January 4th, 2011 at 9:58 AM ^
People whose conferences live in glass houses (aka got their collective ass handed to them on NYD) shouldn't throw stones.
January 4th, 2011 at 9:59 AM ^
I'm saying this on behalf of the Big East, who has been a target on this board countless times.
January 4th, 2011 at 9:58 AM ^
let's not go by Bowl performances...glass houses and what not...
January 4th, 2011 at 9:58 AM ^
And the Big Ten is...
January 4th, 2011 at 10:37 AM ^
Awesome? Adding Nebraska as its 12th member? Now the B1G according to its new logo? Headquartered in Chicago (is this true)?
/teasing
January 4th, 2011 at 9:58 AM ^
Shh.... besides VT, the ACC has Florida State and "the U". While these two programs have been down the last 5-10 years, they are traditional powers and will be back up. Also, after the Big Ten's New Years Day performance, I dont know how much we Big Ten fans/alums should be commenting on other AQ conferences. The BCS works well enough and gets things right a large majority of the time.
January 4th, 2011 at 10:11 AM ^
Try explaining that to TCU right now or Boise State last year. The BCS is a mess.
January 4th, 2011 at 9:59 AM ^
If you're basing it on bowl record, then I guess we in the big ten need to look in the mirror.
January 4th, 2011 at 9:59 AM ^
Negged for obvious bias causing you to include in the Big East record teams that aren't actually in the Big East.
January 4th, 2011 at 10:07 AM ^
Since Miami, BC, and VT split:
Regular season record, final ranking, and BCS bowl result:
2005 - West Virginia 10-1, finished #5, won Sugar Bowl
2006 - Lousville 11-1, finished #5, won Orange Bowl
2007 - West Virginia 10-2, finished #5, won Fiesta Bowl
2008 - Cincinnati 11-2, finished #17, lost Orange Bowl
2009 - Cincinnati 12-0, finished #8, lost Sugar Bowl
2010 - Connecticut 8-5, lost Fiesta Bowl
So in the last ix years since the split, the Big East is 3-3 and has more wins in BCS games than the ACC does in over twice as many games.
I want my point back.
January 4th, 2011 at 10:15 AM ^
I'm keeping the point. Both the ACC's wins are against the Big East, and the ACC poached one of the teams they beat. Actual Big East teams are 3-5 in the BCS, 1-5 minus Rich Rodriguez.
January 4th, 2011 at 10:28 AM ^
To summarize:
The ACC minus VT/Miami is 1-9
The Big East minus VT/Miami is 3-5
Miami/VT is 4-4
Notre Dame: 0-3
Big 12: 8-10
Big Ten: 10-12
Pac-10: 10-5
Mid-Majors: 5-2 (although one win and one loss were against each other)
SEC: 14-5
January 4th, 2011 at 10:29 AM ^
Oyyy. The ACC as it's configured today is 5-13.
January 4th, 2011 at 10:34 AM ^
So you need to add games from when teams were members of the Big East to get you to five wins? Well, in that case, I'm adding TCU's win over Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl.
Big East minus VT/Miami is now 4-5.
January 4th, 2011 at 10:39 AM ^
Go for it. I think we all know that unless something drastic changes at either TCU or one of the current Big East schools, TCU is going to run roughshod over that conference for years. Might as well let them carry the flag too.
Just, one of these days try and stop ignoring the parts that aren't so good for the Big East, OK? TCU has a loss, too.
January 4th, 2011 at 10:44 AM ^
I heard the same thing five years ago about Louisville when they joined.
I heard the same thing about Miami dominating with FSU when they joined the ACC.
January 4th, 2011 at 10:54 AM ^
Both of which saw the kind of drastic change I'm talking about. Coaching change. Miami did it to themselves and Louisville had the nomadic Bobby Petrino in charge. TCU isn't going to fire Patterson. Maybe he leaves, but I doubt that.
January 4th, 2011 at 10:41 AM ^
Seems fair. VT and Miami did not change a thing about their programs when they changed conferences; they exist outside of whatever conference they are in. Their record should follow them to their conference. Even so, not sure what is trying to be proved here - I doubt you're going to find many other Big East fans on this blog. Best head to your favorite Syracuse blog. Besides, 3 of those 4 wins came with coaches who bolted the Big East for greener pastures as soon as they could (RR and Petrino).
January 4th, 2011 at 10:46 AM ^
Most all bolt the Big East. There's more money elsewhere. That's no secret. Charlie Strong is likely the next one. This is why it was important to SU to hire Doug Marrone as an alum who isn't going to pull a Rich Rod/WVU.
But what does that have to do with the wins counting for less?
January 4th, 2011 at 10:22 AM ^
2005 - West Virginia 10-1, finished #5, won Sugar Bowl
2007 - West Virginia 10-2, finished #5, won Fiesta Bowl
(sigh)
January 4th, 2011 at 10:00 AM ^
I'm sure they'd rather cite their overall bowl record (based, as it is, on lots of fleabag bowls where they're playing inferior schools from no-name conferences).
Funny, isn't it, that they're never cited as the conference that "needs to prove itself." No -- that burden almost always seems to fall on the Big Ten. Not entirely unfair, but you could make a case for other conferences (like the Big 12, when their record this year is considered).
January 4th, 2011 at 10:31 AM ^
Bowl records for the last five seasons:
Big East (17-9): 2009: 4-2, 2008: 4-2, 2007: 3-2, 2006: 5-0, 2005: 1-3
Big Ten (13-23): 2009: 4-3, 2008: 1-6, 2007: 3-5, 2006: 2-5, 2006: 3-4
ACC (20-22): 2009: 4-6, 2008: 2-6, 2007: 4-4, 2006: 5-3, 2007: 3-3
January 4th, 2011 at 10:43 AM ^
But the Big East is terrible!
January 4th, 2011 at 10:14 AM ^
But the Big Ten didn't exactly tear it up this bowl season. One of our supposedly strongest teams got annihilated by Alabama.
January 4th, 2011 at 10:15 AM ^
The Big East has really suprised me this year. I fully expected them to lose every single one of their games but they seem a bit stronger than advertised. The ACC will be back and if you use that argument, then the Big Ten might have to lose their AQ status too! 2-5 in bowls this year correct?
January 4th, 2011 at 10:15 AM ^
Based on early returns, one could say the same about the Big 10.
January 4th, 2011 at 10:34 AM ^
Not just bowl games.
When all games are considered, the Big East is by the weakest of the AQ conferences. If they hadn’t added TCU, they were the conference most in danger of losing AQ status.
January 4th, 2011 at 10:37 AM ^
The Big East is/was never in danger of losing its AQ status, same as the ACC or anyone else. The Big East has a lot more power in this shuffle than most realize.
First you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women.
January 4th, 2011 at 10:50 AM ^
This is really why the whole thing is moot, honestly. Fans and most writers don't see things the way the power brokers do. It looks to most people like a clear hierarchy of top-to-bottom conferences. The commissioners see the BCS as a club of six equals and don't want to push anyone out for fear of starting a trend. Kicking out the Big East and replacing them with the MWC would set a precedent that any one of them is vulnerable.
January 4th, 2011 at 10:55 AM ^
Obviously I don't think the ACC should really lose its AQ status. It's more that the Big East gets constantly shit on while the ACC gets a free pass, and the Big Ten has an almost annual poor showing in bowl games.
Leave Britney, I mean the Big East, alone!
January 4th, 2011 at 11:16 AM ^
Eh, I'm equally disinterested in the ACC and Big East football. Take your basketball dominance and just be happy with that, please.
January 4th, 2011 at 11:18 AM ^
Edit: Double Post
January 4th, 2011 at 10:49 AM ^
The ACC as a whole is much better than the BE and their champ, VT, just played one of the top three teams in the country this year. The way Stanford played last nite they would have beat damn near everyone, and that includes Auburn.
January 4th, 2011 at 10:52 AM ^
...so it will never happen.
January 4th, 2011 at 11:05 AM ^
because not ridiculous, groundless, speculative opinion-based "CC" talk.