Most successful ACC teams poll (last 10 years)

[tech_wreck47]

This should be a fun one, we seem to have people on completely different sides of the fence when it comes to GT being successful or not under CPJ. So pick one of these options and if you’d like let us know who you picked and why. I think people measure success differently, so this should be fun to see. If the team has not been in the ACC for 10 years just judge based on wherever they have been over the last 10 years. I’m also doing 10 years because I don’t think it’s fair to cherry pick good or bad years and judge someone by that, it should be a complete view of what they have done. I think this might bring some perspective that GT has been better than most schools not only in the ACC and really in the country over the past 10 years imo. I’m leaving VT, FSU, and Clemson off because I think most can agree those 3 teams have been more successful than GT over the last 10 years. I also left Syracuse off because there isn’t enough options.

 

[MWBATL]

Yeah, this is just an exercise in showing what your current feelings are. If you are down on CPJ and GT, then you'll pick one of the other programs....if you are still a supporter, you'll pick GT.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

If its defined by the last 10 years, then it has to be Georgia Tech: 1 ACC Championship, 3 Coastal Division Championships, and 2 Orange Bowl wins. Duke, North Carolina, and Miami are the only teams on this list that made the ACC Title game in the last 10 years, and they only made it once...and all of them lost. Miami is the only team on this list who has made it to an Orange Bowl in the last 10 years - they made it last year and lost just like they lost in the ACC title game.

 

[Vespidae]

Louisville has a WPCT of 62.5% vs. 60.9% for Miami. GT is at 58.5%.

 

[tech_wreck47]

Yeah, this is just an exercise in showing what your current feelings are. If you are down on CPJ and GT, then you'll pick one of the other programs....if you are still a supporter, you'll pick GT.

Don’t agree with this, i support CPJ but it another team let’s say had a better record with the orange bowl wins and acccg appearances is say they were better.

 

[tech_wreck47]

Louisville has a WPCT of 62.5% vs. 60.9% for Miami. GT is at 58.5%.

Serious question, do you measure success by overall record over what @bwelbo commented above your post?

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Serious question, do you measure success by overall record over what @bwelbo commented above your post?

I would say a little bit of both. But as a fan of Georgia Tech, I would point out our win percentage is actually better than those teams if you exclude 2015 when even the water boys were injured. So if our win percentages are comparable and we have all that extra hardware, its a no brainer. In other words, I'd rather have our 11-2 year in 2014 and our 11-3 year in 2009 along with the 7-5s and 6-6s in between, then a decade of ho hum that Louisville and Miami had. Miami never had a 3-9 season, but they never were better than 5-3 in the ACC the entire decade until just last year, and even then lost 4 games in a row. They made mid-level bowl games, but lost 6 bowl games in a row at one point, so they didn't even have success there either.

 

[tech_wreck47]

I would say a little bit of both. But as a fan of Georgia Tech, I would point out our win percentage is actually better than those teams if you exclude 2015 when even the water boys were injured. So if our win percentages are comparable and we have all that extra hardware, its a no brainer. In other words, I'd rather have our 11-2 year in 2014 and our 11-3 year in 2009 along with the 7-5s and 6-6s in between, then a decade of ho hum that Louisville and Miami had.

Agree, 100%

 

[augustabuzz]

Louisville has a WPCT of 62.5% vs. 60.9% for Miami. GT is at 58.5%.

I haven't checked, but year after year we seem to play a tougher schedule.

 

[Vespidae]

Here's the full list:

Louisville 62.5%
Miami 60.9%
GT 58.5%
UNC 57.4%
Pitt 56.6%
NC State 53.9%
BC 47.7%
Duke 46.8%
WF 41.9%
Virginia 35.2%

 

[tech_wreck47]

Here's the full list:

Louisville 62.5%
Miami 60.9%
GT 58.5%
UNC 57.4%
Pitt 56.6%
NC State 53.9%
BC 47.7%
Duke 46.8%
WF 41.9%
Virginia 35.2%

Once again, how do you rate success? Overall record? Or does the things bwelbo list mean more to you?
Let me put it this way, would you rather be Louisville or GT over the past 10 years?

 

[Boaty1]

I chose GT as the best program of these listed over the past decade. If you had said who was the best over the past 4 years however we fall way down this list.

 

[Jophish17]

The answer is clearly GT BUT past success is not a reason to keep a coach if the future looks bleak... if that's what this is meant to get at.

 

[Vespidae]

You could make a case that Louisville, Duke, Pitt and UNC are all doing well ... as their WPCT is higher over the last ten years than the average since 1970. This suggests the team is either a) doing better in general or b) playing an easier schedule. Either way ... it's working in their favor.

 

[Vespidae]

Serious question, do you measure success by overall record over what @bwelbo commented above your post?

It is the record over the last ten years, yes.

 

[melloace]

I wonder how much of our current struggles are from falling behind the arms race 6-7 years ago with recruiting and football staff, facilities, and marketing. They say most good investments in a company take a couple years to really see the results of. We just started to invest in our facilities, apparel, and recruiting staff. It'll probably be 2 years at least before we really see any results from those. We're going to need a big picture focus on where we want to be in 5 years.

 

[Vespidae]

Once again, how do you rate success? Overall record? Or does the things bwelbo list mean more to you?
Let me put it this way, would you rather be Louisville or GT over the past 10 years?

It's basically a swing of 4 games. Not enough to matter. I personally think Louisville has no class, so I'm with Tech.

But ... our most recent ten year win rate is the same as it was 40 years ago at around 53%. We haven't really improved. Other teams have shown decade over decade improvement ... and that's what is killing us. There is no long term plan.

 

[tech_wreck47]

It's basically a swing of 4 games. Not enough to matter. I personally think Louisville has no class, so I'm with Tech.

But ... our most recent ten year win rate is the same as it was 40 years ago at around 53%. We haven't really improved. Other teams have shown decade over decade improvement ... and that's what is killing us. There is no long term plan.

Personally if the overall record is close I’d take the team who has more hardware and has won more “big” games JMO.

 

[tech_wreck47]

I wonder how much of our current struggles are from falling behind the arms race 6-7 years ago with recruiting and football staff, facilities, and marketing. They say most good investments in a company take a couple years to really see the results of. We just started to invest in our facilities, apparel, and recruiting staff. It'll probably be 2 years at least before we really see any results from those. We're going to need a big picture focus on where we want to be in 5 years.

That’s how I see it, a very good coach just doesn’t forget what he’s doing. The only thing I can see is the fact that GT has fallen WAY behind in resources, to me that’s the only common theme to why a good coach could all of a sudden “lose it”

 

[takethepoints]

But ... our most recent ten year win rate is the same as it was 40 years ago at around 53%. We haven't really improved. Other teams have shown decade over decade improvement ... and that's what is killing us. There is no long term plan.

Oh, I wouldn't say that. It isn't that we don't have plans. It's that we don't have the money to put them into fruition. And the reason for a lot of that is down to two words: Paul Hewitt. (Well, and Gregory.) What we haven't had for the football program recently (last 10 years) is the money to follow through on both the physical and personnel sides of the equation. We've done some to build up the physical side of the program (the new indoor facility, the new locker room), but we haven't been able to do it all at once. Building piecemeal doesn't have the same impact. The personnel side is where we have really fallen down, especially when it comes to recruiting. We have just started to remedy that and much more needs to be done. An airplane - I'm not kidding - would be a good next step.

But, as was mentioned in another thread, our biggest planning failure has been with our scheduling. We need to schedule to pump up the number of wins. Period. Full Stop. Until we start doing that, we'll continue to have problems.