NCAAbbs - ACC Outlook/Predictions

Pages: 1 2

<a href="http://www.ncaabbs.com/overtime/article.php?sid=91" target="_blank">http://www.ncaabbs.com/overtime/article.php?sid=91</a>

(edit: sig line test)

[ September 05, 2002, 01:59 PM: Message edited by: georgia_tech_swagger ]

I think you're a ways off on your UNC-Syracuse prediction, but we shall see....

-JD

Oh, and I think your label of NC State as "the only college team in the state of NC that knows how to play football" is wrong too.

-JD

Knock on my door when you have more touchdowns than turnovers

Where will you be next Saturday?

-JD

Sure you don't want to reschedule that for a week or two after this weekend?

9 - 3 = 6
6 x 7 = 42

Syracuse Defense + UNC Offense =/= 42 points

[ September 03, 2002, 03:04 PM: Message edited by: georgia_tech_swagger ]

We are playing in a dome this weekend, not in 3+ hours of a torrential downpour....

-JD

Miami played in the same weather.

They didn't turn it over 9 times.

And Miami (OH) is nowhere near the same level as Syracuse.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by georgia_tech_swagger:
Miami played in the same weather.

They didn't turn it over 9 times.

And Miami (OH) is nowhere near the same level as Syracuse.<hr /></blockquote>You're right -- they're better.

That doesn't mean we can't still lose at Syracuse this weekend. Anytime you play on the road (especially in front of a crowd like Syracuse), you have to play well to win).

As for the rain this past week, I've already explained my take on that to Nate in <a href="http://ncaabbs.com/forums/acc/boards/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=17;t=000113" target="_blank">this thread.</a>

-JD

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JD Heel:
You're right -- they're better.<hr /></blockquote>[Monty Python & The Holy Grail, King Arthur]
And you're a looney....
[/Monty Python & The Holy Grail, King Arthur]

Once again, we'll see....

-JD

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by georgia_tech_swagger:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JD Heel:
You're right -- they're better.<hr /></blockquote>[Monty Python & The Holy Grail, King Arthur]
And you're a looney....
[/Monty Python & The Holy Grail, King Arthur]<hr /></blockquote><img border="0" alt="[laugh]" title="" src="graemlins/laughing.gif" />

We're talking about Miami of Ohio right?

Miami of Ohio being better than ECU is a stretch, but saying they're better than Syracuse is crazy.

Let's see, last season the Powerhouse that is Miami of Ohio beat such great teams as:

Cincinnati
Ball State
Buffalo
Akron
Ohio
Western Michigan
Bowling Green

Let's see that's 7 total wins, all against Mid-major teams and a whole 2 of those wins came against teams with winning records!!!!!!!!!

And by the way Clemson played a damp game in Georgia so don't go blaming the rain. I've seen some of the replays and it was just bad execution.

Does anybody read what I write? I did not blame our loss on the rain! But, if you don't think that rain can be a major factor in a game (especially one where a team turns it over 9 times), then I'm quite sure I can't explain it to you.

Thanks for showing me last year's Miami team's record. By the way, what was Maryland's record two year's ago -- and what was it last year?

-JD

You have a point JD

You can NEVER tell what will happen in a first game.

If you put FSU and Buffalo out there, I wouldnt be 100% sure FSU would win...it would be very likely, but in UNC's cse, They WERE the better team, they just made too mistakes that cost them

Yes UNC is the better team but lost. I still in NO WAY agree that Miami of Ohio is a better team than ECU or Syracuse just because they beat UNC. You can speculate, but to say that because a subpar team from last year beats UNC they must be better than ECU and Syracuse is jumping the gun.

Face it, you lost to a BAD team. And i still don't agree that the rain caused ALL of those turnovers. From replays i saw (two turnovers) the rain didn't cause those fumbles. Just admitt that UNC was NOT prepared for that game.

Please point out where I said that the rain caused all of our turnovers.

-JD

Oh, and a BAD team loses more games than it wins. Miami consistently wins more than it loses. Doesn't matter if it's against Big 12 competition or MAC competition. Good teams win and bad teams lose.

Miami happens to be a good team. Not a great team -- and one that we should have beaten on Saturday -- but a good team nonetheless.

-JD

So if you win more games than you lose you must be a GOOD team on any level, at least that's what you said.

So if Clemson wins every game it plays it must be a good team, but what if every team it plays is a high school team. Big Whoop. That doesn't make Clemson a good team. A school needs QUALITY wins to be considered a GOOD team.

The point of posting Miami's record last season was to show that they won but they won against nobodies. Buffalo, Akron, and Ohio are wins that don't mean anything.

There is a huge difference btw the major conferences and the mid-majors. That's why NCState is going to DOMINATE it's first three oppanents and not move up in the polls (very much at least) while if Notre Dame dominated it's first three games (Maryland, Purdue, and Michigan) it would be a top 15 team.

This is also why you'll never see a Mid-Major team reach a National Championship game, they are of LESSER QUALITY.

He definately speaks the truth!

ClemTiger: What you did was just exaggerate everything way beyond what I said.

First of all, are any college teams out there playing high school teams?

I will give you the fact that a win against better competition (a good team from a "power" conference) counts more than a win against a so-called "lesser" team. Trust me, you don't have to preach to me about the value of a strong schedule.

But what you did was call Miami of Ohio a "bad team" -- based on last year's winning record, too. I don't agree with that.

That doesn't mean I think Miami is a top 25 team. But, I think they are one of the better teams in NCAA football.

Also, I don't think that the mid-majors are as far below the "power" conferences as you claim. Some MAC wins and two impressive wins by one of middle teams in the MWC (over a top 10 Big 12 team) should be proof of this.

-JD

Okay - you stil lost the game, quit whinning about it. I honestly think you shoud have killed Miami OH, but stuff happens. I've had weird things happen to my team also just like it did last year when you guys stomped us in the Valley.

How is praising Miami of Ohio "whining about the game???"

-JD

Ok, let me clarify I was a bit wordy with my post. Miami of Ohio is a GOOD Mid-Major team, but if you put Miami of Ohio in the ACC or any of the other 5 Major conferences they would be a BAD team, at least by your standards.

"Oh, and a BAD team loses more games than it wins." - JD Heel

Guys, don't let the MAC fool you. Those guys can play. They play a really tough brand of football up there. They also have a chip on their shoulder any time they play against a team from a major conference. And, I'm not just saying that because my Deacons just lost to Northern Illinois. Just because they don't carry "big time" names, that doesn't mean that they don't have big time teams. In my opinion, it is not an embarassment to lose to Miami of Ohio. Consider that they get a lot of players who transfer from Big 10 schools and non-qualifiers that couldn't go to Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, etc. They come from the same mold as East Carolina and Appalachian State players. And, I think we can all agree that those two teams are loaded with talent.

BPD,

Amen to that about the MAC. Marshall is a great, great team and Byron Leftwich is my early favorite for the Heisman.

500 yds last game, and it seemed like it was nothing.

This guy is unreal.

I just don't know what makes anyone think that if teams from mid-major conferences were placed in one of the six "major" conferences, they would all finish at the bottom.

They consistently beat "major" teams, so much so that most "major" teams are even scared to schedule them. Those that do routinely get bit in the arse for it.

I'm just tired of the lack of respect. To the doubters out there: if your team ever schedules them and loses, you'll be singing their praises too.

-JD

Miami of Ohio or any other Mid-Major team can play a Major Conference team down to the wire on any given week. I'm not disagreeing with that.
I however am disagreeing that any of those teams, minus MAYBE one or two, could compete in a Major Conference week in and week out.

I also do not agree with JD Heel when he says Miami of Ohio is a BETTER team than ECU and Syracuse. If you think Miami of Ohio could play Syracuses schedule and have a better record than them you're CRAZY. And if you think Miami of Ohio has better talent than Syracuse you're CRAZY.

I guess I'm crazy then.

ECU may have had a terrible game against dook -- I don't know. But, I saw the coach's show with Steve Logan before the game, and he was giving dook a lot of credit and sounded genuinely worried about the game. He must have known something about his own team that the rest of us didn't.

I said I thought Miami was better than Syracuse too, and I stick by that. I may be wrong or right -- and I admit that I haven't seen enough of Syracuse or ECU to know for sure (or Miami, for that matter).

What I believe I do know enough to contend is that there is not some huge gap between Syracuse and Miami just because of the conferences they are in. I don't want to put words in your mouth, but that's kinda what I get from what you've said.

We'll never know how well Miami (of Ohio) would do in the Big East. I think they would probably be in the middle, though. And I think Syracuse will probably be about there too.

By the way -- Miami's quarterback has been called a Heisman sleeper by some "experts." I'm not saying I agree or disagree, but his name has floated around. Miami has some talent.

Call me crazy.

-JD

[ September 05, 2002, 04:09 AM: Message edited by: JD Heel ]

The gap between the Major Conferences and the Mid-Majors is a small one for a SELECT few. Only a couple of Mid-Major teams can say that though. There is however IMO a HUGE gap between the Major Conferences and the VAST MAJORITY of the Mid-Majors.

The problem with Mid-Major teams is that a team will have one or two years good years followed by multiple bad years. The teams just aren't consistent enough year after year. There are a select few teams that don't do this however: BYU and Marshall are the two that stand out to me.

I would agree that Marshall and BYU are the cream of the mid-major crop, usually. CSU is making waves this year, though.

Miami always has a winning record -- and they were 10-1 one year (the last time they beat us). Call those 6-5 or 7-4 records they've had lately "bad years" -- but they are beating almost all the other mid-major teams they are playing.

I just don't think I would ever say that a team with a winning season in football is a "bad team."

Maybe "decent" or even "mediocre" -- but not "bad."

That's just my opinion, though....

-JD

Anyways, enough about the almighty powerful Mid-major teams. Lets talk about real football! You know, the games this weekend.

Sounds good to me. Go ACC!

-JD

I would just like to add my 2 cents here. Miami (OH) has a history of beating good teams. They beat Virginia Tech a few years back and they were ranked like 15th in the country. They beat LSU a few years before that and they were ranked in the top 15 in the country.

Some of the better teams in the MAC are better than you give them credit for, because there are teams in the MAC that are really bad. That also hurts their strength of schedule. But it does not mean they are not that good.

Syracuse has lost a lot of players from last year's team and is not that good this year. ECU has a new quarterback this year that obviously can't get it done. Their defense was a problem last year too. Remember Marshall scoring 64 points on them in the GMAC Bowl last year?

I am not saying the MAC is the greatest thing out there, but there are teams in the MAC that are better than you guys are willing to give them credit for. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

<blockquote>quote:<hr />
I also do not agree with JD Heel when he says Miami of Ohio is a BETTER team than ECU and Syracuse. If you think Miami of Ohio could play Syracuses schedule and have a better record than them you're CRAZY. And if you think Miami of Ohio has better talent than Syracuse you're CRAZY. <hr /></blockquote>Miami is CLEARLY better than East Carolina.

Miami beat UNC, a good ACC team. In fact, the MAC is 2-0 against the ACC. And the historically WORST ACC team, Duke, beat East Carolina handily. So how could Miami U. possibly be worse than ECU?

Clemsonwhoever, stop dogging Miami. You don't know what you are talking about.

Miami U. is good. They just don't get the respect they deserve.

In 1995, for instance, Miami beat Northwestern, that year's Big Ten champ and finished 8-2-1, including 1-1-1 against ranked teams. But no bowl game would take 'em.

A couple of years later Miami went 10-1. The only loss was to Toledo. Toledo won the MAC. Miami got no bowl game. 6-5 UNC got to go to a bowl game, even though Miami U. beat 'em with no problem.

Finally, you dog that Miami U. win over Bowling Green last year. Bowling Green was 8-3 and got three of those wins against BCS teams.

And Syracuse isn't anything special. a 42-21 loss to BYU? Give me a break.

I think it's going to be an even match. UNC can win that game.

I'm glad some MAC guys finally came over here -- I was starting to wonder where my backup was.

Rochester: I agree with 99 percent of what you said. My only contention is with this: <blockquote>quote:<hr />6-5 UNC got to go to a bowl game, even though Miami U. beat 'em with no problem. <hr /></blockquote>I agree that Miami should have gone to a bowl game that year instead of us. But, as for that game, we actually led for most of it. Their only lead was with mere seconds left on the clock after a field goal -- so "beat 'em with no problem" isn't entirely accurate. But, I agree that they were the better team that year and deserved to win.

-JD

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Their only lead was with mere seconds left on the clock after a field goal -- so "beat 'em with no problem" isn't entirely accurate.<hr /></blockquote>I stand corrected. But 99 percent right... pretty good percentage. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="cool.gif" />

RochesterFalcon, Bowling Green did not beat 3 BCS teams. If you're going to defend the Mid-Major teams get your facts straight.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by ClemTiger:
So if you win more games than you lose you must be a GOOD team on any level, at least that's what you said.

So if Clemson wins every game it plays it must be a good team, but what if every team it plays is a high school team. Big Whoop. That doesn't make Clemson a good team. A school needs QUALITY wins to be considered a GOOD team.

The point of posting Miami's record last season was to show that they won but they won against nobodies. Buffalo, Akron, and Ohio are wins that don't mean anything.

There is a huge difference btw the major conferences and the mid-majors. That's why NCState is going to DOMINATE it's first three oppanents and not move up in the polls (very much at least) while if Notre Dame dominated it's first three games (Maryland, Purdue, and Michigan) it would be a top 15 team.

This is also why you'll never see a Mid-Major team reach a National Championship game, they are of LESSER QUALITY.<hr /></blockquote>So what I see is that the ACC is 0-2 against "LESSER QUALITY" teams from the MAC. The problem with the MAC is that even though our top could run with anybody in the country save the very best (FSU from the ACC) our bottom feeders could have trouble with with an 8 man defense and lose to 1-AA teams (Lehigh over Buffalo). ACC fans should understand a Basketball example where Gonzaga religiously gets into the Sweet 16 as a "Cinderella" team or the MAC's very own Kent getting to the Elite 8 last year from a 10 seed. The point is taht under the current system you will never know how good of a team that UNC lost to, especially if MU finishes in the with 10 or more wins.

Last time I checked, Missouri, Northwestern and Temple were members of the BCS. Bowling Green beat 'em all last year.

The MAC finished last season with two ranked teams (Marshall and Toledo). No non-BCS league has ever done that.

It's a good league. Miami is good. You will see.

[ September 05, 2002, 04:11 PM: Message edited by: RochesterFalcon ]

Yes Bowling Green did beat three BCS teams. Get your facts straight!

at Missouri 20-13
Temple 42-23
at Northwestern 42-41.
All from BCS Conferences, the so called "big six"

[ September 05, 2002, 04:21 PM: Message edited by: bgnormals ]

I'M NOT DOGGING MIAMI OF OHIO!!!!!!!!

A lot of these Mid-Major teams have some serious players that could play on almost any team anywhere. Leftwich, Carr, and Ragone etc. But a team needs more than a few good players.

If you compare the DEPTH of talent between the Major Conferences and Mid-Majors you'll see a HUGE difference. That's why a lot of the better Mid-Major teams start strong but struggle at the end of the season. See BYU and Fresno St. last year.

Now imagine if Miami of Ohio played a tougher schedule, that lack of depth would really start to show.

Miami of Ohio has the talent to beat any team in the nation on any given week. But to do that EVERY week is a WHOLE different story. (If you'll notice I've already stated this in a previous post, but apparently I'm dogging Miami.)

I was under the impression that a Bowl Championship Series team would be a team that PLAYED IN THE BOWL CHAMPIONSHIP SERIES!

ClemTiger: I'm out of this one -- good luck fighting these pesky guys off. I've learned my lesson by now....

<a href="http://www.ncaabbs.com/forums/mac/boards/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000465" target="_blank">By the way, you have GTS to thank for the flood of MAC posters that started showing up all of a sudden.</a>

-JD

A BCS team can be interpreted a lot of different ways. The most common is to say that a school that plays in a conference where their champion gets an automatic bid into a BCS game is therefore a BCS school. Some people do interpret it another way.

I really don't care how it is interpreted or how anyone else feels about teams from the MAC. The MAC won all of their games against C-USA teams last year, and we have not lost to a C-USA team in a bowl game.

The MAC usually has the best winning percentage against teams from the "Major" conferences; out of all the "Mid-Major" conferences that is.

I know how good some of the teams are in the MAC, and so do a lot of other people. You can believe whatever you want to!

<img border="0" alt="[Cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/cheers.gif" />

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JD Heel:
ClemTiger: I'm out of this one -- good luck fighting these pesky guys off. I've learned my lesson by now....

<a href="http://www.ncaabbs.com/forums/mac/boards/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000465" target="_blank">By the way, you have GTS to thank for the flood of MAC posters that started showing up all of a sudden.</a>

-JD<hr /></blockquote>who... ME???

Just promoting discussion -- and they would have posted anyway had they found this thread <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="tongue.gif" />

I just made the find part a bit easier.

<img border="0" alt="[Wavy Guy]" title="" src="graemlins/wave.gif" /> <img border="0" alt="[Saber]" title="" src="graemlins/saber.gif" /> <img border="0" alt="[Cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/cheers.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="tongue.gif" />

ENVY
Main Entry: en

ClemTiger,

How did your Clemson Tigers do in their last game against a MAC team?

We STILL love your kicker!

Go Herd!

You guys totally trip me out when you talk about your conference (MAC). We all know that you guys (MAC) have had like 2 decent wins against mediocre teams so far this year, but don't get all excited, this season just started. I know you all feel like you need to go ahead and use your bragging rights while you still can, but walk the talk in about 4 weeks. Who's your team again..' and who are you playing the next few games? Please go somewhere else with this nonsense!

Pages: 1 2