UConn/ACC

[RegisteredUconn]

Only the 10 best men's and 10 best women's sports are counted in the scoring. That limits the schools that have 30+ sports from counting them all. But it is true in the case of Stanford that with 36 sports, you'll have a better chance of having 20 that are really good than someone who only has 20 total. But that doesn't seem to slow down Texas. They have only 20 total and finish in the top 10 often.

The schools that really have trouble are the ones that only have 16 sports total. They really have to be very good in all of them to do well. And they also probably aren't P5 material. Schools that have 28 sports and rank poorly probably aren't either for different reasons.

But didn't you say the school picks the sports it wants counted? Sponsor the 20-25 sports people care about then sponsor some that are lightly contested. Pick those lightly contested sports and viola! Instant Directors' Cup cred.

 

[whaler11]

There are 20-25 college sports people care about? Seems to be 2 nationally and then some locales have a 3rd, 4th and maybe 5th.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

I just go 1990-1999 is 10 years, 2000-2009 is 10 years, 2010-2014 is 5 years. When I add them I get 25. Do you get something different?

The time periods in question don't begin on Jan 1 and end on Dec 31. If you take the length of time between first week of April (when the champion is decided) of 1989 and first week of April 2014 it is 25 years. In your defense, in the span of the 25 years between April 1989 and April 2014, 26 champions were crowned which makes my selection of the 1989 champ unresponsive to your point. It's the old "How many fence posts do you need to construct a fence 100 yards long if you place a post every 10 yards?" question.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

Neither Nebraska nor Penn State has won a football national championship as a member of the B1G. They both won them before being part of the B1G, but having that conference bring them both down to mediocrity due to scheduling and declining recruiting territory has and will prevent it. You could say the same about Miami and the ACC, but coaching and sanctions have been more of Miami's problem than conference. They have a better shot of returning to power due to their access to recruiting territory.

I count the time Penn State won the title in 1994 and was a member of the Big Ten.

 

[B1GOSU]

The ACC will keep existing, as it will keep replacing teams with teams from the American. In about 5 years from now, the new SEC Network will be maxed out on in-state revenues from its current footprint and it will want to have a larger footprint to increase revenue more. This is exactly what happened in the B1G with BTN. Likewise, after BTN has become more established in its new territory on the East Coast - or Atlantic Coast if you prefer - the B1G will want to expand again to increase revenue with BTN.

The conferences with successful TV networks will be driving the bus of conference realignment from here on out. You have to be blind not to see that.

 

[CoastAtlantic]

Wow.and too think you were the one ACC fan that had a "shred" of decency!?! Join BB and stimpy as deluded, jealous apologetic ACC fans....how would you know why anyone adds anyone?? Join the rest of us fans dissapointed in losing regionality in college sports! How's you're ACCN going if you're so popular? You sound like you work for the spin....if RU was so irrelevant I doubt you ACCers would give a sheet..lol with you're status as the Carolina/Va conference and 2nd tier everywhere else!! The Eastern Sports Conference will be up before anyone but those touting(Espin) you but not supporting a network for you is up!! SEC/ESpin has nothing to gain overpaying you anymore than they already do.How many times do you think you can drink from that well clown? Man how stupid you southerners must think us yankee's that you think you can convert or divide us!?!

http://www.blackshoediaries.com/201...g-ten-football-basketball-penn-state-syracuse

 

[btstimpy]

http://www.blackshoediaries.com/201...g-ten-football-basketball-penn-state-syracuse

That Penn State fan seems thrilled. Geez. Not a terribly thrilling endorsement from the Syracuse person interviewed either.

 

[CoastAtlantic]

Anyway, here are the numbers for basketball attendance from last season:
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/m_basketball_RB/Reports/attend/2014.pdf

I'm not guaranteeing it but there's a chance that the ACC can take the top spot for the 2014-15 season. However, with UConn, that chance gets better.

 

[ArizonaKnight]

Geez. Not a terribly thrilling endorsement from the Syracuse person interviewed either.[/QUOTE]

Strange, I would have expected a ringing endorsement from a Syracuse blogger. Those guys have a hard on for Rutgers that a cat couldn't scratch.

 

[btstimpy]

I count the time Penn State won the title in 1994 and was a member of the Big Ten.

There is a museum with display cases on the side of the Nebraska Cornhusker Stadium that has that trophy in it. The front door to get in there is right on the road that runs by the Stadium. You'll need to sneak into it and break the glass on that case to steal that trophy if you want to count it for Joe Paterno. Tom Osborne thinks it belongs to him at the moment.

 

[Huskybite]

Well, these two standards can't both be right, since they are so wildly divergent.

The strength of an institution is unfortunately measured in two distinct ways, which can muddy the conversation. Undergraduate admissions which USN&WR base their "analyses" on are focused on GPA, SAT data as well as Stop self-congratulatory reputation profile. AAU pertains to graduate research/grant monies which usually reflects the strength of the graduate programs. The latter is a far superior measure of the overall strength of the institution. As the cliche implies, no one ever asks their doctor where they went to college, because by the time you're in graduate school, you're all equal and it's the graduate program(s) that will define you.

 

[chitown76]

UConn will have a home I think its in the big . I look at the total body of work not just athletics but academics as well. I'm a big fan but all I want is for UConn to have a home and not be pushed out. If it's in the big that would be awesome but if its in the ACC then I would say congratulations and good luck a basketball tournament would not be the same without UConn involved and UConn has earned the right to be in the power 5 its a crime they are not in yet. There is only two directions that the big can move in they did not set up shop in NYC for just Rutgers. UConn seals up the northeast for either the big or acc hopefully the big

 

[btstimpy]

Geez. Not a terribly thrilling endorsement from the Syracuse person interviewed either.

Strange, I would have expected a ringing endorsement from a Syracuse blogger. Those guys have a hard on for Rutgers that a cat couldn't scratch.[/QUOTE]
Why would Syracuse fans be concerned about Rutgers? Maybe they are. I would think they would view UConn as more of a rival due to basketball.

 

[chitown76]

The next round of expansion will bring UConn into the power 5

 

[ArizonaKnight]

Strange, I would have expected a ringing endorsement from a Syracuse blogger. Those guys have a hard on for Rutgers that a cat couldn't scratch.

Why would Syracuse fans be concerned about Rutgers? Maybe they are. I would think they would view UConn as more of a rival due to basketball.[/QUOTE]

(I have no intent on starting any pissing match with Cuse here)

They were used to beating Rutgers for decades until recently when we became competitive and won 7 of the last 10 meetings. They claim to not care about Rutgers yet they needed to create a single dedicated Rutgers thread on their board because at any given time there were always several Rutgers related threads on the first page. That thread has remained on the first page despite not being pinned and has over 1,100 responses.

In the interest of fairness, we don't like Syracuse either.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

There is a museum with display cases on the side of the Nebraska Cornhusker Stadium that has that trophy in it. The front door to get in there is right on the road that runs by the Stadium. You'll need to sneak into it and break the glass on that case to steal that trophy if you want to count it for Joe Paterno. Tom Osborne thinks it belongs to him at the moment.

Both Penn State and Nebraska finished that season 13-0. Penn State led the polls through the first couple of weeks of the season. Then a couple of reporters accused Penn State of running up the score. In the Indiana game, Paterno called off the dogs early and the Hoosiers scored a couple of late TDs making the game seem closer than it was. The next week, Nebraska was #1. Osborne learned Paterno's lesson never risking his ranking due to score differential.

I think it was after that season that someone asked Paterno about Nebraska's "championship." Joe said he was thinking of hanging a banner in Happy Valley declaring Penn State champion. After all, he noted, it was only somebody's opinion and his opinion was as valid as theirs.

Wasn't it the 2006 season that Michigan and Ohio State battled for the opportunity to play in the "championship" game or whatever it was called? Season ended with Ohio State #1 and Michigan #2 in whatever that mish-mash of polls and computer rankings was that determined who was raked where. Then the SEC held a title game while the Big Ten sat home idle. When Florida won, Urban Meyer, Florida, and the entire SEC lobbied the pollsters that Michigan didn't deserve a spot in the "title game" because Ohio State had already beaten them (of course they had no problem a few years later when Alabama and LSU played a second time). Pollsters pushed idle Michigan down. Yes, I know Florida won. Makes what the BCS was doing even more ludicrous.

In other words, the entire notion that polls determine a champion is a fraud unworthy of the concept of champion. Why even play the games? Just set a schedule and let the pollsters vote on who wins the games. Anyway, I polled myself and Joe Paterno about who won the 1994 championship and it was Penn State. Nebraska won a vote, not a championship.

 

[btstimpy]

Both Penn State and Nebraska finished that season 13-0. Penn State led the polls through the first couple of weeks of the season. Then a couple of reporters accused Penn State of running up the score. In the Indiana game, Paterno called off the dogs early and the Hoosiers scored a couple of late TDs making the game seem closer than it was. The next week, Nebraska was #1. Osborne learned Paterno's lesson never risking his ranking due to score differential.

I think it was after that season that someone asked Paterno about Nebraska's "championship." Joe said he was thinking of hanging a banner in Happy Valley declaring Penn State champion. After all, he noted, it was only somebody's opinion and his opinion was as valid as theirs.

Wasn't it the 2006 season that Michigan and Ohio State battled for the opportunity to play in the "championship" game or whatever it was called? Season ended with Ohio State #1 and Michigan #2 in whatever that mish-mash of polls and computer rankings was that determined who was raked where. Then the SEC held a title game while the Big Ten sat home idle. When Florida won, Urban Meyer, Florida, and the entire SEC lobbied the pollsters that Michigan didn't deserve a spot in the "title game" because Ohio State had already beaten them (of course they had no problem a few years later when Alabama and LSU played a second time). Pollsters pushed idle Michigan down. Yes, I know Florida won. Makes what the BCS was doing even more ludicrous.

In other words, the entire notion that polls determine a champion is a fraud unworthy of the concept of champion. Why even play the games? Just set a schedule and let the pollsters vote on who wins the games. Anyway, I polled myself and Joe Paterno about who won the 1994 championship and it was Penn State.

I hear you and am glad we now have a playoff. I hope it gets increased to have 8 participants as soon as possible. Then we'll have the dispute over the bubble teams just like in basketball, but the champion won't be in dispute.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

I hear you and am glad we now have a playoff. I hope it gets increased to have 8 participants as soon as possible. Then we'll have the dispute over the bubble teams just like in basketball, but the champion won't be in dispute.

Couldn't agree more, stimpy. As long as they (eventually) invite enough teams that one of the bubble teams never so much as sniffs a title game, let alone wins one, I can live with whatever griping teams that weren't going to win anyway produce.

 

[upstater]

I hear you and am glad we now have a playoff. I hope it gets increased to have 8 participants as soon as possible. Then we'll have the dispute over the bubble teams just like in basketball, but the champion won't be in dispute.

The 1994 championship is undisputed in the AP/UPI. It's also undisputed in other polls, like the NYT which has PSU in front.

In the AP Poll, Penn State actually dropped to #2 after a 63-14 rout of Ohio State.

 

[UConnJim]

Neither Nebraska nor Penn State has won a football national championship as a member of the B1G. They both won them before being part of the B1G, but having that conference bring them both down to mediocrity due to scheduling and declining recruiting territory has and will prevent it. You could say the same about Miami and the ACC, but coaching and sanctions have been more of Miami's problem than conference. They have a better shot of returning to power due to their access to recruiting territory.

I agree with most of this. In the B1G, I think Ohio St and Penn St have the best chances of consistently competing for a football championship. Why? They have fertile natural recruiting territories, really good coaches, as well as great fan support. When Penn St is back to form, and they will be under Franklin and with sanctions rolling off, all this talk of the B1G being a weak conference will subside. There is no real decline of the B1G as only Ohio St and Michigan were ever national powers in the modern era (pre-Penn St and Nebraska).

I think it will be hard, even with great fan support, for Nebraska and Michigan to be consistent contenders. Nebraska's past football history is almost impossible to replicate. They really never had natural advantages like proximity to recruits or an attractive location, which makes what Nebraska did in the past so extraordinary. Michigan has to grab recruits from outside of Michigan which puts them at a disadvantage. With the right coach, they can be consistently good, but I think they will have a hard time competing for football championships. Still, Nebraska and Michigan are two upper echelon football programs.

In the ACC, I really only see Florida St being a consistent contender. I's skeptical that Miami can get back to their glory days, although the fertile recruiting around Miami makes it a possibility. I just think that Miami will not return to the "good old days" and run an undisciplined program, especially under Donna Shalala. The main driver for Miami going to the ACC was to take the pressure off the football team having to win.

 

[billybud]

I think that Miami can come back (they won 9 games last year). They have some athletes and can recruit strong talent, but have not yet put together the complete components necessary for a strong run...a great QB, a good O line, and a strong defense.

 

[btstimpy]

I agree with most of this. In the B1G, I think Ohio St and Penn St have the best chances of consistently competing for a football championship. Why? They have fertile natural recruiting territories, really good coaches, as well as great fan support. When Penn St is back to form, and they will be under Franklin and with sanctions rolling off, all this talk of the B1G being a weak conference will subside. There is no real decline of the B1G as only Ohio St and Michigan were ever national powers in the modern era (pre-Penn St and Nebraska).

I think it will be hard, even with great fan support, for Nebraska and Michigan to be consistent contenders. Nebraska's past football history is almost impossible to replicate. They really never had natural advantages like proximity to recruits or an attractive location, which makes what Nebraska did in the past so extraordinary. Michigan has to grab recruits from outside of Michigan which puts them at a disadvantage. With the right coach, they can be consistently good, but I think they will have a hard time competing for football championships. Still, Nebraska and Michigan are two upper echelon football programs.

In the ACC, I really only see Florida St being a consistent contender. I's skeptical that Miami can get back to their glory days, although the fertile recruiting around Miami makes it a possibility. I just think that Miami will not return to the "good old days" and run an undisciplined program, especially under Donna Shalala. The main driver for Miami going to the ACC was to take the pressure off the football team having to win.

I agree that Ohio State and Penn State have the best access to recruiting in the Big Ten and can stay at the top (i.e Ohio State) and return to the top (i.e. Penn State). Michigan and Nebraska are big brands based on past success, and they can compete nationally for talent, but their access to it locally will really wane over time. They can still do it, but it will become increasingly difficult. I wouldn't want to be in the Big Ten West. Recruiting will be a bear for those coaches.

Miami will have access to talent, but they have work to do with facilities. The facilities at Florida State and Florida have moved well ahead of what Miami can show the top kids. They have to recruit on reputation and with coaches and proximity in south florida. Louisville with Charlie Strong has been stealing a lot of their kids using the sanctions thing against Miami. I think Miami can recover somewhat from that now that the sanctions have been determined. Louisville and Miami will have an instant rivalry for a few years due to all the kids knowing each other on both teams from high school. The new Louisville coach might have to recruit a different territory going forward.

 

[upstater]

I agree that Ohio State and Penn State have the best access to recruiting in the Big Ten and can stay at the top (i.e Ohio State) and return to the top (i.e. Penn State). Michigan and Nebraska are big brands based on past success, and they can compete nationally for talent, but their access to it locally will really wane over time. They can still do it, but it will become increasingly difficult. I wouldn't want to be in the Big Ten West. Recruiting will be a bear for those coaches.

Miami will have access to talent, but they have work to do with facilities. The facilities at Florida State and Florida have moved well ahead of what Miami can show the top kids. They have to recruit on reputation and with coaches and proximity in south florida. Louisville with Charlie Strong has been stealing a lot of their kids using the sanctions thing against Miami. I think Miami can recover somewhat from that now that the sanctions have been determined. Louisville and Miami will have an instant rivalry for a few years due to all the kids knowing each other on both teams from high school. The new Louisville coach might have to recruit a different territory going forward.

Michigan is a huge school with lots of resources, and unlike Penn State, Michigan recruits nationally. And it has never hurt them. Bad coaching hurts them, but not recruiting. Their average class in the last decade is somewhere around #10. They finished #6, #7, #10, #13, #16 going back 5 years. I can't think of any recruiting dynamic that has changed so much in the last 10 years.

 

[btstimpy]

Michigan is a huge school with lots of resources, and unlike Penn State, Michigan recruits nationally. And it has never hurt them. Bad coaching hurts them, but not recruiting. Their average class in the last decade is somewhere around #10. They finished #6, #7, #10, #13, #16 going back 5 years. I can't think of any recruiting dynamic that has changed so much in the last 10 years.

Yes. Michigan and Notre Dame recruit nationally. They have to. There just isn't enough talent locally like there is for Ohio State and Penn State. Nebraska will have to recruit nationally too, and they have lost a bit by not having any presence in front of Texas kids anymore.

 

[ArizonaKnight]

Yes. Michigan and Notre Dame recruit nationally. They have to. There just isn't enough talent locally like there is for Ohio State and Penn State. Nebraska will have to recruit nationally too, and they have lost a bit by not having any presence in front of Texas kids anymore.

I am no Michigan apologist but we should all have their recruiting issues. This year they have 8 commits so far, throw out the kicker and 6 of the remaining 7 players are 4-star recruits.