(07-16-2019 03:34 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 01:44 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 10:24 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  BYU pride. When the music stops they may be left standing. Their brand still holds value and they could be a piece of the puzzle that makes the AAC into a legit P6 conference.

The only schools that could turn a G5 conference into a P6 conference are schools that are not only already in a P5 conference, but perennial winners at that level. BYU won't do it, Boise State won't do it and who else is there? And somehow, I doubt Oklahoma and/or Texas are going to ask for an invite from the AAC or MWC anytime soon.

The only way schools now in G5 conferences are going to get into a P conference is via expansion of the P5. That's highly unlikely in today's climate.

If the AAC got their own NY6 bowl then that would legitimize their power conference status. It would also help if they created some separation between them and the MWC so they can shed that G5 label. On the field performance they really are not too far behind the ACC IMO.

They’re not too far behind, just a few national championships or so in the two major sports. No biggie.

(07-16-2019 05:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 03:34 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 01:44 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 10:24 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  BYU pride. When the music stops they may be left standing. Their brand still holds value and they could be a piece of the puzzle that makes the AAC into a legit P6 conference.

The only schools that could turn a G5 conference into a P6 conference are schools that are not only already in a P5 conference, but perennial winners at that level. BYU won't do it, Boise State won't do it and who else is there? And somehow, I doubt Oklahoma and/or Texas are going to ask for an invite from the AAC or MWC anytime soon.

The only way schools now in G5 conferences are going to get into a P conference is via expansion of the P5. That's highly unlikely in today's climate.

If the AAC got their own NY6 bowl then that would legitimize their power conference status. It would also help if they created some separation between them and the MWC so they can shed that G5 label. On the field performance they really are not too far behind the ACC IMO.

They’re not too far behind, just a few national championships or so in the two major sports. No biggie.

I don’t hear “Power 5” slinged around too much in basketball. And no way the playoff committee will allow a G5 school into the playoffs to prove that they can win. ECU keeps beating Carolina in football, so they are not behind Carolina at all. Since football is the only thing that determines a power 5 conference, the only difference between the ACC and the AAC is Clemson.

(07-16-2019 06:40 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 05:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 03:34 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 01:44 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 10:24 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  BYU pride. When the music stops they may be left standing. Their brand still holds value and they could be a piece of the puzzle that makes the AAC into a legit P6 conference.

The only schools that could turn a G5 conference into a P6 conference are schools that are not only already in a P5 conference, but perennial winners at that level. BYU won't do it, Boise State won't do it and who else is there? And somehow, I doubt Oklahoma and/or Texas are going to ask for an invite from the AAC or MWC anytime soon.

The only way schools now in G5 conferences are going to get into a P conference is via expansion of the P5. That's highly unlikely in today's climate.

If the AAC got their own NY6 bowl then that would legitimize their power conference status. It would also help if they created some separation between them and the MWC so they can shed that G5 label. On the field performance they really are not too far behind the ACC IMO.

They’re not too far behind, just a few national championships or so in the two major sports. No biggie.

I don’t hear “Power 5” slinged around too much in basketball. And no way the playoff committee will allow a G5 school into the playoffs to prove that they can win. ECU keeps beating Carolina in football, so they are not behind Carolina at all. Since football is the only thing that determines a power 5 conference, the only difference between the ACC and the AAC is Clemson.

Clemson and Florida State pretty much.

(07-17-2019 10:57 AM)zoocrew Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 06:40 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 05:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 03:34 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 01:44 PM)ken d Wrote:  The only schools that could turn a G5 conference into a P6 conference are schools that are not only already in a P5 conference, but perennial winners at that level. BYU won't do it, Boise State won't do it and who else is there? And somehow, I doubt Oklahoma and/or Texas are going to ask for an invite from the AAC or MWC anytime soon.

The only way schools now in G5 conferences are going to get into a P conference is via expansion of the P5. That's highly unlikely in today's climate.

If the AAC got their own NY6 bowl then that would legitimize their power conference status. It would also help if they created some separation between them and the MWC so they can shed that G5 label. On the field performance they really are not too far behind the ACC IMO.

They’re not too far behind, just a few national championships or so in the two major sports. No biggie.

I don’t hear “Power 5” slinged around too much in basketball. And no way the playoff committee will allow a G5 school into the playoffs to prove that they can win. ECU keeps beating Carolina in football, so they are not behind Carolina at all. Since football is the only thing that determines a power 5 conference, the only difference between the ACC and the AAC is Clemson.

Clemson and Florida State pretty much.

The bottom of the AAC is weaker than the ACC.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(07-16-2019 03:34 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 01:44 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 10:24 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  BYU pride. When the music stops they may be left standing. Their brand still holds value and they could be a piece of the puzzle that makes the AAC into a legit P6 conference.

The only schools that could turn a G5 conference into a P6 conference are schools that are not only already in a P5 conference, but perennial winners at that level. BYU won't do it, Boise State won't do it and who else is there? And somehow, I doubt Oklahoma and/or Texas are going to ask for an invite from the AAC or MWC anytime soon.

The only way schools now in G5 conferences are going to get into a P conference is via expansion of the P5. That's highly unlikely in today's climate.

If the AAC got their own NY6 bowl then that would legitimize their power conference status. It would also help if they created some separation between them and the MWC so they can shed that G5 label. On the field performance they really are not too far behind the ACC IMO.

I think you missed my point. Which is, the AAC isn't going to get their own access bowl, and the remnants of a Big 12 minus Oklahoma and Texas aren't going to keep one beyond the current contract - just like the Big East wasn't going to keep AQ status in the BCS once it had been stripped of its crown jewels. Essentially merging two conferences, neither of which is P5, isn't going to make a new P conference. It will just make another G conference.

It doesn't make any difference whatsoever how much better they are than the MWC.

(07-16-2019 06:40 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Since football is the only thing that determines a power 5 conference, the only difference between the ACC and the AAC is Clemson.

.........

So the ACC is like every other p5 conference. Most are led by 1 or 2 schools. FSU, MIA, and VTech won't be down long and the rest of the ACC has WAY MORE potential the the AAC.....and it's not even close. Garrett put down the booze.

I think my point is still valid. The term “Power 5” was coined after the BCS era, if we go strictly by that then Clemson is the only real difference. Houston actually beat FSU and UL in the 2015 season and has a recent win over OU. UCF has 2 NY6 bowl wins in that span vs FSU’s 1 (2016 season Orange). ECU even during their down years is beating UNC. The bottom of the AAC is definitely weaker than the bottom of the ACC, if you look at the top half of the AAC you will see some teams that are pretty good even though they may not have the name cache or recruiting rankings of the ACC teams. It’s like when SEC snobs look down their noses at the ACC, but we know we play good football also.

(07-17-2019 06:37 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  I think my point is still valid. The term “Power 5” was coined after the BCS era, if we go strictly by that then Clemson is the only real difference. Houston actually beat FSU and UL in the 2015 season and has a recent win over OU. UCF has 2 NY6 bowl wins in that span vs FSU’s 1 (2016 season Orange). ECU even during their down years is beating UNC. The bottom of the AAC is definitely weaker than the bottom of the ACC, if you look at the top half of the AAC you will see some teams that are pretty good even though they may not have the name cache or recruiting rankings of the ACC teams. It’s like when SEC snobs look down their noses at the ACC, but we know we play good football also.

No, they don't.

And, I disagree your point is valid.

Ok, so I was off by 1 year. UCF defeated Baylor in the Fiesta bowl (2013 season). They only match FSU’s 1 win in a NY6 bowl.
.
..
...
.....
Still valid

(07-17-2019 07:37 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Ok, so I was off by 1 year. UCF defeated Baylor in the Fiesta bowl (2013 season). They only match FSU’s 1 win in a NY6 bowl.
.
..
...
.....
Still valid

Actually The Big East, The American’s predecessor, had more BCS wins than The ACC during the BCS era. That mattered not to the powers that be. When the BCS ended, The Big East’ access ended.
Head to head matters little, except on message boards.

(07-16-2019 06:40 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 05:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 03:34 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 01:44 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 10:24 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  BYU pride. When the music stops they may be left standing. Their brand still holds value and they could be a piece of the puzzle that makes the AAC into a legit P6 conference.

The only schools that could turn a G5 conference into a P6 conference are schools that are not only already in a P5 conference, but perennial winners at that level. BYU won't do it, Boise State won't do it and who else is there? And somehow, I doubt Oklahoma and/or Texas are going to ask for an invite from the AAC or MWC anytime soon.

The only way schools now in G5 conferences are going to get into a P conference is via expansion of the P5. That's highly unlikely in today's climate.

If the AAC got their own NY6 bowl then that would legitimize their power conference status. It would also help if they created some separation between them and the MWC so they can shed that G5 label. On the field performance they really are not too far behind the ACC IMO.

They’re not too far behind, just a few national championships or so in the two major sports. No biggie.

I don’t hear “Power 5” slinged around too much in basketball. And no way the playoff committee will allow a G5 school into the playoffs to prove that they can win. ECU keeps beating Carolina in football, so they are not behind Carolina at all. Since football is the only thing that determines a power 5 conference, the only difference between the ACC and the AAC is Clemson.

You’re right, you hear “Power Conferences”, and it includes the Big East, not the AAC. With the UConn move, they just separated themselves further from the AAC.

UNC has a top 30 recruiting class now that they have a decent football coach again. Any bums that beat UNC during the Fedora era were gifted lucky timing. I’ve never seen such porous defense.

(07-17-2019 09:08 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 06:40 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 05:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 03:34 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 01:44 PM)ken d Wrote:  The only schools that could turn a G5 conference into a P6 conference are schools that are not only already in a P5 conference, but perennial winners at that level. BYU won't do it, Boise State won't do it and who else is there? And somehow, I doubt Oklahoma and/or Texas are going to ask for an invite from the AAC or MWC anytime soon.

The only way schools now in G5 conferences are going to get into a P conference is via expansion of the P5. That's highly unlikely in today's climate.

If the AAC got their own NY6 bowl then that would legitimize their power conference status. It would also help if they created some separation between them and the MWC so they can shed that G5 label. On the field performance they really are not too far behind the ACC IMO.

They’re not too far behind, just a few national championships or so in the two major sports. No biggie.

I don’t hear “Power 5” slinged around too much in basketball. And no way the playoff committee will allow a G5 school into the playoffs to prove that they can win. ECU keeps beating Carolina in football, so they are not behind Carolina at all. Since football is the only thing that determines a power 5 conference, the only difference between the ACC and the AAC is Clemson.

You’re right, you hear “Power Conferences”, and it includes the Big East, not the AAC. With the UConn move, they just separated themselves further from the AAC.

UNC has a top 30 recruiting class now that they have a decent football coach again. Any bums that beat UNC during the Fedora era were gifted lucky timing. I’ve never seen such porous defense.

Perception and on the field performance are 2 separate things. From a performance stance, my original point was that the only difference between the AAC and ACC was Clemson. I’ll back pedal a little bit and say that the ACCs bottom is better than the AACs. With UConn leaving, the AAC is shedding some dead football weight.

From a national perception, the ACC was labeled a “Power 5” and the AAC a “Group of 5”. We have more talking heads talking us up than the AAC just like the SEC has more talking heads to talk them up than the ACC so no matter what happens on the field the SEC will always seem superior.

(07-18-2019 07:31 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 09:08 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 06:40 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 05:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 03:34 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  If the AAC got their own NY6 bowl then that would legitimize their power conference status. It would also help if they created some separation between them and the MWC so they can shed that G5 label. On the field performance they really are not too far behind the ACC IMO.

They’re not too far behind, just a few national championships or so in the two major sports. No biggie.

I don’t hear “Power 5” slinged around too much in basketball. And no way the playoff committee will allow a G5 school into the playoffs to prove that they can win. ECU keeps beating Carolina in football, so they are not behind Carolina at all. Since football is the only thing that determines a power 5 conference, the only difference between the ACC and the AAC is Clemson.

You’re right, you hear “Power Conferences”, and it includes the Big East, not the AAC. With the UConn move, they just separated themselves further from the AAC.

UNC has a top 30 recruiting class now that they have a decent football coach again. Any bums that beat UNC during the Fedora era were gifted lucky timing. I’ve never seen such porous defense.

Perception and on the field performance are 2 separate things. From a performance stance, my original point was that the only difference between the AAC and ACC was Clemson. I’ll back pedal a little bit and say that the ACCs bottom is better than the AACs. With UConn leaving, the AAC is shedding some dead football weight.

From a national perception, the ACC was labeled a “Power 5” and the AAC a “Group of 5”. We have more talking heads talking us up than the AAC just like the SEC has more talking heads to talk them up than the ACC so no matter what happens on the field the SEC will always seem superior.

The bolded statement is true. It is also true that the ACC's top half is better on the whole than the AAC's top half. The AAC's top half is comparable to the ACC's bottom half. Does that make the two conferences nearly equal? You do the math.

You really think UCF, Houston, Memphis, UC would finish in the bottom half of the ACC? Last year I think only Clemson and (possibly) SU would finish ahead of either one of those 4.

Remember, the ACC has 14, the AAC 12 (soon 11)

I can't believe this is actually being discussed. The season cannot start soon enough.

(07-18-2019 08:28 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  You really think UCF, Houston, Memphis, UC would finish in the bottom half of the ACC? Last year I think only Clemson and (possibly) SU would finish ahead of either one of those 4.

Remember, the ACC has 14, the AAC 12 (soon 11)

UCF definitely, and Likely Cinci would finish in the top half of the ACC last year. Eight win teams like Houston and Memphis would finish in the bottom half. Remember, those teams had a healthy diet of Tulsa, ECU, Tulane, Navy and UConn, who all won between 1-3 games the whole season. SU would have finished ahead of all those teams you mentioned with the possible exception of UCF. I love reading your posts, but this one you are way off.


The ACC was full of parity last season, but it was the worst season the league has had in 6 or 7 years. It was still a far better league than the AAC.

(07-18-2019 08:28 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  You really think UCF, Houston, Memphis, UC would finish in the bottom half of the ACC? Last year I think only Clemson and (possibly) SU would finish ahead of either one of those 4.

Remember, the ACC has 14, the AAC 12 (soon 11)

In any given year, one or two of those could finish in the top half of the ACC. But on average, over time, they would be in either the middle third or bottom third at best.

EDIT:

To check my perception against existing data, I calculated the ten year average Sagarin power ratings for all the ACC teams plus these four AAC teams. I also calculated a weighted average of their last five year's results. Out of the combined 18 schools, these are the rankings for the four AAC teams.

School.....10 year...5 year

UCF...............10.........14
Houston.........11.........13
Cincinnati.......12.........18
Memphis........18...........8

(07-18-2019 08:28 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  You really think UCF, Houston, Memphis, UC would finish in the bottom half of the ACC? Last year I think only Clemson and (possibly) SU would finish ahead of either one of those 4.

Remember, the ACC has 14, the AAC 12 (soon 11)

They could compete in The Coastal but not The Atlantic.
The Atlantic year in year out is one of the toughest divisions in college football.

The game The AAC faced an Atlantic team last year, they lost. The games they faced The Coastal teams they won.

The AAC is a good football conference. It’s just not as good as The Big East was when WVU, Syracuse, Louisville and Pitt were members.

(07-18-2019 10:12 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-18-2019 08:28 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  You really think UCF, Houston, Memphis, UC would finish in the bottom half of the ACC? Last year I think only Clemson and (possibly) SU would finish ahead of either one of those 4.

Remember, the ACC has 14, the AAC 12 (soon 11)

In any given year, one or two of those could finish in the top half of the ACC. But on average, over time, they would be in either the middle third or bottom third at best.

EDIT:

To check my perception against existing data, I calculated the ten year average Sagarin power ratings for all the ACC teams plus these four AAC teams. I also calculated a weighted average of their last five year's results. Out of the combined 18 schools, these are the rankings for the four AAC teams.

School.....10 year...5 year

UCF...............10.........14
Houston.........11.........13
Cincinnati.......12.........18
Memphis........18...........8

Can you really count on Sagarin? Don’t they take into account the same human polls that pump up the SEC preseason and then when they beat each other they don’t fall much because they lost to supposedly good teams? You also have the deck stacked against the AAC when it comes to OOC scheduling where most P5 programs don’t want to do home and home series with them because they don’t want to lose to a G5 program. I’d really like to see ACC vs AAC and bowl results over the last 5 years. Just from memory I know the AAC has been competitive with the ACC.

I think I’m a reasonable person, so if you can pull up this data to prove I’m clearly in the wrong I’ll back off on my thinking. Human polls are terribly subjective to bias, I cannot refute on the field results.

(07-18-2019 01:11 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  

(07-18-2019 10:12 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-18-2019 08:28 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  You really think UCF, Houston, Memphis, UC would finish in the bottom half of the ACC? Last year I think only Clemson and (possibly) SU would finish ahead of either one of those 4.

Remember, the ACC has 14, the AAC 12 (soon 11)

In any given year, one or two of those could finish in the top half of the ACC. But on average, over time, they would be in either the middle third or bottom third at best.

EDIT:

To check my perception against existing data, I calculated the ten year average Sagarin power ratings for all the ACC teams plus these four AAC teams. I also calculated a weighted average of their last five year's results. Out of the combined 18 schools, these are the rankings for the four AAC teams.

School.....10 year...5 year

UCF...............10.........14
Houston.........11.........13
Cincinnati.......12.........18
Memphis........18...........8

Can you really count on Sagarin? Don’t they take into account the same human polls that pump up the SEC preseason and then when they beat each other they don’t fall much because they lost to supposedly good teams? You also have the deck stacked against the AAC when it comes to OOC scheduling where most P5 programs don’t want to do home and home series with them because they don’t want to lose to a G5 program. I’d really like to see ACC vs AAC and bowl results over the last 5 years. Just from memory I know the AAC has been competitive with the ACC.

I think I’m a reasonable person, so if you can pull up this data to prove I’m clearly in the wrong I’ll back off on my thinking. Human polls are terribly subjective to bias, I cannot refute on the field results.

In a word, no. Human polls play no part in these ratings. What makes you think they do?

Sagarin may not be perfect. College football is far too complex for any ratings to be perfect. The ratings I cited are compiled solely from the results of literally thousands of games played over that time span. I'll take that over my memory of a handful of games over a short time span. But it has always been my experience that, if somebody wants badly enough for something to be true, he will find evidence to support his position.