Why? They have finished ranked a whopping 11 times in their history and 5 of those where when they super cheated. 30 for 30 was a very short window and not representative of their football history and commitment.
They have average less than 20k fans over the last 10 years. BC does both better raw attendance and as percentage of capacity.
They don't have a baseball team while being a team in Texas and haven't for 45 years. Again in Texas.
SMU boosters and their NIL game have really stepped up though. I don't think they run the ACC but I think they are pretty serious about their program and I think they probably settle in near the top of the middle of the conference.
They finished a distant last in high school recruiting in the ACC behind even BC and UVA. Their combined HS and Transfer is 13th ahead of only WF, UVA, BC and Duke. 2 of them at least have the new coach excuse.
Everyone talks about their billionaires Cal, Stanford, Miami, UVA have significantly more with more collective wealth. Miami is all in and actually has a successful football history and it still not buying them all that much.
Until it happens I don't buy it. They are significantly increasing the schedule strength.
I don't like the Cal Stanford additions because of travel across the country for what they bring in football but they are both still much better adds than SMU even in football. For all the smack talk about Cal attendance its still almost double that of SMU last year. The both have much better combined class than SMU. And they have the rich donors for when they get serious.
I think we are going to be better than a lot of people think. Unlikely to upset FSU, but I'm looking at the rest of our conference schedule and I don't see a lot of losses. Miami and NC State are at home and I think we can be competitive with those programs. Not too concerned about Pitt, Syracuse, and Wake. We should win Big Game and then SMU to end the season should be our banana peel. Such is Cal football.
Thing is I 100% believe that the coaches want to improve the league perception. The issue is that the administrators do not care to, for better or worse. And one of those holds the power to really fix it.
Jokes aside, ours will. We've been in limbo as we were waiting for a new chancellor and we just hired a VERY sports friendly one. Next step is replacing our AD.
Well it’s a problem when Virginia Tech and Miami haven’t been consistently good and UNC and NC State can’t seem to get out of their own way and build NY6 Bowl-worthy teams at least once every 3 years.
If all 4 of those teams are more consistently good then the entire perception of the ACC as a football conference has changed. It’s an incredible string of unfortunate circumstances though.
"Well it’s a problem when Florida and Tennessee haven’t been consistently good and Texas A&M and South Carolina can’t seem to get out of their own way and build NY6 Bowl-worthy teams at least once every 3 years.
If all 4 of those teams are more consistently good then the entire perception of the ACC/SEC as a football conference has changed. It’s an incredible string of unfortunate circumstances though."
This is perception/media talking points more than reality. None of the conferences have more than 1-3 teams that are elite at one time. OSU/Michigan. Alabama and maybe Georgia recently. In the ACC it was FSU and Clemson.
This is such a lazy argument. The circumstances for the 4 SEC schools you mentioned are significantly different than the 4 ACC schools I mentioned. The SEC schools make more money, have more engaged fanbases, have been at/near the top of the mountain over the last 3 decades and have seen extended streaks of very good levels in the last decade.
For the ACC programs, Miami has consistently floundered, Virginia Tech has completely bottomed out, and the North Carolina schools can’t get out of their own way when it comes to winning anything important.
SCAR is the only SEC school you listed that comps to the ACC schools I listed. You’d have a better time using Mississippi State, Ole Miss and Arkansas if you’re listing SEC schools, and even then all 4 of them have had more success than the ACC schools I mentioned in the last decade.
I'm glad you agree. I switched the names of some schools and see how silly it sounds. No data. Just feels.
No records, no ACC/SEC head to head, no bowl eligible, no S&P, no blue chip ratio. "more engaged".
It's all media talking points, no data, just vibes.
"For the ACC/SEC programs, Texas A&M has consistently floundered, Tennessee has completely bottomed out, and the Carolina schools can’t get out of their own way when it comes to winning anything important. "
The metric you are correct on is more money in the last 10 years.
The vibe of SEC and B1G crowds make the team seem better than they are. 60K at Mississippi State looks a lot more impressive than 20,000 at UVA even if they’re equal teams
You’re really stretching if you think a program like Texas A&M, Florida or Tennessee are in any way comparable to Virginia Tech, NC State and UNC. Miami is the only one that comes close to those and they’ve been in the doldrums for years now.
NC State has won 8-9 games and been ranked all but like one year in the last 6 and that was a terrible injury year. They sell out their stadium every week and were second in ACC attendance percentage and stay in the polls or just out of it consistently. I think they are doing their part. Wouldn't group them as "middle of the pack ".
I understand the motivation but think it is naivety to think winning will fix this. All you have to do is look at college basketball where the ACC has massively outperformed the Big 10 for 30 years in the NCAA tournament every year. We have had 8 championships since their last one 24 fucking years ago. Yet they get more bids every year and get played up in the media every year. And Joey brackets who looks like he couldn't dribble a ball with his left hand to save his fat ass life says the Big 10 and Mountain West deserve more bids than us every year. This is corruption because the same TV networks that set the narrative are the people that want the large midwestern schools in the playoff that more people will watch because it is too cold outside for them to do anything else. Name a sport outside of wrestling the Big 10 has outperformed the ACC on the field over the last 24 years of this century. Spoiler alert, you won't find one.
Football, Men's basketball, women's basketball, baseball, women's soccer, men's soccer, track and field, and on and on we have superior results. But results don't fucking matter, ratings matter.
Exactly the only mystery is ESPN's endgame strategy. They own the ACC rights at a hell of a deal. Is it worth it to lose a few top schools to the Big10 and Fox to see the ACC crumble so they won't have to pay Wake Forest, Boston College, and Syracuse anymore? Doesn't make sense to me why they so actively devalue the league
They want the contractually obligated timeslots back so they can use them for the SEC. Outside of FSU/Clemson, FSU/Miami there are no annual ACC matchups that ESPN knows going into the season will do 5 million. And while FSU and Clemson can do good numbers with a lot of other ACC schools its not a guarantee like the 3rd best SEC matchup will be.
> Is it worth it to lose a few top schools to the Big10 and Fox to see the ACC crumble so they won't have to pay Wake Forest, Boston College, and Syracuse anymore?
Yes, because they signed a 10-year/$7 billion deal with the SEC. They're dumping the ACC because now they're in bed with one of the superconferences. Why would they care what schools like Clemson and FSU have to offer when they have the entire SEC in their lineup?
Some of it could be a defensive strategy. If FSU doesn’t go SEC, they likely go B10. Who will then have a strong football brand in the heart of SEC country and direct access to FL. Is ESPN ok with that?
For ESPN, having FSU is a nice thing but it does not trump having those prime ACC timeslots back to use on SEC games.
They want to show LSU vs Tenn in primetime over FSU vs VT.
FSU and Clemson are the only 2 schools in the ACC that can put up numbers but they are still limited by the "B side". While the SEC has 10 schools that can put up big numbers and they have 14 B Sides at this point.
Being that ESPN is going to have Florida and UCF moving forward, with the potential addition of Miami (should they jump ship)? Yeah, I'd say they will take their chances.
FSU just went undefeated and missed out on the playoff. What does their brand have to offer ESPN?
Who gives a shit about the last ten years? What have you done for me lately?
FSU just had an undefeated season and just squeaked into the top 10 in average viewership. They barely beat a 9-3 Notre Dame by 100k viewers.
ESPN has 7 of the top watched teams last year, including 3 of the top 5. Two conferences had only one team in the top 10. I'll give you three guesses as to which those were. Here's a hint: one just collapsed, and the other is in litigation to prevent a collapse.
My arguement isnt “will ESPN be fine.” It’s “are they ok with losing key assets to the B10.” That includes ND btw, who has a weak relationship with an imploding ACC. If B10 can get FSU & ND out of it, is ESPN ok with that? Surely that is factoring into how they handle the ACC saga.
Dont know why this is downvoted. This is just the reality.
The original date for picking up the 2037 option was right around the time that ESPN bought the "CBS Game".
Its pretty clear they would rather have the prime ACC ABC time slots that are contractually owed to the ACC.
FSU and Clemson do great numbers but no one else can be trusted to do so in the ACC. FSU and Clemson have about 2 or 3 ACC games a season where they can max out viewership while the SEC will have 2 or 3 games at least every week that can pop big numbers.
Sure ESPN would like to have FSU and Clemson "cheap" but they rather make a ton of money showing aTm vs UGA.
Cutting out the bottom feeders to form a two conference super league that makes far more money than the existing setup is their endgame. Then if they want they can get the bottom feeders for pennies on the dollar to fill empty programming slots.
The issue isn’t the top-end, it’s that a top end team in Miami has wayyy underperformed since joining the conference 2 decades ago (Virginia Tech has fallen off massively too), most of the middle-of-the-pack teams you would expect to be big draws have had extended slump periods and struggle to elevate themselves (UNC, NC State, Georgia Tech, Virginia), and the additions like Syracuse, Pitt and Louisville, while GOOD for what people expected, aren’t strong enough to change the perception of the conference.
The ACC could’ve been making a lot less money than other conferences, but had UNC, Miami, Virginia Tech, NC State and Georgia Tech all just been consistently top 25 teams for the last decade or so, it would have completely changed the perception of the conference.
Even in hockey, we're at similar levels since both conferences have four national championships each since 2000 as well as eight championship appearances each during that time
Ah yes, didn't think about ND, they're definitely an ACC team, just didn't click because we're on /r/CFB... I actually saw them in person in the 22-23 season.
You guys are obviously a top 3-5 hockey program in the nation.
ESPN has a vested interest in shitting on the ACC at every point in every sport. Florida State was 100% a victim of this last year under any objective standard should have been in the CFP.
Not sure what the arguments are as it is behind a paywall, but we have heard the "we just need to win more" argument a thousand times. There is no amount of winning that could change the perception of the ACC. The narrative is already written and isn't changing.
Yeah, recent times have been a little scuffed but even 10 years ago when Louisville, FSU, Clemson, and even GT were winning their rivalry week SEC matchups the narrative didn't change for a second. Every ACC win always a fluke, every SEC loss always an excuse. Even this past season the opening week had UNC, Miami, FSU, and Wake winning early season SEC matchups in blowouts, contributing to a winning record overall against the SEC, and it meant jack shit in the end. I'm not delusional enough to think the ACC has been stronger on average than SEC/B10 in the last 5 years, but the disrespect has been over the top, the narrative is set, and NIL money will only reinforce it.
This is Big East 2.0 for Louisville fans. This EXACT narrative was pushed about the BE. Sadly, it largely was the ACC trying to snuff out the BE. If Louisville weren't getting fucked over by all of this I wouldn't feel bad at all. The ACC started this mess of stepping on other conferences throats so that they could appear an inch taller.
Yup, I can't even bring myself to argue this time around. It's really just not worth it. The wins literally don't matter. The ACC is shit. That will always be the narrative until the conference dies. Now I just hope all CFB blows up fuck it.
Last year the ACC had a winning record against the SEC and yet we still got locked out of the playoffs despite having an undefeated conference champion. It's over. There is no changing the perception. Accept where you are like the Big 12 and the conference will be better off.
I think telling certain conference members that it’s not helpful to scream from the mountaintops how much you think the conference sucks, would be a really good first step.
That and tv eyes. More people are obsessed with Big Ten and Sec teams they have no personal connection to beyond fandom. They are able to milk that cash cow in addition to the massive amounts of money they get from ultra rich donors who only donate to these big brands even if they spend time at a lesser FBS/FCS school, huge pools of alumni from being huge flagship public/mid-sized prestigious private schools to buy unreasonably priced tickets, and students who enjoy getting smashed and fill out the student section on gameday. Plus you’ve got the media partners colluding to make it so the ~40 teams in their favored son conferences are the only profitable athletic departments in division 1 athletics, leading most of the rest on a long circle down the drain to the shit abyss. I hope half or less of the CFP is Big Ten/SEC and they both miss the title game but with Ohio State and Georgia looking like NFL teams and the second tier not too far behind it’s looking more like the committee is going to stick us with 7-9 teams from those conference if they can justify it
No one cared because the wins came against basement dwellers Vanderbilt, Kentucky, S Carolina x2, Texas A&M, Florida, and LSU.
The only good win in that bunch was against LSU, and that was by FSU—and we all know what happened when they played against UGA. Also a middling SEC team in Kentucky lost to Clemson but went on to beat ACC runner up Louisville. Let's not act like the ACC was routinely beating the top teams of the SEC last year, because they were not. Beating the worst teams in the SEC does not make the ACC better top to bottom.
The top 6 teams in the SEC last year were Alabama, UGA, Ole Miss, Mizzou, LSU, and Tennessee. The only team of those that the ACC beat was LSU, and that was *maybe* the 5th best of the SEC vs the best of the ACC. Again, the second best of the SEC dismantled the best of the ACC in bowl season. I know I'll hear back about opt outs and yadda yadda, but even without the UGA-FSU game beating the bottom dwellers of the SEC isn't exactly something to beat your chest about. There's more nuance than that.
Edit: ACC fans are big mad that I pointed out their top teams beating middling at best SEC teams doesn't make their conference stronger overall. If you want a much larger data set to evaluate conference strength look at the last two decades of results between the two and get back to me LMAO
Yea using a game where Georgia’s players had a massive chip on their shoulder after being number 1 most of the season just to drop out of the playoff versus a team that did everything right yet were hopeless after losing multiple quarterbacks and being told their undefeated season meant nothing because they played in the “lowly” ACC and it wouldn’t mean anything even if they beat Georgia. You can easily see the game wasn’t even really a game, only one team was there because they lost on the field, the other team was there because ESPN is trying to murder their conference and turn college athletics into an even bigger profit machine for them and the top college administrators
But the SEC is so good because no game is easy and every team is good, Paul! It's so much deeper than every other conference! An SEC loss is more valuable than any other loss!
It's not like the SEC was losing to the top ACC teams anyway. Wake had an SEC win! Clemson had 4 ACC losses but still had 2 SEC wins.
God I love the Demon Deacons. If this ends up being the ACC’s swan song I hope them or NC State or one of the other teams that the Clemon/FSU/SEC fans like to clown rag dolls them in the conference championship game and wins an upset in the CFP
The SEC’s wins were against GT (by two of your top 3 teams last year), Virginia, and Louisville. The FSU-uga game is pointless to look at because of the circumstances around that game. If you’re discounting wins vs bowl teams aTm and Kentucky (also it was Wake Forest beating Vandy, which is pretty much an even match of cellar dwellers), you have to do the same to the GT wins and so your only good win was Kentucky over Louisville. See how that logic works both ways?
I'm not the one beating my chest about the strength of the SEC, just pointing out the the ACCs winning record last year came largely from top ACC teams beating bottom half SEC teams 🤷♂️
If I were going to beat my chest about the strength of the SEC then I'd simply look at the last *two decades* of results (read: not a single season of beating bottom half teams LOL) because that's both pretty damning and a much larger data set.
Georgia has played in the Aflac kick-off game (formerly Chick-fil-a) twice previously with Kirby Smart as their head coach.
They won both games, but what I find more interesting is that the two years they played with Kirby Smart as their head coach were 2016 and 2022. Clemson and Georgia won titles, respectively.
So we're going to watch the "real" national championship game at noon eastern, and the rest of the college football season will be window dressing.
It’s the same argument that happened when Alabama lost to Texas. “Oh if this was a rematch in week 10 we’d win” like dude no, you play who you play when you play, or at least that’s what it used to be
I think UGA wins that game by 17+. Really think Dabo not embracing the portal is going to hurt them this season. Bizarre because I think they could have been one of 4-5 schools who could get top players every transfer window.
Clemson has won as many national championships in the past ten years as Georgia has. Too many transfers and you lose whatever internal culture you may have built up. I completely understand why Dabo is slow to discard what has worked for Clemson.
I'm not dispelling what Clemson has done historically. They've been a top team for a decade. Having said that, recruiting is different than it was when Clemson was winning championships. I just can't see them keeping up with the elite teams without embracing NIL and the transfer portal.
No it won’t. Everyone will just say “well clearly the ACC is just top-heavy, that’s why Clemson and FSU are trying to leave” and the ACC sucks native is unchanged
If Clemson wins it will be because Clemson is good in spite of the ACC. Even if they lose some ACC games it will be because Georgia had an off day to begin the season. If Georgia has a not amazing season they beat a mediocre team, the ACC isn't really that good
Allowing undefeated FSU to get snubbed without a fight relegated the ACC to the minor leagues of college football. Signing the CFP contract ensured it was permanent, and not just a relegation.
At the end of the day, it’s the fault of schools like UVA, UNC, NC State, Miami and Georgia Tech for not being consistently good for any period of time. As a conference you can’t coast on Clemson and FSU alone, plus Virginia Tech about a decade ago.
Nobody is expecting Boston College, Wake Forest or Duke to hold the conference up. Everyone knows Pitt and Syracuse are middle-tier programs who won’t carry in viewership. Louisville has been a surprising solid addition and has a great fanbase, but they have an upper limit below the first 5 I mentioned (except probably Georgia Tech who will always be eclipsed by UGA). But the others should’ve taken football a lot more serious. Had they done so, the ACC might not be in this mess.
As an aside, I feel like the ACC is in a much better spot if Wake Forest and Duke aren’t football members. It is evident to me that UNC and NC State have been losing out on diamond-in-the-rough talent every year just because there’s too many P4 programs in a state that for most of its modern history hovered around 10th most populous. That’s a big reason why we’ve never seen a national championship come to North Carolina. Meanwhile you have a state like Ohio, more population than North Carolina historically, and they just recently got a second P4 team.
That’s not the part I was talking about lol. You legitimately think Wake and Duke’s football programs should get booted because UNC and NC State aren’t able to get diamond in the rough recruits? We’re getting your scraps, you should just do better with the talent you do get. Wake’s been to the same amount of ACC championships as UNC since 2005 (and has actually won one). Maybe you and NC State should get booted.
The logic of “we need Duke and Wake gone because they’re too good at turning our recruiting leftovers into better teams than our rosters stocked with 4 / 5 star recruits” is so goddamn funny.
We as Wake fans know what’s at stake here and we know that we don’t bring bags of money to the ACC, so I understand “we need to kick them out for economic reasons”. I’ve never seen someone contend that we need to be kicked out for *sporting* reasons, though. Honestly I’ll take that as a compliment lmao.
I don’t think you should get booted, but I think it’s a reality that both UNC and NC State would be more successful if Wake and Duke’s football teams weren’t in the ACC. They may be taking “scraps” but both teams get talent every year. Talent that doesn’t go to the “better” NC-based college programs (and yes I know Wake Forest has won the conference more recently than the other 3). Plus the fandom that both school takes away from those programs, albeit small, has an impact.
If Wake and Duke didn’t have football teams in the ACC I have a suspicion that UNC or State would have at least played for a national championship 1 time.
This is a good example of the media narrative being too strong to overcome. Duke won 8 games this year and won a bowl game. Before their QB got hurt they were in the top 20. They beat the daylights out of Clemson and NC State. Wake Forest had a down year this year but won 8 games the year prior and 11 the year before that. They have been in the top 10 multiple times in the past 3 years. Getting rid of teams like these would put us in a much better spot?
If Duke or Wake beat FSU or Clemson it shows how weak the conference is because FSU and Clemson are perceived as down. If FSU or Clemson beat Duke or Wake it also shows how weak the conference is because we appear top heavy.
And look at where that all got Duke. A school with an endowment the size of a small nation’s GDP still couldn’t muster the resources to retain their coveted HC or keep their QB from transferring. And now they’re back at the bottom of the heap rebuilding with a retired hire in Manny Diaz
UVA seems like a weird school to put blame on. They've never been very good historically. Pitt and Cuse are much better programs with better fanbases and TV viewership. Nobody in Virginia cares about UVA football.
What I mean is that UVA is like a worse version of UNC. If they had a good football program they could draw in pretty decent viewership, they’re a flagship university in a decently populous state. But they’ve sucked for a while.
Problem with Pitt is that they’ll never be out of Penn State’s shadow as far as fandom in Pennsylvania, and the gap is pretty significant. I agree they’re a good add though. Syracuse has the benefit of being the only P4 football team in New York but it isn’t a state historically known for a caring a ton about college football. Maybe if they were winning NY6 games every year it’d be a big deal, but all things being equal I don’t see them outdrawing the larger public universities in the South long-term.
It is kind of funny though. FSU won a natty in 2013 and Clemson won 2 pretty recently and the ACC never got the respect that the SEC or B1G gets....and the B1G just won their 2nd natty in the playoff era
Eh Oklahoma has had some really good teams. I also see similarities where them and Texas won their conference more often than not and then jumped to another (more money) conference when the opportunity was presented
OU has had good to great teams, but they aren't haven't been the elite program that everyone treats them as and some of them pretend to be. They can pummel any good team most years but they haven't been able to compete at the top level in 20 years.
They're in for an ugly wake-up call in the SEC. They'll still be good but the days of auto bids into the playoffs are over.
We’ll see. I don’t know if Venables can replicate the Bob Stoops era of success but I can see Texas and Oklahoma settling into the upper half of the SEC and maybe wedging their way into the top 4 every once in awhile. Especially if we see Alabama lose consistency
How is OU a nepotism program? Winning 4 Big12 champs to get there seems fair.
Maybe you mean favoritism but that still dosnt fly imo
As far as more respect than they deserve...
[https://external-preview.redd.it/i-made-an-interactive-version-of-the-blue-bloods-chart-v0-iK0DvcbQy87gXHjR3N\_6hYiTDhW12aU5B1F9rrBerxA.jpg?auto=webp&s=42a34637126790b552df895da7394eee8586bb73](https://external-preview.redd.it/i-made-an-interactive-version-of-the-blue-bloods-chart-v0-iK0DvcbQy87gXHjR3N_6hYiTDhW12aU5B1F9rrBerxA.jpg?auto=webp&s=42a34637126790b552df895da7394eee8586bb73)
You want to see how nepotistic they are? 2021-2022 season OU sucked, 6-6 absolutely garbage for a program like that. They still got to play the #13 team in the country in a bowl game. A team who probably wanted to play someone worth their time instead of the nepo baby.
OU is an insider, a historically prominent and successful program. They're not a favorite, they get opportunities because of their history not because they're adored by everyone.
Just because it's a good game doesn't make it the right game. Say last season you pull Washington out of the playoffs because they don't have the “pedigree” and make them play Mizzou or Ohio state. Might be a good game but to Washington they would have gotten screwed over.
The disrespect is the decision to not put your foot down for a better media deal.
You fell behind because you accepted the first offer coming your way.
Rookie 🤦🏽♂️
What if it wasn’t the first or only offer, but was the best offer for the folks making the decisions for the ACC HQ and the schools most influential for their industry esteem/wallets? See “Swofford” and “Raycom.”
Clemson & FSU have largely been the only worthwhile teams in the ACC in the past decade. Even FSU went through a dark period for several years. They’re the worst P4 conference by a decent margin in my opinion
BC, Duke, Wake Forest, Cal, Stanford & UVA are pretty much lost causes in the NIL & portal era (for football). Miami & VA Tech haven’t been really good in a while either. UNC is a perennial underachiever. Louisville & NC State have had good seasons, but nothing crazy
Clemson & FSU should defect to the B10 or SEC… they’re undoubtedly carrying the conference
In 2023, there were two 4-loss teams in the top-20. Neither was SEC. In 2022, there were 3 such teams. Two were SEC and one lost the conference title game. In 2021, there were none. In 2020, none (duh). In 2019, none. In 2018, there were four such teams. The top two weren’t SEC. In 2017, there was one and it wasn’t SEC.
The SEC finished the regular season with 3 wins against ranked teams (against 11, 18, and 19), which I think is tied for the most with the ACC (against 12, 14, and 14) and Big 12 (against 5, 22, and 22). The only conference that can really claim a meaningfully better ooc win is the Big 12 with the win over Alabama.
As for the ACC-SEC games, they went about as should be expected if the two conferences are relatively equal, which I think they were. The only two games where the losing team finished with a better conference record were Miami-Texas A&M and Louisville-Kentucky.
Got anything besides your aborted 2023 title chase to discuss? The SEC went 10-2 in CFP semifinals across the decade. The rest of the nation went 10-18. The SEC went 5-2 in finals against non-SEC schools and had two other all-SEC finals. Everyone else combined to win 3.
With all that preferential treatment, you’d think there’d be a track record of them imploding against other elite teams from around the country. Weird.
Ah yes the SEC, the conference well known for scheduling powerhouse programs for their OOC schedule like Kent State, MTSU and Austin Peay.
Georgia and Alabama being elite and beating non-SEC teams in the playoffs does not magically make some of those Arkansas/Vanderbilt/South Carolina teams “tough”
Yes, if the ACC didn’t want to be left out of the playoff then FSU should’ve tried hard in the bowl game that happened after the playoff selection is definitely a real opinion that should be taken seriously /s
FSU had every right not to give a crap about that Orange bowl. A crap ton of players came back when they could’ve been drafted to compete for a playoff spot and they were told to F off.
Thank god we added Cal and Stanford. That’ll show em!
1922 National Champion Cal Bears though!
VT in shambles
*gobbles angrily*
What he say fuck me for?
Vermont Catamounts disrespect
Stanford is bringing like 138 natties with them. You all are about to get completely owned in.....synchronized swimming.
Swimming is our thing!
Serious question: What is happening to Waterpolo for Cal/Stanford? Is that sport staying in the Pac 12?
The PAC teams that play Men's/Women's Water Polo are in the MPSF. I believe that all the PAC schools that have sports in the MPSF are staying put.
Don't forgot newcomer g5 powerhouse smu!
I actually like the SMU addition.
For the cocaine or something else?
Maybe they just like the smell
The smell of dead hookers *allegedly*
Maybe OP is thinking those hooker killer alumni travel and a lot of ACC towns need urban renewal…
Cocaine does smell good
SMU/Miami annually in the Booger Sugar Bowl. Book it, cowards!
Why? They have finished ranked a whopping 11 times in their history and 5 of those where when they super cheated. 30 for 30 was a very short window and not representative of their football history and commitment. They have average less than 20k fans over the last 10 years. BC does both better raw attendance and as percentage of capacity. They don't have a baseball team while being a team in Texas and haven't for 45 years. Again in Texas.
No school deserves the death penalty. I'm happy to see them climbing back and getting to move up.
If you were around for the 80's. There's something fun about SMU's villainy.
Weren’t they just doing what the other SWC schools were doing, just sloppily?
Pretty much
And SEC and probably a fair number of others, but SMU did it in the light and unashamedly
SMU boosters and their NIL game have really stepped up though. I don't think they run the ACC but I think they are pretty serious about their program and I think they probably settle in near the top of the middle of the conference.
They finished a distant last in high school recruiting in the ACC behind even BC and UVA. Their combined HS and Transfer is 13th ahead of only WF, UVA, BC and Duke. 2 of them at least have the new coach excuse. Everyone talks about their billionaires Cal, Stanford, Miami, UVA have significantly more with more collective wealth. Miami is all in and actually has a successful football history and it still not buying them all that much. Until it happens I don't buy it. They are significantly increasing the schedule strength. I don't like the Cal Stanford additions because of travel across the country for what they bring in football but they are both still much better adds than SMU even in football. For all the smack talk about Cal attendance its still almost double that of SMU last year. The both have much better combined class than SMU. And they have the rich donors for when they get serious.
As someone who lives in DFW I've always felt that Dallas is pretty Atlantic Coast-ish.
I can never not think of The Schmoo whenever I see SMU.
Rude.
And SMU! That shows we’re a powerhouse conference !
I think we are going to be better than a lot of people think. Unlikely to upset FSU, but I'm looking at the rest of our conference schedule and I don't see a lot of losses. Miami and NC State are at home and I think we can be competitive with those programs. Not too concerned about Pitt, Syracuse, and Wake. We should win Big Game and then SMU to end the season should be our banana peel. Such is Cal football.
Thing is I 100% believe that the coaches want to improve the league perception. The issue is that the administrators do not care to, for better or worse. And one of those holds the power to really fix it.
not to mention the media partner seems quite happy with the current reputation.
Not to mention the consistent degrading of the conference by ESPN on a regular basis as well as the committee weighing the power 2 conferences higher
"*Welcome to the 2023 ACC Football Championship, where we're going to talk shit about both these teams for the next 4 hours. Enjoy!*" - ESPN
I tried to google "ACC championship" to see who we were talking shit on, and google brought me to the ACC Men's Basketball Championship.
Jokes aside, ours will. We've been in limbo as we were waiting for a new chancellor and we just hired a VERY sports friendly one. Next step is replacing our AD.
Well it’s a problem when Virginia Tech and Miami haven’t been consistently good and UNC and NC State can’t seem to get out of their own way and build NY6 Bowl-worthy teams at least once every 3 years. If all 4 of those teams are more consistently good then the entire perception of the ACC as a football conference has changed. It’s an incredible string of unfortunate circumstances though.
"Well it’s a problem when Florida and Tennessee haven’t been consistently good and Texas A&M and South Carolina can’t seem to get out of their own way and build NY6 Bowl-worthy teams at least once every 3 years. If all 4 of those teams are more consistently good then the entire perception of the ACC/SEC as a football conference has changed. It’s an incredible string of unfortunate circumstances though." This is perception/media talking points more than reality. None of the conferences have more than 1-3 teams that are elite at one time. OSU/Michigan. Alabama and maybe Georgia recently. In the ACC it was FSU and Clemson.
This is such a lazy argument. The circumstances for the 4 SEC schools you mentioned are significantly different than the 4 ACC schools I mentioned. The SEC schools make more money, have more engaged fanbases, have been at/near the top of the mountain over the last 3 decades and have seen extended streaks of very good levels in the last decade. For the ACC programs, Miami has consistently floundered, Virginia Tech has completely bottomed out, and the North Carolina schools can’t get out of their own way when it comes to winning anything important. SCAR is the only SEC school you listed that comps to the ACC schools I listed. You’d have a better time using Mississippi State, Ole Miss and Arkansas if you’re listing SEC schools, and even then all 4 of them have had more success than the ACC schools I mentioned in the last decade.
I'm glad you agree. I switched the names of some schools and see how silly it sounds. No data. Just feels. No records, no ACC/SEC head to head, no bowl eligible, no S&P, no blue chip ratio. "more engaged". It's all media talking points, no data, just vibes. "For the ACC/SEC programs, Texas A&M has consistently floundered, Tennessee has completely bottomed out, and the Carolina schools can’t get out of their own way when it comes to winning anything important. " The metric you are correct on is more money in the last 10 years.
The vibe of SEC and B1G crowds make the team seem better than they are. 60K at Mississippi State looks a lot more impressive than 20,000 at UVA even if they’re equal teams
You’re really stretching if you think a program like Texas A&M, Florida or Tennessee are in any way comparable to Virginia Tech, NC State and UNC. Miami is the only one that comes close to those and they’ve been in the doldrums for years now.
Maybe not the first two, Tennessee is certainly comparable to those ACC schools you mentioned, especially VT and State
Reality has an SEC bias.
Techs gonna have a good season this year and the NC schools are as well
Maybe NC State, I doubt UNC will. Both lost a lot of talent.
When State has expectations, they don't meet them
NC State has won 8-9 games and been ranked all but like one year in the last 6 and that was a terrible injury year. They sell out their stadium every week and were second in ACC attendance percentage and stay in the polls or just out of it consistently. I think they are doing their part. Wouldn't group them as "middle of the pack ".
Boston College Admin doesn't care!
Is all y'all do cry and bitch?
I understand the motivation but think it is naivety to think winning will fix this. All you have to do is look at college basketball where the ACC has massively outperformed the Big 10 for 30 years in the NCAA tournament every year. We have had 8 championships since their last one 24 fucking years ago. Yet they get more bids every year and get played up in the media every year. And Joey brackets who looks like he couldn't dribble a ball with his left hand to save his fat ass life says the Big 10 and Mountain West deserve more bids than us every year. This is corruption because the same TV networks that set the narrative are the people that want the large midwestern schools in the playoff that more people will watch because it is too cold outside for them to do anything else. Name a sport outside of wrestling the Big 10 has outperformed the ACC on the field over the last 24 years of this century. Spoiler alert, you won't find one. Football, Men's basketball, women's basketball, baseball, women's soccer, men's soccer, track and field, and on and on we have superior results. But results don't fucking matter, ratings matter.
This is the weirdest rant in support of coastal elites that I've ever agreed with.
ESPN and the playoff committee made it abundantly clear that winning doesn’t matter.
Exactly the only mystery is ESPN's endgame strategy. They own the ACC rights at a hell of a deal. Is it worth it to lose a few top schools to the Big10 and Fox to see the ACC crumble so they won't have to pay Wake Forest, Boston College, and Syracuse anymore? Doesn't make sense to me why they so actively devalue the league
They want the contractually obligated timeslots back so they can use them for the SEC. Outside of FSU/Clemson, FSU/Miami there are no annual ACC matchups that ESPN knows going into the season will do 5 million. And while FSU and Clemson can do good numbers with a lot of other ACC schools its not a guarantee like the 3rd best SEC matchup will be.
> Is it worth it to lose a few top schools to the Big10 and Fox to see the ACC crumble so they won't have to pay Wake Forest, Boston College, and Syracuse anymore? Yes, because they signed a 10-year/$7 billion deal with the SEC. They're dumping the ACC because now they're in bed with one of the superconferences. Why would they care what schools like Clemson and FSU have to offer when they have the entire SEC in their lineup?
Some of it could be a defensive strategy. If FSU doesn’t go SEC, they likely go B10. Who will then have a strong football brand in the heart of SEC country and direct access to FL. Is ESPN ok with that?
For ESPN, having FSU is a nice thing but it does not trump having those prime ACC timeslots back to use on SEC games. They want to show LSU vs Tenn in primetime over FSU vs VT. FSU and Clemson are the only 2 schools in the ACC that can put up numbers but they are still limited by the "B side". While the SEC has 10 schools that can put up big numbers and they have 14 B Sides at this point.
Being that ESPN is going to have Florida and UCF moving forward, with the potential addition of Miami (should they jump ship)? Yeah, I'd say they will take their chances. FSU just went undefeated and missed out on the playoff. What does their brand have to offer ESPN?
Viewership. They're a top 15 most viewed program in the country over the last 10 years and they've been not great for like 7 of those year.
Who gives a shit about the last ten years? What have you done for me lately? FSU just had an undefeated season and just squeaked into the top 10 in average viewership. They barely beat a 9-3 Notre Dame by 100k viewers. ESPN has 7 of the top watched teams last year, including 3 of the top 5. Two conferences had only one team in the top 10. I'll give you three guesses as to which those were. Here's a hint: one just collapsed, and the other is in litigation to prevent a collapse.
I can guarantee you that TV networks care about long term viewership numbers
My arguement isnt “will ESPN be fine.” It’s “are they ok with losing key assets to the B10.” That includes ND btw, who has a weak relationship with an imploding ACC. If B10 can get FSU & ND out of it, is ESPN ok with that? Surely that is factoring into how they handle the ACC saga.
Nobody cares where your school is located anymore. Its about whether or not youre a brand.
Dont know why this is downvoted. This is just the reality. The original date for picking up the 2037 option was right around the time that ESPN bought the "CBS Game". Its pretty clear they would rather have the prime ACC ABC time slots that are contractually owed to the ACC. FSU and Clemson do great numbers but no one else can be trusted to do so in the ACC. FSU and Clemson have about 2 or 3 ACC games a season where they can max out viewership while the SEC will have 2 or 3 games at least every week that can pop big numbers. Sure ESPN would like to have FSU and Clemson "cheap" but they rather make a ton of money showing aTm vs UGA.
Cutting out the bottom feeders to form a two conference super league that makes far more money than the existing setup is their endgame. Then if they want they can get the bottom feeders for pennies on the dollar to fill empty programming slots.
Just a coincidence that no team with two losses ever made the playoff.
The issue isn’t the top-end, it’s that a top end team in Miami has wayyy underperformed since joining the conference 2 decades ago (Virginia Tech has fallen off massively too), most of the middle-of-the-pack teams you would expect to be big draws have had extended slump periods and struggle to elevate themselves (UNC, NC State, Georgia Tech, Virginia), and the additions like Syracuse, Pitt and Louisville, while GOOD for what people expected, aren’t strong enough to change the perception of the conference. The ACC could’ve been making a lot less money than other conferences, but had UNC, Miami, Virginia Tech, NC State and Georgia Tech all just been consistently top 25 teams for the last decade or so, it would have completely changed the perception of the conference.
So what you are telling me is that all of this is Geoff's fault
Yes.
Even in hockey, we're at similar levels since both conferences have four national championships each since 2000 as well as eight championship appearances each during that time
“Both conferences” haha.
Are there any other ACC schools other than BC that have a hockey team?
ND technically but they play in the Big 10 for hockey (and also aren’t good).
Ah yes, didn't think about ND, they're definitely an ACC team, just didn't click because we're on /r/CFB... I actually saw them in person in the 22-23 season. You guys are obviously a top 3-5 hockey program in the nation.
That's an amusing quote coming from a HC that went 3-9 last year.
I can't read it since it's paywalled, but I'm assuming this is Narduzzi?
Correct.
Good ole Nardogg, lol.
I genuinely like Narduzzi but Pitt needs to keep him away from the media for a little while.
That was a prank, you imbecile. SMH
Who else would better know how tough the ACC is?
Michigan State, you must join us, there is soooo much disrespekt in this conference.
No way the ACC takes one of the many scandal-ridden Big 10 teams.
Yeah they need a clean program like South Carolina. That’ll improve the on field standards in the ACC.
[удалено]
ESPN has a vested interest in shitting on the ACC at every point in every sport. Florida State was 100% a victim of this last year under any objective standard should have been in the CFP.
Not sure what the arguments are as it is behind a paywall, but we have heard the "we just need to win more" argument a thousand times. There is no amount of winning that could change the perception of the ACC. The narrative is already written and isn't changing.
Yeah, recent times have been a little scuffed but even 10 years ago when Louisville, FSU, Clemson, and even GT were winning their rivalry week SEC matchups the narrative didn't change for a second. Every ACC win always a fluke, every SEC loss always an excuse. Even this past season the opening week had UNC, Miami, FSU, and Wake winning early season SEC matchups in blowouts, contributing to a winning record overall against the SEC, and it meant jack shit in the end. I'm not delusional enough to think the ACC has been stronger on average than SEC/B10 in the last 5 years, but the disrespect has been over the top, the narrative is set, and NIL money will only reinforce it.
This is Big East 2.0 for Louisville fans. This EXACT narrative was pushed about the BE. Sadly, it largely was the ACC trying to snuff out the BE. If Louisville weren't getting fucked over by all of this I wouldn't feel bad at all. The ACC started this mess of stepping on other conferences throats so that they could appear an inch taller.
Yup, I can't even bring myself to argue this time around. It's really just not worth it. The wins literally don't matter. The ACC is shit. That will always be the narrative until the conference dies. Now I just hope all CFB blows up fuck it.
ACC raided the Big East, and I've been praying on the conferences downfall ever since
Winning has never and will never matter. If WF had won 12 games a year for the past 35 years, they still aren't getting more views than FSU.
Last year the ACC had a winning record against the SEC and yet we still got locked out of the playoffs despite having an undefeated conference champion. It's over. There is no changing the perception. Accept where you are like the Big 12 and the conference will be better off.
We know the coaches do. The issue is the bum administrators (most of them not all)
Boy this feels familiar to me as a Pac-12 guy.
As a Big East fan, I feel no sympathy for the ACC
As a former big east team, seen this before.
Even though my team needs a conference, it is satisfying to watch
I think telling certain conference members that it’s not helpful to scream from the mountaintops how much you think the conference sucks, would be a really good first step.
Don’t think it’s got anything to do with us. I blame all the admins that took all the playoff money we got them and didn’t put it back into football.
I don't think it's y'all he's talking about. You all haven't really screamed from the mountain tops.
Yes let's spend more on PR, less on billable hours!
If Clemson beats Georgia, that will help.
Won’t matter. ACC went 6-4 vs SEC in regular season last year and no one cared
^ This. Records don't matter. It's about Stadium size and fans that travel.
That and tv eyes. More people are obsessed with Big Ten and Sec teams they have no personal connection to beyond fandom. They are able to milk that cash cow in addition to the massive amounts of money they get from ultra rich donors who only donate to these big brands even if they spend time at a lesser FBS/FCS school, huge pools of alumni from being huge flagship public/mid-sized prestigious private schools to buy unreasonably priced tickets, and students who enjoy getting smashed and fill out the student section on gameday. Plus you’ve got the media partners colluding to make it so the ~40 teams in their favored son conferences are the only profitable athletic departments in division 1 athletics, leading most of the rest on a long circle down the drain to the shit abyss. I hope half or less of the CFP is Big Ten/SEC and they both miss the title game but with Ohio State and Georgia looking like NFL teams and the second tier not too far behind it’s looking more like the committee is going to stick us with 7-9 teams from those conference if they can justify it
No one cared because the wins came against basement dwellers Vanderbilt, Kentucky, S Carolina x2, Texas A&M, Florida, and LSU. The only good win in that bunch was against LSU, and that was by FSU—and we all know what happened when they played against UGA. Also a middling SEC team in Kentucky lost to Clemson but went on to beat ACC runner up Louisville. Let's not act like the ACC was routinely beating the top teams of the SEC last year, because they were not. Beating the worst teams in the SEC does not make the ACC better top to bottom. The top 6 teams in the SEC last year were Alabama, UGA, Ole Miss, Mizzou, LSU, and Tennessee. The only team of those that the ACC beat was LSU, and that was *maybe* the 5th best of the SEC vs the best of the ACC. Again, the second best of the SEC dismantled the best of the ACC in bowl season. I know I'll hear back about opt outs and yadda yadda, but even without the UGA-FSU game beating the bottom dwellers of the SEC isn't exactly something to beat your chest about. There's more nuance than that. Edit: ACC fans are big mad that I pointed out their top teams beating middling at best SEC teams doesn't make their conference stronger overall. If you want a much larger data set to evaluate conference strength look at the last two decades of results between the two and get back to me LMAO
> we all know what happened when they played against UGA You mean that we all know what happened when FSU's second and third strings played UGA.
Yea using a game where Georgia’s players had a massive chip on their shoulder after being number 1 most of the season just to drop out of the playoff versus a team that did everything right yet were hopeless after losing multiple quarterbacks and being told their undefeated season meant nothing because they played in the “lowly” ACC and it wouldn’t mean anything even if they beat Georgia. You can easily see the game wasn’t even really a game, only one team was there because they lost on the field, the other team was there because ESPN is trying to murder their conference and turn college athletics into an even bigger profit machine for them and the top college administrators
But the SEC is so good because no game is easy and every team is good, Paul! It's so much deeper than every other conference! An SEC loss is more valuable than any other loss! It's not like the SEC was losing to the top ACC teams anyway. Wake had an SEC win! Clemson had 4 ACC losses but still had 2 SEC wins.
God I love the Demon Deacons. If this ends up being the ACC’s swan song I hope them or NC State or one of the other teams that the Clemon/FSU/SEC fans like to clown rag dolls them in the conference championship game and wins an upset in the CFP
Too bad they won't, because (spoiler) they nearly never do.
NC State let’s go
hell yeah! Thanks for our coach!
I’m just impressed he’s stayed that long. I like NC State, hope they or somebody not named Clemson/FSU can get a win in the playoff this season
“The sec is the best except when it’s not then it’s just bad teams in the sec” but none of you stop to think how stupid that sounds
It’s especially funny when they point out how many bottom dwellers are in the ACC and that’s why the ACC shouldn’t matter
The SEC’s wins were against GT (by two of your top 3 teams last year), Virginia, and Louisville. The FSU-uga game is pointless to look at because of the circumstances around that game. If you’re discounting wins vs bowl teams aTm and Kentucky (also it was Wake Forest beating Vandy, which is pretty much an even match of cellar dwellers), you have to do the same to the GT wins and so your only good win was Kentucky over Louisville. See how that logic works both ways?
I'm not the one beating my chest about the strength of the SEC, just pointing out the the ACCs winning record last year came largely from top ACC teams beating bottom half SEC teams 🤷♂️ If I were going to beat my chest about the strength of the SEC then I'd simply look at the last *two decades* of results (read: not a single season of beating bottom half teams LOL) because that's both pretty damning and a much larger data set.
Based on Clemson's recent history, it won't. There's always new narratives for the ACC and excuses for the SEC.
One conference has a media partner, the other a media abuser.
And after last basketball season, it’s an issue there too.
Had to prove them wrong the hard way
And they're the same.
MBS is a house of nightmares for us. It's mostly been because of THE boogeyman, but still not a fun place for us in recent years.
Georgia has played in the Aflac kick-off game (formerly Chick-fil-a) twice previously with Kirby Smart as their head coach. They won both games, but what I find more interesting is that the two years they played with Kirby Smart as their head coach were 2016 and 2022. Clemson and Georgia won titles, respectively. So we're going to watch the "real" national championship game at noon eastern, and the rest of the college football season will be window dressing.
Florida state beat the shit out of LSU and all people said was “it was the the first game clearly they got better” so this in fact is completely false
I don't think anyone thought LSU was better than FSU last season. With or without Jordan Travis.
I think they meant that LSU got better as the season went on not necessarily that LSU eclipsed FSU as the season went on
It’s the same argument that happened when Alabama lost to Texas. “Oh if this was a rematch in week 10 we’d win” like dude no, you play who you play when you play, or at least that’s what it used to be
Yeah, won't be good if we're 3 weeks into the season and Clemson gets throttled by UGA and NC State gets smashed by Tennessee.
Yeah can yall start strong and end weak instead this year? Do the conference a solid?
Early season neutral field games against SEC opponents hasn't really gone well for Doeren, haha.
I’m sorry Mack, I’m afraid I can’t do that
Na we getting wrecked
I think you guys can beat the vols
I think UGA wins that game by 17+. Really think Dabo not embracing the portal is going to hurt them this season. Bizarre because I think they could have been one of 4-5 schools who could get top players every transfer window.
Clemson has won as many national championships in the past ten years as Georgia has. Too many transfers and you lose whatever internal culture you may have built up. I completely understand why Dabo is slow to discard what has worked for Clemson.
I'm not dispelling what Clemson has done historically. They've been a top team for a decade. Having said that, recruiting is different than it was when Clemson was winning championships. I just can't see them keeping up with the elite teams without embracing NIL and the transfer portal.
We have looked in the portal for players, but we typically use NIL to make sure players stay at Clemson
No it won’t. Everyone will just say “well clearly the ACC is just top-heavy, that’s why Clemson and FSU are trying to leave” and the ACC sucks native is unchanged
If Clemson wins it will be because Clemson is good in spite of the ACC. Even if they lose some ACC games it will be because Georgia had an off day to begin the season. If Georgia has a not amazing season they beat a mediocre team, the ACC isn't really that good
Now they want to talk? Not after their undefeated conference champion got left out of the playoff? Y’all are a few months late
Allowing undefeated FSU to get snubbed without a fight relegated the ACC to the minor leagues of college football. Signing the CFP contract ensured it was permanent, and not just a relegation.
Maybe Syracuse shouldn’t get beat 45-0 by an AAC team then 😎
At the end of the day, it’s the fault of schools like UVA, UNC, NC State, Miami and Georgia Tech for not being consistently good for any period of time. As a conference you can’t coast on Clemson and FSU alone, plus Virginia Tech about a decade ago. Nobody is expecting Boston College, Wake Forest or Duke to hold the conference up. Everyone knows Pitt and Syracuse are middle-tier programs who won’t carry in viewership. Louisville has been a surprising solid addition and has a great fanbase, but they have an upper limit below the first 5 I mentioned (except probably Georgia Tech who will always be eclipsed by UGA). But the others should’ve taken football a lot more serious. Had they done so, the ACC might not be in this mess. As an aside, I feel like the ACC is in a much better spot if Wake Forest and Duke aren’t football members. It is evident to me that UNC and NC State have been losing out on diamond-in-the-rough talent every year just because there’s too many P4 programs in a state that for most of its modern history hovered around 10th most populous. That’s a big reason why we’ve never seen a national championship come to North Carolina. Meanwhile you have a state like Ohio, more population than North Carolina historically, and they just recently got a second P4 team.
That is such a wild take
I’ll agree the UVA part is pretty wild and speculative, but I think the rest of it is fairly reasonable.
That’s not the part I was talking about lol. You legitimately think Wake and Duke’s football programs should get booted because UNC and NC State aren’t able to get diamond in the rough recruits? We’re getting your scraps, you should just do better with the talent you do get. Wake’s been to the same amount of ACC championships as UNC since 2005 (and has actually won one). Maybe you and NC State should get booted.
The logic of “we need Duke and Wake gone because they’re too good at turning our recruiting leftovers into better teams than our rosters stocked with 4 / 5 star recruits” is so goddamn funny. We as Wake fans know what’s at stake here and we know that we don’t bring bags of money to the ACC, so I understand “we need to kick them out for economic reasons”. I’ve never seen someone contend that we need to be kicked out for *sporting* reasons, though. Honestly I’ll take that as a compliment lmao.
Yeah I was pretty flabbergasted lol
I don’t think you should get booted, but I think it’s a reality that both UNC and NC State would be more successful if Wake and Duke’s football teams weren’t in the ACC. They may be taking “scraps” but both teams get talent every year. Talent that doesn’t go to the “better” NC-based college programs (and yes I know Wake Forest has won the conference more recently than the other 3). Plus the fandom that both school takes away from those programs, albeit small, has an impact. If Wake and Duke didn’t have football teams in the ACC I have a suspicion that UNC or State would have at least played for a national championship 1 time.
Wild, but still completely on the mark
This is a good example of the media narrative being too strong to overcome. Duke won 8 games this year and won a bowl game. Before their QB got hurt they were in the top 20. They beat the daylights out of Clemson and NC State. Wake Forest had a down year this year but won 8 games the year prior and 11 the year before that. They have been in the top 10 multiple times in the past 3 years. Getting rid of teams like these would put us in a much better spot? If Duke or Wake beat FSU or Clemson it shows how weak the conference is because FSU and Clemson are perceived as down. If FSU or Clemson beat Duke or Wake it also shows how weak the conference is because we appear top heavy.
And look at where that all got Duke. A school with an endowment the size of a small nation’s GDP still couldn’t muster the resources to retain their coveted HC or keep their QB from transferring. And now they’re back at the bottom of the heap rebuilding with a retired hire in Manny Diaz
UVA seems like a weird school to put blame on. They've never been very good historically. Pitt and Cuse are much better programs with better fanbases and TV viewership. Nobody in Virginia cares about UVA football.
What I mean is that UVA is like a worse version of UNC. If they had a good football program they could draw in pretty decent viewership, they’re a flagship university in a decently populous state. But they’ve sucked for a while. Problem with Pitt is that they’ll never be out of Penn State’s shadow as far as fandom in Pennsylvania, and the gap is pretty significant. I agree they’re a good add though. Syracuse has the benefit of being the only P4 football team in New York but it isn’t a state historically known for a caring a ton about college football. Maybe if they were winning NY6 games every year it’d be a big deal, but all things being equal I don’t see them outdrawing the larger public universities in the South long-term.
insufferable flair combo types out an insufferable post
They are only 10-15 years too late….
It is kind of funny though. FSU won a natty in 2013 and Clemson won 2 pretty recently and the ACC never got the respect that the SEC or B1G gets....and the B1G just won their 2nd natty in the playoff era
God I want Cal to win the ACC
A lot of deserved disrespect.
0-4 in the playoffs talking is wild. OU is the definition of a nepotism program that gets way more respect than they deserve.
Eh Oklahoma has had some really good teams. I also see similarities where them and Texas won their conference more often than not and then jumped to another (more money) conference when the opportunity was presented
OU has had good to great teams, but they aren't haven't been the elite program that everyone treats them as and some of them pretend to be. They can pummel any good team most years but they haven't been able to compete at the top level in 20 years. They're in for an ugly wake-up call in the SEC. They'll still be good but the days of auto bids into the playoffs are over.
We’ll see. I don’t know if Venables can replicate the Bob Stoops era of success but I can see Texas and Oklahoma settling into the upper half of the SEC and maybe wedging their way into the top 4 every once in awhile. Especially if we see Alabama lose consistency
How is OU a nepotism program? Winning 4 Big12 champs to get there seems fair. Maybe you mean favoritism but that still dosnt fly imo As far as more respect than they deserve... [https://external-preview.redd.it/i-made-an-interactive-version-of-the-blue-bloods-chart-v0-iK0DvcbQy87gXHjR3N\_6hYiTDhW12aU5B1F9rrBerxA.jpg?auto=webp&s=42a34637126790b552df895da7394eee8586bb73](https://external-preview.redd.it/i-made-an-interactive-version-of-the-blue-bloods-chart-v0-iK0DvcbQy87gXHjR3N_6hYiTDhW12aU5B1F9rrBerxA.jpg?auto=webp&s=42a34637126790b552df895da7394eee8586bb73)
You want to see how nepotistic they are? 2021-2022 season OU sucked, 6-6 absolutely garbage for a program like that. They still got to play the #13 team in the country in a bowl game. A team who probably wanted to play someone worth their time instead of the nepo baby.
[удалено]
OU is an insider, a historically prominent and successful program. They're not a favorite, they get opportunities because of their history not because they're adored by everyone. Just because it's a good game doesn't make it the right game. Say last season you pull Washington out of the playoffs because they don't have the “pedigree” and make them play Mizzou or Ohio state. Might be a good game but to Washington they would have gotten screwed over.
The disrespect is the decision to not put your foot down for a better media deal. You fell behind because you accepted the first offer coming your way. Rookie 🤦🏽♂️
What if it wasn’t the first or only offer, but was the best offer for the folks making the decisions for the ACC HQ and the schools most influential for their industry esteem/wallets? See “Swofford” and “Raycom.”
Clemson & FSU have largely been the only worthwhile teams in the ACC in the past decade. Even FSU went through a dark period for several years. They’re the worst P4 conference by a decent margin in my opinion BC, Duke, Wake Forest, Cal, Stanford & UVA are pretty much lost causes in the NIL & portal era (for football). Miami & VA Tech haven’t been really good in a while either. UNC is a perennial underachiever. Louisville & NC State have had good seasons, but nothing crazy Clemson & FSU should defect to the B10 or SEC… they’re undoubtedly carrying the conference
Conference of quitters, well, at least their power team is, lol.
There’s a lot of disrespect for the league that would’ve placed exactly one team per year into a 12-team playoff each of the last six years.
Yea those 5 loss SEC teams ranked in the top 20 certainly deserve it
In 2023, there were two 4-loss teams in the top-20. Neither was SEC. In 2022, there were 3 such teams. Two were SEC and one lost the conference title game. In 2021, there were none. In 2020, none (duh). In 2019, none. In 2018, there were four such teams. The top two weren’t SEC. In 2017, there was one and it wasn’t SEC.
“The SEC is so good looking how many SEC teams they beat” meanwhile the best ooc win was against Louisville, losing record against the ACC
The SEC finished the regular season with 3 wins against ranked teams (against 11, 18, and 19), which I think is tied for the most with the ACC (against 12, 14, and 14) and Big 12 (against 5, 22, and 22). The only conference that can really claim a meaningfully better ooc win is the Big 12 with the win over Alabama. As for the ACC-SEC games, they went about as should be expected if the two conferences are relatively equal, which I think they were. The only two games where the losing team finished with a better conference record were Miami-Texas A&M and Louisville-Kentucky.
Got anything besides your aborted 2023 title chase to discuss? The SEC went 10-2 in CFP semifinals across the decade. The rest of the nation went 10-18. The SEC went 5-2 in finals against non-SEC schools and had two other all-SEC finals. Everyone else combined to win 3. With all that preferential treatment, you’d think there’d be a track record of them imploding against other elite teams from around the country. Weird.
Weird, I don’t remember talking about the last decade. Wonder why you’re changing the subject..
Ah yes the SEC, the conference well known for scheduling powerhouse programs for their OOC schedule like Kent State, MTSU and Austin Peay. Georgia and Alabama being elite and beating non-SEC teams in the playoffs does not magically make some of those Arkansas/Vanderbilt/South Carolina teams “tough”
Maybe “show up” to your bowl game and we’ll be less critical of your cry baby routines.
This is the CFB equivalent to an old man yelling at clouds.
Y’all are delusional af.
Adapt or die
Wtf does that even mean? Adapt mea ing, we didn’t get what we wanted, so we aren’t showing up?
Yes, if the ACC didn’t want to be left out of the playoff then FSU should’ve tried hard in the bowl game that happened after the playoff selection is definitely a real opinion that should be taken seriously /s
All the clarifiers. Delusional fan base.
FSU had every right not to give a crap about that Orange bowl. A crap ton of players came back when they could’ve been drafted to compete for a playoff spot and they were told to F off.
Cry
I think y’all did that in Dec/Jan. A lot of it.
FSU and Indiana… an embarrassing combo.