PDA

View Full Version : Rank the Conferences


icantackleclaret
01-08-2008, 01:36 PM
I heard them ranking the conference on the radio today. I'm curious to see what people around the map think. Here are mine:

1) SEC
2) PAC 10
3) Big 12
4) Big 10
5) ACC
6) Big East

P-L
01-08-2008, 01:44 PM
1. SEC
2. Pac-10
3. Big XII
4. Big Ten
5. ACC
6. Big East
7. MAC
8. C-USA
9. WAC
10. Mountain West
11. Sun Belt

bearsfan_51
01-08-2008, 01:45 PM
If Ohio State is embarassing the Big Ten, and Ohio State has completely owned Michigan, then what does that make Michigan?

TPFKA#1SaintsFan
01-08-2008, 01:48 PM
If Ohio State is embarassing the Big Ten, and Ohio State has completely owned Michigan, then what does that make Michigan?

Taking it a step farther, if OSU is 15-1 in Big Ten play over the past 2 seasons, and they're embarrassing the Big Ten... what does that say about the Big Ten?!

I think I just blew my mind.

diabsoule
01-08-2008, 02:03 PM
1. SEC
2. Big XII
3. Pac 10
4. Big 10
5. ACC
6. Big East
7. Mountain West
8. C-USA
9. MAC
10. WAC
11. Sun Belt

JT Jag
01-08-2008, 03:01 PM
1. SEC
2. Big XII
3. Pac-10
4. Big East
5. Big 10
6. ACC
7. Mountain West
8. C-USA
9. MAC
10. WAC
11. Sun Belt

bearsfan_51
01-08-2008, 03:29 PM
1. SEC
2. Big XII
3. Pac-10
4. Big East
5. Big 10
6. ACC
7. Mountain West
8. C-USA
9. MAC
10. WAC
11. Sun Belt

I'm sorry but the Big East is not a better football conference than the Big 10. Other than the West Virginia game, there wasn't a single team in the Big East that won a difficult bowl game.

The Big Ten, while getting drubbed no doubt, had a much harder draw than anyone else.


LSU, Florida, USC, Tennessee, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M, Boston College, Central Michigan

vs.

Virginia Tech, Oregon, Wake Forest, Ball State, Southern Miss


Ok...end of that stupid argument.

As for the Big 12 and Pac 10, this year they were certainly better, but all time I'd say it's SEC, Big Ten, Pac-10, and then maybe Big XII or ACC.

DChess
01-08-2008, 03:39 PM
I'm sorry but the Big East is not a better football conference than the Big 10. Other than the West Virginia game, there wasn't a single team in the Big East that won a difficult bowl game.

The Big Ten, while getting drubbed no doubt, had a much harder draw than anyone else.


LSU, Florida, USC, Tennessee, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M, Boston College, Central Michigan

vs.

Virginia Tech, Oregon, Wake Forest, Ball State, Southern Miss


Ok...end of that stupid argument.

As for the Big 12 and Pac 10, this year they were certainly better, but all time I'd say it's SEC, Big Ten, Pac-10, and then maybe Big XII or ACC.

they went 5-0 on bowl games last year. they beat the big 12's best team, and besides usc weree supposedly the "hottest team in the country". usf went into auburn and beat them. its not like they cant beat anybody, its kind of getting out of control how disrespected the big east is.

Forenci
01-08-2008, 03:43 PM
It's too bad Boston College, Virgina Tech and Miami left the Big East. I never did like that, personally.

I think if all those teams stayed there wouldn't be a doubt in my mind the Big East is somewhere in the Top 4, probably at 4 behind the SEC, Pac-10 and Big 10.

diabsoule
01-08-2008, 03:53 PM
It's too bad Boston College, Virgina Tech and Miami left the Big East. I never did like that, personally.

I think if all those teams stayed there wouldn't be a doubt in my mind the Big East is somewhere in the Top 4, probably at 4 behind the SEC, Pac-10 and Big 10.

I liked the expansion of Virginia Tech and Miami to the ACC but I was hoping Boston College would have stayed in the Big East. Not only does it make sense geographically but it also helps strengthen the Big East in every sport. If the ACC would have gone after a C-USA school along with VT and the U then it would have helped increase parity.

Billingsley26
01-08-2008, 03:57 PM
SEC
PAC 10
Big 12
Big East
Big 10
ACC
WAC
Mountain West
MAC
Sun belt
CUSA

Michigan
01-08-2008, 04:02 PM
1. SEC
2a. Pac 10
2b. Big 12 (fantastic bowl season)
4. Big 10
5. ACC
6. Big East
7. Mountain West
8. CUSA
9. WAC
10. MAC
11. Sun Belt

Namy
01-08-2008, 04:09 PM
1. SEC
2. Big XII
3. Pac-10
4. Big 10
5. ACC
6. Big East
7. Mountain West
8. C-USA
9. WAC
10. MAC
11. Sun Belt

GB12
01-08-2008, 04:12 PM
The Big East over the Big Ten is absolutely hilarious. The top 5 teams in the Big Ten could each beat all the Big East teams except West Virginia where just Ohio State would. And if you matched them up head to head based on record the Big East might get 1 win.

Michigan
01-08-2008, 04:31 PM
The Big East over the Big Ten is absolutely hilarious. The top 5 teams in the Big Ten could each beat all the Big East teams except West Virginia where just Ohio State would. And if you matched them up head to head based on record the Big East might get 1 win.

but the big east has 4 heisman candidates!!!!!!

DChess
01-08-2008, 04:42 PM
The Big East over the Big Ten is absolutely hilarious. The top 5 teams in the Big Ten could each beat all the Big East teams except West Virginia where just Ohio State would. And if you matched them up head to head based on record the Big East might get 1 win.

west virginia is extremely similar to illinois, just they have better personnel. ohio st almost lost to them two years ago and lost to them this year. they have trouble against that spread. im an ohio st and west v fan so im not really biased on this situation.

kwilk103
01-08-2008, 04:48 PM
sec
big 12
pac 10
big east
big 10
acc

acc is horrible; they havent won a bcs game since fsu in 99

DChess
01-08-2008, 04:54 PM
i agree, the acc is absolutely terrible

etk
01-08-2008, 04:56 PM
This is how they were ranked statistically in an article I saw...

1. SEC
2. Pac 10
3. ACC
4. Big East
5. Big 10 & 12 (tie)

kwilk103
01-08-2008, 05:53 PM
sagarin rankings

CONFERENCE CENTRAL MEAN SIMPLE AVERAGE TEAMS

1 SOUTHEASTERN (A) = 81.99 81.83 ( 1) 12
2 PAC-10 (A) = 79.47 79.63 ( 2) 10
3 BIG 12 (A) = 78.62 78.35 ( 3) 12
4 BIG EAST (A) = 77.46 77.12 ( 4) 8
5 ATLANTIC COAST (A) = 75.21 74.98 ( 5) 12
6 BIG TEN (A) = 74.63 74.17 ( 6) 11
7 MOUNTAIN WEST (A) = 70.95 70.84 ( 7) 9
8 I-A INDEPENDENTS (A) = 61.74 61.79 ( 8) 4
9 WESTERN ATHLETIC (A) = 61.29 61.72 ( 9) 9
10 SOUTHERN (AA)= 60.50 59.92 ( 11) 8
11 CONFERENCE USA (A) = 59.54 60.06 ( 10) 12
12 COLONIAL (AA)= 59.52 59.33 ( 12) 12
13 SUN BELT (A) = 59.19 59.25 ( 13) 8
14 MID-AMERICAN (A) = 58.37 58.51 ( 14) 13


http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbc07.htm?loc=interstitialskip

fenikz
01-08-2008, 06:06 PM
SEC
PAC 10
Big 12
Big East
Big 10
ACC
WAC
Mountain West
MAC
Sun belt
CUSA

i agree with this one

bearsfan_51
01-08-2008, 06:28 PM
they went 5-0 on bowl games last year. they beat the big 12's best team, and besides usc weree supposedly the "hottest team in the country". usf went into auburn and beat them. its not like they cant beat anybody, its kind of getting out of control how disrespected the big east is.

No I actually like the Big East, but as a conference top to bottom it's not better than the Big Ten. Not this year, not any year.

soybean
01-08-2008, 07:16 PM
alright, i can't believe I'm going to be defending the big 10 but here goes: the whole notion that the big ten was weak/down this year was due to Michigan losing to App state and then getting crushed by Oregon. After that people were saying that the big 10 was slow couldn't keep up with the other conferences because at the time Michigan was arguably the second best team in the big 10. But, now at the end of the year they showed that with the right play calling they are a top 10 team. so by them beating florida it should kind of void the whole big 10=weakest conference in the league.

PS. northwestern losing to Duke and minnesota losing to another div 1aa team doesnt help either.

Primetime21
01-08-2008, 07:23 PM
1. SEC
2. Pac-10
3. Big XII
4. Big Ten
5. ACC
6. Big East
7. WAC
8. C-USA
9. MAC
10. Mountain West
11. Sun Belt

bearsfan_51
01-08-2008, 07:25 PM
PS. northwestern losing to Duke and minnesota losing to another div 1aa team doesnt help either.
Honestly App State and North Dakota State probably could have won the Mountain West and Conference USA. North Dakota State destroyed Central Michigan, who ended up winning the MAC. Losing to Bowling Green was a much bigger dissapointment than N.Dakota State.

Rich Jr
01-08-2008, 07:25 PM
1.) SEC
2.) Pac-10
3.) Big-12
4.) ACC
5.) Big-10
6.) Big East

andyjo672
01-08-2008, 07:44 PM
How anyone can rank the ACC above the Big 10 or Big East is completely ridiculous. Va Tech is good, very good, but miles away from being even on Ohio States level. Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, all better than BC. Miami and FSU can have all the talent in the world but over the past few years they continue to prove that they're programs on the decline. After that, who is there Wake Forest, NC State, Georgia Tech, North Carolina and Duke? Please.

iowatreat54
01-08-2008, 10:19 PM
1.) SEC
2.) Pac-10
3.) Big-12
4.) ACC
5.) Big-10
6.) Big East

that's hilarious...the ACC is easily the worst of the 6 BCS schools without question

etk
01-08-2008, 10:29 PM
that's hilarious...the ACC is easily the worst of the 6 BCS schools without question

The ACC is not without question easily worse than the Big 10 or Big East. That's a huge overstatement. The ACC is solid from top to bottom (except for Duke), all it lacks is one great team that can have BCS success. The same can't be said about either of the other 2 conferences.

nfrillman
01-08-2008, 11:56 PM
SEC
Big 12
Pac 10
After that I personally think its a gigantic pile of doodoo. The Big East and Big 10 combined have two teams worth even mentioning. The ACC is just so average it's ridiculous. ACC people can argue that their lower level teams would beat other conference's lower level teams, but no one cares because the ACC has zero great teams. I hate to break it to you, but a conference with 3 or 4 great teams, 3 average teams, and the rest being weak is better than a conference with a bunch of average teams and a couple crappers.

bearsfan_51
01-09-2008, 12:25 AM
SEC
Big 12
Pac 10
After that I personally think its a gigantic pile of doodoo. The Big East and Big 10 combined have two teams worth even mentioning. The ACC is just so average it's ridiculous. ACC people can argue that their lower level teams would beat other conference's lower level teams, but no one cares because the ACC has zero great teams. I hate to break it to you, but a conference with 3 or 4 great teams, 3 average teams, and the rest being weak is better than a conference with a bunch of average teams and a couple crappers.
The Big 12 had a good year, but historically is pretty mediocre. Oklahoma, Texas, Nebraska, and then what? It's all a "gigantic pile of doodoo" as you said. If you want to make the case that the Big 12 had a better year than most, no argument, but historically it's nothing special at all and I highly doubt that Kansas is going to be much in the future. Missouri may have taken the place of Nebraska as the best team in the North, but there will never be more than 3 great teams in any conference (other than the SEC of course).

DChess
01-09-2008, 12:29 AM
The ACC is not without question easily worse than the Big 10 or Big East. That's a huge overstatement. The ACC is solid from top to bottom (except for Duke), all it lacks is one great team that can have BCS success. The same can't be said about either of the other 2 conferences.

they're pretty bad. and all they lack is a bcs team, thats a pretty big thing to to have in a conference. va tech got blown the **** out by lsu, if they played 100 time lsu would win everyone. completely over matched. i dont wanna hear the bull ****, oh they got better has the year gone. well of course they ******* did they played conference games, in a ****** conference. BC really wasnt has good as advertised, clemson always has talent but cant do ****, ga tech is very good, virginia has a solid defense but thats about it. ncst and unc are terrible. i really dont see how they arent a terrible conference.

GB12
01-09-2008, 12:31 AM
Wait is this for this year or all time?

DChess
01-09-2008, 12:37 AM
Wait is this for this year or all time?

present i think.

i hate the arguement of like championships and heismans, when half of them came when CFB just started out and it was nothing like it is today. ill say bragging rights for football should begin somewhere around the 70's

bearsfan_51
01-09-2008, 12:40 AM
present i think.

i hate the arguement of like championships and heismans, when half of them came when CFB just started out and it was nothing like it is today. ill say bragging rights for football should begin somewhere around the 70's
College football started in the 19th century.

DChess
01-09-2008, 12:42 AM
College football started in the 19th century.

alright, im just saying all those notre dame championships look a little more impressive than they actually are. im just saying it took a while to really take shape

iowatreat54
01-09-2008, 01:58 AM
The ACC is not without question easily worse than the Big 10 or Big East. That's a huge overstatement. The ACC is solid from top to bottom (except for Duke), all it lacks is one great team that can have BCS success. The same can't be said about either of the other 2 conferences.

yea so that game where the ACC #2 team barely beat the Big 10 #7 team was pretty impressive...besides a good VT team and an over rated BC team, who else is there in the ACC? The middle of the pack Big 10 teams are better than pretty much the whole ACC after the top 2

I guess a case against the Big East could be made...they have WV at the top, followed by UConn, Rutgers, Cincy, USF and so on, very similar to the ACC...the only difference is they don't have a top 2nd team and probably better teams rounding out the top half

Turtlepower
01-09-2008, 03:01 AM
As for this year:
1. SEC (Easily)
2. Big 12 (I hate saying this, but they were a better conference this year. I think the main edge went with Texas beating ASU. I think their will be a role reversal next year with the two, but sadly, the Big 12 was better this year. Though, it wasn't by much.)
3. PAC-10 =D
4. Big 10 (I agree with everyone else here that people use Ohio State's loss as a summary of the entire Big 10. People seem to forget that everyone had a man-crush on Florida, which was beaten by a supposedly horrid Michigan team.)
5. Big East (Why not?)
6. ACC (Wow....)

nfrillman
01-09-2008, 03:11 AM
The Big 12 had a good year, but historically is pretty mediocre. Oklahoma, Texas, Nebraska, and then what? It's all a "gigantic pile of doodoo" as you said. If you want to make the case that the Big 12 had a better year than most, no argument, but historically it's nothing special at all and I highly doubt that Kansas is going to be much in the future. Missouri may have taken the place of Nebraska as the best team in the North, but there will never be more than 3 great teams in any conference (other than the SEC of course).

I will agree that it is difficult for more than 3 teams to be great in a conference, other than the SEC or possibly Big 12 at some point, strictly because those conferences have the most teams. I also agree that this season for Kansas is most likely an anomoly rather than a sign of things to come. As for historical greatness I don't really care. When I am talking about college football I am talking about the present. Why should anything but the current state of specific teams and conferences be considered in determining who is legitimate and who is overrated right now. The Big 12 basically just came into existance from a historical perspective. Looking at it from a historical perspective Notre Dame and SMU are fantastic programs, but that means jack sh*t about how good they are now, and thats all I'm concerned about. This post may come across as an attack on ur post, but it's not. It's just my view on ranking conferences.

YAYareaRB
01-09-2008, 11:54 AM
The WAC, MAC, and C-USA are NOT better than the MWC.

etk
01-09-2008, 04:20 PM
they're pretty bad. and all they lack is a bcs team, thats a pretty big thing to to have in a conference. va tech got blown the **** out by lsu, if they played 100 time lsu would win everyone. completely over matched. i dont wanna hear the bull ****, oh they got better has the year gone. well of course they ******* did they played conference games, in a ****** conference. BC really wasnt has good as advertised, clemson always has talent but cant do ****, ga tech is very good, virginia has a solid defense but thats about it. ncst and unc are terrible. i really dont see how they arent a terrible conference.

Umm...I don't know where or what to answer cause it's all a bunch of stars. I'm getting dizzy.

yea so that game where the ACC #2 team barely beat the Big 10 #7 team was pretty impressive...besides a good VT team and an over rated BC team, who else is there in the ACC? The middle of the pack Big 10 teams are better than pretty much the whole ACC after the top 2

I guess a case against the Big East could be made...they have WV at the top, followed by UConn, Rutgers, Cincy, USF and so on, very similar to the ACC...the only difference is they don't have a top 2nd team and probably better teams rounding out the top half

I have to rightfully disagree. There's not a huge drop off from the top ACC teams and the rest of them, except for Duke, which is on the rise big time. The middle of the pack teams in the Big 10 all got smoked by Michigan, which didn't impress me as more than an average ACC team this year. I don't believe for one minute that Michigan State, Northwestern, Iowa, Purdue, etc. are better than Virginia, Maryland, Clemson, Wake Forest, etc.

diabsoule
01-09-2008, 06:29 PM
The WAC, MAC, and C-USA are NOT better than the MWC.

I know. The MWC is actually fairly tough top to bottom and that's why I have them ranked as the 7th toughest conference.

princefielder28
01-09-2008, 06:32 PM
1. SEC
2. Big XII
3. Pac 10
4. Big Ten
5. Big East
6. ACC

Rich Jr
01-09-2008, 07:38 PM
that's hilarious...the ACC is easily the worst of the 6 BCS schools without question


The ACC is not without question easily worse than the Big 10 or Big East. That's a huge overstatement. The ACC is solid from top to bottom (except for Duke), all it lacks is one great team that can have BCS success. The same can't be said about either of the other 2 conferences.

Agree, personally, I feel they've been down the past 3 years but generally year in and year out they have Miami, FSU, Va Tech in BCS Bowls.

They are a well rounded conference like the SEC and not just 1 or 2 powerhouses like the Pac 10, Big 12, Big 10.

jballa838
01-09-2008, 07:52 PM
Honestly App State and North Dakota State probably could have won the Mountain West and Conference USA. North Dakota State destroyed Central Michigan, who ended up winning the MAC. Losing to Bowling Green was a much bigger dissapointment than N.Dakota State.
You sure about that? BYU is nationally ranked, only lost to Tulsa in 2OT and Ucla, and they are easily better than NDSU and Appy. Saying that they could beat BYU is ridiclious. BYU actually prepares for big games and small games, hence why no team ever competes when they shouldnt since the start of the Bronco era and the Tulsa game was against a great offense that could beat a lot of teams, in regulation. The UCLA game was at a point where BYU was without an identity and they played horribly, but the game was never out of hand.

bearsfan_51
01-09-2008, 07:57 PM
You sure about that? BYU is nationally ranked, only lost to Tulsa in 2OT and Ucla, and they are easily better than NDSU and Appy. Saying that they could beat BYU is ridiclious. BYU actually prepares for big games and small games, hence why no team ever competes when they shouldnt since the start of the Bronco era and the Tulsa game was against a great offense that could beat a lot of teams, in regulation. The UCLA game was at a point where BYU was without an identity and they played horribly, but the game was never out of hand.
Ok fine, they would be 2nd. Pardon me for not giving a rat's ass about the Mountain West conference.

jballa838
01-09-2008, 08:03 PM
Ok fine, they would be 2nd. Pardon me for not giving a rat's ass about the Mountain West conference.
its ok, because I could care less about the Big 11.

Namy
01-10-2008, 11:57 AM
The Big 12 had a good year, but historically is pretty mediocre. Oklahoma, Texas, Nebraska, and then what? It's all a "gigantic pile of doodoo" as you said. If you want to make the case that the Big 12 had a better year than most, no argument, but historically it's nothing special at all and I highly doubt that Kansas is going to be much in the future. Missouri may have taken the place of Nebraska as the best team in the North, but there will never be more than 3 great teams in any conference (other than the SEC of course).

IT'S DIVISOIN 1 FOOTBALL! IT'S THE BIG XII!!

Watch out for ******* COLORADO next season!! ;]

But in all seriousness, I think the rankings are about current standings, not "historical" ones. If we're talking about conference rankings all time, it would look much much different. As for now, the Big 12 has to be #2 imo.

Oklahoma gagged in the past 2 bowl games, but sometimes that's what happens when you're that heavily favored against your opponent like they were the past two seasons.
Texas had a down year, but when they showed up they were easily a top 10 team as they pounded Pac 10's ASU.
Missouri is scary with Chase Daniel and they destroyed the SEC's Arkansas (who beat LSU)
Kansas' record was probably a fluke, but they did do the most with it and shut up doubters by beating VaTech (who, according to the computers, should've gone to the BCS NC)
Texas Tech is a scary future team with Crabtree and Harrell and can score quickly as Virginia founded out.
Colorado lost to Alabama but I think a lot of it had to do with inexperience and anxiety in the first half (they responded well later in the game imo). They won 2 games the season before, and 6 this season. I expect us to win 9 next season. People forget but CU was a proud program too...
Nebraska looked mediocre this season, but they too are too proud of a program to be this bad for long. I think they'll surprise ppl next season.

Patriots16-0
01-12-2008, 03:11 PM
1. SEC
2. ACC
3. Big 10
4. Big 12
5. Pac-10
6. WAC
7. Big East
8. C-USA
9. Sun Belt
10. MAC
11. Mountain West

Tampa 2 4 life
01-12-2008, 03:13 PM
1. SEC
2. ACC
3. Big 10
4. Big 12
5. Pac-10
6. WAC
7. Big East
8. C-USA
9. Sun Belt
10. MAC
11. Mountain West

ACC #2?
Big Ten #3?
PAC-10 #5?
LOL at WAC ahead of Big East.

TouchdownUSC
01-12-2008, 04:46 PM
1. SEC
2. ACC
3. Big 10
4. Big 12
5. Pac-10
6. WAC
7. Big East
8. C-USA
9. Sun Belt
10. MAC
11. Mountain West

LOL...do you actually watch college football?

Patriots16-0
01-12-2008, 04:55 PM
LOL at WAC ahead of Big East.

Well, Hawaii is so good as WVU and Boise State is better than Louisville and Rutgers. Also, New Mexico State and Fresno State are better than Pittsburgh and Cincinnati.

Patriots16-0
01-12-2008, 04:56 PM
LOL...do you actually watch college football?

Yes, I do.

kwilk103
01-12-2008, 05:06 PM
Well, Hawaii is so good as WVU and Boise State is better than Louisville and Rutgers. Also, New Mexico State and Fresno State are better than Pittsburgh and Cincinnati.

hawaii sucks; did you watch their bowl game? and wvu beat down ou

wac is horrible

Tampa 2 4 life
01-12-2008, 05:10 PM
Well, Hawaii is so good as WVU and Boise State is better than Louisville and Rutgers. Also, New Mexico State and Fresno State are better than Pittsburgh and Cincinnati.

A: WVU's Offense would put up 70 on Hawaii and could hold Hawaii to just a few scores.

B: Louisville sucks. Rutgers would beat Boise State(Expect Scottyboy to make a long post detailing this.)

C: NMSU would beat Pitt...Yeah? Besides WVU, they didn't do anything this year.

Fresno State < Cincinatti. Ben Mauk has there Offense clicking.

For the sake of argument, lets match up each team based on Conference standings,

1. Hawaii Vs. WVU - WVU fairly easily.
2. UCONN Vs. Boise State - I'll give you Boise.
3. Cincy Vs. Fresno State - Cincinatti
4. USF Vs. Nevada - USF, Nevada doesn't have the type of Offense to be effective against us.
5. Rutgers Vs. Louisiana Tech - Rutgers.
6. Louisville Vs. San Jose State - Louisville if they're motivated.
7. Pitt Vs. NMSU - Pitt, Mccoy would run all day.
8. Syracuse Vs. Idaho - Syracuse.

7-1. I think its safe to say the BE wins...

YAYareaRB
01-13-2008, 01:02 AM
Yes, I do.



If you have ACC at #2.. I don't think you watch much college football

junior2430
01-13-2008, 02:28 AM
Honestly App State and North Dakota State probably could have won the Mountain West and Conference USA. North Dakota State destroyed Central Michigan, who ended up winning the MAC. Losing to Bowling Green was a much bigger dissapointment than N.Dakota State.

C-USA maybe. But the Mountain West? Seriously? You're not joking? Neither of those teams would finish in the top half of the MWC. BYU, New Mexico, Utah, TCU, and Air Force would all finish ahead of those guys.

Not to take anything away from those programs, but that is just a ludicrious statement.

Patriots16-0
01-13-2008, 08:07 AM
bearsfan_51, Appalachian State in the Mountain West??? Appalachian State is located at Boone, North Carolina.

Iamcanadian
01-13-2008, 09:40 AM
I hope you mean for this year only because conference strength changes every year depending on 2 factors. 1) the # of starting QB's returning and 2) the # of starters per team returning.
For this season I'd rank them this way:
SEC - can be no doubt that they are #1 this season
Pac 10 - If Oregon has Dixon playing all year, they not LSU would have been in the NCG and probably be NC's.
Big 12 would be tied with the Big East. Wake up guys, the Big East not only beat Oklahoma(the Big 12 Champion), but from top to bottom, they have a lot of solid football teams this year.
Big 10 - I barely put them ahead of the ACC. just a sad year for the conference and I'm a Big 10 fan.
ACC - They scare nobody from top to bottom. With the severe decline of Florida St and Miami, they just aren't much of a conference.

Next year won't be anything like this season, why, because the # of returning starting QB's will be very high and an awful lot of teams have a high # of starters returning. This year, the top returning QB's for the most part had miserable seasons with a lot of injuries. We should have seen USC, Michigan, Oregon and Louisville as strong teams but in most cases injuries and upsets set these teams back leaving young untested QB's to lead other teams to victory. This provided us with an awful lot of upsets as young QB's can be inconsistant from game to game and that is exactly how the season played itself out. Next year, almost all the top teams will have experienced QB's and should play a lot more consistantly. We'll see far less upsets because of the experienced leaders returning.
Next season, the Big East will continue to rise. Every team but Louisville returns their QB and almost every team but Louisville returns a huge # of starters. Right now they will be the only conference that can match the SEC from top to bottom.

YAYareaRB
01-13-2008, 10:21 AM
C-USA maybe. But the Mountain West? Seriously? You're not joking? Neither of those teams would finish in the top half of the MWC. BYU, New Mexico, Utah, TCU, and Air Force would all finish ahead of those guys.

Not to take anything away from those programs, but that is just a ludicrious statement.


I don't know about New Mexico but the other four would finish in front of them for sure! BYU is a Mountain West Powerhouse year in and year out. Utah almost always comes in as a close second and the nice season from Air Force lets them duke it out with TCU for the third spot. It could take some time for App St. to compete with these teams.

andyjo672
01-13-2008, 10:25 AM
bearsfan_51, Appalachian State in the Mountain West??? Appalachian State is located at Boone, North Carolina.

He wasn't saying they should or are in the MWC, he said they could compete in that conference. Why do people have such a hard time understanding these things?

Patriots16-0
01-13-2008, 11:50 AM
Well, They can't compete in the MWC. The Mountain West is for teams in the... mountains area.

diabsoule
01-13-2008, 11:55 AM
I hope you mean for this year only because conference strength changes every year depending on 2 factors. 1) the # of starting QB's returning and 2) the # of starters per team returning.
For this season I'd rank them this way:
SEC - can be no doubt that they are #1 this season
Pac 10 - If Oregon has Dixon playing all year, they not LSU would have been in the NCG and probably be NC's.
Big 12 would be tied with the Big East. Wake up guys, the Big East not only beat Oklahoma(the Big 12 Champion), but from top to bottom, they have a lot of solid football teams this year.
Big 10 - I barely put them ahead of the ACC. just a sad year for the conference and I'm a Big 10 fan.
ACC - They scare nobody from top to bottom. With the severe decline of Florida St and Miami, they just aren't much of a conference.

Next year won't be anything like this season, why, because the # of returning starting QB's will be very high and an awful lot of teams have a high # of starters returning. This year, the top returning QB's for the most part had miserable seasons with a lot of injuries. We should have seen USC, Michigan, Oregon and Louisville as strong teams but in most cases injuries and upsets set these teams back leaving young untested QB's to lead other teams to victory. This provided us with an awful lot of upsets as young QB's can be inconsistant from game to game and that is exactly how the season played itself out. Next year, almost all the top teams will have experienced QB's and should play a lot more consistantly. We'll see far less upsets because of the experienced leaders returning.
Next season, the Big East will continue to rise. Every team but Louisville returns their QB and almost every team but Louisville returns a huge # of starters. Right now they will be the only conference that can match the SEC from top to bottom.

I agree with you about the Big East and I think they could compare to the SEC in everything but depth, considering the amount of teams the SEC has compared to the amount of teams the Big East has.

Shane P. Hallam
01-13-2008, 12:20 PM
This past year:

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

Tampa 2 4 life
01-13-2008, 01:28 PM
Well, They can't compete in the MWC. The Mountain West is for teams in the... mountains area.

But his point was they would beat those teams...

etk
01-13-2008, 01:38 PM
If you have ACC at #2.. I don't think you watch much college football

I think having the Pac-10 at 5 is a bit more glaring to be honest.

YAYareaRB
01-13-2008, 01:41 PM
I think having the Pac-10 at 5 is a bit more glaring to be honest.


they should be higher than the ACC

Go Cowboys
01-13-2008, 01:42 PM
1. SEC
2. ACC
3. Big 12
4. Pac 10
5. Big Ten
6. MAC
7. Big East
8. C-USA
9. Wac
10. Sun Belt
11. MWC

etk
01-13-2008, 01:43 PM
they should be higher than the ACC

1. SEC
2. Pac 10

Those are the only locks when ranking the conferences.

iowatreat54
01-13-2008, 01:43 PM
1. SEC
2. ACC
3. Big 12
4. Pac 10
5. Big Ten
6. MAC
7. Big East
8. C-USA
9. Wac
10. Sun Belt
11. MWC

wow.......

BamaFalcon59
01-13-2008, 01:48 PM
1. SEC
2. Big 12
3. Pac-10
4. ACC
5. Big 10
6. Big East

kwilk103
01-13-2008, 02:06 PM
acc is horrible

they should be 6

sec
pac 10
big 12
big east
big 10
acc

big east and big 10 are interchangeable really (at least imo); big 10 teams are better historically thats why they get the benefit of the doubt; you could make a case for either one; i just go with the big east cuz of wvu, but i can see why some would say the big 10

acc is just horrible

bearsfan_51
01-13-2008, 02:16 PM
Well, They can't compete in the MWC. The Mountain West is for teams in the... mountains area.

Ok...go find a desk...put your head down on it...and take a nap. It's already been explained to you once, I'm not going to bother again.

BrownsTown
01-13-2008, 02:23 PM
1. SEC
2. Pac 10
3. Big 12
Here it gets dicey. The Big 10 and Big East are fairly close, so I'll go team by team

OSU vs. West Virginia - Push
Illinois vs. UConn - Illinois
Michigan vs. Cincinnati - Michigan
Wisconsin vs. South Florida - Push
Rutgers vs. Penn St. - Rutgers
Louisville vs. Iowa - Louisville
Pitt vs. Purdue - Purdue
Syracuse vs. Anyone - Anyone

So I'll go

4. Big 10
5. Big East
6. WAC
7. ACC

The ACC sucks

Tampa 2 4 life
01-13-2008, 02:26 PM
1. SEC
2. ACC
3. Big 12
4. Pac 10
5. Big Ten
6. MAC
7. Big East
8. C-USA
9. Wac
10. Sun Belt
11. MWC

Ball State = MAC #2
Rutgers = Big East #5

Yeah....

etk
01-13-2008, 03:44 PM
acc is horrible

they should be 6



acc is just horrible



So I'll go

4. Big 10
5. Big East
6. WAC
7. ACC

The ACC sucks

Really great analysis guys. Skip Bayless' job might be in jeopardy once and for all.

"The ACC sucks, it's just horrible."

Nice convincing argument, especially the one where you have the WAC ahead of the ACC. IIRC, Hawaii and Boise State spanked the WAC, then Hawaii got spanked by Georgia and Boise State lost to 7-5 East Carolina, which was beaten pretty easily by Virginia Tech early in the season. The WAC is a two-team conference and those teams can't even win bowl games. Nice.

The ACC is on the rise more than any conference right now. Miami, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, Boston College, Wake Forest...all teams on the rise big time. The ACC will be the 2nd best conference in 3-4 years, just wait and see.

BrownsTown
01-13-2008, 03:58 PM
I don't really think they're worse than the WAC, I just wanted to illustrate how I felt that they were way below the other conferences. The only team that people considered "good" from the ACC got beaten by Kansas, the Big XII #3. The ACC doesn't really have any teams in the upper echelon, and they lack depth as well. Too many of the ACC teams are around 7-5, 6-6 or 5-7 every year and the powerhouses of the conference (Miami and Florida State) are struggling and the ACC is suffering because of it.

kwilk103
01-13-2008, 04:04 PM
plus, it doesnt help the acc that their 1-9 in bcs games; 0 for their last 8

neko4
01-13-2008, 04:07 PM
1-SEC
2-PAC 10
3-Big 10
4-Big 12
5-ACC
6-Big East
7-MAC
8-WAC
9-C-USA
10-Mountain West



11-Appalachain St's conference



12-Sun Belt (Though FAU could change this, but its an embarrasing conference)

BrownsTown
01-13-2008, 04:16 PM
Guys, the MAC was bad this year. 3 bowl teams, and gave up over 50 in each game (including a 63-7 pounding of runner up Bowling Green by Tulsa) for an 0-3 record. Their conference champion was 1-5 in non conference play with the only win coming against Army. Even if Hawaii did get blown out by Georgia, they're still better than anything the MAC has to offer.

neko4
01-13-2008, 04:18 PM
Guys, the MAC was bad this year. 3 bowl teams, and gave up over 50 in each game (including a 63-7 pounding of runner up Bowling Green by Tulsa) for an 0-3 record. Their conference champion was 1-5 in non conference play with the only win coming against Army. Even if Hawaii did get blown out by Georgia, they're still better than anything the MAC has to offer.
I just like Dan Lefevour

BrownsTown
01-13-2008, 04:19 PM
I just like Dan Lefevour

Everyone does, he's the next great MAC QB, but 1 player can't make a conference.

SuperMcGee
01-13-2008, 04:52 PM
You'll all believe in the MAC once Buffalo beats Missouri

But yeah, it's terrible and doesn't deserve to be any higher than 10th right now.

I'm not sure what's going on with the other teams, but I think Buffalo finally has two OOC home games (UTEP and Army, not so bad), as well as an easier part of the MAC West (I think we avoid Central Mich and Ball State). Then the MAC East is just not good. So that's 10 potentially winnable games (double the win total for a 3rd straight year?) for a team returning 19/22 starters, and then two against Missouri and Pitt. Buffalo is going to represent the MAC next year and NOT be embarassed!

But besides that it's just LeFevour.

etk
01-13-2008, 05:29 PM
I don't really think they're worse than the WAC, I just wanted to illustrate how I felt that they were way below the other conferences. The only team that people considered "good" from the ACC got beaten by Kansas, the Big XII #3. The ACC doesn't really have any teams in the upper echelon, and they lack depth as well. Too many of the ACC teams are around 7-5, 6-6 or 5-7 every year and the powerhouses of the conference (Miami and Florida State) are struggling and the ACC is suffering because of it.

If there's anything the ACC has going for it, it's depth. Only the SEC & Pac-10 are deeper than the ACC. Every team in the ACC has a realistic shot at winning it next year, excluding Duke who is about 2 years away from contention. That is a testament to how solid it is from top to bottom, especially considering how the ACC "powerhouses" are upset every year by weaker ACC foes. Compare that to a conference like the Big 10, where Ohio State and Michigan plow through their conference schedule only to lose in their bowl games (Mich beat Florida, we get it). What we lack right now is a consistent team that can match up against the LSUs, Ohio States, Oklahomas and USCs. In 2-3 years we will have at least 2 teams that fit that bill while the lower ACC teams also continue to improve. The ACC is solid but unspectacular ATM, with a very promising future for the next 5 years.

BrownsTown
01-13-2008, 06:06 PM
If there's anything the ACC has going for it, it's depth. Only the SEC & Pac-10 are deeper than the ACC. Every team in the ACC has a realistic shot at winning it next year, excluding Duke who is about 2 years away from contention. That is a testament to how solid it is from top to bottom, especially considering how the ACC "powerhouses" are upset every year by weaker ACC foes. Compare that to a conference like the Big 10, where Ohio State and Michigan plow through their conference schedule only to lose in their bowl games (Mich beat Florida, we get it). What we lack right now is a consistent team that can match up against the LSUs, Ohio States, Oklahomas and USCs. In 2-3 years we will have at least 2 teams that fit that bill while the lower ACC teams also continue to improve. The ACC is solid but unspectacular ATM, with a very promising future for the next 5 years.

Is the fact that ever year any team has a shot because of depth, or because of a lack or powerhouse?

To say that the ACC has any more depth than anyone but the SEC and Pac 10 doesn't seem right. Let's say, compared to the big 10. Take out the best 2 and worst two teams from each conference

Big 10 - 64-35 (.634 winning percentage)
ACC - 56-46 (.571 winning percentage)

That doesn't show depth to me.

etk
01-13-2008, 07:11 PM
To say that the ACC has any more depth than anyone but the SEC and Pac 10 doesn't seem right. Let's say, compared to the big 10. Take out the best 2 and worst two teams from each conference

Big 10 - 64-35 (.634 winning percentage)
ACC - 56-46 (.571 winning percentage)

That doesn't show depth to me.

Michigan State, Iowa, Northwestern and Purdue would all struggle in the ACC. Penn State, Wisconsin and Illinois would not win either division. Sounds like the conferences are equal in depth or the ACC is deeper. I'm not buying one altered stat as a reason for the Big 10 being deeper.

BrownsTown
01-13-2008, 07:41 PM
Michigan State, Iowa, Northwestern and Purdue would all struggle in the ACC. Penn State, Wisconsin and Illinois would not win either division. Sounds like the conferences are equal in depth or the ACC is deeper. I'm not buying one altered stat as a reason for the Big 10 being deeper.

See, that's just opinion. My personal opinion is that Michigan State, Iowa, Northwestern and Purdue would do fairly well in the ACC, posting as good or better records than in the Big 10, and that those Wisconsin and Illinois could win either division.

But opinion isn't what we're arguing. I gave you facts about the teams that are supposed to prove the ACC depth and proved your point wrong. You responded with an opinion.

So how about give me some support as to why those teams would struggle? Something besides your opinion?

junior2430
01-13-2008, 10:34 PM
I don't know about New Mexico but the other four would finish in front of them for sure! BYU is a Mountain West Powerhouse year in and year out. Utah almost always comes in as a close second and the nice season from Air Force lets them duke it out with TCU for the third spot. It could take some time for App St. to compete with these teams.

They would finish ahead of New Mexico? No chance. New Mexico finished tied for 3rd with Utah, ahead of TCU, and beat Air Force. Also the only team in the conference to be bowl eligible every year the conference has existed.
No way App State finishes ahead of us. Wyoming, Colorado State, SDSU, and UNLV, maybe.

etk
01-13-2008, 10:39 PM
See, that's just opinion. My personal opinion is that Michigan State, Iowa, Northwestern and Purdue would do fairly well in the ACC, posting as good or better records than in the Big 10, and that those Wisconsin and Illinois could win either division.

But opinion isn't what we're arguing. I gave you facts about the teams that are supposed to prove the ACC depth and proved your point wrong. You responded with an opinion.

So how about give me some support as to why those teams would struggle? Something besides your opinion?

I'm sorry to disappoint a stat-geek, but I watch the Big Ten network very often and those teams are all very average.

Since you enjoy looking up stats, how about you compare the middle ACC teams with the middle Big Ten teams as far as NFL talent and draft production. That's always a good indicator of overall team and conference talent.

BrownsTown
01-13-2008, 10:46 PM
I'm sorry to disappoint a stat-geek, but I watch the Big Ten network very often and those teams are all very average.

Since you enjoy looking up stats, how about you compare the middle ACC teams with the middle Big Ten teams as far as NFL talent and draft production. That's always a good indicator of overall team and conference talent.

Well considering none of those players will be in the NFL for a few years...can't really do that. And NFL talent doesn't equal how good a college team is, usually, well, how good that college team does determines it. Simply watching and seeing how good you [i]think[/] a team does doesn't really mean much.

And if Big 10 teams are "all very average", then what are the ACC teams?

etk
01-13-2008, 10:54 PM
Well considering none of those players will be in the NFL for a few years...can't really do that. And NFL talent doesn't equal how good a college team is, usually, well, how good that college team does determines it. Simply watching and seeing how good you [i]think[/] a team does doesn't really mean much.

And if Big 10 teams are "all very average", then what are the ACC teams?

Overall team talent is the best way to compare teams from different conferences. Comparing records isn't fair because teams play different conference schedules and schedule different OOC opponents. The Big 10 doesn't produce a whole lot of NFL talent, outside of Ohio State, Michigan and maybe Wisconsin.

BrownsTown
01-13-2008, 11:47 PM
Overall team talent is the best way to compare teams from different conferences. Comparing records isn't fair because teams play different conference schedules and schedule different OOC opponents. The Big 10 doesn't produce a whole lot of NFL talent, outside of Ohio State, Michigan and maybe Wisconsin.

We're not talking about how good the NFL talent is. Many great college players are horrible in the NFL. Especially when many Big 10 teams run the spread.

Listen, no offense, but you seem biased. To say that the ACC has depth right now is wrong. Pretty much plainly said. Their record and bowl record will attest to that. They're not on the level of the others as much as you want them to be. Not to say they can't or won't be soon, but they aren't.

Iamcanadian
01-14-2008, 08:07 AM
The ACC is on the rise more than any conference right now. Miami, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, Boston College, Wake Forest...all teams on the rise big time. The ACC will be the 2nd best conference in 3-4 years, just wait and see.

Sorry but outside of North Carolina I just don't see the ACC moving up. With Butch Davis at North Carolina I can see them becoming dominant in a few years.
Miami is moving in the wrong direction and the jury is still out on Shannon as a HC.
North Carolina St. will have to compete with North Carolina to make a real move and I think they come out second.
Duke and football just aren't synonymies.
Boston College made a serious mistake switching to a conference where they have no natural rivals. I think it will kill their recruiting and that is why their HC jumped to NCS.
Wake Forest will never be a football power, it's a small school with limited recruiting power.

The ACC has really never been much of a football conference and with the decline of Florida St. they look to be going back to their old ways.

Patriots16-0
01-14-2008, 09:14 AM
Sorry but outside of North Carolina I just don't see the ACC moving up. With Butch Davis at North Carolina I can see them becoming dominant in a few years.
Miami is moving in the wrong direction and the jury is still out on Shannon as a HC.
North Carolina St. will have to compete with North Carolina to make a real move and I think they come out second.
Duke and football just aren't synonymies.
Boston College made a serious mistake switching to a conference where they have no natural rivals. I think it will kill their recruiting and that is why their HC jumped to NCS.
Wake Forest will never be a football power, it's a small school with limited recruiting power.

The ACC has really never been much of a football conference and with the decline of Florida St. they look to be going back to their old ways.

Butch Davis will lead North Carolina to 4 ACC titles in the next 5 years and a trip to the BCS Bowl. Mark it down. :)

toonsterwu
01-14-2008, 09:19 AM
I won't claim that the ACC will be the top conference anytime soon. But I do think the ACC overall is doing well. I think etk could've given better examples for the ACC on the rise. Using a roughly 3 year window

Teams I'm Not Worried About

1) Maryland - Still recruiting top athletes. With a strong team returning next year and QB stability, they have the chance to have a quality campaign, which should help their recruiting efforts. They key there is that, with Turner likely there for 2 more years, they may be able to have sustained success.

2) Miami - From a recruiting perspective, they've bounced back and have a great class coming in. Whether Shannon can coach them up, only time will tell. But talent is one big part of the equation.

3) Virginia - They have a loaded squad next year ... and their quality recruiting class from this past year will be keyed up. With some QB stability in line (Sewell/Lalich), the outlook looks positive for a couple of years and early signs on 2009 recruiting are somewhat positive. Being in the Gator Bowl should help.

4) Clemson - Still maintaining strong recruiting classes and Tommy Bowden seems to have found a bit of stability.

5) Florida State - Addressed the big succession issue. Whereas Fisher walked into the Weatherfod/Lee situation, he gets to develop Manuel from the ground up. Strong recruiting class. Talent is still there. In all honesty, the main issue with FSU and Miami has been the QB play. It's not a lack of talent.

6) North Carolina - Davis will get good recruiting classes and push them forward.

7) Virginia Tech - I think Beamer's staff is a bit underrated in their teaching. They haven't exactly gotten star studded classes year in and year out, but they've developed talent.

Teams that I'm uncertaini about

NC State - I'm not too worried about NC State. O'Brien's one of the more underrated coaches, and his success with them down the stretch this year has to be a positive sign. I think he'll have them as a solid squad soon, and O'Brien is a solid recruiter, but a better teacher.


Boston College - They may get hurt a bit by the recruiting base, but Jagodzinski's pro experience is something that they should be able to sell the kids on.

Wake Forest - Coaching is fine. Ability to attact talent will always be a problem. I think this is the type of squad that have spurts of success for a couple years due to having experienced players, followed by down years as their youngsters gain experience.

Georgia Tech - Johnson's a good coach. I just wonder how successful that offense can be and whether or not they can attract the top talent there for that offense.

Team that I have some worries on:

Duke - Okay ... this one was easy. After a decent class 2 years ago, there was some hope. But it's just hard for them to compete. Maybe a new coaching staff will help, but that seems unlikely.

Is the ACC headed for some level of greatness? Dunno. But I'd feel more comfortable about the ACC than I would about, say, the Big 10 and Big East. The Big 12 is a toss up. Pac-10 and SEC will always have the talent bases to recruit from if they do well. Roughly speaking, that's about how I would rank the conferences, SEC/Pac-10/Big 12/ACC/Big 10/Big East.

etk
01-14-2008, 12:21 PM
Sorry but outside of North Carolina I just don't see the ACC moving up. With Butch Davis at North Carolina I can see them becoming dominant in a few years.
Miami is moving in the wrong direction and the jury is still out on Shannon as a HC.
North Carolina St. will have to compete with North Carolina to make a real move and I think they come out second.
Duke and football just aren't synonymies.
Boston College made a serious mistake switching to a conference where they have no natural rivals. I think it will kill their recruiting and that is why their HC jumped to NCS.
Wake Forest will never be a football power, it's a small school with limited recruiting power.

The ACC has really never been much of a football conference and with the decline of Florida St. they look to be going back to their old ways.

Miami in the wrong direction? We've stripped ourselves of all the poor character guys and we're bringing in a top 5 overall recruiting class with the indisputably best defensive class. In 2-3 years we will be a BCS bowl contender, but the depth of our conference may prevent us from making the NC.

I agree that NC State will be behind North Carolina, but they are a young team and Tom O'Brien will only improve the program.

Duke returns almost their whole team, and they will only improve under Coach Cutliffe. Look out for Thaddeus Lewis next year.

Boston College runs a very effective offensive system. They lose a lot of talent next year but they will return to form once they develop another QB.

Wake Forest, once again, is one of the most high-rising programs right now. They return 4 of their best players in Riley Skinner (Jr), Josh Adams (So), Aaron Curry (Sr) & Alphonso Smith (Sr). They will be a damn good team once again next year, and they might just beat out FSU and Clemson.

Toonster is right. I haven't given good, clear examples as to how the ACC is on the rise, but I thought it's obvious to any college fan. I guess I forgot how impossible Big 10 homers are to deal with. The ACC is on the same relative level as the Big 10 right now, and is rising more than any conference not named the Big East. That shouldn't be hard for anyone to fathom. In 2-3 years, the ACC will be the 3rd best conference in football, and probably the 2nd in terms of depth.

toonsterwu
01-14-2008, 06:13 PM
Another thing that will help the ACC squads in the short term window (say next 3-4 years) is the likelihood of relative coaching stability in terms of the potential for coaches to get fired. There's been some recent turnover, which should mean that, barring some huge collapses by programs, most folks are in place for the near future (and Fisher is in place at FSU). There also isn't really a coach that screams "NFL" anytime soon, so the only other thing would be if they bolt to another program.

etk
01-14-2008, 06:49 PM
Another thing that will help the ACC squads in the short term window (say next 3-4 years) is the likelihood of relative coaching stability in terms of the potential for coaches to get fired. There's been some recent turnover, which should mean that, barring some huge collapses by programs, most folks are in place for the near future (and Fisher is in place at FSU). There also isn't really a coach that screams "NFL" anytime soon, so the only other thing would be if they bolt to another program.

Yeah, I agree. Butch Davis won't be bolting for the NFL again anytime soon.