The Confidential

The ACC Sports Blog

Archive for the tag “Football”

08 Dec 2011

ACC Expansion Still on Hold

Yesterday, the Big East announced that it would stretch coast-to-coast by adding Boise State, San Diego State, Houston, SMU, and Central Florida.  If this move surprised you, then you are likely living without the Internet (how are you even reading this?) because this had been rumored and discussed for many weeks now.  The announcement was mere anti-climactic confirmation of what everyone had already known.  But it does impact the ACC because the addition did not in any way alter the Big East’s stance that Syracuse and Pittsburgh must stick around for the full 27-months before departing.

Indeed, according to ESPN, Big East Commissioner John Marinatto remains firm in holding Syracuse and Pittsburgh to that time frame:

Meanwhile, Marinatto said the conference is still determined to hold the three departing schools to the Big East bylaw that each signed and helped craft, especially Pitt, when it was the chair of the conference board, to a 27-month departure. That would mean the three schools couldn’t leave until the fall of 2014.

Pitt and Syracuse are joining the ACC and haven’t pushed to leave early.

While West Virginia has sued the Big East to leave early, Syracuse and Pittsburgh are placing nice.  And it is not being reciprocated.

The ESPN report further notes that ACC commissioner John Swofford has indicated that the ACC will accept those schools at any point over the next three years.  While there will be no battle over the schools, the ACC will not get caught flat-footed if they are released early.

The question that begs is why the Big East would really want to keep these schools around.  If Syracuse and Pitt have good seasons, that will just make their departure all the more painful.  Just think about what happens if either school defeats Boise State.  How much would the Broncos’ reputation be hurt the following year once those schools are gone?  And if Syracuse and Pitt have poor seasons, this will simply drag down the schedule strength of the current schools.  The Confidential understands that the Big East would want to keep Syracuse and Pitt around for basketball purposes–but that is the one area where the Big East does not need any help.  Why have your elite, remaining schools run the risk of losses to departing programs?  From an on-field perspective, there is little reason for the Big East to dig its heels in, especially now that the Big East has the Plan B in place.

One can only assume that the Big East’s position is one that can be negotiated with $$$.  If the schools offer to pay the Big East some additional funds, the Big East will release them.  It seems likely that there will be no changes for 2012, as the Big East cannot secure replacements that soon.  But, by 2013, that problem should be gone.

For the ACC, this means that expansion is still on hold.  It will be, at least, 2013 before we find out how many Syracuse fans will cram into the Carrier Dome to watch a game against Duke or North Carolina.

Posted by acaffrey in ACC only, Conference Realignment and tagged , , , , , , , ,
07 Dec 2011

Fedora to North Carolina Imminent

ESPN and other media outlets are reporting that Larry Fedora will leave Southern Mississippi to become the next head football coach for the North Carolina Tar Heels.  Fedora was 33-19 in four seasons at Southern Miss, including four straight bowl appearances.  The Golden Eagles will face Nevada in the 2011 Sheraton Hawai’i Bowl on December 24th.

For North Carolina, this ends several months of speculation since the firing of Butch Davis.  Although North Carolina had some very good years under Mack Brown in the 1990’s, they have not had a 10-win season since that decade.  Davis was unable to fix that and, worse yet, saw various NCAA infractions allegedly occur on his watch.

Still, Fedora enters a situation where the cupboard is far from bare.  The Tar Heels have been to four straight bowl games.  The ACC is good enough to merit two BCS bowl participants, but not so good to prevent a team like North Carolina from rising to the top.  Time will tell, but this certainly seems like a win-win hire for all parties.

Posted by acaffrey in ACC only, Football and tagged , ,
07 Dec 2011

The College Football Overtime Rules Need to be Revised

With all the other hot topics to discuss, such as alleged molestation and the always-present college football post–season debate, the Confidential is hesitant to start another debate.  But the college football overtime rules stink.  There is no need for the NCAA to continue to use a system that is more “NHL Shootout” than the “Modified Sudden-Death” rules of the NFL during the playoff season.  Let the kids play real football in overtime.

As all college football fans know, the overtime rules allow each team to get one possession at the 25-yard line.  The possession order flips each overtime period.  In the third overtime, teams must go for a 2-point conversion after a touchdown.

The first problem the Confidential has is that the possessions start at the 25-yard line.  For the most part, teams start in field goal position.  If they gain 5 yards, it is a 37-yard field goal.  Even for college kickers, this is not a daunting kick (sorry Boise).  In a game like LSU-Alabama, the defenses came up big all night in denying the opposing offense the opportunity to get into field goal position.  And then in overtime, the rules just gave each team automatic placement there.  It was a field goal contest with LSU winning and Alabama losing.  The result was fair–Alabama has no reason to whine or complain.  But is this really how games should be resolved?  The field goal equivalent to an NHL shootout?  A team does not move the ball, but can win because it has the better kicker?

To be sure, the NFL sudden-death rules are a bit harsh.  The team that wins the coin flip MUST take the ball (ask the Detroit Lions about this) and the majority of time will score via a field goal to end the game.  The other team does not even get the ball.  That seems odd.  Football is not just an offensive sport–it is a game that involves offense, defense, and special teams.  Allowing the recipient to win on a field goal where the opponent does not even get a chance to put its offense on the field against its opponent’s defense diminishes the fairness and reliability of the result.

Even the NFL is moving away from the rule, allowing both teams to at least have possession of the ball in playoff overtime games.  To deprive an overtime game of Drew Brees, Tom Brady, and Aaron Rodgers, simply because their teams had the poor fortune of losing a coin flip, was finally deemed insufficient by the NFL.  The college rules, fortunately,  never wavered in recognizing that both teams deserve to put their offenses on the field.

But the NFL does not adopt entirely new rules for overtime, such as having the teams start from the opponent’s 25-yard line. Nor should college football.  Just guarantee each team a chance to possess the ball and be done with it.  Play normal football and see what happens.

The second problem the Confidential has with the rules is that it is as if the goal of the college football game is to end the game as soon as possible.  What’s the hurry?  Baseball doesn’t start extra innings with a runner on third-base.

Even the NHL plays a 5-minute overtime (albeit with 4 on 4) before resorting to the shootout.  And those rules do not apply to NHL playoff games, which just continue indefinitely until there is a winner.    After all, the NHL playoffs are elimination-type games (some are elimination, all count towards determining elimination).

College basketball provides 5 minute overtime period(s) with the same basic rules–regardless of whether the game is played in November or March.  Who can forget the epic six-overtime Syracuse-Connecticut game?   The game ended at 1:22 a.m.  Is there any reason a college football game cannot extend as long as necessary to reach a reliable result?  Absolutely not.  In fact, college basketball features players fouling out and being unable to return in overtime.  Eight players fouled out of the Syracuse-UConn game.  That led to reduced rosters.  In football, most teams travel with at least 65 players and usually quite a bit more.  There is no concern about not being able to field a team.

That being said, the Confidential does understand that college football is grueling.  Players need to be appropriate hydrated wearing all of those pads.  The game is, itself, physical.  So if there is a reason to not drag out the game by having coaches play a very conservative style of overtime and taking three fifteen-minute overtime periods to resolve.  That is understandable.  But that is why a modified form of sudden-death rules is appropriate.

In light of all of this, the Confidential proposes this for a modified, sudden-death overtime:

  • The overtime game begins with the last team to score in regulation receiving the football via kickoff.
  • The first kickoff by any team in overtime cannot be an onside kick.  The kick must travel beyond the 50-yard line or it is a 10-yard penalty–with the receiving team choosing to apply to the recovery or require a re-kick with the penalty yardage.
  • The team that receives the first kickoff can punt, score, or be scored upon.
  • If the team that receives the first kickoff punts, they lose the game if its opponent scores a TD or FG.
  • If the team that receives the first kickoff is scored upon via a safety, defensive touchdown or punt return touchdown, the game ends without any further action.
  • If the team that receives the first kickoff scores, the other team will get one offensive possession.  That team has the one possession to tie the game or win the game.  If they score to take a lead, they win the game.  But, if they tie the game, the overtime shifts to full sudden-death mode.  The next team that scores by any method wins.
  • After each team has one possession, onside kicks are allowed.
  • A fumbled punt return or kickoff return counts as an offensive possession.

With this rule, both teams would have at least one chance to put its special teams and offense on the field.  If the receiving team gets conservative and does not go for it on 4th down or kicks a FG, they run the risk of losing by a FG or TD later.  If the team that gets the ball second chooses to go for the tie, rather than the win… so be it.  Do not complain that you lost in sudden-death when you had the opportunity to win.

The only unfairness possible is if the first team with possession  scores a TD, goes for two, and converts it…. in that instance, the team with the ball second has no chance to win it.  But even then they could decide to kick an onsides kick if they really did not want their opponent’s offense back on the field for a sudden-death chance to win it.  At least there is a chance.

Return to the LSU-Alabama overtime.  By not having both teams start at the 25-yard line, either Alabama or LSU would have to drive the field to score a TD.  Or have their defense make a play to get them in FG range.  Or have a punt return that sets up field position.  In other words, even the FG would require some performance by the three phases of football.  Whomever won that game would have done something other than have a FG kicking contest.  The result would be that much more reliable.

And given that the FBS system is all about the regular season being the playoff, isn’t that all the more important?  Let Oklahoma State play Iowa State in a real overtime to determine if the Cowboys lose control of their own destiny.  Let Alabama and LSU play real football to decide the outcome in overtime.  Overtimes decide hugely important games.  These overtimes would be thoroughly enjoyable for the fans watching in person and on television.  Everyone wins if the NCAA adopts these more reasonable overtime rules.

 

Posted by acaffrey in Football, Uncategorized and tagged , , ,
06 Dec 2011
6 Comments

College Football Playoffs–Be Careful What You Wish For!

The period between the announcement of the bowl matchups and the crowning of the national championship is the season for many to clamor that college football is a failure and will be until there is a playoff.  ‘Tis the season for media personalities to jump on the populist bandwagon and complain about the evil BCS system.  The easy argument is that it is absurd that college football is the only sport without a playoff–and the NCAA has one at every other level of football.  But be careful what you wish for sports fans.  While a playoff may seem like an overdue necessity, the current college football system is simply awesome.  The Confidential thinks that football fans need to appreciate the beauty of the system, rather than looking for the few ways that it is imperfect.

As an initial matter, the current system WORKS!  The BCS system is designed to ensure that the #1 team plays the #2 team.  Well, it has always done that, right?  If you are excluded, it is because your team is ranked #3.  Maybe it should have been #2… but it was not deemed to be.

Yeah, there is often debate about who is #1 and who is #2, but isn’t that always the case?  If there was a 4-team playoff, the fifth place team would be excluded as the greatest injustice in the history of injustices every year.  Just think about this year… who would the 4 teams be?  LSU, Alabama, Stanford, and Oklahoma State.  Stanford and Alabama did not even win their conference division, much less win their conference championship. And what about 2008, where there were FIVE undefeated teams.  Who are you leaving out?

What about an 8-team playoff.  If 4 is hard, try figuring out 8.  If you went by BCS standings, you would have LSU, Alabama, Okie State, Stanford, Oregon, Arkansas, Boise State, and Kansas State.  That’s right, no teams from the ACC or Big 10.  How do you leave out Wisconsin, the Big 10 champ at an impressive 11-2 record?   And so on.  Is it the major conference champions that qualify?  So a 7-5 Louisville or 7-6 UCLA would qualify just for winning their conference title, even though there are teams with much better records in their conference and, of course, outside their conference.  The deeper you go in a playoff pool, the smaller the difference is between candidates.  Is Michigan really worse than Kansas State?  Are you sure?  Really sure?  8 teams is just not enough.

Perhaps you think that they should have a 16-team playoff, just like the other divisions.  Now you are adding four weeks to the season.  The FCS playoffs have started and are already down to 8 teams.  Actually, the FCS uses 20 teams and started Thanksgiving weekend.  For a team like Albany, their 11-game regular season schedule ended on November 19th and they were eliminated before December.  They did not have a bye week.  There are no conference championship games.  Albany finished the regular season 8-3, but still qualified in a playoff for the right to go 8-4.  Is that what people want?  8-3 playoff teams?  Of course, in the round of 16, the top seeds all advanced to the next round anyway.  Despite giving the 8 teams the opportunity to pull an upset, none did.  This is not surprising, given that they just played a whole season to determine who the cream of the crop was.  All a 16-team playoff does is water down the regular season.  Having a bunch of 3-loss teams qualify does nothing more than render some regular season losses irrelevant.  You can still lose 1 or 2 more and make the playoffs, after all.

In contrast, the BCS system always pits #1 against #2.  Occasionally, the debate between #2 and #3 is such that a winning #3 might get some votes that belong to the winning #2.  But no matter who is crowned the champion, it is based on the performance of work from day 1 to the last day of the season. Even if you vehemently disagree as to who is #1 or #2, those are still great teams.

But, you say, the playoffs are the only way to settle a champion.  Says who?  Look at basketball.  3 weeks of games and you get a national champion.  However, look at last year!  The 9th place team in the Big East, UConn, won the national championship.  Quick… name UConn’s regular season losses.  I bet you cannot even name how many they had.  They lost 9.  Even though they lost 9 times, they were still deemed the best team–the National Champion. How can that be?  The Cinderella stories of North Carolina State and Villanova were great, but nobody REALLY thinks that those schools were the best in the land.

Perhaps you are of the mind that the National Champion simply refers to the team that wins the post-season tournament, not the “best team.”  Whoever wins it all deserves praise.  But college football does not stop there.  College football sets out to crown a National Champion AND determine who the best team is.  In basketball, you play for 4 months to whittle the field down from 300+ to 68.  Of those 68, roughly 20 of them are not truly among the top 68 teams.  Even so , that leaves 48 that likely are the best 48 (especially if ignore that coach of the 12-loss team on the radio show circuit the morning after the bracket is announced and his team was #49).  You do all that, only to discard it and play a tournament.

Is the regular season just a practice for the Big Dance?  Nobody EVER says that about college football.  Lose to Iowa State in week 10, and it could keep you out of the national championship.  Perhaps you think that it is not fair to penalize a team who loses.  Well, every March, we penalize 67 teams for losing.  It’s a single-elimination tournament where every loss ends the season.  #1 seed?  Better beat Northern Iowa.  #3 seed?  Better beat Belmont.  And so on.

In football, the loss in September or November may or may not end your season from a national championship perspective, but it likely will.  At the very least, you lose control over your own destiny.  In college football, every September game is basically just like a first-round game of the Big Dance.  You have to win to stay alive.  Every October game is like a Round of 32 game.  Every November game narrows down to Sweet 16, Elite 8, and Final Four.  And, by the time the BCS bids are announced, you are down to 2.

But the football system makes up for it with bowl games for many.  Ask Pitt and Syracuse whether their weekend matchup of 5-6 teams mattered.  The winner got a bowl game, the loser went home.  Ask West Virginia whether its game against USF–a win that got them into the Orange Bowl–mattered.  It did.  And we know that West Virginia was watching Cincinnati beat UConn with glee.  Three regular season games in the worst BCS conference and they all mattered greatly.  If there was a 16-team playoff, would those games have mattered at all?   How many college basketball games in February matter?  Sure, for seeding.  A few bubble teams clashing to see which 10-loss team qualifies to be a 12th seed.  But merely days before the bracket is announced, those games largely do not matter.  Even in the worst conference, the worst team in that conference can win its conference championship and get a ticket to the Big Dance.  And notice how exciting those conference championship games are?  That television is compelling.  Because the games matter.  Elimination games matter.

And that is why the current football system is simply awesome!  Every game is an elimination game, from September to December.  Lose once, you are no longer controlling your national championship destiny.  Lose twice, you are done.  Lose three times, and your conference championship hopes dim.  Lose four times, you are looking at a mid-level bowl.  Lose five times, now you are looking at a late December bowl.  Lose six times?  You’ll be playing in mid-December.  Lose  seven times?  There is no post-season (except for UCLA).  Every weeks costs something measurable.

The NFL has a playoff system.  Yes, the NFL allows 12 of its 32 teams to make the playoffs.  The NFL is, like college basketball, more of a marathon than a sprint.  You can lose an NFL game in September, another in October, another in November, and another in December, and yet still finish 12-4.  No 12-4 team has been excluded from the playoffs.  Quite the contrary, there have been late season NFL games that are so unimportant that teams rest their stars.  You don’t see that in college football under the current system.  You might if there was a playoff.  Is that desirable?  Meaningless games at the end of the season?  Of course, unlike many other sports, Football is always single elimination.  The better team does not always win.  The 2010 Super Bowl was won by a #6 seed.  A college football playoff would do nothing more than weaken the import of that September win over your best OOC opponent.  A college football playoff would render that November win over your rival secondary.   Those games are mere tuneups for the playoff.

The day that college football goes to a playoff is the day that your team no longer has to try to win every game.  If a 10-2 team can make the playoffs, that’s all that teams need to strive to obtain.  Sure, a team will always want to go undefeated, but the pressure to do so will no longer be there.   At that point, college football will cease to be what it has been for all these decades.  All the Confidential can say is be careful what you wish for–sometimes the cure is worse than the disease.

Posted by acaffrey in Football, Uncategorized and tagged , , ,
05 Dec 2011

ACC Basketball Rankings: December 5, 2011

This is particularly complex with Pitt and Syracuse not yet in the ACC, but it can still be done.  Here is how we view the ACC basketball schools as of December 5, 2011:

1.  Syracuse–Win over top 10 Florida keeps the Orange rolling at 8-0.  Fab Melo and Dion Waiters are much improved sophomores.

2. North Carolina–At 6-2, the Tarheels have lost twice.  Both were on the road in tough games.  The loss to Kentucky carries no shame.  Nice win over Wisconsin.

3. Duke–At 7-1, Duke has also beaten some good teams.  The 20-point loss to Ohio State is hard to ignore though.

4. Virginia–At 7-1, the Cavaliers finally got that nice win (over Michigan).  In fact, the Cavs were one of just 4 ACC teams to win their matchup against a Big 10 foe.

5. Pittsburgh–At 7-1, the Panthers are circling the wagons.  Tennessee is not a great team, but a good road win though.

6.  Miami–At 5-2, the win over UMass helps offset the loss to a very good Purdue team on the road.

7. Virginia Tech–One of four 5-3 teams, the Hokies get the edge based on the quality of losses–Syracuse (8-0), Minnesota (8-1), and Kansas State (5-0).

8. Florida State– At 5-3, the Seminoles have also lost to three very good teams in Harvard (8-0), UConn (7-1), and Michigan State (6-2).  Narrowly behind the Hokies in this regard.

9.  North Carolina State–At 5-3, losing at home to Indiana was a bit of a surprise.  Indiana is off to a good start at 8-0, but the Wolfpack need to protect home court.  Stanford and Texas are decent losses too.

10. Wake Forest– At 5-3, the Demon Deacons started the week well by defeating Texas Tech and Nebraska, but closed poorly losing to Richmond.

11. Clemson–at 4-3, with a decent win over Iowa and tough loss to South Carolina.

12. Georgia Tech–at 4-4, Georgia Tech gets the edge over Maryland based on the quality of the losses this week Tulane (9-0) and Northwestern (7-1).

13. Maryland–at 4-3, Maryland showed some life by beating Notre Dame, who is still reeling from the loss of Tim Abromaitis.  A positive sign that a surge may be on the horizon though.

14. Boston College--at 2-6.  Ugh.

Agree?  Disagree?  Let us know!

Posted by acaffrey in ACC only, Football, Rankings and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
05 Dec 2011
1 Comment

Virginia Tech and Clemson BOTH Heading for BCS Bowls!

The bowl matchups are complete and BOTH Virginia Tech and Clemson are heading for BCS games this year.  The collective wisdom was that the ACC Championship was for the right to play in the Orange Bowl as the ACC’s sole BCS representative.  Nobody expected the loser, in this case Virginia Tech, to sneak in the backdoor and snare the at-large bid to the Sugar Bowl.  But that is exactly what happened–meaning a larger payout to the ACC.

Here are all the bowl matchups:

ORANGE BOWL, January 4, 2012

Clemson (10-3) vs. West Virginia (9-3) in a matchup of two excellent traveling fan bases who consider themselves overdue for a BCS appearance.

SUGAR BOWL, January 3, 2012

Virginia Tech (11-2) vs. Michigan (10-2).  Only Clemson could beat the Hokies.  Can the Hokies stop Denard Robinson?

CHICK-FIL-A Bowl, December 31, 2011

Virginia (8-4) vs. Auburn (7-5)

SUN BOWL, December 31, 2011

Georgia Tech (8-4) vs. Utah (7-5)

MUSIC CITY BOWL, December 30, 2011

Wake Forest (6-6) vs. Mississippi State (6-6)

CHAMPS SPORTS BOWL, December 29, 2011

Florida State (8-4) vs. Notre Dame (8-4)

BELK BOWL, December 27, 2011

North Carolina St. (7-5) vs. Louisville (7-5)

INDEPENDENCE BOWL, December 26, 2011

North Carolina (7-5) vs. Missouri (7-5)

Notes:

  • With the Virginia Tech selection to the Sugar Bowl, the ACC was unable to fill all of its bowl slots.  The Military Bowl will now feature Toledo and Air Force.
  • Miami was bowl-eligible, but self-imposed a bowl ban due to possible NCAA rules violations.
  • Future members Syracuse and Pittsburgh battled for a bowl spot, with Pitt winning and earning the right to play in the BBVA Compass Bowl against SMU on January 7, 2012.
Posted by acaffrey in ACC only, Football and tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,
05 Dec 2011

ACC Football Rankings: November 28, 2011

This is particularly complex with Pitt and Syracuse not yet in the ACC, but it can still be done.  With only bowl games remaining, here is how we view the ACC football schools as of December 5, 2011:

1.  Clemson–At 10-3, the Tigers lost more games than Va Tech, but beat the Hokies soundly.  Twice.  Without hosting them in either game.

2. Virginia Tech–at 11-2, Virginia Tech need not be ashamed of its season.  A Sugar Bowl bid as an at-large BCS team now awaits.

3. Virginia–of the three 8-4 teams, Virginia beat both of them.

4. Georgia Tech–at 8-4, the Yellow Jackets’ losses were to teams with a combined record of 35-13.

5. Florida State–at 8-4, the Seminoles losses were to teams with a combined record of 32-16.

6. North Carolina State–North Carolina State gets the edge here for beating North Carolina.

7. North Carolina–same 7-5 record as NC State, who shutout the Tar Heels.

8. Wake Forest–the same 6-6 record as Miami, but Wake Forest gets the edge here.  Wake Forest’s season was bookended by losses to Syracuse and Vanderbilt.

9. Miami–the same 6-6 record as Miami.  Too bad Miami’s season was sandwiched between losses to Maryland and Boston College.

10.  Pittsburgh–the win over Syracuse to get to 6-6 gives them the easy edge.

11.  Syracuse–second-half of season collapse drops them from 5-2 to 5-7 and outside the bowl picture.

12.  Boston College–rallied at the end.

13. Duke–made some strides

14. Maryland–the less said, the better.

Do you agree with these rankings?  If not, let us know.

Posted by acaffrey in ACC only, Football, Rankings and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
02 Dec 2011

ACC Football Predictions for December 3, 2011

Here are The Confidential’s football predictions for this week’s games featuring ACC teams:

ACC CHAMPIONSHIP GAME: Virginia Tech (11-1) v Clemson (9-3)

There is no compelling reason to pick Clemson here.  After clinching the spot in this game, Clemson has gone on cruise control–only to be destroyed by a mediocre North Carolina State and handled by a decent, but not great, South Carolina team.  Granted, Clemson beat Virginia Tech on the road.  But that was a long time ago.  Since then, Virginia Tech has been rolling, while Clemson has been struggling.  Even Clemson’s wins down the stretch were of a questionable ilk.  In contrast, Virginia Tech dominated Virginia.  There are playmakers for both teams, but Virginia Tech’s just have that much more oomph, including ACC Player of the Year David Wilson.  Prediction: Virginia Tech 27- Clemson 20.

BONUS GAME: Future ACC Member Syracuse (5-6) at Future ACC Member Pittsburgh (5-6):

Major bowl implications here.  And, by major, I mean that the winner becomes bowl eligible and might get selected to a bowl game that is played next Wednesday or something.  For the Big East, it is just pleasing that this is not their Championship Game.  No 6-6 team will ever get a BCS bid out of the Big East.  7-5?  Possible.  Stay tuned for Louisville.  Anyway, both of these teams are limping right now… Syracuse more so than Pittsburgh.  Both teams have demonstrated anemic offenses, despite seasoned quarterbacks.  Smart money says to go with Pittsburgh in a low scoring affair.  Therefore, the prediction is Syracuse 33-Pittsburgh 30.

The Confidential apologizes in advance for not picking your team.   Feel free to share why we are wrong. 

Posted by acaffrey in ACC only, Football, Predictions and tagged , , , , , , ,
29 Nov 2011

Updated ACC Bowl Projections

With the 2011 football season coming to a close, the time is ripe to predict where the various ACC teams are headed for bowl purposes.  Here are The Confidential’s projections as of November 29, 2011:

ACC #1 goes to the Orange Bowl (BCS)-Miami, Florida to face another BCS team on January 4, 2012.

Last Year’s Matchup: Stanford 40, Virginia Tech 12

Projected 2011-2012 Matchup: Virginia Tech vs. West Virginia. 

Explanation: Clemson is reeling.  Meanwhile, the odds are that Cincy will beat UConn, WVU will beat USF, and the voters will like West Virginia. 


ACC #2 goes to the Chick-Fil-A Bowl-Atlanta, Georgia to face the SEC #5 on December 31, 2011.

Last Year’s Matchup: Florida State 26, South Carolina 17

Projected 2011-2012 Matchup: Clemson vs. Auburn.   

ACC #3 goes to the Champ Sports Bowl-Orlando, Florida to face Big East #2 on December 29, 2011.

Last Year’s Matchup: North Carolina State 23, West Virginia 7

Projected 2011-2012 Matchup: Florida State v Notre Dame (eligible to take Big East spot here once every four years)

ACC #4 goes to the Sun Bowl- El Paso, Texas to face Pac-12 #4 on December 31, 2011.

Last Year’s Matchup: Notre Dame 33, Miami 17

Projected 2011-2012 Matchup: Virginia v Utah.

ACC #5 goes to the Belk Bowl-Charlotte, North Carolina to face Big East #3 on December 27, 2011.

Last Year’s Matchup: South Florida 31, Clemson 26

Projected 2011-2012 Matchup: Georgia Tech v Louisville.

ACC #6 goes to the Music City Bowl-Nashville, Tennessee to face SEC #7 on December 30, 2011.

Last Year’s Matchup: North Carolina 30, Tennessee 27

Projected 2011-2012 Matchup: North Carolina v Florida

ACC #7 goes to the Independence Bowl-Shreveport, Louisiana to face MWC #3 on December 26, 2011.

Last Year’s Matchup: Air Force 14, Georgia Tech 7

Projected 2011-2012 Matchup: Wake Forest v San Diego State

ACC #8 goes to the Military Bowl-Washington, DC, to face Navy on December 28, 2011.

Last Year’s Matchup: Maryland 51, East Carolina 20

Projected 2011-2012 Matchup: North Carolina State v Cincinnati (Navy fails to qualify)

Posted by acaffrey in ACC only, Football, Predictions and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
28 Nov 2011

ACC Basketball Rankings: November 28, 2011

This is particularly complex with Pitt and Syracuse not yet in the ACC, but it can still be done.  Here is how we view the ACC basketball schools as of November 28, 2011:

1.  Syracuse–Not going to penalize Syracuse for beating everyone on its schedule.  6-0 is 6-0.  Va Tech and Stanford are good wins too.

Next big test: Florida on December 2.

2. Duke–At 7-0, and with more impressive wins that Syracuse, Duke could be #1.  But both teams are just holding North Carolina’s spot right now.   Duke did great in Maui though.

Next big test: Ohio State on November 29.

3. North Carolina–At 5-1, North Carolina gets a huge benefit of the doubt here after that loss to UNLV.  2 huge tests coming up–we’ll know a lot more soon enough.

Next big test: Wisconsin on November 30.

4. Virginia Tech–At 5-1, the Hokies looked very good in losing to Syracuse and beating Oklahoma State.

Next bit test:  Minnesota on November 30.

5. North Carolina State–At 5-1, North Carolina State is off to a real good start.  The win over Texas was nice.

Next big test: Indiana on November 30.

6. Pittsburgh–At 5-1, the Panthers are still reeling from the loss to Long Beach State.  Winning, but not entirely impressively.

Next big test: Tennessee on December 3.

7. Virginia–At 5-1, the Cavaliers still have no quality wins.  And that bad loss to TCU lingers.

Next big test: Michigan on November 30.

8.  Miami–At 4-1, the loss to Mississippi is not the worst loss ever.  A good team gets the win there.

Next big test: Purdue on November 29.

9.  Florida State– At 5-2, hit a rough spot with losses to Harvard and UConn.  Two very good teams, but two losses nevertheless.

Next big test: Michigan State on November 30.

10. Wake Forest– At 4-2, the Demon Deacons have two decent losses, but got a nice win over Texas Tech to give them the edge of Georgia Tech here.

Next big test: Nebraska on November 30.

11. Georgia Tech–at 4-2, Georgia Tech needs a good win soon.

12. Clemson–at 3-2, with closer losses, Clemson gets the nod here.

13. Maryland–at 3-2, same record as Clemson, but barely beat Florida Gulf Coast and some horrible losses.

14. Boston College--at 2-4.  Nowhere to go but up.

Agree?  Disagree?  Let us know!

Posted by acaffrey in ACC only, Football, Rankings and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Post Navigation

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →