Sim Dynasty

View Old Forum Thread

Old Forum Index » Other Stuff » Sports Talk » For Tyson especially - BC and the Big East
FuriousGiorge

For Tyson especially - BC and the Big East

August 23, 2005 at 12:07AM View BBCode

Stolen from Simmons' intern's daily links -

[url=http://www.ndnation.com/mainpage.cgi]Oct 13, 2007[/url] (bottom left). Click the link provided there. Youch.

[Edited on 8-23-2005 by FuriousGiorge]

[Edited on 8-24-2005 by FuriousGiorge]
tysonlowery

August 24, 2005 at 04:54PM View BBCode

Wow, that's pretty harsh. Especially considering ND never joined the Big East for football. BC does celebrate their upsets though - you have to be thankful for what you can get. We did win the 2001 national championship in hockey.
drunkengoat

August 24, 2005 at 05:05PM View BBCode

:lol:

Still waiting on Bower and Co. to step their asses up down here and do something significant myself.
drunkengoat

August 24, 2005 at 05:07PM View BBCode

It is good, though, that [url=www.southernmiss.com/sports/football/schedules/index.asp]four games[/url] will be televised nationally. I just wish we had a stronger schedule. Outside of Tulane and Bama, I don't see a threat anywhere.
drunkengoat

August 24, 2005 at 05:07PM View BBCode

Oh, and fucking Memphis.
FiveToolPlayer

August 24, 2005 at 07:54PM View BBCode

Tyson, you went to BC? Half of the people I worked with in my previous job are BC grads.

Also, how does ND talk smack? BC has beat them like 5 times in a row and ND hasn't been good since the 80s. Is the guy that made that website still holding on to the championships they won before Rudy played?
Cubsfan13

August 24, 2005 at 10:18PM View BBCode

Is Memphis considered Southern Miss' rival? Memphis should be able to beat Southern Miss behind the one man attack of DeAngelo Williams.

Anyway, Notre Dame sucks.
FuriousGiorge

August 24, 2005 at 10:26PM View BBCode

I don't know why BC gets all the hatred from the Big East (of which Notre Dame is, of course, not a part) when us and Miami gave them the exact same shaft. The only teams left in the Big East who have been around for any length of time, and therefore have any right to say anything are Pitt, Syracuse, WVU and Rutgers, and Syracuse really doesn't have a leg to stand on since they were ready to leave too before the ACC told them to go to hell (thank you, Governor Warner). You'd think the members of the Big East would be happy, since they basically got rid of all the good football teams and made their road to a BCS bowl easier. I guess they're just pissed because, since they added Louisville, they're still a bunch of second-rate teams who can't even win their second-rate conference.
barterer2002

August 24, 2005 at 10:57PM View BBCode

Miami in the Big East was always a strange matchup. Miami is just too geographically removed from most of the teams to be a good fit. They should have been an ACC or SEC school from the start. Virginia Tech-well, it makes sense for them to go to the ACC. There is a natural rival in Virgina and has a great more in common with the historically southern schools than with the Big East. Boston College, however, is not a fit for the ACC. They're as mismatched there as Miami was in the Big East. If I were commissioner of the world (scary thought I know), here's how the major conferences would look.

ACC
Duke
North Carolina
NC State
Maryland
Virginia
Wake Forest
Georgia Tech
Virginia Tech
Florida State
Miami

Big East
Boston College
UConn
Georgetown
Penn State
Pittsburgh
Providence
Rutgers
Seton Hall
St. Johns
Syracuse
Villanova
West Virginia

Pac 10
Arizona
Arizona State
Cal
Oregon
Oregon State
Stanford
UCLA
USC
Washington
Washington State

SEC
Alabama
Arkansas
Auburn
Clemson
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
LSU
Ole Miss
Mississippi State
South Carolina
Tennessee

Big 10
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Michigan
Michigan State
Minnesota
Notre Dame
Ohio State
Purdue
Wisconsin

Big 12
Colorado
Kansas
Kansas State
Iowa State
Missouri
Nebraska
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
SMU
Texas
Texas A&M
Texas Tech

edited with Cubsfan and FGs suggestions at 10:11 EDT

[Edited on 8-25-2005 by barterer2002]

[Edited on 8-25-2005 by barterer2002]
Cubsfan13

August 24, 2005 at 11:11PM View BBCode

You replaced Baylor with SMU? The big ten and big twelve should just switch names with the big twelve dropping Baylor and Iowa State going to the big ten (its a better fit). Let Northwestern stay in the big ten.. they were good not THAT long ago.
FuriousGiorge

August 24, 2005 at 11:22PM View BBCode

Apparently, winning the ACC in our inaugural year wasn't good enough to allow us entry into a major football conference.
FuriousGiorge

August 24, 2005 at 11:25PM View BBCode

I also have no idea why you switched USC and Clemson. If you're going to move them around, you might as well put them in the same conference.
Cubsfan13

August 24, 2005 at 11:40PM View BBCode

And what happened to UConn? They made a bowl game and they have a top basketball program.
FuriousGiorge

August 24, 2005 at 11:43PM View BBCode

Clearly, that is not good enough to be included in this ridiculous exercise.
barterer2002

August 25, 2005 at 02:06AM View BBCode

Sorry, got called away before I could fine tune it.

OK, I don't like Northwestern int he Big 10 so have dropped them. Put Clemson and South Carolina in the SEC and Va Tech in the ACC where they should have been to begin with. Have added UConn to the Big East as well as Providence to even it out.

[Edited on 8-25-2005 by barterer2002]
drunkengoat

August 25, 2005 at 03:54PM View BBCode

Cubs, Memphis is in C-USA with Southern Miss. And I'm thinking we fell to them last year, playing the game in Memphis. I'm just hoping the loss of key defensive players like Boley isn't going to hurt us as much as it should, but the fact that we toned down our schedule considerably is going to look even worse for us if we can't piece together a winning season with what we have ahead of us.
tysonlowery

August 25, 2005 at 03:58PM View BBCode

Northwestern clearly doesn't belong in the Big Ten - they are a much smaller, and a much better, school than anyone else in the conference.
swerve

August 26, 2005 at 01:03AM View BBCode

SMU in the Big 12 is stupid, that is even worse than Baylor. TCU, Rice or Houston would be better options than SMU. Houston has the best upside for football, Rice brings in great academics and baseball, TCU has great academics and good potential. SMU has worse potential than Baylor.
Bone-Scorpion

August 27, 2005 at 12:03AM View BBCode

IMO the Big East was more concerned about basketball then football. Yes it hurt them in Football terms, but the Big East isnt really a HUGE football conference outside of Miami, BC and Virginia Tech. They have always had top 25 teams, but not national powerhouses (outside of the above mentioned). In terms of Basketball the move made absolutely no sense to Notre Dame and BC. I mean BC was in the middle of the pack in the Big East, and now they go to the ACC!!!! BC is gonna be at the bottem of the league every year. There is no way they can outrecruit ACC schools. That was such a mistake for BC, but then again College Football has bigger crowds......... :D
lvnwrth

August 27, 2005 at 01:53AM View BBCode

That the Big Least maintains an automatice berth in the BCS has to be one of the great jokes of college football today.

Awesome basketball conference...crap for football.
FuriousGiorge

August 27, 2005 at 02:06AM View BBCode

The real controversy will be if Louisville (Louisiana, Peyton) goes undefeated this year, and there are less than 3 total undefeated schools in major conferences including them. You can leave out a Utah or a Boise State from the title game and say it was because their schedule was too weak. But if you leave out an undefeated, BCS conference school for the same reason, there will be hell to pay.
swerve

August 27, 2005 at 03:52AM View BBCode

I think Louisville has enough respect, that as long as, two unbeatens don't come from the power conferences they would be in the championship game. If they are unbeaten.

[Edited on 8-27-2005 by swerve]
lvnwrth

August 27, 2005 at 02:27PM View BBCode

Originally posted by FuriousGiorge
The real controversy will be if Louisville (Louisiana, Peyton) goes undefeated this year, and there are less than 3 total undefeated schools in major conferences including them. You can leave out a Utah or a Boise State from the title game and say it was because their schedule was too weak. But if you leave out an undefeated, BCS conference school for the same reason, there will be hell to pay.


Even though such a move would be totally justified. I don't know Louisville's non-conference schedule, but looking at the "football powers" in the Big Least, their conference schedule isn't going to be appreciably more difficult than the WAC or the Mountain West. Simply calling them a "BCS conference" doesn't make it so.

Take the fourth or fifth best teams from the SEC, ACC, Big 10, Big 12 and put them in the Big Least and they're the immediate favorites to win the conference.
FuriousGiorge

August 27, 2005 at 04:43PM View BBCode

Louisville is a legitimately good team who could run with pretty much any team in the country. No, they wouldn't be in trouble against the 4th or 5th best team in any of those conferences, and they'd be a contender for the top spot in pretty much all of them. The problem isn't their talent, it's their schedule. They have the sad Big East schedule, and their out of conferences are Kentucky (a team which could conceivably not win a game this year), Oregon State (a mediocre team in a shallow conference) and Florida Atlantic (no comment necessary). You can make a strong comparison between this Louisville team and the Kansas State teams of several years ago, when they used to win double digit games with Saskatchewan State and Missouri School for the Blind on the schedule. Those K State teams never went undefeated, so the BCS never had to decide on whether they would play in the national championship. But if Louisville goes undefeated, and the BCS passes them over for a 1 loss team with a big boy schedule, it MIGHT be the event that really gets the ball rolling on a playoff. Maybe.
FiveToolPlayer

August 27, 2005 at 05:31PM View BBCode

While I agree that BC will struggle in ACC basketball against Duke, UNC, Wake, GT, etc., some view it as an advantage due to more exposure. Some kids would probably respond positively to the chance at playing against the best players in the country consistently for a program that is already reasonably successful. On the other hand, you could argue that this hasn't worked for teams like Florida State and the other ACC hoops cellar dwellers. Don't underestimate BC's basketball program though. Al Skinner keeps finding hidden gems on the recruiting trail (Troy Bell, Craig Smith) and they currently have a good young team. I predict they'll be in the upper middle of the ACC standings for the next few years.

Pages: 1 2