Ranking the acc schools

<p>Totally. To me, golf is more boring to watch than soccer (just don't find a slow game or watching people WALKING exciting). So the real reason is probably Americans just don't watch sports they don't excel in. In soccer, at least you can see where the ball goes. Golf? On TV, you often can't see it until it lands on the green (never watch in person); maybe HDTV would help but still! LOL!</p>

<p>wanna talk about boring? in a baseball game, the ball is actually in play for an average of 2.5 minutes. wow. hold on to your hats.</p>

<p>
[quote]
here's what i found out
Fencing, gymnastics, skiing, volleyball (men), and wrestling are not part of ncaa (they are national colligiate sports)

[/quote]
</p>

<p>First of all - what difference does it make?</p>

<p>And second (I don't know where you get your info.) - fencing, gymnastics, skiing and wrestling are ALL NCAA sports (as is women's volleyball).</p>

<p><a href="http://www.ncaasports.com/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.ncaasports.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
indiana is good in soccer but one team is good in one sport doesn't make the conference strong in that sport! the ACC has more good teams in soccer than any conference (VA used to win several consecutive national champs) UVA coach went on and became US soccer coach and brought the sport to another level in the US.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Do you do any research before you make these silly conclusions?</p>

<p>Besides Indiana (which btw, has also repeated as champions several times), MSU has won 2 national titles and Wisconsin has won 1 (and NU made it to the Elite 8 this year before losing to the eventual champion 3-2).</p>

<p>
[quote]
the ACC is good in team sports! it's just they don't play those sport (waterpolo ...) that's why other conferences who played dominated.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>What about baseball, softball and volleyball - which most or all ACC teams compete in? And the ACC is usually not a top 2-3 FB conference either.</p>

<p>Plus, you can say the same thing for lax and field hockey which are pretty much Eastern sports.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I know nothing about the ACC teams (if they even have any) in volleyball, softball, water polo and crew, but they sure do in tennis and it will probably surprise you that the ACC is now much stronger than the Pac 10, the Big 10 and the SEC. Granted, the Pac 10 history is far stronger as Stanford has won tons of national titles and UCLA is the current defending champion, but top to bottom today, the ACC is clearly the stronger conference in this sport.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's for ONE year. Over the past ten years (and longer) - both the PAC10 and the SEC have had more success in tennis.</p>

<p>People - can be try to be a little less biased here?</p>

<p>k&s</p>

<p>I’m not so sure that your charges of bias are accurate. Consider the following:</p>

<p>Soccer: While the Big 10 has historically had some success in soccer, the ACC is now the top conference. Two of this year’s Final Four were from the ACC (Duke and Virginia). The ACC had six teams qualify for the NCAA tournament (Duke, Virginia, Maryland, Wake Forest, Clemson, North Carolina, and Virginia Tech). The Pac 10 had three (UCLA, Cal, and Washington). The Big 10 had two (Northwestern, Indiana). </p>

<p>In the final rankings conference strength, the ACC ranked first and the Pac 10 was second. The Big 10 was fourth behind the West Coast Conference. The SEC does not play soccer.</p>

<p>Tennis: I gave props to the Pac 10. They have most of the history (and the weather), but things have changed in the past few years. The ACC is now the strongest and the SEC is very close behind with the Pac 10 a little further back. The Big 10 is a little further back from there although both Ohio State and Illinois are legitimate national title contenders. </p>

<p>Baseball: In the latest USA Today Baseball Poll Rankings (1/26/07), the ACC and the SEC both have strong records. The ACC has six teams in the top 25: Clemson (2), Miami (3), UNC (5), Virginia (9), Georgia Tech (11), and Florida State (17). The SEC has five teams: South Carolina (4), Arkansas (7), Vanderbilt (10), Mississippi (18), and Tennessee (19). The Pac 10 has four: Arizona State (14), Oregon State (15), UCLA (21), and Stanford (25). The Big 10 has zero teams ranked in the Top 25.</p>

<p>Football: I think that most unbiased observers of the college game would rank the SEC as the toughest conference. The Big 10 has a strong reputation, but both Ohio State and Michigan got blasted in their bowl games and this is not a rare occurrence. The Big 10’s history of failure in the Rose Bowl is well known. The Pac 10 is probably stronger now than the Big 10 in football. This was definitely a down year for the ACC as both Florida State and Miami had off years.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Soccer: While the Big 10 has historically had some success in soccer, the ACC is now the top conference. Two of this year’s Final Four were from the ACC (Duke and Virginia)

[/quote]

ehh...actually it was Wake Forest and UVA. Wake has had an awesome year in sports. Men's Soccer was number 3, Women's soccer top 10, field hockey number 2, Orange Bowl appearance, and we have a bunch of smaller sports like golf and tennis top 25.</p>

<p>Like several other musical genres [soul (Motown), hard rock (Seger, Nugent, Alice Cooper, Mitch Ryder), white rap (EMINEM, Kid Rock), and Alternative (White Stripes)], techno has deep roots in Detroit. </p>

<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Techno_music%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Techno_music&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>dajada07 - The problem is that some of you take ONE YEAR or some other highly questionable basis as a basis for your claims (kind of like your "average" of USWNR rankings which conveniently didn't take into account the ACC schools with the lowest rankings which would have placed the ACC behind the B10 in average USNWR ranking).</p>

<p>Take baseball for instance - yes, the ACC is particularly strong THIS YEAR. But in 2005, the ACC wasn't as strong as the SEC, B12 or the Pac10.</p>

<p>
[quote]
The Big 10’s history of failure in the Rose Bowl is well known. The Pac 10 is probably stronger now than the Big 10 in football. This was definitely a down year for the ACC as both Florida State and Miami had off years.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well - in the last 10 match-ups, the B10 has gone .500 against the PAC-10 in the Rose Bowl (and this with the no. 2 Big 10 team playing in the Rose Bowl a couple of times, since another B10 team was playing the Championship game).The problem is that some of you take ONE YEAR as a basis for your claims.</p>

<p>And let's not forget that in the past 2 decades or so - the B10 is .600 against the ACC (plus, all of the ACCs best FB teams are recent additions - FSU, UMiami, VTech and BC).</p>

<p>As for baseball and other outdoor sports - the B10 is hampered by the fact that its weather is unconducive to the year-round practice of outdoor sports (which is why the B10 is traditionally better at indoor sports such as wrestling, gymnastics, swimming, volleyball, etc.).</p>

<p>I liked the previous post about the Rose bowl, but I would add that the Rose Bowl is essentially a PAC 10 homegame being played in LA. Have USC come to Happy Valley or Ann Arbor and see how that works out. </p>

<p>I think we should have a Big 10 vs ACC wrestle off to detirmine who is the better conference. I think we know who would dominate.</p>

<p>k&s
I don't mean to cherry pick a single year, but what is happeniing now is probably most relevant. And I did concede that ACC football is down and I didn't make some lame attempt to prop it up by pointing to all of the success that FSU and Miami have had over the last two decades (not to mention Georgia Tech's national championship). But ACC sports currently are superior to the Big 10 in the sports that I have mentioned-basketball, soccer, tennis, baseball. And the Big 10 is probably better in the sports you mention-I don't know as I don't follow wrestling, crew, hockey, volleyball, etc. </p>

<p>wilmington wave,
My apologies to you and the Demon Deacons. I stand corrected and, as I recall, didn't Wake tie for the conference regular season championship with Duke? A fabulous year for Wake in the Fall season including a Final Four appearance in soccer and a BCS appearance in the Orange Bowl.</p>

<p>Let's rank the Conference USA schools next.</p>

<p>K&S </p>

<p>
[quote]
And second (I don't know where you get your info.) - fencing, gymnastics, skiing and wrestling are ALL NCAA sports (as is women's volleyball).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>ncaa has divisions, some colligiate sports don't that's the difference! it's not as popular that's why there aren't many schools playing and it ends up having 1 or maybe 2 division, not 3. that's why ncaa are the more 'well known' sports because there are many school competing. </p>

<p>and i get my source from google. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Besides Indiana (which btw, has also repeated as champions several times), MSU has won 2 national titles and Wisconsin has won 1 (and NU made it to the Elite 8 this year before losing to the eventual champion 3-2).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>wow that's it?! did u see the list I posted up there? taking back about 15 years of college soccer history? did u see the women's championship too? (and don't claim that women's sport is less important than men's).</p>

<p>Let me quote this and throw it back at you

[quote]
Do you do any research before you make these silly conclusions?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>you think u know more soccer than me? It's not just this year that the ACC is strong in soccer! in 2005 the ACC sent ALL but 1 team to the ncaa tournement. Duke & Maryland went to final 4. In 2004, Maryland went to the final 4. In 2003 Maryland went to the final 4. The last 5 years there have been 8,9 ACC teams in the final 4. This year the top 5 MLS super draft are all ACC players. There were like 6,7 ACC teams ranked in top 10 pre-season AND post-season rankings the last 5,6 years. Indiana is the strongest Big 10 team and only got pass the second round (and is the only representative from big 10 there) It's not just 1 year (same for last year). </p>

<p>And for the women's championship we don't need to go there u can see the list of consecutive wins by NC. Don't argue soccer with me, please! it might (or might not) make you look stupid depending on my mood.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Plus, you can say the same thing for lax and field hockey which are pretty much Eastern sports.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>why is something ur not strong at becomes some other conference's sport?</p>

<p>
[quote]
didn't Wake tie for the conference regular season championship with Duke? A fabulous year for Wake in the Fall season including a Final Four appearance in soccer and a BCS appearance in the Orange Bowl.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>yes wake and duke tied for the ACC regular season. Wake beat UVA on PK and Duke beat Maryland 1-0. Duke beats Wake in the final to claim the ACC title! I watched all the ACC final 4 games.</p>

<p>nazhockey,
Are you proposing a direct competition with the ACC? Bring it on, but I warn you that the results may be as ugly for the overrated Big 10 as the basketball "challenge" has been. </p>

<p>And as for the Rose Bowl, your response is classic Big 10 speak. Whine and explain away. The Big 10 is just not that strong in football. OSU, Michigan and Wisconsin play each other and dominate "powers" like Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, and Michigan State and then claim that they are the best in the country. The non-conference opponents for the Big 10's Big Three were:
OSU: Northern Illinois, Texas (a quality win and this does deserve a lot of recognition), Cincinnatti, Bowling Green, Florida (we all know how that turned out)
Michigan: Vanderbilt, Central Michigan, Notre Dame (a good win, but I think we all saw just how overrated ND was in their games with USC and LSU), Ball State, USC (totally outclassed)
Wisconsin: Bowling Green, Western Illinois, San Diego State, Buffalo, Arkansas (a nice win in a squeaker)</p>

<p>Having said that, Florida wasn't playing the toughest non-conference schedule either (Southern Miss, Central Florida, Florida State, Western Carolina, OSU), but the SEC's schedule is tougher than the Big 10 and the closing game against vaunted Ohio State was completely one-sided. </p>

<p>As for USC, they played Arkansas (a very impressive blowout win on the road over the SEC's # 2 team), Nebraska (the Big 12's #2 or #3 team), Notre Dame (by another blowout), and Michigan (not very competitive). </p>

<p>The bottom line is that, for 2006 at least, the Big 10 was not as strong at the top as promoted by the media. And down the line (#5-11), the conference was weak. </p>

<p>If you want to talk about hockey, wrestling, crew,etc., well, you got me there and kudos to the Big 10. But be thankful for the fact that most of the ACC, Pac 10, and SEC don't even field teams in these sports.</p>

<p>"If you want to talk about hockey, wrestling, crew,etc., well, you got me there and kudos to the Big 10. But be thankful for the fact that most of the ACC, Pac 10, and SEC don't even field teams in these sports"</p>

<p>You have hit upon the sports problem today. With Title 9 you can only be strong in so many sports as you have to offer as many to women. The Big 10 schools are strong in sports that are strong in the region--ice hockey, wrestling, cross country, crew etc and the same for the southeastern schools. Big 10 football is a little down in the lower half of the teams it is down right weak but PSU, MSU ans Iowa will be better again soon and Indiana shows life. Nu and Minny might be the only really bad teams next year. Iowa was a huge diappointment this year as many had them a Top 10 team.
Thankfully that was the only really bad year for the UW football schedule. We are picking up teams like ASU, Va Tech, Washington State in the future. I hate playing weak teams.</p>

<p>^^^
I agree with you about Title 9 which has been a disaster for many mens sports programs. With the large football teams, that really hurts on the number of mens sports. It only makes sense that schools and conferences would focus on sports where there was a natural interest, eg, Big 10 in hockey. </p>

<p>Big 10 football has a long and proud history and maybe they will be back stronger in the years ahead, but their reputation is above the current level of play. We'll have to wait on that and see, but Michigan scheduling and beating up on the likes of Vanderbilt is not likely to impress anybody. Try playing schools like (4th in the SEC) Tennessee, which Cal did and got smoked, or (4th in the Pac 10) UCLA, which ND did and lost in South Bend. </p>

<p>The only Big 10 school that I think is consistently underrated is the University of Wisconsin. The Badgers seem always in the shadow of Ohio State and Michigan and, oftentimes, undeservedly so. They have very solid teams in most of the major sports. The current UW mens hoop team is very, very good and certainly will be a strong contender for the national title coming tourney time.</p>

<p>alright so the SEC my be slightly better than the Big 10 this year in football, but what does that have to do with the ACC? There is no way that wake would be nearly as good if it played a Big 10 schedule. It is a top to bottom more consistant conference. Ok so you are better at basketball, soccer, baseball and maybe Lacross but unless you can come with a lot more sports I don't think you are going to have a vaild argument about how it is a better sports conference. We should have a direct competion in a bunch of sports, Including football, basketball, soccer, volleyball, wrestling, ect. and then we can detirmine a winner.</p>

<p>back to the original point of this thread. Ranking the conferences academically. first here is my ACC rating of schools</p>

<ol>
<li>Duke</li>
<li>UVA
T3. Wake
T3. BC (no bias, im probably transferring, but we are talking undergrad here)</li>
<li>UNC</li>
<li>GT</li>
<li>Maryland</li>
<li>VT
then it doesnt matter</li>
</ol>

<p>As far as conferences go, perhaps the patriot league is top to bottom deeper, but look at the head to head matchups</p>

<p>Duke vs. Navy
UVA vs. Army
Wake vs. Lehigh
BC vs. Bucknell
UNC vs Lafayette
GT vs. Colgate
Maryland vs. Holy Cross
VT vs. American</p>

<p>I think the ACC might be ahead, but its for yourself to judge these matchups since the LACs in the patriot league are tough to compare to some of the bigger schools in the ACC</p>

<p>If we are talking d1, ivy then either patriot or ACC, then PAC 10. Overall, NESCAC is second..now after I actually do work rather than procrastinate on CC, ill argue the sports angle</p>

<p>
[quote]
the results may be as ugly for the overrated Big 10 as the basketball "challenge" has been.

[/quote]

Yeah, when you schedule how the ACC does.</p>

<p>Put the Big Ten's best team against the ACC's 6th, that's good scheduling. I guess the ACC will sacrifice a loss in order to have UNC and Duke playing inferior opponents on their home court. And don't get me started on Georgia Tech and Clemson playing Penn State and Minnesota, that's a joke.</p>

<p>ACC - Big Ten challenge draws match ups randomly every year, it's not like you can pick your opponent. So far it's been 8-0 ACC wins every year at random combination. I think that's a good enough indication of who's better in basketball.</p>

<p>Rice
Tulane
Southern Methodist/U of Tulsa
UAB Birmingham/East Carolina
UTEP/USouthern Mississippi/UMemphis/UHouston/UCentral Florida/(I don't know where Marshall goes)</p>