<p>Hey GentlemanandSholar,</p>
<p>Thanks for clarifying that. Do you know what the total # of ncaa championships that Pac-10 have won? My guess is it's probably few times more than ACC.</p>
<p>"FYI: Championships won this year so far by ACC and Pac10:
ACC: M baskeball (UNC)"</p>
<p>Plus, W Golf (Duke) :)</p>
<p>i thot this was about academics and not athletics. </p>
<p>i think academically ACC and PAC 10 are pretty equivalent but PAC 10 comes out in the end
Stanford > Duke
Berkeley = UVA
UCLA > (slightly) UNCCH
Wake = USC</p>
<p>the rest dont really matter =P</p>
<p>UCLA 95
Stanford 89
USC 83
Cal 23
Arizona 14
Arizona St. 16
Wash 3
Wash St. 2
Oregon 13
Oregon St. 1
TOTAL 339</p>
<p>Duke 6
Miami 5
UNC 31
NC St. 2
UVA 14
VA Tech 0
Boston 2
FL St. 4
Clemson 3
GA Tech 0
Maryland 16
Wake 7
TOTAL 90</p>
<p>There's room for debate for academics but not athletics. What's funny is UCLA has more championships than the entire ACC has. Wow!</p>
<p>And to further counter uvajoe's argument that only football and basketball matter, I again reiterate that USC (along with ND) has a monopoly on football and UCLA has a monopoly on basketball. If you want to consider other sports, just look at <a href="http://espn.go.com/ncaa/almanac.html%5B/url%5D">http://espn.go.com/ncaa/almanac.html</a></p>
<p>It's a few years old, but when you look at which school has the most NCAA titles in which sport, USC, UCLA, and Stanford come up very often, especially in the Spring. I see few ACC teams.</p>
<p>megastud, i never said they are the only ones that matter, personally i like soccer and lax, i just said they are the easiest to debate because they are watched by larger crowds than the other sports.</p>
<p>USC a monopoly on football? No, not really. They've only won the national championship game for one year.</p>
<p>And UCLA a monopoly on basketball? HAHAHAHA. Dude, they weren't even in the top 25 last year. UCLA likes to hang on to the glory days of Wooden; however, they haven't been very good in years. Duke and UNC have a monopoly on basketball.</p>
<p>^^^
Two years.</p>
<p>Your going to need that flame suit, Ivygrad. LOL How in the world does Duke, UC Berkeley, and Northwestern not compete to Dartmouth, Brown, and Cornell? I might even venture to say that all three of the schools beforementioned might be better academically than all three you just mentioned. And let's not get started on Stanford. Those schools cannot touch it on their best day. Duke an Ivy wannabe? LOL Why would it want to be involved in a sports group that is clearly inferior to it athletically. Yes, I said it. </p>
<p><em>puts flames suit on</em></p>
<p>BRING.
IT.
ON.</p>
<p>ahhahaa jk</p>
<p>
[quote]
I might even venture to say that all three of the schools beforementioned might be better academically than all three you just mentioned.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>er, i was only talking about these institutions from an academic perspective...</p>
<p>
[quote]
Your going to need that flame suit
[/quote]
</p>
<p>p.s. You are = you're</p>
<p>We are chatting on a mesage board. lol I don't think correcting me is necessary. Moreover, I was talking from an academic perspective too
OMG WHAT A SHOCKER!</p>
<p>"Each one of these institutions are solid across the board be it in admissions criteria, student body, quality of faculty, quality of resources, etc. (ALBIET with strengths and weaknesses in any given area as one would expect when you are bringing together 8 institutions)."</p>
<p>Correct me if I am wrong, but is the word not
A
L
B
E
I
T
?</p>
<p>However, I am just a lowly Duke student, so I will respectfully aquiesce to your renowned, princetonian facility with words.</p>
<p>No you weren't.</p>
<p>Otherwise you wouldn't have said:</p>
<p>"i might even venture to say...."</p>
<p>Whatever. This exchange is adding absolutely zero value.</p>
<p>Wow.</p>
<p>Uhm, if I was not talking about academics, then why would I have said..."I might even venture to say..?" It is pretty obvious that the ACC holds an athletic vantage point over the ivies, so I was merely introducing a topic that is surely disputable. I'm not sure where you get off on telling people that Rice is an ivy wannabe and that Duke and Northwestern can't supercede any Ivy academically. Moreover, I am very happy that you garnered an education at such magnificent institutions, but that still does not give you the justification to plaster it in everyone's face. I just thought you were being slightly aplomb and disrespectful to TheCity back there. That's all.</p>
<p>Duke is the best ever.</p>
<p>Happy?</p>
<p>p.s. TheCity and I don't have any issues as far as I know, and the last time I checked TheCity can very well speak for himself/herself.</p>
<p>We all know that the Big 10 is the best :)</p>
<p>Sigh.</p>
<p>I am not "speaking" for anybody, but I believe I do have the right to point out that you are slightly out of line. I think Princeton and Penn are the most amazing places out there. However, what constitutes being an ivy wannabe? LOL Let me guess..</p>
<ol>
<li>Not existing for 2,000 years</li>
<li>Having a magnificent student body</li>
<li>Fabulous academics</li>
<li>Alienaton from the WASPs (as far as I am concerned)</li>
<li>Awesome grad placement</li>
</ol>
<p>If these are the qualifications, then I am proud to be an ivy wannabe. Cheers.</p>
<p>i just want to jump in and agree with those who say the pac-10 is the best overall athletic league because it has the complete package. the schools are strong in almost all sports, of both genders too. </p>
<p>the pac-10 has four representatives among the top 10 most division 1 team championships won among men (#1 USC, #2 UCLA, #3 Stanford, #9 Cal) and women (#1 Stanford, #2 UCLA, #8 USC, #10 Arizona). the overall count is #1 UCLA, #2 Stanford, #3 USC... and then it's not even close after that (#4 okalahoma state is about 37 team championships away from #3 USC). refer to Sam Lee's post above for totals... where the Pac-10 would crush the ACC. </p>
<p>however, academically the pac-10 isn't balanced. washington state, oregon state, and arizona state aren't even the flagship state universities. there's a big disparity between the california 4 (stanford, berkeley, ucla, usc) and the rest. i think some of the other athletic leagues are more balanced. </p>
<p>if you add up all the US News rankings of each school and then average them, you'd find the Big 10 with the best score (after Ivy) and then the ACC.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It is also, in my opinion, the best athletic conference.
[/quote]
[quote]
Note: i am considering the two most watched sports when evaluating.
[/quote]
[quote]
megastud, i never said they are the only ones that matter, personally i like soccer and lax, i just said they are the easiest to debate because they are watched by larger crowds than the other sports.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>uvajoe,</p>
<p>So I guess you were saying you didn't know much about other sports. Well, there are RECORDS for you to look up! Please read my post earlier; Pac10 had won 339 while ACC had won ONLY 90 championships. UCLA ALONE HAS WON MORE CHAMPIONSHIPS THAN WHOLE ACC HAS. If that's not clear to show you Pac10 is better (actually much better in my opinion), I don't know what is.</p>
<p>Well one, I think we are talking about currently. Historically, a great argument could be made for the Pac 10 conference. Currently, there's a lot more to debate. Just for example... UCLA won the men's tennis title. But they are the only Pac 10 team in the top 20 of the rankings. The ACC has 4 teams in the top 20 (including 3 in the top 13). Who has the best team... UCLA. Better conference... I'd say the ACC.</p>
<p>How 'bout them researching skills... :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
^^^
Two years.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Actually USC only won the national championship game one year (in 2004).</p>