The Mountain West Conference

[SDHornet]

MWC
TCU - great team won't say anything bad about them
Utah - got blown out by ND
San Diego St- upcoming team best win was a two point game against Air Force (only team with a winning record)Air Force - had a close game against OU
BYU- to use your words they're "terrible" and they got handled by an inconsistent ACC team (at home and on the road)
Colorado St, UNLV, New Mexico, and Wyoming all combined for 9 wins. UNLV didn't even win an OOC game

Losing to the Big 12 Champ is an inconsistency? I guess Auburn is inconsistent since they beat a terrible (your words) Clemson team.

Best win has to be thier dominating bowl win over Navy.

[tampajag]

SDSU beat Navy soundly, I agree but that's not very impressive since yt determined that Maryland wasn't good and they beat Navy as well. So if Navy can't beat a terrible team then is that really a quality win? See that's what happens when people make poor word choices in a discussion.
YT, did you watch the OU/Air Force game? The Sooners played that game the same way they did against Utah St. Since the Aggies only lost by 7 they must be better than FSU as well. I can play that game as well how bad did Air Force beat BYU? Cuz the Noles beat the brakes off em.
Let's look at your numbers the best non Nevada/Boise non AQ the top 5 MWC played was Navy (but as I did above I'm gonna dismiss them) or than that it would be SMU (who lost to TCU) so that stat is decieving and further proves that the league is unbalenced.
The MWC is very top heavy, look at the standings, can you dispute that the bottom teams are bad? I won't deny that some ACC teams are average. But if you think that Clemson is terrible, what the hell does that make New Mexico, UNLV, Wyoming, or Colorado St?

[youngterrier]

SDSU beat Navy soundly, I agree but that's not very impressive since yt determined that Maryland wasn't good and they beat Navy as well. So if Navy can't beat a terrible team then is that really a quality win? See that's what happens when people make poor word choices in a discussion.
YT, did you watch the OU/Air Force game? The Sooners played that game the same way they did against Utah St. Since the Aggies only lost by 7 they must be better than FSU as well. I can play that game as well how bad did Air Force beat BYU? Cuz the Noles beat the brakes off em.
Let's look at your numbers the best non Nevada/Boise non AQ the top 5 MWC played was Navy (but as I did above I'm gonna dismiss them) or than that it would be SMU (who lost to TCU) so that stat is decieving and further proves that the league is unbalenced.
The MWC is very top heavy, look at the standings, can you dispute that the bottom teams are bad? I won't deny that some ACC teams are average. But if you think that Clemson is terrible, what the hell does that make New Mexico, UNLV, Wyoming, or Colorado St?

Maryland was lucky that Navy didn't destroy them, Ricky Dobbs turned the ball over something like 3 times in the redzone, and granted that's part of the game but if there was a rematch I would pick Navy. Navy is a team that often plays to the level of their competition. The bottom teams are bad I concede, but let's remember, Wyoming and Colorado state have won bowl games more recently than Wake Forest, Duke, and Virginia

[tampajag]

tampajag wrote:
SDSU beat Navy soundly, I agree but that's not very impressive since yt determined that Maryland wasn't good and they beat Navy as well. So if Navy can't beat a terrible team then is that really a quality win? See that's what happens when people make poor word choices in a discussion.
YT, did you watch the OU/Air Force game? The Sooners played that game the same way they did against Utah St. Since the Aggies only lost by 7 they must be better than FSU as well. I can play that game as well how bad did Air Force beat BYU? Cuz the Noles beat the brakes off em.
Let's look at your numbers the best non Nevada/Boise non AQ the top 5 MWC played was Navy (but as I did above I'm gonna dismiss them) or than that it would be SMU (who lost to TCU) so that stat is decieving and further proves that the league is unbalenced.
The MWC is very top heavy, look at the standings, can you dispute that the bottom teams are bad? I won't deny that some ACC teams are average. But if you think that Clemson is terrible, what the hell does that make New Mexico, UNLV, Wyoming, or Colorado St?

Maryland was lucky that Navy didn't destroy them, Ricky Dobbs turned the ball over something like 3 times in the redzone, and granted that's part of the game but if there was a rematch I would pick Navy. Navy is a team that often plays to the level of their competition. The bottom teams are bad I concede, but let's remember, Wyoming and Colorado state have won bowl games more recently than Wake Forest, Duke, and Virginia

Since there's no chance for a rematch between these two teams this season makes that point moot. I could say that if VaTech wasn't still moping over the Boise game they would have responded to getting punched in the mouth by JMU but that doesn't change anything.

Wyoming (bowl win in 09), Colorado St (bowl win 08), Wake (bowl win 08), Virginia (bowl win 05) , Duke just plain sucks I can readily admit that all 5 of those teams are bad.

[youngterrier]

Maryland was lucky that Navy didn't destroy them, Ricky Dobbs turned the ball over something like 3 times in the redzone, and granted that's part of the game but if there was a rematch I would pick Navy. Navy is a team that often plays to the level of their competition. The bottom teams are bad I concede, but let's remember, Wyoming and Colorado state have won bowl games more recently than Wake Forest, Duke, and Virginia

Since there's no chance for a rematch between these two teams this season makes that point moot. I could say that if VaTech wasn't still moping over the Boise game they would have responded to getting punched in the mouth by JMU but that doesn't change anything.

Wyoming (bowl win in 09), Colorado St (bowl win 08), Wake (bowl win 08), Virginia (bowl win 05) , Duke just plain sucks I can readily admit that all 5 of those teams are bad.

as can I, but to add to your point Navy lost to Duke this year....

[Skjellyfetti]

I hope you enjoy VaTech beating Stanford tomorrow, what will you come up with then?

Oops.

Looks like the ACC is going to move to 2-12 all time in BCS games.

The ACC sucks. You need to come to terms with the fact that Miami plays in a basketball conference.

[youngterrier]

The ACC is 4-3 so far in bowls. things look bad for VT early in the 4th as Stanford just scored again 33-12 XP pending. I doubt BC will beat Nevada as they have only beaten one team with a winning record all year (Syracuse) and Kaepernick and company haven't won a bowl before so I don't think they will come out flat. The ACC was somewhat predictable in their outcomes bowl-wise

[collegesportsinfo]

I hope you enjoy VaTech beating Stanford tomorrow, what will you come up with then?

Oops.

Looks like the ACC is going to move to 2-12 all time in BCS games.

The ACC sucks. You need to come to terms with the fact that Miami plays in a basketball conference.

I can't think of a less relevant "stat" then a conference bowl record. It doesn't take into consideration the individual matchups that decide the outcome. And the only stat that matters is the Vegas betting line. If a school is SUPPOSED to lose via the betting line, then you can't point fingers when the expected outcome happens. It's like when in the NCAA basektball tournament, when people pull out a conferences record.





The ACC lost a BCS game in 1999 and their rep, FSU was ranked #2 int he country. But guess what...they were underdogs against #1 Tennessee.

In 2000, FSU (ACC) was #1 and beat #2 VA Tech...as expected.

In 2001, FSU (ACC) was #2....and lost, not from an upset, but to #1 Oklahoma.

in 2002, Maryland, #10 lost to #5 Florida...as expected.

In 2003, FSU, #14, lost to #3 Georgia...as expected.

in 2004, FSU, #9, lost to #7 Miami...as expected

In 2005, VA Tech, #8, lost to #3 and undefeated Auburn.

In 2006, #22 FSU lost to #3 Penn St...as expected...in 3OT

In 2007, #14 WFU lost to #7 Louisville...as expected

In 2008, #3 VA Tech lost to underdog #8 Kansas...who had been undefeated up until the final week of the year. But VA Tech was still favored and lost.

In 2009, #19 VA Tech beat favored #12 Cincy

In 2010, #9 GA Tech lost a push game versus #10 Iowa.

And this year, #13 VA Tech lost to #4 Stanford...as expected.




Meanwhile, in the Big East, like the ACC, they've never had an at-large school.
But note that 5 of the bids that the Big East got went to schools now in the ACC (Miami, VA Tech).


Is the ACC on par with the SEC or Big Ten? No. But nobody is. It's not like the Big Ten is a weak conference because of their bowl record.

[Skjellyfetti]

I can't think of a less relevant "stat" then a conference bowl record. It doesn't take into consideration the individual matchups that decide the outcome. And the only stat that matters is the Vegas betting line. If a school is SUPPOSED to lose via the betting line, then you can't point fingers when the expected outcome happens. It's like when in the NCAA basektball tournament, when people pull out a conferences record.
But nobody is. It's not like the Big Ten is a weak conference because of their bowl record.

So, when Vegas predicts the 2nd place Pac-10 team should defeat the ACC champion... we shouldn't take anything away from the game as far as comparing conferences?

Was pitting the 2nd place Pac-10 team against the ACC champ and unfair matchup? Doesn't that speak enough about the inferiority of the ACC? What would have been a better matchup for Va Tech? The 3rd place Pac 10 team? The 4th place Pac 10 team?

"It's ok, guys. ACC is still good. The ACC champ was supposed to lose to the Pac 10 runner up. Doesn't mean our conference is weak."

"It's ok, guys. Big 10 is still good. The Big 10 cochamp was supposed to lose to the 4th place SEC West team. Doesnt' mean our conference is weak."

[SDHornet]

I can't think of a less relevant "stat" then a conference bowl record. It doesn't take into consideration the individual matchups that decide the outcome. And the only stat that matters is the Vegas betting line. If a school is SUPPOSED to lose via the betting line, then you can't point fingers when the expected outcome happens. It's like when in the NCAA basektball tournament, when people pull out a conferences record.
But nobody is. It's not like the Big Ten is a weak conference because of their bowl record.

So, when Vegas predicts the 2nd place Pac-10 team should defeat the ACC champion... we shouldn't take anything away from the game as far as comparing conferences?

Was pitting the 2nd place Pac-10 team against the ACC champ and unfair matchup? Doesn't that speak enough about the inferiority of the ACC? What would have been a better matchup for Va Tech? The 3rd place Pac 10 team? The 4th place Pac 10 team?

"It's ok, guys. ACC is still good. The ACC champ was supposed to lose to the Pac 10 runner up. Doesn't mean our conference is weak."

"It's ok, guys. Big 10 is still good. The Big 10 cochamp was supposed to lose to the 4th place SEC West team. Doesnt' mean our conference is weak."

[youngterrier]

"It's ok, guys. Big 10 is still good. The Big 10 cochamp was supposed to lose to the 4th place SEC West team. Doesnt' mean our conference is weak."

To Alabama's credit, the SEC west is the best division in college football, and they were only a game away from being the second place team in the SEC west (and 2 away from the SEC west champion), So Alabama was a great football team. It was very much apparent that Michigan State was the weak link of Big 10 trifecta after they were destroyed by Iowa. When you take a glance at the Pac 10, there were 2 teams that somewhat towered over the rest (Ohio State, Wisconsin), then there were 2 that were better than the rest but either couldn't win in close games (Iowa) or did not show up in big games (Michigan State, yes they beat Wisconsin but other than that what is impressive about who they have beaten? they beat the teams they were supposed to beat). Overall I think the Big 10 is not as bad as most people think. Iowa beat the 3rd or 4th best team in the Big 12 in Missouri. I don't think anyone expected Michigan State to beat Alabama. We all knew Michigan didn't play defense and Mississippi State's defense was pretty good itself. TCU is not a bad team. Northwestern hasn't won a bowl since the 40s, but managed to stay within a touchdown (though it was uglier than that) of an average Texas Tech team, all without their very good QB Persa.

[Skjellyfetti]

Yeah, I know Alabama was a good football team. They would have won the Big Ten, Big East, and ACC this year.

Just pointing to the strength of the SEC when the 4th place SEC West team destroys the Big Ten co-champs. Even though it was "supposed" to happen.

[youngterrier]

Yeah, I know Alabama was a good football team. They would have won the Big Ten, Big East, Big 12, and ACC this year.

Just pointing to the strength of the SEC when the 4th place SEC West team destroys the Big Ten co-champs. Even though it was "supposed" to happen.

FIFA. But don't tell the ACC guys on here that the SEC is strong, they won't take you serious in discussion about the strength of other conferences because it automatically makes you "an SEC guy"

[tampajag]

Yeah, I know Alabama was a good football team. They would have won the Big Ten, Big East, Big 12, and ACC this year.

Just pointing to the strength of the SEC when the 4th place SEC West team destroys the Big Ten co-champs. Even though it was "supposed" to happen.

FIFA. But don't tell the ACC guys on here that the SEC is strong, they won't take you serious in discussion about the strength of other conferences because it automatically makes you "an SEC guy"

Don't try to play yourself as a victim. That's a b.s. statement, people called you an SEC guy because you went out of your way to bash the ACC, with generalizations and terrible word choices.

[youngterrier]

FIFA. But don't tell the ACC guys on here that the SEC is strong, they won't take you serious in discussion about the strength of other conferences because it automatically makes you "an SEC guy"

Don't try to play yourself as a victim. That's a b.s. statement, people called you an SEC guy because you went out of your way to bash the ACC, with generalizations and terrible word choices.

oh please

[tampajag]

tampajag wrote:

Don't try to play yourself as a victim. That's a b.s. statement, people called you an SEC guy because you went out of your way to bash the ACC, with generalizations and terrible word choices.

oh please

If that wasn't the case you wouldn't be bitching about it. what part of my statement is false?

[youngterrier]

oh please

If that wasn't the case you wouldn't be bitching about it. what part of my statement is false?

terrible word choice-probably
generalization-I wouldn't say that

[tampajag]

tampajag wrote:

If that wasn't the case you wouldn't be bitching about it. what part of my statement is false?

terrible word choice-probably
generalization-I wouldn't say that

look at that I'm .500 I guess that does make me an ACC fan. Since you didn't say I made a false statement (only that you wouldn't say it was false) I'll just go ahead and say I'm right:thumb:

[youngterrier]

I'll declare victory too

[tampajag]

I'll declare victory too

Great we both win

[youngterrier]

I'll declare victory too

Great we both win

SO SAYS THE RULES OF THE INTERNET!!!!!!!!

[tampajag]

tampajag wrote:

Great we both win

SO SAYS THE RULES OF THE INTERNET!!!!!!!!

That's right!