Fair enough - early season polls certainly aren't very meaningful. Because Clemson IS less exciting than OSU or Tech. In the last 10 years, Clemson has never finished the season ranked above 21st. They are mostly unranked and have never been anywhere close to being in the top 10 beyond maybe a preseason poll or two. If location is important, the west coast is the ideal scenario.
I think a Big16 or Pac16 schedule would definitely be more interesting than an ACC16 schedule simply by virtue of those conferences consistently having more ranked teams and higher ranked teams than the ACC, as demonstrated by the the stats. My point about the ACC is that they DON'T have those programs having the Tech/OSU/Mizzou/Kansas type successes - outside of VaTech, not a single ACC program has ended in the top 10 in the last decade. They consistently seem to top out at 8-4 type seasons. To take it a step further, in the last 5 years, only GaTech has even made it into the top 15 to end the season - and that occurred only once. I'd love to see good OOC schedules, but OU will probably be enough to satisfy Texas. Besides which, it's difficult to consistently get good OOC games. A few years ago, Texas scheduled Cal and USC when they were top 10-15 type teams (as well as BYU this year) - but by the time we play those games, who knows if they'll be any good. The beauty of a strong conference is that you know someone will be good, even if you don't know who in advance. The ACC often has no one except Virginia Tech being any good.
Again you are being completely arbitrary. In the last decade (2000-2009), Clemson had 5 top 25 finishes. They also have an undefeated national championship in living memory if that counts. Georgit Tech has 4, finishing as high as 13. Again, they too have a share of a national title in living memory. Texas Tech has...5 top 25 finishes, with a lone #12 finish being the differentiator according to you. They had a nice season that year but honestly they also had a nonconference slate of SMU, 2 FCS teams, and an average at-best Nevada outfit. Again, this is the differentiator? Oklahoma state also had 5, with the highest being 12. See argument v. Tech. I just don't see how you think an outside observer would find a signficant difference there.
Yes and the hellholes of the NC research triangle towns, Charlottesville, major media markets like DC, Atl, Miami, Boston just one time zone away in major media markets are markedly worse? On balance there are fewer weak links in the ACC, location wise (maybe Greenville or wherever clemson is - not sure; Tallahassee is a dump, Blacksburg is a crap location though apparently not charmless in the mountains), than the Pac 10 - though the nice spots in the Pac 10 are probably nicer than teh ACC
As the person with the most UMD ties on this board (this is true) and the person with the most time spent on the UMD campus (probably true), I'll tell you that UMD (University of Maryland) students don't really give a damn about their football team. They're all about hoops. It's like the reverse of Houston with the Rockets and the Texans. That's why UMD went to the Military Bowl last year instead of anywhere far. Bowls didn't want to invite UMD b/c their fans don't travel. This home opener vs Miami needed a Groupon special to sell out. This environment is prevalent amongst many ACC schools, not just UMD.
There is some interesting case law on point that another attorney shared with me. I do not have the citation handy. Essentially, it says that an entity (for example SEC) cannot tortiously interfere with a contract (Big 12 agreement) by causing a party to a contract (A&M) to do something they have the express right to do under the contract (exercise the exit provisions). If I come across it, I will happily give it to you. The legal side of this is fascinating. What is scarier to me is Ken Starr's visit to Congress today. Yikes!
This made me laugh a lot. Thanks. Lubbock sucks. The drive there and back is even worse. I never thought I would see the day when Sweetwater, Texas looked like civilization.
So what was with that five page report I heard Craig Roberts reading about last night on 790? Something about aTm to SEC (Duh), Ok, Ok State and Tech to Pac whatever, and Texas/Notre Dame to the Big Ten. Sounded pretty legit how it was written, but also stated that behind the scenes Texas and the Big 10 had planned this together (LOL). Texas WOULD be able to keep the LHN, but would not receive a single dollar the Big Ten network. Anyone? Anything? Another smoke screen? They sure spoke about the article a lot. I'm sure it's just another pointless article but I really wanted to read it.
I think that would be a win-win for everyone except for Nebraska. I know the Husker friends don't like the idea of being in the same conference as Texas at all especially if it means playing us every year.
Deserving of its own thread, but here's a 14,000 word brutal historical takedown of the NCAA by Taylor Branch, just posted to the Atlantic: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...hame-of-college-sports/8643/?single_page=true
That is the advantage of super conferences. They can create their own playoff and basically be an independent league. Start paying players and all 64 teams make money and pay players. Then the Baylors of the world will take the non-NFL prospects and be actual amateurs.
i've only read the first few paragraphs but i tell people all the time, i don't care about ncaa "scandals" but as the piece alludes to, the real scandal is acting like these guys are student athletes. most of the guys on the big time sports team couldn't come close to qualifying for the schools they play for, so who cares if they got some money from a booster. and that being said, i still don't think players should be paid by schools, just a bigger can of worms
The article closes with the example of the IAAF/IOC they basically underwent the same debate in the 70's about pro v. amateur - people predicted armageddon/chaos/whatever and it didn't happen.
