SEC: 6-6
Big 11: 1-1
BE: 3-4
P10: 1-2

15-14 OOC record

Big East OOC: 9-15
Big 11 OOC: 6-11
Big 12 OOC: 11-11
Pac10 OOC: 17-6
SEC: 11-10

Not only did we play more OOC games vs "the big 6" by a margin of 6, we had essentially the same record as the SEC, and only the PAC10 was siginificantly ahead of anyone.

Yet from ESPN, blogs, fans...you would think that the ACC might as well be CUSA or something.

The fact is, the ACC is competitive in AND OUT of conference, but until we get a Nat'l title contender we WILL NOT have any respect....regardless of how many games we win otherwise.
Click to expand...
But almost every time we have a big game, the ACC team blows it. Duke beating Vandy is meaningless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top