The Big East thread would be a great place to continue.

Thanks....

Another one of Richie's brilliant analysis of Boston College at #23. I'm not arguing the ranking. Comments of his analysis of the Boston College football program alone makes me wonder if Richie formulates his opinions as he types. Some of his comments are completely incorrect and lack research that are the premise for his opinions. Whether bias, lack of research, or whatever reasoning, he should attempt to be more concise. Especially when referencing information ( that is mostly or completely inaccurate) as main points to support a statement or opinion. Here are his comments regarding BC football at #23 in this top 25 poll:


"Tom O'Brien always has decent team, but never sensational ones. It's hard to say why, as BC is the only real football school in the northeast and has an alumni base that supports the team. Maybe it's just the intangibles; things that add up during the season or particular games, that just provide to be too much to a team to overcome. Assume the same type of season this year that BC has been known to produce: A second or third place finish in its side of the conference, and a good bowl game." :





Comment 1: " Tom O'Brien always has decent team, but never sensational ones."

I agree with this assesment. BC is very lackluster and plays a boring brand of football.


Comment 2: It's hard to say why, as BC is the only real football school in the northeast and has an alumni base that supports the team.

This comment is comical and completely erroneous. Syracuse, Rutgers, and UCONN all have an alumni that is a lot more passionate about their football program than Boston College. Syracuse and UCONN averaged a higher attendance than Boston College last season. Rutger sent more fans ( 12k) to its bowl game than BC has sent in its previous 5 Bowl games combined( not an exageration). BC averaged 37k in its first season in the ACC which was a drop from 41k in its last season in the Big East. Also, as mentioned above Rutgers took 12k fans to the Insight Bowl game last year compared to Boston College's 1,000 fans that went to Boise Blue Smurf Bowl. Just in case you didn't know, the INsight Bowl against a Pac-10 team is a considerably better bowl game the "Boise" Bowl which matches an ACC team against a WAC team. Btw, the 12,000 fans from Rutgers ( in just one bowl game ) who attended the Insight game in Arizona is about the total number of fans BC has sent to its last 5 Bowl games. Also, Just to put things into perspective, UCONN sent 20,000 fans to the Motor City Bowl ( where BC played in 2003) in 2004. In comparison BC sent a whopping 1,500 fans in 2003 to Detroit the same year. Additionally, Syracuse has averaged 5-15k ( depending on the year) more fans than Boston College over the course of the last 25 years. The reality is BC alumni ( in basketball too) is one of the worst at traveling to Bowl games and supporting its athletic programs. Its stadium is very high schoolish. The new 8,000 seat basketball arena Conte Center is about as loud as a library. This is the reasoning why Boston College is dismissed by good Bowl games and sent to Boise and Motor City bowls to face Non-bcs teams. Their fans are awful at supporting BC athletics and the comment BC is the only "real" team in the Northeast that supports its team is not slightly inaccurate but a ridiculous comment. You are aware Boston College hasn't been to a New Year's Day Bowl Game since 1982, right? In the same amount of time Syracuse has been to 9 New Year Day Bowl game> Also, Syracuse has been to 7 more bowl games than Boston College overall in that same period. I guess they aren't a "real" team compared to BC, ehh? wink

Comment 3:

Assume the same type of season this year that BC has been known to produce: A second or third place finish in its side of the conference, and a good bowl game."

First, I will explain what Richie was alluding to in "their side of the conference". The ACC is split into two divisions. One is the Atlantic Division ( FSU, BC, Clemson and so on) and the other is the Coastal Division ( Miami, VT, GT, and so on).
Now that everyone understands what Richie was attempting to convey which is important( see below), lets "carry on".

BC has played a GRAND total of ONE year of ACC football, yet Richie states BC football already has a reputation of producing the second or third place finish in its Atlantic Division? LOL!!!!!!!!! Very interesting........ Lets See. Last year in its first year of "ACC BALL" , BC along with Florida State tied for 1st place in the Atlantic Division. Both teams sported 5-3 conference records. I fail ( as anyone would) to see how 1st place in the ACC Atlantic Division last year( in its first year) registers as BC being "known" as a team that finishes 2nd or 3rd yearly " in thier side of the conference" aka Atlantic division. . Also, just so Richie doesn't reference BC's Big East days as reasoning for this comment ( aka he was confused with records since conference realignment), BC finished above 4th in the Big East only twice during its entire existence, right? BC was the perpetual 5th or 6th place team in the Big East most years as it finished with 4-3 or 3-4 ( thank good for Rutgers ( the RU of old) and Temple).

Moreover, Richie's comment BC should land in a good Bowl game AGAIN is baffling. I doubt any fan would think their team landing in the Tire Bowl, Motor City Bowl ( twice), and Boise Bowl during the last 4 years as BC has would describe those bowls "good". When BCS team plays 4 straight years in these type of bowl games ( 3 of which are against non-bcs teams), I doubt anyone is in agreement they are "good" bowl games.

I'm thinking Richie needs to keep his bias in check and do some research. Some of of his comments lack factual substance and if bias is going to be the driving force in formulating polls and opinions, at least have some accuracy in order to defend your opinions. Also, a Tech fan commenting on Northeastern or Eastern fotoball is a bit out of place, don't you think? Maybe schools and their fans that actually are part of the Eastern fraternity ( one's that compete for Lambert Trophy yearly) should give input on college football issues in the Eastern/Northeast. As I said previously, there will always be a WVU fan around to keep a Hokie "honest". wink

[ September 06, 2006, 01:33 PM: Message edited by: GymMountainEER ]

honest Hokie fan?

where?

I clearly stated my position of what I consider the northeastern states in the Big East football thread. Deal with it there instead of rehashing an issue on this thread.

If a team is in a conference with only one division, that team will always finish in "its side" of the conference; there's only one side! My statement that BC always finishes second or third in its side of the division comes from the inclusion of "one division conferences" into divisional conferences. Where'd BC wind up finishing in the standings during its last year in the Big East? And in 2003 before Miami & VT left for the ACC?

I write for Outsports because I love college football; it's not my primary job in life. It's something I do because I have passion for the sport. That said, I do my best to verify all facts are indeed facts, instead of making up stories and situations to support what I think is the truth Bill O'Reilly style.

So why all the hate? Does it all stem from the fact I don't have your Mountaineers in the top-25? If they start playing at a top-12 level, I will include them in the Dirty Dozen polls. Same with Notre Dame. Same with Tennessee. Heck, same with Duke. How often do teams actually wind up in the exact ranking at the end of the season as they do preseason? Doesn't it seem that a third of the teams drop out of the top-25 and are replaced by new teams that have unexpected, solid results.

I think you've made your point clear by now: You don't like my top-25. That's fine. It's your opinion just like my top-25 is my opinion.

Hey Richie...Quick question...

Have you ever seen WVU play at pitt? It might be CALLED a home game for pitt, but they do NOT have home field advantage. WVU has had more fans at that game EVERY YEAR since they built ketch-up field, than pitt has. You REALLY think this is a true home game for pitt when Morgantown is only 68 miles from pittsburgh? There is no doubt which team is more talented. WVU hands down.

Get real. I've BEEN THERE. I've SEEN THE GAMES at pitt several times. WVU has CONSISTENTLY had more fans AT pittsburgh, not to mention pitt's fans are about excited about watching their football team as VT fans are about their basketball team.

Oh, and I'll bet you $1000 that WVU beats pitt by at least 17 points. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that WVU will manhandle pitt much in the same they we did last year. UVA sucks ass, so I wouldn't base any expectations on pitt off that performance. UVA will probably finish 2nd to last in the entire ACC behind only...lol...Duh-uke. Not saying much since the ACC pretty much looks like shit this year. Talk about the Big East being not deserving the BCS bid...good grief. Look at the shit the ACC has sent to their BCS bowls. ACC is the most overrated piece of crap conferences in college football right now...like that's anything new.

[ September 06, 2006, 08:58 PM: Message edited by: wvderby ]

"I clearly stated my position of what I consider the northeastern states in the Big East football thread. Deal with it there instead of rehashing an issue on this thread."

You certainly did post on the geography and your perception of what "Northeast" represents. That issue is irrelevant to this specific topic. CT,NY,and NJ are indeed Northeastern States, thus Syracuse, UCONN, and Rutgers are applicable to this paticular conversation since you stated Boston College ( an ACC school) was the only "relevant" college football program in the Northeast. Based on that, the issue is perfectly fine for debate in this thread since it pertains to one of your ( Outsports experts) opinions.


"If a team is in a conference with only one division, that team will always finish in "its side" of the conference; there's only one side! My statement that BC always finishes second or third in its side of the division comes from the inclusion of "one division conferences" into divisional conferences. Where'd BC wind up finishing in the standings during its last year in the Big East? And in 2003 before Miami & VT left for the ACC?"

I figured you would go this route and attempt to reference BC's Big East playing days as the premise for stating BC would finish its customary 2nd or 3rd. When has BC finished 2nd or 3rd in any conference with regularity? BC was in a 4 way tie for 1st place in 2004 in its last year of Big East play. Guess where BC placed in 2003 and 2002? Both years in 5th place sporting a combined 7-7 ( again thank god for Rutgers and Temple providing 4 wins during that time as Virginia Tech knows all too well these two years ) record in Big East play during that time. My point in all this that you seem to be missing is Boston College only finished above 4th place in any conference 3 times ( once in the ACC and twice in the Big East) in the last 15 years. That hardly give the BC Eagles the reputation of being a 2nd or 3rd place team, does it?


"I write for Outsports because I love college football; it's not my primary job in life. It's something I do because I have passion for the sport. That said, I do my best to verify all facts are indeed facts, instead of making up stories and situations to support what I think is the truth Bill O'Reilly style."

I don't believe you intentionally fabricated any facts used to support your opinions. That being said, anytime someone has an agenda or is biased, its easier to say be less objective on issues that possibly are conflicting to one's own interests.


"So why all the hate? Does it all stem from the fact I don't have your Mountaineers in the top-25? If they start playing at a top-12 level, I will include them in the Dirty Dozen polls. Same with Notre Dame. Same with Tennessee. Heck, same with Duke. How often do teams actually wind up in the exact ranking at the end of the season as they do preseason? Doesn't it seem that a third of the teams drop out of the top-25 and are replaced by new teams that have unexpected, solid results."

There is no hate. Here is the deal. If you care to admit it or not, but you have little to zero respect for WVU's program and most likely the Big East overall ( as you have said in the past). That is ok. Many WVU fans view VT in similar fashion and its not worth getting into as its well documented, right? However, Would I dismiss VT ( during a good to very good year) out of my dislike of all things Hokie? I would hope it wouldn't play into the equation. I would mostly likely touch base on on off the field issues that seem to give the Tech program a black eye, but I would give VT their due on the football field. So when you deliver backhanded comments on issues like the schedule( without getting into the reasoning for this), crowd support of Northeast teams while pimping BC, and other issues just ensure your comments are factually correct and and somewhat accurate. Leaving WVU and Notre Dame out of your poll is not logical as 90 percent of America would agree. This is open for debate and ridicule when you leave two preseason top 5 teams out of your top 25 poll. Being biased is ok aas we are all guilty of it to some degree, but ensure facts that support logic and opinions that are baffling ( non- mainstream) to say an ojective person or entity needs to be accurate.

"I think you've made your point clear by now: You don't like my top-25. That's fine. It's your opinion just like my top-25 is my opinion."

This is exactly what makes debates on a sports message board enteraining. There can be differing opinions and all is well at the end of the day. The reality is I can still go to bed at night asking myself what millions do everyday- "What the hell is a Hokie"? wink

[ September 06, 2006, 09:11 PM: Message edited by: GymMountainEER ]

no one hates you Richie

some of us believe that you don't know your behind from a hole in the ground when it comes to football

QUOTE

Are you kidding? Seriously? WVU ended up 11-1 last year with 17 starters returning this year and their two freshman AA stars on offense. Naw, we didn't beat UGA in the Sugar Bowl and run up 385 yard rushing on them. Naw, our RB didn't run 203 yards in his first game this year and set an all-time Sugar Bowl rushing record with 204 yards against the #5 run defense in the nation (Georgia.) Naw, our QB didn't complete 10-14 passes for 168 yards, 2 td's 0 int's and run 47 yards on 7 carries in the first game this year. And I guess our defense sucks since we held marshall to less points than VT did last year even though they returned 9 starters on offense. Right?

By the way....we scored more points on marshall than anyone in their last 16 games in our first game this year and it could have been far worse. We scored more points on UGA in the Sugar Bowl than anyone since GT scored 51 on them on Nov. 27th 1999. We scored more on pitt than anyone in their since WVU laid 52 on them on Nov. 15th 2003. We scored more on UConn than anyone since Miami scored 48 on them Oct. 5th 2002.

I guess WVU just isn't top 12 material but (lol) Miami (#5) Arkansas (#8) California (#4) and Colorado (#20)were top 25 "in your opinion."

Thanks, we get the idea.

lol.

[ September 06, 2006, 09:41 PM: Message edited by: wvderby ]

2005 Bowl Wins and Losses for the Big East:
Win - WVU 38, UGA 35
Loss - Louisville 24, VT 35
Loss - USF 0, NCSU 14
Loss - Rutgers 40, ASU 35
2005 Record: 1-3
2005 Record against BCS Conference teams: 1-3

2004 Bowl Wins and Losses for the Big East:
Win - UConn 39, Toledo 10
Win - BC 37, UNC 24
Loss - Pitt 7, Utah 35
Loss - WVU 18, FSU 30
Loss - Syracuse 14, GT 51
2004 Record: 2-3
2004 Record against BCS Conference teams: 1-2

2005 Bowl Wins and Losses for the ACC:
Win - VT 35, Louisville 24
Win - UVA 34, Minnesota 31
Win - Clemson 19, Colorado 10
Win - Boston College 27, Boise State 21
Win - NCSU 14, USF 0
Loss - Miami 3, LSU 40
Loss - GT 10, Utah 38
Loss - FSU 23, Penn State 26
2005 Record: 5-3
2005 Record against BCS Conference teams: 4-3

2004 Bowl Wins and Losses for the ACC:
Win - Miami 27, Florida 10
Win - GT 51, Syracuse 14
Win - FSU 30, WVU 18
Loss - VT 13, Auburn 16
Loss - UNC 24, BC 37
Loss - UVA 34, Fresno State 37
2004 Record: 3-3
2004 Record against BCS Conference teams: 3-2

Yup, looks like the ACC is the most overrated piece of crap conference...not that winning records in bowl games indicates anything.

ACC 1-7 in BCS games
Big East 4-4 in BCS bowl games

Big East 3-1 against BCS teams this season
ACC is 1-3 against BCS teams this season.


Discuss? wink

Those are amazing opening weekend stats. Don't forget to mention that Georgia Tech lost to a top-ranked team and no other Big East & ACC teams beat a ranked team, let alone played one, outside their conference during week one. And, unless Syracuse pulls off a miracle against Iowa, that trend will continue for week two.

"Don't forget to mention that Georgia Tech lost to a top-ranked team"

Now Richie, you are going to have to be consistent with your opinions. You are contradicting yourself now. You exclude Notre Dame from your top 25 poll, yet reference the Irish as a "top ranked team" when its needed to support your argument of explaining Georgia Tech's loss.

You can't have it both ways. Either insert the Irish into your top 10 or call Georgia Tech's loss a bad one ot a mediocre overrated Irish team.


Also, North Carolina was a .500 ACC team last year and UVA was an ACC bowl team, yet your dismiss their losses to Big East teams as not of importance? LOL! wink

[ September 07, 2006, 04:39 PM: Message edited by: GymMountainEER ]

Yup. That I did. Since you don't care for my rankings, I went with the AP rankings for that statement.

Since you have submitted to the AP rankings, I guess you are on the MountainEER bandwagon now, eh? wink

[ September 07, 2006, 04:52 PM: Message edited by: GymMountainEER ]

Did I ask yet?

Who are these "experts?"

Check out the Pac-10 for my thoughts on sports media.

Smile,
Rob

I've been away and am just getting caught up. wvderby...I have been to every WVU game AT PITT since 1978 and sorry, but you have not had MORE fans than Pitt has. You've made a great showing there, yes, but more means greater than 50 percent, and again, you haven't had that. I know Panther fans sit on their hands a lot (except me; I annoy my husband with my screaming), but not when we play WVU.

Finally, you can all laugh and point fingers at Richie's choice of Pitt at #10. I think it's crazy too. But there is no denying Pitt's improvement over a year ago. To suggest that USF and Rutgers have more talent is as ludicrous and thinking we are #10 in the country. Finally, when you list our standout players Palko and Blades, please don't forget Darelle Revis, who is the best defensive back in the Big East hands down, and maybe in the entire country.

Now, we damn well better beat Cincinnati tonight!We're improved but that doesn't mean we aren't ALWAYS nervous!

DnD,

Pitt is a much improved team from last season. It seems the Panthers have adjusted nicely to Wanny's system.

Palko, Revis, and Blades are all All American type players.

I'm one WVU fan that wants Pitt to become a top 10- 20 porgram again as the Backyard Brawl becomes very more of a fierce rivalry game.

When you think Eastern Football- it doesn't get any bigger than the Pitt-WVU game wink

Useless trivial note of the night....while Pittsburgh battles Cincinnati at Nippert tonight, the Pirates clash with the Reds at Great American Ballpark downtown.