Is the ACC the best football conference?

[HomerJSimpson]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I have never considered college football to have a 'national champion.' I think it's silly to argue about in the absence of a real tournament or playoffs.

Agreed.

[st.cronin]

I also would like to say I am ok with the status quo... college football is a spectacle, and doesn't demand a champion. Look at Navy's year last year ... with a playoffs or tournament, such a magical season is impossible.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by VPI97

I quit reading here because 'denied' implies that USC deserved to play LSU. According to the system agreed to by the PAC-10 (and by proxy, USC) they didn't.

Yet the South, which you stated considers there to be NO split, believes that Auburn deserved to play USC, even though according to the 'system' agreed to, they didn't.

[HomerJSimpson]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I also would like to say I am ok with the status quo... college football is a spectacle, and doesn't demand a champion. Look at Navy's year last year ... with a playoffs or tournament, such a magical season is impossible.

...and then I jumped off the bus.

[HomerJSimpson]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Yet the South, which you stated considers there to be NO split, believes that Auburn deserved to play USC, even though according to the 'system' agreed to, they didn't.

Not really. I do, and maybe Auburn fans do, but the South as a whole sort of liked Auburn getting screwed.

[ISiddiqui]

Not in Atlanta, and it's not like Georgia fans like Auburn or anything.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by HomerJSimpson

...and then I jumped off the bus.

lol

I admit my opinions are occasionally eccentric.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Yet the South, which you stated considers there to be NO split, believes that Auburn deserved to play USC, even though according to the 'system' agreed to, they didn't.

I agreed that USC should have played Oklahoma, so I can't comment there. Just like USC in 2003, Auburn had too weak of a schedule in 2004 to be considered for a berth in the BCS title game.

[ISiddiqui]

So what the 'South' thinks or doesn't think is not germane to this discussion . Whether LSU was split NC or not depends on your opinion on the polls, not a region's opinion.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

So what the 'South' thinks or doesn't think is not germane to this discussion . Whether LSU was split NC or not depends on your opinion on the polls, not a region's opinion.

I was just illustrating exceptions to the comment that 'everyone' recognized USC as the co-champs in 2003. When it comes to Auburn last year, the Tiger fans I talked to were more inclined to talk about the Sugar bowl than anthing else.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by Leonidas

I'll take the Big 10 and SEC easily over the ACC. ... I think from the Big 10 alone Iowa, Michigan, and Ohio State would all be the best team in the ACC.

Notre Dame 17
Michigan 10

Iowa 3
Iowa State 23

Texas 25
Ohio State 22

Just sayin'

[Butter]

I was going back through old threads I had started because I was bored, and came across this one, leaving just one question.

ACC - What the hell happened??????

[CU Tiger]

and here I came in to say, "No".

[Matthean]

My first thought was that it had to be an old thread.

[GoSeahawks]

I thought it was either a basketball thread, or a joke thread.

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

and here I came in to say, "No".

Originally Posted by Matthean

My first thought was that it had to be an old thread.

Originally Posted by GoSeahawks

I thought it was either a basketball thread, or a joke thread.

I think these all apply to me.