Pat Hill to GT?

[daBuzz]

Miami did not finish ahead of Tech. in 2012. 5-3=5-3

5-3 with a head-to-head win over the other 5-3 team IS finishing ahead. If Miami hadn't turned down the ACCCG, they'd have gone. Arguing otherwise is a bit silly.

 

[daBuzz]

You put Duke and UNC in the same tier as GT even though we've beat them several years in a row, so your last paragraph doesn't explain your rationality.

I said

and the occasional Dukes, Carolinas,

.
We have owned Duke head-to-head but they DID finish in the top 25 last year and I would absolutely consider us a higher level program than them in most years. But if you ask any national sportswriter, commentator, or general non-ACC sports fan who had a better year last year or even who was a better team, I'm going to speculate that at least 80 or 90% of those people would say Duke.

Same goes with UNC. In 2012, we beat them but they got us in the tiebreaker scenario just like Miami. I think we're a better national program than them as well but I'm not sure people outside of the ACC perceive it that way.

With Virginia Tech and Miami, they regularly beat us AND regularly finished ranked higher nationally than we do. That's why I said they're on a different plane than us.

 

[augustabuzz]

5-3 with a head-to-head win over the other 5-3 team IS finishing ahead. If Miami hadn't turned down the ACCCG, they'd have gone. Arguing otherwise is a bit silly.

Actually, Miami lost the first tie breaker which was inserted at the ACC meeting October 2012. The rule was made to keep UNC from Charlotte that year, but eventually eliminated Miami. The first tie breaker is; "Are you eligible?"

 

[daBuzz]

Actually, Miami lost the first tie breaker which was inserted at the ACC meeting October 2012. The rule was made to keep UNC from Charlotte that year, but eventually eliminated Miami. The first tie breaker is; "Are you eligible?"

Miami was eligible. UNC was not.
Miami OPTED not to go to attempt to minimize their NCAA penalties from previous years' violations. But they were most certainly eligible to go.

 

[augustabuzz]

Miami was eligible. UNC was not.
Miami OPTED not to go to attempt to minimize their NCAA penalties from previous years' violations. But they were most certainly eligible to go.

Miami declared themselves ineligible as a preamble to NCAA sanctions which were later accepted by the NCAA as part of the sanctions imposed on Miami.

 

[daBuzz]

Miami declared themselves ineligible as a preamble to NCAA sanctions which were later accepted by the NCAA as part of the sanctions imposed on Miami.

Correct. But had they not CHOSEN to do so, guess which team would have represented the Coastal division in that ACCCG?
Here's a hint: it wouldn't have been the Yellow Jackets.

 

[AE 87]

Well, there are a few problems wrong with your rationale. First of all, Miami finished ahead of us in the Coastal in 2012 and opted not to play in the ACCCG to minimize penalties from the NCAA. But they DID finish ahead of us. We were 6-6 going into the championship game, which isn't exactly something to brag about.

Second, I thought I was very clear. I'm basing my opinion on Top 25 rankings. Miami has been ranked in the top 25 several times during the past 3 or 4 years; we haven't.

And the final rationale for why they would be ranked above us: well, they have beaten us 5 years in a row. That seems to be a pretty rational way of thinking they're on a different plane from us.

Over the last 6 years, Miami has finished in the top 25 once, 2009 at 19. GT has finished twice 2009, 13, and 2008, 22.

Now if you mean ranked during the season, I'm not sure that they are a great indicator of relative program strength. They often depend on expectations (based in part on recruiting grade) and schedule so that good recruiting classes plus slow opening schedule can get teams ranked early that are unranked later.

If you look at just the last 3 years, based on the average footballoutsiders' F/+ rating, GT is 36th over the last 3 years, Miami is 38th. Over the last 6 years, GT is 39th and Miami is 32nd. (2010 was a bad year for us). I think that it is much more rational to put Miami and GT in the same tier.

I think the idea of dividing the ACC into tiers is an interesting one. I'm going to start a new thread.

I said .
We have owned Duke head-to-head but they DID finish in the top 25 last year and I would absolutely consider us a higher level program than them in most years. But if you ask any national sportswriter, commentator, or general non-ACC sports fan who had a better year last year or even who was a better team, I'm going to speculate that at least 80 or 90% of those people would say Duke.

Same goes with UNC. In 2012, we beat them but they got us in the tiebreaker scenario just like Miami. I think we're a better national program than them as well but I'm not sure people outside of the ACC perceive it that way.

With Virginia Tech and Miami, they regularly beat us AND regularly finished ranked higher nationally than we do. That's why I said they're on a different plane than us.

Your last paragraph does clarify, by changing, your criteria for dividing tiers. Could you provide the end of year rankings for Miami on which this claim is based?

 

[augustabuzz]

Correct. But had they not CHOSEN to do so, guess which team would have represented the Coastal division in that ACCCG?
Here's a hint: it wouldn't have been the Yellow Jackets.

Do you really believe they had a choice? If they really had a choice, then they would've been in Charlotte.

 

[Jean-Baptiste Rochambeau]

I like how Miami is ahead of us in your mind, but we are an "occasional," along with Duke and UNC. That said, we have played in the ACC championship game 3 times, and they never have once. Aside from head to head, there is absolutely no rational argument that could possibly put Miami in a higher tier in the ACC than Georgia Tech. None. Since CPJ got here:

Georgia Tech
2008: 9-4 (5-3) - T1st Coastal
2009: 10-3 (7-1) - 1st Coastal
2010: 6-7 (4-4) - T3rd Coastal
2011: 8-5 (5-3) - T2nd Coastal
2012: 7-7 (5-3) - T1st Coastal
2013: 7-6 (5-3) - T2nd Coastal
Total: 47-32 (31-17)
ACC Championship Games: 2
ACC Championship Titles: 1

Miami
2008: 7-6 (4-4) - 3rd Coastal
2009: 9-4 (5-3) - 3rd Coastal
2010: 7-6 (5-3) - 2nd Coastal
2011: 6-6 (3-5) - 5th Coastal
2012: 7-5 (5-3) - T1st Coastal
2013: 9-4 (5-3) - T2nd Coastal
Total: 45-31 (27-21)
ACC Championship Games: 0
ACC Championship Titles: 0

If you want to put them on the same tier, fine. But there is no rational argument that Miami is in a tier ahead of us in the ACC, unless you are only looking at last season and trying to project forward.

Dude, I am seriously sorry I ever brought the subject up. If it will help I will so stipulate that we are first tier again.There! All is good. Let me point out, however, on the subject of Miami they were ranked in the top ten at one point last year. They absolutely did not deserve it, and they absolutely went on to prove they did not deserve it, but the public perception was "they are Miami, they are undefeated, or have only lost to FSU, they must be a good team". People used to say that about us. Not no more. The perception and immediate assumption for Georgia Tech football (until we prove otherwise) is we are not very good, we run an offense like Army, and we can't win against any good teams---including the University of Miami. Golden is 22-15 in 3 years, was 9-4 last year and started 7-0 last year.

 

[Squints]

Dude, I am seriously sorry I ever brought the subject up. If it will help I will so stipulate that we are first tier again.There! All is good. Let me point out, however, on the subject of Miami they were ranked in the top ten at one point last year. They absolutely did not deserve it, and they absolutely went on to prove they did not deserve it, but the public perception was "they are Miami, they are undefeated, or have only lost to FSU, they must be a good team". People used to say that about us. Not no more. The perception and immediate assumption for Georgia Tech football (until we prove otherwise) is we are not very good, we run an offense like Army, and we can't win against any good teams---including the University of Miami. Golden is 22-15 in 3 years, was 9-4 last year and started 7-0 last year.

Are you serious? The last time we started out undefeated (2011) we shot up the rankings and were at #12 before we lost to Virginia. If we win that game and go 7-0 like last year's Miami team you cite we're in the top 10. I think the problem here is you are projecting your own perceptions all over the place.

 

[Squints]

5-3 with a head-to-head win over the other 5-3 team IS finishing ahead. If Miami hadn't turned down the ACCCG, they'd have gone. Arguing otherwise is a bit silly.

I'm not a huge fan of this argument. I mean it's kind of a legit point but people cite it like Miami went 7-1 and we went 3-5. We had the same record. The official record for both teams would show a tie for first in the division. Going to Charlotte on a three way tie breaker is barely less then a technicality then how we got in in my eyes.

 

[Jean-Baptiste Rochambeau]

Are you serious? The last time we started out undefeated (2011) we shot up the rankings and were at #12 before we lost to Virginia. If we win that game and go 7-0 like last year's Miami team you cite we're in the top 10. I think the problem here is you are projecting your own perceptions all over the place.

I am serious. Last time I looked 12 is not in the top ten. There is a bias for Miami based upon their history. It isn't fair, but it is real.

 

[CuseJacket]

If the argument is about perception, Miami wins, and will almost always win. I don't see anyone really arguing this.

If the argument is about actual performance, Miami = UNC. We beat UNC regularly. Miami goes in the "big 4" category because of perception.

To segue back to Pat Hill, I don't think he'd be a good fit for GT. I lean toward thinking his lack of SE recruiting connections is a negative that more than offsets the positives that come with his name and mustache. West coast kids who care about academics will go to Stanford, Cal, USC, UCLA, B1G before GT. I think that's always been the case. And if they want to make the haul east, they have plenty of other academic options as well.

 

[TechPhi97]

Correct. But had they not CHOSEN to do so, guess which team would have represented the Coastal division in that ACCCG?
Here's a hint: it wouldn't have been the Yellow Jackets.

So our decision not to cheat means that we were the better team. At least that's how I'm going to look at it. Miami CHEATED to get that team, and UNC CHEATED to get that team.

 

[Squints]

I am serious. Last time I looked 12 is not in the top ten. There is a bias for Miami based upon their history. It isn't fair, but it is real.

Miami did not enter the top ten until they were 6-0. And they were ranked #10. So they barely made it. When we were 6-0 we were #12. If you're going to quibble over 2 spots I'm not even gonna bother arguing with you.

 

[Jean-Baptiste Rochambeau]

Miami did not enter the top ten until they were 6-0. And they were ranked #10. So they barely made it. When we were 6-0 we were #12. If you're going to quibble over 2 spots I'm not even gonna bother arguing with you.

There is no need to be dismissive. Miami was #7 going into the Florida State game. We haven't been #7 since 1990 or 1991

 

[AE 87]

There is no need to be dismissive. Miami was #7 going into the Florida State game. We haven't been #7 since 1990 or 1991

Well, we got to #9 in 2009. If you're going to quibble over 2 spots, I'm not sure @Squints is even going to bother arguing with you.

 

[Squints]

There is no need to be dismissive. Miami was #7 going into the Florida State game. We haven't been #7 since 1990 or 1991

Yes they were. But that was not until they were 7-0. If we beat Virginia in 2011 and are 7-0 we could easily have been ranked that high. That's the point I'm trying to make here.