Heather Dinnich is a tool...

[Skeptic]

It seems like I always degree with your final conclusion, but I respect your opinion and appreciate the good points you make. With respect to the media, I still believe the criticism of Heather Dinich and anything ESPN is fair. She's displayed a long term negative bias against Tech that predates CPJ OB appearance #1. And it's not that she's "anti-tech". She's anti providing quantitative or qualitative evidence to support her extremely opinionated "reporting". Just google her and read how every ACC fanbase hates her. Regardless of my affiliation with GT, I've never gained information from reading HD, which is disappointing since she is/was the ACC football reporter for the biggest (by far) sports news company. Also, the conflict of interest between ESPN and major conference's launching their own networks through a partnership with ESPN is a major cause for concern. It's one thing to have this relationship with professional sports leagues, which are much closer to entertainment companies than college sports. The incentives in this relationship are only going to amplify the current problems with college sports. SEC Network is to college sports what Fox News and . . . the liberal media are to politics.

Before I pivot to agreeing with you, I want to point out you forgot Louisville, which is probably the #4 ACC team until Miami/UNC get their acts together or ND swaps the promise ring for a wedding ban.

That said, the ACC needs to take control of its imagine. Who the hell is running our conference? It's a complete joke. Everything about the ACC's branding screams Russell Athletics. If I was the ACC commissioner, I would realize that the SEC has 1 and only 1 strength - football. Their geographic footprint comprises the only part of America that's less appealing than the flyover states: Athens GA; 2 cities in Alabama, 2 cities in Mississippi, a city in Arkansas, Gainesville Florida, Columbia South Carolina. Moreover, every SEC program uses the exact same dumb band songs (with different words), the same exact dumb bowl stadium design, has the same dumb morally and socially unacceptable fan base, and bland uniforms (purple & yellow! Orange and blue! bright red! Maroon! name a tackier color scheme - i dare you).

Right there, I'm branding ACC football around the city game day environment (Miami, Atlanta, Pittsburg, Louisville, Boston) - who cares if its 100% true - it's a brand, it's how you identify yourself. I'm branding the ACC around the authentic Identities of the programs - GT & ND are as college football tradition as college football tradition gets. The U, the seminole war chant, the death valley hill thingy. The only thing that comes close in the SEC is...rocky top? Gator chomp? barking? Also, I'd never sell the football program alone. Always ACC sports. Otherwise, why do we have the 4 NC teams + Syracuse? I'd also add a soccer program to every ACC school b/c I think soccer is about to blow up in the U.S.

Lastly, I'd take the biggest strength of the ACC and use it make the SEC look like a backwoods cockfight betting league - quality research universities. I know the ACC has some sort of academic research program, but I'd increase it 10 fold. Duke, UNC, GT, Wake Forest, Miami, Pitt, BC, UVA, ND, am i missing any? As research universities become more integrated with private industry, a collaboration among these top flight universities becomes more valuable. Not only could you share data and joint-fund initiatives, you would have a platform of 14 stadiums, fan bases, and universities + your own TV network with a large audience. It's shark tank on steroids. Instead of having those dumb college commercials that appeal to no one, why don't you use that airtime to highlight startups associated with that university? No one applies to GT because they saw the cake race on a commercial. However, you tell people the story about ICE's beginnings and how they went on to buy the NYSE, you've probably caught a few 16 year olds attention. Duke, GT, UNC, WF = technology and financial industry powerhouses. I'd implement whatever payment technology innovation that came out of ATL or RTP into every stadium. To hell with a blimp, we're broadcasting aerial shots from drones. It's a win-win. SEC's brand depends on it winning football games. That's not a high barrier. A brand built on intelligence and technological innovation - that can't be replicated by the SEC. I mean,does Starksville even have internet access?

Whoever is running the ACC is acting like a SEC fanboy reject. Hire Steven Koonin as the ACC commissioner and the ACC would topple the SEC in less than 3 years.

Skeptic's archnemesis until GTSwarm does us part,

The Optimist

There are so many good points in a very thoughtful post that I am not sure I can touch them all. We are reading the same book if the page is different sometimes, but I’m a slow reader.

As to Dinich, my first thought is that if everybody everywhere hates her, she is doing a good job. But that is a copout. The problems you enumerate are all intertwined with what TV and particularly ESPN has done to sports, and not just with the SEC channel. (ND has a national network that can demand an Orange Bowl appearance?) They are incestuous, and so much money, metric tons of it, showered by ESPN and now the Fox Sports network , is eventually corruptive, and as you note with Fox on the one hand and MSNBC on the other doing to politics, will turn the Power Five conferences at minimum into a toxic mix of greed running head on into maybe the few remaining who see college sports as elevating and inspirational. (Thomas coming back from the biggest mistake of his football life to make the big scramble against Georgia, followed by Butker’s improbable FG made the hair on my arms stand up. Sure, I was ecstatic that GT won the game, but those personal triumphs I can still visualize, and they are why I like sports.)

Lastly as to that, ESPN has changed, for the worse, the role of “reporters”. They are now expected to be provocative, opinionated – real, real, opinionated – and to mix these opinions of the action with the reality of the action. Because ESPN knows what others do not: all the dumb opinions in the world are off into the cosmos and forgotten. The bad that print reporters do, however, lives after them. (My personal worst of the worst is almost every sideline reporter, and I hope Roddy Jones does not fall into that trap.)

(I agree with you on Louisville, and I did forget them. I’d like to forget the coach as well. Now we have FSU AND Louisville … AND Syracuse in basketball? Is there not a quota for shame?)

Everything about the ACC's branding screams Russell Athletics: I can’t add a thing to that. Dammit, the whole passage is funny. Right, but funny.

… make the SEC look like a backwoods cockfight betting league …No one applies to GT because they saw the cake race on a commercial.… I mean,does Starksville even have internet access? …Whoever is running the ACC is an SEC Fanboy reject.

Now, each of those lines on their own would get you time on Comedy Central. But wrapped in a very thoughtful and provocative -- dare I say innovative in a context outside a football offense? -- proposal for the ACC to get it together and emphasize not just football/sports, but – surprise! – academics, would be ground-breaking and seize the narrative. This post alone, seriously, could be a template .

A really thoughtful piece of work, which suggests to me you are not an engineer. Now I am obliged to say, before somebody on the board goes off, just joking. I can appreciate criticism like that any time.

 

[Skeptic]

Skeptic, all of what you say is true, however, you could do the same exercise for all the conferences. Truth be told, the ACC is not all that different than any other conference yet it is always the step child.

True, but until last year the ACC had not always fared so well against the other "power" conferences. Teams like Clemson could not get over the SC hurdle though it seemed to me they had the better team most years, and GT was frustrated against Georgia, as examples. I hope 2014 woke up players and coaches that they really can compete with those guys.

 

[RLR]

A really thoughtful piece of work, which suggests to me you are not an engineer. Now I am obliged to say, before somebody on the board goes off, just joking. I can appreciate criticism like that any time.

You nailed it. I wasn't an engineer - just someone who recognized that the engineering kids held all the answers, if asked the right questions. In all sincerity, I was probably the dumbest kid at GT back then and certainly would be now. And I wouldn't change that perspective for anything in the world. The way you engineering folk can look at nature or a machine, identify a problem, and use logic to solve the problem is inspiring. I myself don't have that ability. I just daydream in my head - something similar to 1 + 1 = what if the life i experience is equivalent to the life a computer game character experiences? If that were true, and the computer character somehow ventured to the realm outside of his software, into the computer, and found the trash bin, would that be like human's finding a black hole and trying to make sense of it? ... it's not a great process for GT math. or really any academic subject

That said, being armed with the knowledge that people who can solve problems exist at large in the world combined with an imagination that is not bound by the physical limitations of reality is a fun way to view the world. Gotta love that MTrain life. And although I admit I basically piggyback off the intellectual capacity and achievement of you engineers, at least you can rest assured there's a growing class of bankers, lawyers, and politicians advocating for you to take a leadership role in repairing the broken, runaway aspects of our social and economic systems. At the end of the day, the MTrain is a service profession. I for one prefer to serve those with the best ideas.

Lastly, just want to make clear I didn't intend to criticise you. I really did enjoy your prospective and you really did make good points. Part of my initial reaction was wrong, you helped me realize that. No better way to learn than to eliminate false beliefs.

Go Jackets. Boo Heather. Long live the triple option

 

[takethepoints]

I think the problem is that a lot of the people who are sports writers or broadcasters don't really know that much about the sports themselves. Ditto the usual fan. So they go with the easy analysis: they peg conferences and the teams within them with certain sports.

For the ACC, that sport is, for better or worse, basketball. It is the basketball league in most everyone's mind in the sports media, just like the SEC is the football league. Upsetting this convenient stereotyping makes it harder to keep up with the sports and to sell them to fans. So even people who really do know their stuff tend to stick with it and switch narratives about the "dominant conference" with the seasons.

Now, this makes about zero sense. The P-5 conferences are spending a lot of time and money trying to even the playing field in all sports and it is paying off. But there it is and it'll take a lot of time and a lot more change before it stops.

 

[RLR]

I disagree. I think the problem is that the ACC feeds reporters the same monotonous material as the SEC, but worse, since we're not as good at it. See ACC Media Days vs. SEC media days. We feed fans the same, generic, cookie-cutter, umm are you sure this ACC network game is in HD presentation. Hell, the only reason we're the best basketball league is because we bought out the big east and coach K hasn't run out of jet black ink hair dye yet.

I really do like Skeptic's point about not blaming the media. If we don't like what they are reporting, which we don't, then it's on us to change our message. GT and the ACC's current marketing plan is the Kmart of college football. Yeah, it has name recognition. But it's a name that's been trampled for, idk all of history. And we've done nothing to correct that image in people's mind. we just occasionally sprinkle in ads the Sunday classifieds - leaving consumers to go, hmm the ACC. I thought they would have gone under by now.

Upsetting the sports world stereotypes isn't impossible. It just takes non-idiotic leadership. Quick, name the starting lineup for the Atlanta Hawks. I'm willing to bet the number of people in Atlanta that can answer that correctly is the same now as it was 2 years ago. And yet, the Hawks attendance was way up. The TV ratings were way up. And the merchandise sales were way up. I agree with you that the average sports viewer is probably a lazy idiot, but those people are the easiest to reach! #Riseup #Truetoatlanta - it's really as simple as that.

Worth reading: http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/12080830/reselling-hawks-atlanta

 

[Northeast Stinger]

It's comforting to see that even with 11 wins and an OB win, fans still insist in blaming everything on "the media". The ACC will get respect when it deserves it, and I can't say Dinich said anything many weren't already saying. FSU is an ACC embarrassment. GT had one great year following three mediocre years. Clemson gets into double digits, has a fine program, but hasn't gotten over the hump. VT is stumbling in and out of the gate. UNC is, well, UNC and this year is always the year. The additions of Pittsburgh and Syracuse haven't moved the needle at all. Nobody is going to take Duke seriously, seriously. And then where has Miami been? And ND seems always to be halfway in and halfway out of the ACC, depending on what it wants at the moment.

As a fan base we need to man up the same way the football team did. Blaming somebody else is self-destructive.

Sorry but that is too easy to me. The problem is that if the media talks up a conference the losses don't count as much. If the ACC starts off in a deep pit perception wise then every team has to have an almost perfect record to even gain a modicum of respectability. The climb out becomes too great.

By contrast the mighty SEC west got thoroughly embarrassed during bowl season but I bet the average starting position in the polls of any of those teams this year will be at least 15-20 places ahead of the average starting position of any ACC team. I am all for manning up but starting perception also becomes reality too often.

 

[RLR]

The whole model with the ACC has been wrong from the beginning. They pretended to care about academics and focus on basketball because they couldn't compete in football. Kind of like the way Clemson fans respond to South Carolina fans during down years. Between it's inception and adding FSU, the ACC has 2 won NCAA football championships - Clemson in '81 and GT in '90. I wish there was a way to bust apart these insane restrictions barring schools from having say in what conference they belong to.

Imagine the value of a 16 team conference that included something along the lines of:

1. GT
2. Virginia
3. Duke
4. Vandy
5. Navy/airforce
6. Stanford
7. Cal Berkley
8. UCLA
9. Washington
10. Illinois
11. Michigan
12. Notre Dame
13. Northwestern
14. Wisconsin
15. Texas
16. 100 choose 1: USC/Pitt/Ohio State/Miami/minnesota/maryland/ texas A&M/ Florida/Boston College

Should geographic proximity be a factor? I'd argue that it only benefits 4 charter schools of the ACC who have a vested interest in upper carolina. But, if college sports are about money and money is determined by TV contracts and TV contracts are determined in large part by number of viewers - then why do we waste over 25% of our membership on capturing the 27th largest U.S. TV market? Its like landing on an unowned boardwalk, but choosing to purchase a hotel on Baltimore Avenue instead of buying higher valued property. In terms of travel, what's the marginal difference to GT for flying a chartered plane to Miami/Boston vs. LA?

GT plays 5 away games this year. Clemson is the only nearby game. Duke is a 6 hour drive. UVA is 8 hours. Miami 9.5 hours. Notre Dame 11. All 4 are ACC games, all 4 are probably too far for the non-insane fan to drive. The funniest part is that all of those away schools made my new conference list (Miami a choice in the final slot). Nonetheless, my point remains - if you can't drive to away games already, why not expand GT's brand into LA, SF, Chicago, Seattle - which are the largest TV markets, commerce centers, and repositories of tech talent.

The best part of my ideal league is that you finally get rid of this Ivy League SEC-effect in college rankings. Can someone please explain to me how Dartmouth is ranked 24 spots ahead of GT? Brown +15? Don't even get me started on Cornell. I'll give you the power 5 Ivys, but not over Stanford, MIT, and Cal Tech. U.S. News has the top 10 ranked in this order: (1) Princeton (2) Harvard (3) Yale (4 tie) Columbia (4 tie) Stanford (4 tie) Chicago (7) MIT (8 tie) Duke (8 tie) Penn (10) Cal Tech. How many times have we seen this grouping bias fallacy manifest itself in favor of the SEC in the top 10 rankings? No, SEC. The loser of the SEC championship game should not advance to the NC game.

I know rankings don't matter, but in terms of attracting talent, they do have an impact on shaping perception, which helps with everything from attracting applicants to improving your student job placement to networking with venture capitalists, something ATL notoriously lacks but for a few heaven-sent angels. In my league though, you create an association between 16 schools that excel in either engineering, business, law, medicine, or some combination thereof. What's the future of research? 3d printing, energy (I assume?), personalized medicine, financial security and payment technology, data analysis, cyber security, advanced computing. I like my chances of my alma mater being associated with these 16 schools. But it's more than that, like i said in my prio message, you basically have one of the largest platforms in the U.S. to advertise and launch the innovation spun off from your university. You have shared pools of entertainment money that can be used to fund high return joint research initiatives, which is only amplified by federal gov't matching funds. It's more efficient for the entire system, less the this-deuchebag-is-trying-to-make-a-billion-dollars-off-of-research-instiutions-and-unpaid-athletes-and-pay-out-as-many-hundres-of-millions-of-dollars-to-his-croonies-as-he-can-before-he-gets-arrested-JK-clearly-he'll-get-a-plea-bargin-admitting-to-no-crime-but-paying-a-large-fine delegation.

So I ask you, would you rather be aligned with the current ACC brethren Louisville, Syracuse, NC State, FSU, Clemson, Wake, the only school i hate more than UGA (UNC) OR shift the axis of power within American higher education, making millions of dollars more to join a conference of schools with better academics, in better markets, with more talented basketball, football, and law school programs - a nontrivial fact, since this deal would have more opposition than the Iran treaty.

 

[Skeptic]

I think the problem is that a lot of the people who are sports writers or broadcasters don't really know that much about the sports themselves. Ditto the usual fan. So they go with the easy analysis: they peg conferences and the teams within them with certain sports.

For the ACC, that sport is, for better or worse, basketball. It is the basketball league in most everyone's mind in the sports media, just like the SEC is the football league. Upsetting this convenient stereotyping makes it harder to keep up with the sports and to sell them to fans. So even people who really do know their stuff tend to stick with it and switch narratives about the "dominant conference" with the seasons.

Now, this makes about zero sense. The P-5 conferences are spending a lot of time and money trying to even the playing field in all sports and it is paying off. But there it is and it'll take a lot of time and a lot more change before it stops.

I disagree. I think the problem is that the ACC feeds reporters the same monotonous material as the SEC, but worse, since we're not as good at it. See ACC Media Days vs. SEC media days. We feed fans the same, generic, cookie-cutter, umm are you sure this ACC network game is in HD presentation. Hell, the only reason we're the best basketball league is because we bought out the big east and coach K hasn't run out of jet black ink hair dye yet.

I really do like Skeptic's point about not blaming the media. If we don't like what they are reporting, which we don't, then it's on us to change our message. GT and the ACC's current marketing plan is the Kmart of college football. Yeah, it has name recognition. But it's a name that's been trampled for, idk all of history. And we've done nothing to correct that image in people's mind. we just occasionally sprinkle in ads the Sunday classifieds - leaving consumers to go, hmm the ACC. I thought they would have gone under by now.

Upsetting the sports world stereotypes isn't impossible. It just takes non-idiotic leadership. Quick, name the starting lineup for the Atlanta Hawks. I'm willing to bet the number of people in Atlanta that can answer that correctly is the same now as it was 2 years ago. And yet, the Hawks attendance was way up. The TV ratings were way up. And the merchandise sales were way up. I agree with you that the average sports viewer is probably a lazy idiot, but those people are the easiest to reach! #Riseup #Truetoatlanta - it's really as simple as that.

Worth reading: http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/12080830/reselling-hawks-atlanta

Both you and takethepoints are right, he said from the balance beam. The desire for cash, and lots of it, has diluted major league baseball, and threatens to again, as well as the NFL and NBA. All these expansion teams very suddenly need knowledgeable writers at the local papers and knowledgeable talking heads on the telecasts. Then ESPN starts signing contracts with every league in the western hemisphere, and now they all need at least three every Saturday: two in the booth, one expected to actually know the game and the teams, and the sideline reporter (His or her job apparently is to stick a camera in front of a coach losing at halftime and brightly ask, "What do you plan to do differently in the second half?" Here Johnson when he permits such intrusion clearly laps the field. "Play better." Oh.)

But now all the low hanging fruit is gone. Seriously. That field is diluted along with the player pool. I know the broadcast teams are supposed to spend some time during the week with the coaches and players of both team. Can't prove it by me. I get more, a lot more, insight into the spread option and drive or dive blocking on this board than any analyst other than Kirk Herbstreit ever imparted. Even he, whom I consider the very best, screwed up, in carefully chalk talked diagramming, the option man on an early play against FSU. And will we ever get past the blithe "chop block" references to cut blocks? Bob Davie, a coach, was the worst.

Lastly, and way too long, RLR -- still on a roll I see -- is on target with marketing the product and merchandise and exposure. I cannot imagine a more interesting, creative or innovative offense in the country than GT. It ain't a gimmick, it ain't high school, it is an explosive, in your face, mixture of 4-5 yard and 10 yard dives and sweeps, and exciting long runs in open space, with the occasional over the top 45-yard pass instead of the dink it along first down mindset. The triple option is the most sublime play in football. How does the ACC treat it? As the product of a cranky tinkerer of eccentric turn of the century (20th) gimmick offenses run by colleges and high schools. There are other examples other than Tech, I'm sure. Maybe the problem is the people marketing the sports don't now diddly about them, and think they are selling soap, which for most people is needed, and the ACC is not.

 

[OldJacketFan]

I cannot imagine a more interesting, creative or innovative offense in the country than GT. It ain't a gimmick, it ain't high school, it is an explosive, in your face, mixture of 4-5 yard and 10 yard dives and sweeps, and exciting long runs in open space, with the occasional over the top 45-yard pass instead of the dink it along first down mindset. The triple option is the most sublime play in football. How does the ACC treat it? As the product of a cranky tinkerer of eccentric turn of the century (20th) gimmick offenses run by colleges and high schools. There are other examples other than Tech, I'm sure. Maybe the problem is the people marketing the sports don't now diddly about them, and think they are selling soap, which for most people is needed, and the ACC is not.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Preach this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[GTpdm]

Sorry but that is too easy to me. The problem is that if the media talks up a conference the losses don't count as much. If the ACC starts off in a deep pit perception wise then every team has to have an almost perfect record to even gain a modicum of respectability. The climb out becomes too great.

By contrast the mighty SEC west got thoroughly embarrassed during bowl season but I bet the average starting position in the polls of any of those teams this year will be at least 15-20 places ahead of the average starting position of any ACC team. I am all for manning up but starting perception also becomes reality too often.

I heartily agree with this. @Skeptic said "The ACC will get respect when it deserves it..." I tend to agree with that, too. Part of the problem, however, is that the standard for "deserving respect" has not been consistently applied, conference-to-conference. With one or two exceptions, SEC teams padded out their regular-season non-conference schedule last year with cupcake opponents. Their OOC wins were against very poor teams, generally, and their track record against OOC P5 opposition was no better than the ACC (12-11 SEC vs 11-12 ACC—FYI, I'm counting ND and BYU as equivalent to P5, even though it works against the ACC). In head to head matchups, the ACC was 5-2 over the SEC.

That should earn some respect from the media, but it doesn't. (There was a little talk about that at the end of bowl season, but the media dropped that like a hot potato as soon as they possibly could, and it has all but disappeared from the 2015 preseason narrative.) The SEC's mediocrity against quality OOC competition should raise some questions, but it does not. Tell me—which conference's record last year deserves more respect, and which one is getting more respect right now?

I also tend to agree with Skeptic that part of the problem is due to poor marketing--but as Northeast points out, part of it is due to ingrained bias that gives SEC teams higher initial rankings, and that practically guarantees higher final rankings for the same overall season performance. If the standards for determining what is "respectable" are not applied consistently across all conferences, all the marketing in the world won't help. Maybe several years of "good marketing" will earn us the same standard of respectability, but personally I doubt it.

 

[RLR]

Skeptic, you've done it again. If ever I emerge from the ranks of broke, unemployed grad student to billionaire mogul, I'm hiring you as my Chief Thinking Officer.

Thanks all for occupying my time in the dead period between the OB and kickoff / Campbell signing with GT.

 

[JCTNJacket]

Not sure how we got from "Heather is a tool" to ideas on league re-alignment, but damn RLR- that league would be awesome to watch and compete in! Where do I sign up?

I agree ACC Marketing is minor league compared to others, and thinks small. Good dialog and thoughtful for a "trash ESPN reporter" thread....

 

[RLR]

Not sure how we got from "Heather is a tool" to ideas on league re-alignment

Growing up with sisters, I learned the best way to separate yourself from the opinion of a woman whom you disagree with is to just talk about something else non-stop and passionately. Never attack it head on. By the time you finish describing your perfect sandwich, dream football conference, optimal halo 2 strategy, etc. you've arrived at your end game.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

In head to head matchups, the ACC was 5-2 over the SEC.

That should earn some respect from the media, but it doesn't. (There was a little talk about that at the end of bowl season, but the media dropped that like a hot potato as soon as they possibly could, and it has all but disappeared from the 2015 preseason narrative.) The SEC's mediocrity against quality OOC competition should raise some questions, but it does not. Tell me—which conference's record last year deserves more respect, and which one is getting more respect right now?

Liked every thing you wrote but had to highlight this part especially. You have named the elephant in the room.

 

[Oldgoldandwhite]

Not only did we thrash the SEC, but the only team to slow The Buckeyes down, was a middle of the pack VT.

 

[Skeptic]

Liked every thing you wrote but had to highlight this part especially. You have named the elephant in the room.

I don't dispute for a second what the ACC accomplished in 2014, , including a particular Blowout Bowl that should have demonstrated to anyone watching that if the game was offense only, GT would be in the Select Four. Alas, that narrative was blown up when FSU was run out of the stadium by Oregon -- 39 points. Say that again. Slowly. In the playoff. 39 points. Then mighty Oregon was waxed by 22 by OSU. (Some playoff. The only excitement was in the race to the cars in leaving early to beat the traffic.) Regardless, the ACC needs to do this with some frequency, some regularity. It has to prove it is not a one-off occurrence, and its teams will not be stared down by a contest of whose team has the most PR agents, and start gaining competitive splits every year. And when it gets a team into the Fabulous Four, it won't get snowboarded away by six touchdowns.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Alas, that narrative was blown up when FSU was run out of the stadium by Oregon -- 39 points. Say that again. Slowly. In the playoff. 39 points.

Now you are really reaching. Teams get blown out for a lot of reasons. Without getting into why FSU and Winston finally had their breakdown, why don't we just look at this another way.

Ole Miss. The team that took down mighty Alabama. Beaten in their big bowl game. By 39 points Say that again slowly. 39 points.

Do you see my point? The SEC can lose blowout games right and left and the following year it is as if it never happened. The ACC loses one key playoff game and the whole conference is horse dung. Double standard?

 

[Animal02]

Now you are really reaching. Teams get blown out for a lot of reasons. Without getting into why FSU and Winston finally had their breakdown, why don't we just look at this another way.

Ole Miss. The team that took down mighty Alabama. Beaten in their big bowl game. By 39 points Say that again slowly. 39 points.

Do you see my point? The SEC can lose blowout games right and left and the following year it is as if it never happened. The ACC loses one key playoff game and the whole conference is horse dung. Double standard?

I agree...Arkansas was 7-6 and 2-6 in the SEC and I have seen them highly ranked in the preseason.

 

[GTpdm]

Now you are really reaching. Teams get blown out for a lot of reasons. Without getting into why FSU and Winston finally had their breakdown, why don't we just look at this another way.

Ole Miss. The team that took down mighty Alabama. Beaten in their big bowl game. By 39 points Say that again slowly. 39 points.

Do you see my point? The SEC can lose blowout games right and left and the following year it is as if it never happened. The ACC loses one key playoff game and the whole conference is horse dung. Double standard?

Not enough likes for this.

 

[Animal02]

Should geographic proximity be a factor? I'd argue that it only benefits 4 charter schools of the ACC who have a vested interest in upper carolina. But, if college sports are about money and money is determined by TV contracts and TV contracts are determined in large part by number of viewers - then why do we waste over 25% of our membership on capturing the 27th largest U.S. TV market? Its like landing on an unowned boardwalk, but choosing to purchase a hotel on Baltimore Avenue instead of buying higher valued property. In terms of travel, what's the marginal difference to GT for flying a chartered plane to Miami/Boston vs. LA?

GT plays 5 away games this year. Clemson is the only nearby game. Duke is a 6 hour drive. UVA is 8 hours. Miami 9.5 hours. Notre Dame 11. All 4 are ACC games, all 4 are probably too far for the non-insane fan to drive. The funniest part is that all of those away schools made my new conference list (Miami a choice in the final slot). Nonetheless, my point remains - if you can't drive to away games already, why not expand GT's brand into LA, SF, Chicago, Seattle - which are the largest TV markets, commerce centers, and repositories of tech talent.

The best part of my ideal league is that you finally get rid of this Ivy League SEC-effect in college rankings. Can someone please explain to me how Dartmouth is ranked 24 spots ahead of GT? Brown +15? Don't even get me started on Cornell.

With regard to distance, no it doesn't matter much in a 12 game season, it certainly does for all the non revenue sports that many people forget about. With regard to college rankings, it all depends on what the rankers deem important. # of Pulitzer prize winning alumni, student satisfaction with campus life, faculty respect from other institutions, etc etc. I have seen these and others listed as factors.....all of which will hurt Tech in the rankings.