Had this argument with a buddy who goes to Va Tech the other day. He, like most everyone else, always hates on the Big East. He said its ridiculous that a team with 4 losses might be going to a BCS bowl and that the Big East should lose its bid because of this. So the student in me decided to see if anyone had gone to a BCS bowl with 4 losses before and found some interesting information.

Florida State got the ACC BCS bowl bid with four losses and went to the Sugar Bowl in 2003 (2002 season) ended at 9-5

Florida State did it again after the 2005 season and went to the Orange Bowl ended at 8-5

Va Tech did it in 08/09 and went to the Orange bowl (won their bowl game though against Cincy)


SO should the ACC have lost their BCS status too?




Also look at the Final AP poll standings for the two conferences over the last couple of seasons....


2009
Big East
9. UC
15. Pitt
22. WVU
37. UConn
39. Rutgers

ACC
10. Va Tech
13. Ga Tech
19. Miami
38. Fl St

2008
Big East
17. UC
25. WVU
31. Pitt
36.Rutgers
40. UConn

ACC
14. Va Tech
22. Ga Tech
23. Fl St

2007
Big East
6. WVU
20. UC
33. Uconn
35. S. Fl

ACC
9. Va Tech
11. BC
27. Virginia
28. Wake

2006
Big East
6. Louisville
10. WVU
12. Rutgers
29. S Fl

ACC
18. Wake
19. Va Tech
20. BC
28. Maryland
31. Ga Tech



If you look at BCS bowl records the case for the Big East continues to get better.

I did not include Miami's bowl record b/c they played all of their BCS games while in the Big East (they were 3-1)

The ACC is 2-11 in BCS bowl games
The Big East is 3-4 (remember that 3 of the 8 teams in the Big East have only been in the BCS since 2005 and 1 of them since 2004 and thus have played in far fewer BCS games)


obviously these are the two worst BCS conferences, but why does everyone hate the Big East more than the ACC? When the Big East has apparently played better on the field.

The ACC is not a good BCS conference either. I think the top top bottom the ACC is better. Just look at what a middle of the road Acc team in Miami did to Pitt at their place.

but why is there never a call for the ACC to lose its BCS status?

Because the Big East is made up of:

1 traditionally decent/good BCS program that has tanked the last several years
1 traditionally decent BCS program that has done slightly better since the defections
1 traditionally mediocre BCS program that always good for a bad non-conference loss
1 traditionally terrible program that has looked really good since the defections (not a point in their favor)
2 infant FBS programs that have managed moderate success at the expense of the mediocre conference roster
2 right-place-right-time mid-major programs that were able to jump on board (one that has now tanked and one that tore through the conference and then was thoroughly embarrassed in a BCS bowl most recently)

enigmaax;583695 wrote:Because the Big East is made up of:

1 traditionally decent/good BCS program that has tanked the last several years
1 traditionally decent BCS program that has done slightly better since the defections
1 traditionally mediocre BCS program that always good for a bad non-conference loss
1 traditionally terrible program that has looked really good since the defections (not a point in their favor)
2 infant FBS programs that have managed moderate success at the expense of the mediocre conference roster
2 right-place-right-time mid-major programs that were able to jump on board (one that has now tanked and one that tore through the conference and then was thoroughly embarrassed in a BCS bowl most recently)

and still not answering the question, they have had more success on the field than the ACC, so why doesn't the ACC get the scrutiny from the football "brains" on this site and in the media give to the BE?
They have played better on the BCS stage and were viewed as being better at the end of each season than their ACC counterparts by the polls.

goosebumps;583690 wrote:but why is there never a call for the ACC to lose its BCS status?

I'd assume that it has something to do with traditional football powerhouses in the south (Florida State and the U) are all in the ACC. That and the fact that the first place team in the Big East and potential Fiesta Bowl participant (UCONN) was stomped by the third place team in the MAC's eastern division earlier this year.

Jughead;583709 wrote:I'd assume that it has something to do with traditional football powerhouses in the south (Florida State and the U) are all in the ACC. That and the fact that the first place team in the Big East and potential Fiesta Bowl participant (UCONN) was stomped by the third place team in the MAC's eastern division earlier this year.

The potential ACC rep this year lost to a DIAA school...

Right.
But you asked why and I gave a reason, albeit 2 poor reasons. I'm not sure the reason why everybody hates on the Big East while the ACC has "The Wheel of Destiny!" segment on ESPN.

"Why so much hate for the Big East and not the ACC?"

This is what you asked. That is what I answered. The perception is that the Big East has a bunch of lame teams who never did shit to earn their spot in the first place. I didn't say I agree or that it is right, but that is a big part of it (I think).

They are both b-ball conferences

This stuff always runs in cycles, and this year your Big East really sucks!! Other years the ACC has sucked too perhaps!! In past years though, the ACC has had member schools win or play for the National Championship!! So in their down years they are sliding by on reputation. What past history does the Big East have in winning, or playing for national Championships? Im not agreeing or disagreeing...................just telling you why I think the Big East backlash is coming out now. Its what has your conference done in the last decade!!

Pitt during the early 80's was a long time ago!!

gerb131;583739 wrote:They are both b-ball conferences

Not this year the ACC has one team ranked..

Everyone is saying the Big East is horrible this year they have no team ranked....Virginia Tech is a pretty good football team. Yes they lost to Boise State and James Madison but they are still a pretty good football team. Not man people were saying bad things about the Big East last year, yes there were some people but then it all went down hill after Cincinnati forgot to show up at the Sugar Bowl......think if Nebraska would have beat Texas and Cincy would have played Bama.....

Bama would still have crushed Cincinnati last year!! If thats what you were getting at?

Both conferences are hapless. Complete opposite of the Big 10 and SEC.

The Big East gets a lot of flack for several reasons:

1. They are still a relatively new conference, forming in 1979 for basketball. They did not become a football conference until 1991.
2. The Big East (from 2004 up to now) had only eight members. All the other conferences had 9-12 schools. People saw this as a sign of weakness.
3. When Miami, VT and BC left in 2004, all the naysayers were predicting doom and gloom. Despite all of this, the BE has actually done very well from 2005-2009 against other BCS opponents, in their bowl games, etc.
4. The Big East has the worst bowl tie-ins. Over the past five years, the BE bowl games included the International Bowl (vs. MAC), The Beef O'Brady/St. Petersburg Bowl (C-USA), and formerly the Papa John's Bowl (initially C-USA but now #9 SEC). Even the better BE bowl games are either relatively new or matches a higher ranked BE team against another lower ranked opponent (Meineke Car Care Bowl, Champs, NY Pinstripe Bowl). People are stupid. They think because the BE representative plays in these games, it means they were not any good. They don't realize the games are contractual obligations and not the best the teams could aspire to.
5. Teams of other conferences point to the BE to compensate for their own insecurities. As you mentioned, the ACC has nothing to brag about. In fact, since the inception of the BCS, the ACC has only won one BCS Bowl game. The Big East on the other hand has won several, even after the 2004 raid of the conference.

This year has been the first year the naysayers have been right about the BE. They did perform poorly OOC and a number of teams will finish with several losses. WVU (9-3) or UCONN (8-4) will win the BE this year and be the BCS bowl participant. There are 4-5 other teams lumped in at 7-5/6-6. However, as you pointed out, other conferences have done the same (Florida State, VT, Illinois in 2007).

september63;583759 wrote:Bama would still have crushed Cincinnati last year!! If thats what you were getting at?

Exactly would have been the same thing as what happened to them in the Sugar Bowl.

Two things about the Sugar Bowl last year

1. Watching just about everyone play last year (and being at the game) I am convinced the best two teams in the country by far were Bama and Florida. Florida would have likely beaten Texas convincingly as well last January. If you don' t believe it, consider this: That Florida team was the defending national champions and 11-1 going into that game. They returned a good bulk of the team from the year before.
2. It's just not fair to talk about how UC did in that game considering the coach bailed on them (after telling them he was staying and then them finding out at the sports banquet), the Gators were inspired by Tebow's last game and Urban Meyer's "I'm leaving/I'm staying".

Little Danny;583780 wrote:The Big East gets a lot of flack for several reasons:

1. They are still a relatively new conference, forming in 1979 for basketball. They did not become a football conference until 1991.
2. The Big East (from 2004 up to now) had only eight members. All the other conferences had 9-12 schools. People saw this as a sign of weakness.
3. When Miami, VT and BC left in 2004, all the naysayers were predicting doom and gloom. Despite all of this, the BE has actually done very well from 2005-2009 against other BCS opponents, in their bowl games, etc.
4. The Big East has the worst bowl tie-ins. Over the past five years, the BE bowl games included the International Bowl (vs. MAC), The Beef O'Brady/St. Petersburg Bowl (C-USA), and formerly the Papa John's Bowl (initially C-USA but now #9 SEC). Even the better BE bowl games are either relatively new or matches a higher ranked BE team against another lower ranked opponent (Meineke Car Care Bowl, Champs, NY Pinstripe Bowl). People are stupid. They think because the BE representative plays in these games, it means they were not any good. They don't realize the games are contractual obligations and not the best the teams could aspire to.
5. Teams of other conferences point to the BE to compensate for their own insecurities. As you mentioned, the ACC has nothing to brag about. In fact, since the inception of the BCS, the ACC has only won one BCS Bowl game. The Big East on the other hand has won several, even after the 2004 raid of the conference.

This year has been the first year the naysayers have been right about the BE. They did perform poorly OOC and a number of teams will finish with several losses. WVU (9-3) or UCONN (8-4) will win the BE this year and be the BCS bowl participant. There are 4-5 other teams lumped in at 7-5/6-6. However, as you pointed out, other conferences have done the same (Florida State, VT, Illinois in 2007).

Just a couple thoughts, not really points. Last year the Big East was really the only "major" conference that didn't have a terrible OOC loss. The Big XII and Big Ten had a few and I think that gets to your 5th point. Easier to point arbitrarily to someone worse when you're trying to state your own case and most people talk in generalizations instead of facts.

The bowl season doesn't help the Big East, especially when they try to sell a successful bowl season. Was it two years ago that the BE went undefeated in bowls...and tried to tout that? And immediately everyone looked at who they played and...well, it is really a no-win for them (partially by their own doing).

Another odd thing is that the fact that the former face of the Big East has shit itself in the ACC doesn't really help the comparison. Although, no one will really bring up that VT and BC have actually done better in-conference.

Little Danny;583792 wrote: 2. It's just not fair to talk about how UC did in that game considering the coach bailed on them

Hey, WVU lost its coach right after losing a shot at the national title and hammered Oklahoma in a BCS game. You gotta suck that one up.

enigmaax;583799 wrote:Hey, WVU lost its coach right after losing a shot at the national title and hammered Oklahoma in a BCS game. You gotta suck that one up.

Hmm... WVU played against Oklahoma led by a freshman QB (Sam Bradford)
UC played against Florida led by a senior QB (Tim Tebow).

Huge difference.... not to mention Oklahoma has their own issues about crapping the bed in bowl games.

Little Danny;583801 wrote:Hmm... WVU played against Oklahoma led by a freshman QB (Sam Bradford)
UC played against Florida led by a senior QB (Tim Tebow).

Huge difference.... not to mention Oklahoma has their own issues about crapping the bed in bowl games.

Eh...now you're just making excuses. The opponent in a BCS bowl game was 1) good and 2) motivated. Big fucking deal. Just sayin'.

Little Danny;583801 wrote:Hmm... WVU played against Oklahoma led by a freshman QB (Sam Bradford)
UC played against Florida led by a senior QB (Tim Tebow).

Huge difference.... not to mention Oklahoma has their own issues about crapping the bed in bowl games.

What are you trying to get at? Cincy was overrated. With or without their coach, it was still the same players.

As Ive said. This shit runs in cycles!! The fact that 4 to 5 ACC teams could beat this years Big East Champion isnt helping you this year.

Little Danny;583780 wrote: There are 4-5 other teams lumped in at 7-5/6-6. However, as you pointed out, other conferences have done the same (Florida State, VT, Illinois in 2007).

Big Difference with Illinois in 2007. They were picked as an at-large to the Rose Bowl at 9-3 because the conference champion (11-1 OSU) went to the Title Game.

dtdtim;584337 wrote:Big Difference with Illinois in 2007. They were picked as an at-large to the Rose Bowl at 9-3 because the conference champion (11-1 OSU) went to the Title Game.

This. The Big Ten's BCS representative was 11-1 and ranked #1 in the country.