How strong is the ACC relative to other conferences this year?

[Heisman's Ghost]

That has been my position from the start of the year. I bet that this would be the first time in college football history that each team within a division won the division in consecutive years! The costal is by far the most competitive division in college football!!!

" The coastal is by far the WORST...division in college football!!!" There FIFY. Professional courtesy, no charge.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

" The coastal is by far the WORST...division in college football!!!" There FIFY. Professional courtesy, no charge.

Mmmmmmmm, I disagree. We will probably have 6 of the 7 teams qualify for bowls. The Coastal isn’t great, but it’s full of very similar average to decent teams. You could say it’s one of the weakest divisions in P5, but that’s only because it doesn’t have any ranked teams. We’ve been the only actually bad team, but we’re in a big transition and getting better.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Mmmmmmmm, I disagree. We will probably have 6 of the 7 teams qualify for bowls. The Coastal isn’t great, but it’s full of very similar average to decent teams. You could say it’s one of the weakest divisions in P5, but that’s only because it doesn’t have any ranked teams. We’ve been the only actually bad team, but we’re in a big transition and getting better.

By illustration, both SEC divisions have 3 teams with losing records overall. We’re the only team in the Coastal with a losing record.

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

By illustration, both SEC divisions have 3 teams with losing records overall. We’re the only team in the Coastal with a losing record.

Both SEC divisions have multiple teams better than the best team, whichever one it is, in the coastal. Still the worst.

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

Mmmmmmmm, I disagree. We will probably have 6 of the 7 teams qualify for bowls. The Coastal isn’t great, but it’s full of very similar average to decent teams. You could say it’s one of the weakest divisions in P5, but that’s only because it doesn’t have any ranked teams. We’ve been the only actually bad team, but we’re in a big transition and getting better.

Qualifying for a bowl means very little these days. The coastal is pitiful.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Both SEC divisions have multiple teams better than the best team, whichever one it is, in the coastal. Still the worst.

That is a nonsensical post. Clemson is better than every team in the SEC except a couple. Who cares. Undefeated Alabama and LSU could beat Virginia. Who cares. Pick the bottom 3 teams in each SEC division. Could North Carolina for example beat them? Virginia? I think they would be picked to win. I never said the Coastal was great. Bowl games aren’t that consequential, you’re right. But if you’re a 7-5 or a 6-6 team, I have a hard time accepting that the team is “pitiful”. Doesn’t make any sense. And we’ll likely have every team but us finish with at least that record.

 

[bobongo]

Qualifying for a bowl means very little these days. The coastal is pitiful.

No, it is not pitiful. Don't exaggerate. It's below average. Pitt lost to Penn State by 7. North Carolina lost to Clemson by 1, and beat the beat the team that beat Ugag. Virginia was beating Notre Dame at halftime and lost by a respectable 15. Below average, but far from pitiful.

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

No, it is not pitiful. Don't exaggerate. It's below average. Pitt lost to Penn State by 7. North Carolina lost to Clemson by 1, and beat the beat the team that beat Ugag. Virginia was beating Notre Dame at halftime and lost by a respectable 15. Below average, but far from pitiful.

Perhaps a bit of hyperbole on my part. But consider this: In the CBS power rankings for this week of the 130 teams there was not one Coastal Division team among the top 25. Represented among the top 25 were 3 from the SEC West, 2 from the SEC East, 5 from the Big 10 and even 2 from the American and 2 from the ACC Atlantic. No Coastal team was in the top 25. The highest ranked Coastal team was UVA at #29. Of the 7 Coastal teams only 3 were in the top 50. UVA, Pitt at #32 and Virginia Tech at #49. UNC, Duke, Miami and Tech were all scattered from #51 to #112. It would appear that mediocre, below average, crummy, and whatever other adjectives for less than satisfactory one can dream up will fit this collection of underachieving football programs at the present. Historically, the really bad conferences ranged from the Big 8 of the 1950s and early 1960s derided by the media of that day as "Oklahoma and the 7 drwaves" to what was then the PAC 8 which usually had only USC as a decent team to the ACC which did not have any good teams except Clemson on occasion and North Carolina every once in a while. The Coastal is NOT that bad but when Wake is ranked ahead of everyone...well that's pretty bad.

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

That is a nonsensical post. Clemson is better than every team in the SEC except a couple. Who cares. Undefeated Alabama and LSU could beat Virginia. Who cares. Pick the bottom 3 teams in each SEC division. Could North Carolina for example beat them? Virginia? I think they would be picked to win. I never said the Coastal was great. Bowl games aren’t that consequential, you’re right. But if you’re a 7-5 or a 6-6 team, I have a hard time accepting that the team is “pitiful”. Doesn’t make any sense. And we’ll likely have every team but us finish with at least that record.

Maybe not the Mississippi schools but South Carolina and Tennessee could beat any of the Coastal teams on a given day...could also lose to any of them as well. In this day of way too many bowl games 7-5 does not count in my book as having a good team. Miami has talent, UNC has talent, UVA has a good quarterback and some nice pieces as does Pitt but none of them strike me as being what I would call a "good team" they just don't. We can therefore, agree to disagree.

 

[MWBATL]

Maybe not the Mississippi schools but South Carolina and Tennessee could beat any of the Coastal teams on a given day...could also lose to any of them as well. In this day of way too many bowl games 7-5 does not count in my book as having a good team. Miami has talent, UNC has talent, UVA has a good quarterback and some nice pieces as does Pitt but none of them strike me as being what I would call a "good team" they just don't. We can therefore, agree to disagree.

Yup. you seem super-impressed by the SEC legend and "name" teams.

The only reasonable way to rate entire divisions or conferences is by total or average team strength, not by cherry picking the best or the worst teams. When you do that you find out that the conferences, while there are better and worse groups, are not THAT far apart in overall strength. For example, were you aware that the SEC Non-Conference record is 31-11 while the ACC's is 31-13?

 

[JacketOff]

Perhaps a bit of hyperbole on my part. But consider this: In the CBS power rankings for this week of the 130 teams there was not one Coastal Division team among the top 25. Represented among the top 25 were 3 from the SEC West, 2 from the SEC East, 5 from the Big 10 and even 2 from the American and 2 from the ACC Atlantic. No Coastal team was in the top 25. The highest ranked Coastal team was UVA at #29. Of the 7 Coastal teams only 3 were in the top 50. UVA, Pitt at #32 and Virginia Tech at #49. UNC, Duke, Miami and Tech were all scattered from #51 to #112. It would appear that mediocre, below average, crummy, and whatever other adjectives for less than satisfactory one can dream up will fit this collection of underachieving football programs at the present. Historically, the really bad conferences ranged from the Big 8 of the 1950s and early 1960s derided by the media of that day as "Oklahoma and the 7 drwaves" to what was then the PAC 8 which usually had only USC as a decent team to the ACC which did not have any good teams except Clemson on occasion and North Carolina every once in a while. The Coastal is NOT that bad but when Wake is ranked ahead of everyone...well that's pretty bad.

A division or conference being top heavy does not mean it’s superior to any other conference. That argument is why everyone believes the SEC is head and shoulders above every other conference, solely because there’s been 1 or 2 teams in championship contention every year. Arkansas, Vanderbilt, the Miss schools, Kentucky, Mizzou, USC, and Tennessee are not better than the majority of teams in any other conference, including the ACC in general or ACC Coastal. Alabama, LSU, Georgia, and Florida would compete or beat the top 4 teams in any conference, Texas A&M and Auburn are in the middle ground.

 

[RonJohn]

I said this in a different thread, but the "measure" of a good conference changes year to year. According to pundits during years in which the SEC has several good teams, the top of the conference is the measuring stick for the top conference. According to pundits during years in which the SEC has one good team and several second tier teams, the depth of the conference is the measuring stick for the top conference. If the ACC has a losing record in bowl games, it is proof that the ACC is weak. If the SEC has a losing record(and the SEC West only has one winning team), then bowl games don't really matter and it is the "eye test" through the season that needs to be looked at. Overall even the pundits on TV do little more than talk smack. I can't remember even one person on TV who makes statements about conference strength and then sticks to that statement year after year.

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

A division or conference being top heavy does not mean it’s superior to any other conference. That argument is why everyone believes the SEC is head and shoulders above every other conference, solely because there’s been 1 or 2 teams in championship contention every year. Arkansas, Vanderbilt, the Miss schools, Kentucky, Mizzou, USC, and Tennessee are not better than the majority of teams in any other conference, including the ACC in general or ACC Coastal. Alabama, LSU, Georgia, and Florida would compete or beat the top 4 teams in any conference, Texas A&M and Auburn are in the middle ground.

True enough but Texas A&M and Auburn are top 25 quality teams, while there is no one in the Coastal that meets that standard. Granted that Vanderbilt, Arkansas, the two Mississippi schools and Kentucky are pretty ordinary even by Coastal standards. In recent years, Tech has beaten all of those except Ole Miss and Arkansas. Auburn and Texas A&M are not what I would call the "middle ground". The middle ground of the 130 or so upper echelon teams would be about say 65th or so in the power rankings which is about where you will find Duke, UNC, Miami, etc.

Yup. you seem super-impressed by the SEC legend and "name" teams.

The only reasonable way to rate entire divisions or conferences is by total or average team strength, not by cherry picking the best or the worst teams. When you do that you find out that the conferences, while there are better and worse groups, are not THAT far apart in overall strength. For example, were you aware that the SEC Non-Conference record is 31-11 while the ACC's is 31-13?

I am "super impressed" by them because Tech used to play them all the time. I had good reasons then and good reasons now to respect them but not fear them. The fact remains that the ACC has one team in the top tier while the SEC has arguably about 6 or so. Its a rough neighborhood that rewards cheating and paying players. I trust Tech never goes down that path.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Well both divisions in the SEC have 3x more teams with a losing record than the Coastal. I guess it just means more.

 

[Jacket05]

" The coastal is by far the WORST...division in college football!!!" There FIFY. Professional courtesy, no charge.

TBF I said "most competitive" not best. I agree with @bobongo that the Coastal is below average overall. We don't have any world beaters OR any pushovers. We are just a group of teams that would all be middle of the pack in any other division. You can argue that Tech has been a bottom of the barrel team but I think we are finally starting to figure things out and will be more competitive through the rest of the year.

 

[bobongo]

TBF I said "most competitive" not best. I agree with @bobongo that the Coastal is below average overall. We don't have any world beaters OR any pushovers. We are just a group of teams that would all be middle of the pack in any other division. You can argue that Tech has been a bottom of the barrel team but I think we are finally starting to figure things out and will be more competitive through the rest of the year.

"Worst to First" is always a compelling story. Before last week I saw our chances of willing the division at 0.1%. It would be quite a coup if we pull it off. Long, long way to go but it's something to dream about. I know winning the Coastal seems small potatoes, but I wonder if anybody has ever won a P-5 division after starting 0-3.

 

[MWBATL]

Long, long way to go but it's something to dream about.

For a few more days, in any event.

 

[Jacket Bracket]

Maybe not the Mississippi schools but South Carolina and Tennessee could beat any of the Coastal teams on a given day...could also lose to any of them as well. In this day of way too many bowl games 7-5 does not count in my book as having a good team. Miami has talent, UNC has talent, UVA has a good quarterback and some nice pieces as does Pitt but none of them strike me as being what I would call a "good team" they just don't. We can therefore, agree to disagree.

Well South Carolina can also beat the SEC best. Ask Georgia. North Carolina beat them…so any given day…doesn’t say much about conference strength to me. ‍

 

[RyanS12]

It’s so strong that the best team in the division is 1-3/2-5 overall!

 

[Sarrick]

I think we are probably the 4th best conference this year, behind the big12, big10, and the SEC.

While we only have 1 top team, we have a ton of middle of the pack teams. I feel like if we put the bottom of the barrel of each conference to play each other, our conference would win. But that isn’t saying much when we don’t have much of a top end