Has the ACC fallen to the bottom of the Power 5?

[bobongo]

Im not trying to do anything other than prove we’re not the worst unless you cherry pick data.

Cherry pick? Like pointing out that the ACC is number two in bowl wins over the last decade without noting that they're number one in bowl losses? Like that?

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Cherry pick? Like pointing out that the ACC is number two in bowl wins over the last decade without noting that they're number one in bowl losses? Like that?

I’m not arguing we’re the best. It’s a valid point to show we’ve had more 6+ win teams than everyone else, so we’ve qualified for more bowl games. Think about what you’re saying here - we’ve been so good that we’ve had more appearances than everyone else - so we’ve had the most losses and second most wins.........so therefore we’re the worst? LOLOLOLOLOLOL

 

[GTNavyNuke]

I’m not arguing we’re the best. It’s a valid point to show we’ve had more 6+ win teams than everyone else, so we’ve qualified for more bowl games. Think about what you’re saying here - we’ve been so good that we’ve had more appearances than everyone else - so we’ve had the most losses and second most wins.........so therefore we’re the worst? LOLOLOLOLOLOL

Exactly. The ACC isn't the worst but is the most over rated?

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Exactly. The ACC isn't the worst but is the most over rated?

How would one argue the ACC is most overrated when almost nobody thinks we’re the best or even one of the best?

 

[JacketOff]

I’m not arguing we’re the best. It’s a valid point to show we’ve had more 6+ win teams than everyone else, so we’ve qualified for more bowl games. Think about what you’re saying here - we’ve been so good that we’ve had more appearances than everyone else - so we’ve had the most losses and second most wins.........so therefore we’re the worst? LOLOLOLOLOLOL

The ACC has so many 6+ win teams because the SEC and ACC only play 8 conference games. If you play 1 OOC P5 game a year (like most teams do, if they play any at all) that means you’re still playing 1/4 of your games against G5 or FCS teams. You can have a losing conference record and very easily make a bowl game with that setup. The B1G, Big 12, and PAC-12 each play 9 conference games, and most play an additional P5/ND/BYU game on top of that. Meaning you’ve only got 1-2 non P5 games making it tougher for teams in the bottom half of the conference to make a bowl game.

Since 2016 (when the other 3 P5 conferences all went to 9 conf games) the ACC and SEC have had more losing teams make bowls

2016

• ACC - 4
• SEC - 4
• B1G - 2
• Big 12 - 2
• PAC-12 - 0

2017

• ACC - 3
• SEC - 1* (Ole Miss would have played a bowl had they not been under NCAA penalty
• B1G - 2
• Big 12 - 1
• PAC-12 - 3

2018

• ACC - 2
• SEC - 2
• B1G - 1
• Big 12 - 3
• PAC-12 - 1

2019

• ACC - 0 (only 4 teams finished with losing records. 6 teams finished 4-4. All 6 made a bowl)
• SEC - 2
• B1G - 2
• Big 12 - 0
• PAC-12 - 2

Not counting 2020 since there was no win requirement to get a bowl. But from 2016-2019, the ACC had 9 teams with losing conference records play in bowl games. The SEC had 8 (would’ve been 9 without NCAA violations), the B1G had 7, and the Big 12 and PAC-12 each had 6. In those 4 years the ACC had 15 teams finish at 4-4, and the SEC had 11. Because it’s literally impossible to finish with a .500 record in a 9 game schedule, some of those 4-4 teams would have had losing records in a 9 game schedule. So would it not be fair to say the ACC’s number of losing teams to make bowl games would be drastically higher than the other conferences if the ACC played 9 games? Does having more low-quality teams make bowl games mean the conference is better? I don’t think so. Is losing bowl games a metric that supports the ACC being a strongman conference? The numbers and data are out there. The overwhelming majority of it says the ACC as a whole is mediocre, and the worst of the P5s.

 

[Silk3]

Lol y

The ACC has so many 6+ win teams because the SEC and ACC only play 8 conference games. If you play 1 OOC P5 game a year (like most teams do, if they play any at all) that means you’re still playing 1/4 of your games against G5 or FCS teams. You can have a losing conference record and very easily make a bowl game with that setup. The B1G, Big 12, and PAC-12 each play 9 conference games, and most play an additional P5/ND/BYU game on top of that. Meaning you’ve only got 1-2 non P5 games making it tougher for teams in the bottom half of the conference to make a bowl game.

Since 2016 (when the other 3 P5 conferences all went to 9 conf games) the ACC and SEC have had more losing teams make bowls

2016

• ACC - 4
• SEC - 4
• B1G - 2
• Big 12 - 2
• PAC-12 - 0

2017

• ACC - 3
• SEC - 1* (Ole Miss would have played a bowl had they not been under NCAA penalty
• B1G - 2
• Big 12 - 1
• PAC-12 - 3

2018

• ACC - 2
• SEC - 2
• B1G - 1
• Big 12 - 3
• PAC-12 - 1

2019

• ACC - 0 (only 4 teams finished with losing records. 6 teams finished 4-4. All 6 made a bowl)
• SEC - 2
• B1G - 2
• Big 12 - 0
• PAC-12 - 2

Not counting 2020 since there was no win requirement to get a bowl. But from 2016-2019, the ACC had 9 teams with losing conference records play in bowl games. The SEC had 8 (would’ve been 9 without NCAA violations), the B1G had 7, and the Big 12 and PAC-12 each had 6. In those 4 years the ACC had 15 teams finish at 4-4, and the SEC had 11. Because it’s literally impossible to finish with a .500 record in a 9 game schedule, some of those 4-4 teams would have had losing records in a 9 game schedule. So would it not be fair to say the ACC’s number of losing teams to make bowl games would be drastically higher than the other conferences if the ACC played 9 games? Does having more low-quality teams make bowl games mean the conference is better? I don’t think so. Is losing bowl games a metric that supports the ACC being a strongman conference? The numbers and data are out there. The overwhelming majority of it says the ACC as a whole is mediocre, and the worst of the

Lol you rlly want the acc to be the worst. Imagine taking the time to try to convince everyone the team you root for conference is the worst when no ones trying to say their the best.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

The ACC has so many 6+ win teams because the SEC and ACC only play 8 conference games. If you play 1 OOC P5 game a year (like most teams do, if they play any at all) that means you’re still playing 1/4 of your games against G5 or FCS teams. You can have a losing conference record and very easily make a bowl game with that setup. The B1G, Big 12, and PAC-12 each play 9 conference games, and most play an additional P5/ND/BYU game on top of that. Meaning you’ve only got 1-2 non P5 games making it tougher for teams in the bottom half of the conference to make a bowl game.

Since 2016 (when the other 3 P5 conferences all went to 9 conf games) the ACC and SEC have had more losing teams make bowls

2016

• ACC - 4
• SEC - 4
• B1G - 2
• Big 12 - 2
• PAC-12 - 0

2017

• ACC - 3
• SEC - 1* (Ole Miss would have played a bowl had they not been under NCAA penalty
• B1G - 2
• Big 12 - 1
• PAC-12 - 3

2018

• ACC - 2
• SEC - 2
• B1G - 1
• Big 12 - 3
• PAC-12 - 1

2019

• ACC - 0 (only 4 teams finished with losing records. 6 teams finished 4-4. All 6 made a bowl)
• SEC - 2
• B1G - 2
• Big 12 - 0
• PAC-12 - 2

Not counting 2020 since there was no win requirement to get a bowl. But from 2016-2019, the ACC had 9 teams with losing conference records play in bowl games. The SEC had 8 (would’ve been 9 without NCAA violations), the B1G had 7, and the Big 12 and PAC-12 each had 6. In those 4 years the ACC had 15 teams finish at 4-4, and the SEC had 11. Because it’s literally impossible to finish with a .500 record in a 9 game schedule, some of those 4-4 teams would have had losing records in a 9 game schedule. So would it not be fair to say the ACC’s number of losing teams to make bowl games would be drastically higher than the other conferences if the ACC played 9 games? Does having more low-quality teams make bowl games mean the conference is better? I don’t think so. Is losing bowl games a metric that supports the ACC being a strongman conference? The numbers and data are out there. The overwhelming majority of it says the ACC as a whole is mediocre, and the worst of the P5s.

The only way you get a bowl game with a losing conference record is if you have a winning record OOC. But people were just saying how bad we were OOC. So which is it? LOLOLOLOLOLOL.

 

[JacketOff]

Lol y

Lol you rlly want the acc to be the worst. Imagine taking the time to try to convince everyone the team you root for conference is the worst when no ones trying to say their the best.

I don’t “want” the ACC to be the worst. I’m stating facts. I really couldn’t care less what any conference is “ranked.” But people are on here acting like the ACC is some murderer’s row of programs when it’s clearly not.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I don’t “want” the ACC to be the worst. I’m stating facts. I really couldn’t care less what any conference is “ranked.” But people are on here acting like the ACC is some murderer’s row of programs when it’s clearly not.

Maybe I missed it - who here is saying the ACC is one of the top conferences?

 

[JacketOff]

The only way you get a bowl game with a losing conference record is if you have a winning record OOC. But people were just saying how bad we were OOC. So which is it? LOLOLOLOLOLOL.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL, because they play awful OOC games. I literally said that LOLOLOLOL.

2016 Boston College finished 2-6 in the ACC and made a bowl game. Their OOC games were Umass, UConn, Buffalo, Wagner. Sure are some tough ones in there.

2016 Wake Forest finished 3-5 in the ACC and made a bowl game. Their OOC games were Tulane, Delaware, Indiana, and Army. To their credit they did beat an Indiana team that went 6-7 that year. But they also lost to Army, sooo

2017 Virginia went 3-5 in the ACC and made a bowl. Their OOC games were William & Mary, Indiana (L), Boise State, and UConn

2018 Wake Forest went 3-5 in the ACC and made a bowl game. Their OOC games were Towson, Tulane, Notre Dame (ACC tie-in + L), and Rice

A lot of tough P5 OOC games in there.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL, because they play awful OOC games. I literally said that LOLOLOLOL.

2016 Boston College finished 2-6 in the ACC and made a bowl game. Their OOC games were Umass, UConn, Buffalo, Wagner. Sure are some tough ones in there.

2016 Wake Forest finished 3-5 in the ACC and made a bowl game. Their OOC games were Tulane, Delaware, Indiana, and Army. To their credit they did beat an Indiana team that went 6-7 that year. But they also lost to Army, sooo

2017 Virginia went 3-5 in the ACC and made a bowl. Their OOC games were William & Mary, Indiana (L), Boise State, and UConn

2018 Wake Forest went 3-5 in the ACC and made a bowl game. Their OOC games were Towson, Tulane, Notre Dame (ACC tie-in + L), and Rice

A lot of tough P5 OOC games in there.

So all those teams suck because they went 13-3 OOC. Got it.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

How would one argue the ACC is most overrated when almost nobody thinks we’re the best or even one of the best?

Being over rated is based on losing so many bowl games when we aren't playing cupcakes or each other. Like I believe ND is typically over rated since they've lost 7 consecutive Years Day bowls.

Being over rated is some what independent of how good you are. You can be good and under rated like UCF or good and over rated like ND.

The ACC has been .below P5 average in quality of play and over rated IMHO based on the stats.

 

[bobongo]

I’m not arguing we’re the best. It’s a valid point to show we’ve had more 6+ win teams than everyone else, so we’ve qualified for more bowl games. Think about what you’re saying here - we’ve been so good that we’ve had more appearances than everyone else - so we’ve had the most losses and second most wins.........so therefore we’re the worst? LOLOLOLOLOLOL

I never said we were the worst. Having a lot of teams in the bowls means the ACC was highly rated. Having them lose so often might mean the ACC was overrated. The ACC was highly rated to have two in the CFP (one of them with an asterisk). Seeing them both blown out might mean they were overrated.

So all those teams suck because they went 13-3 OOC. Got it.

Against weak sisters, as was pointed out. Now you've got it.

 

[bobongo]

The only way you get a bowl game with a losing conference record is if you have a winning record OOC. But people were just saying how bad we were OOC. So which is it? LOLOLOLOLOLOL.

Bad against POWER 5 OOC. Sheesh.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Bad against POWER 5 OOC. Sheesh.

Right, but we were previously told we were terrible OOC - not just P5. But then we’re given an example of bad teams who went 13-3.

This thread is called “Has the ACC fallen to the bottom of the Power 5?” My point is there is enough data to say no. My apologies if you were arguing the same point. It had seemed like you weren’t.

 

[bobongo]

Right, but we were previously told we were terrible OOC - not just P5. But then we’re given an example of bad teams who went 13-3.

This thread is called “Has the ACC fallen to the bottom of the Power 5?” My point is there is enough data to say no. My apologies if you were arguing the same point. It had seemed like you weren’t.

I would say there's not enough data to clearly say, "yes" to that question, but there is plenty of evidence to indicate the ACC is pretty weak the last few years as is obvious from an impartial examination of the entire un-cherry picked data.

 

[forensicbuzz]

I would say there's not enough data to clearly say, "yes" to that question, but there is plenty of evidence to indicate the ACC is pretty weak the last few years as is obvious from an impartial examination of the entire un-cherry picked data.

I'm not ready to concede that yet. Maybe it looks that way at the 60,000 foot level; but, it may be very different once you drill down. I don't have an opinion one way or the other yet.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I would say there's not enough data to clearly say, "yes" to that question, but there is plenty of evidence to indicate the ACC is pretty weak the last few years as is obvious from an impartial examination of the entire un-cherry picked data.

You mean like:
1) Subjective: Coaches Poll: Most teams ranked of any conference.
2) Formulaic: FEI: Most teams ranked in the top third of any conference.

I see why I thought you were arguing that the ACC was the worst - you are. You can’t not say otherwise. Come on man, just say it!

 

[bobongo]

I don’t “want” the ACC to be the worst. I’m stating facts. I really couldn’t care less what any conference is “ranked.” But people are on here acting like the ACC is some murderer’s row of programs when it’s clearly not.

Remember when some folks were saying after Miami and VT were added that it would be a "super-conference"? I was hoping it would be, but things haven't worked out that way.

 

[bobongo]

I see why I thought you were arguing that the ACC was the worst - you are. You can’t not say otherwise.

That doesn't make any sense.