Well the ACC bowls are over. 4-2 isn't too bad for the ACC. Love the fact that the two losses were State and Duke.

Yep, perfect bowl record!

Not to mention the fact that teams #3 and #4 didn't even get to play, potentially bumping up the positions of some others.

...and Syracuse won as well. I am keeping my fingers crossed that they and Pittsburgh contribute more than expected to the ACC's football fortunes in the coming years.

---------------------------------------------
--- jsf5259 wrote:

Well the ACC bowls are over. 4-2 isn't too bad for the ACC. Love the fact that the two losses were State and Duke.

---------------------------------------------
spell check.

The league can thank the Clemson comeback for a good bowl season. Otherwise, there wasn't really anything impressive about it.

dook choked

State looked dreadful

Virginia Tech looked horrible in victory...in one of the worst bowl games I've ever seen

Florida St. drew N. Illinois...a team that had no business in a BCS game. If our league champion couldn't win this one, then the BCS should've made a rule not to invite the ACC Champion for 5 years.

Ga Tech -- this win was more impressive for perception purposes. They beat USC...the mighty Trojans...the preseason #1 team. It looks great on paper. However, if you watched the game, you saw a backup QB who was nothing short of awful AND a Pac 12 team who clearly didn't want to be there.

Clemson -- They played hard & inspired. Definitely a good win for the league. Though, luck played a role. LSU had an EASY pass completion on a 2nd & 2 to get a first down & put the game away...but couldn't execute. For the ACC's sake, it is a good thing they didn't.

I'll give Clemson a lot of credit for playing a very good game. Even if they lost, they still played well. Other than that...well...color me unimpressed. 4-2 had more to do with the opposition IMO...especially N. Illinois, Rutgers, and an uninspired USC team with a crappy QB.

--------------------------RoyIsTheBest wrote--------------------

Virginia Tech looked horrible in victory...in one of the worst bowl games I've ever seen

Florida St. drew N. Illinois...a team that had no business in a BCS game. If our league champion couldn't win this one, then the BCS should've made a rule not to invite the ACC Champion for 5 years.

-------------------------------------------------- ---------------

Agree completely with both paragraphs.

Clemson was the only team from the ACC that impressed me. They played onehellofa game!

I was actually pulling for dook. It was football not basketball!

---------------------------------------------
--- RoyIsTheBest wrote:

The league can thank the Clemson comeback for a good bowl season. Otherwise, there wasn't really anything impressive about it.

dook choked

State looked dreadful

Virginia Tech looked horrible in victory...in one of the worst bowl games I've ever seen

Florida St. drew N. Illinois...a team that had no business in a BCS game. If our league champion couldn't win this one, then the BCS should've made a rule not to invite the ACC Champion for 5 years.

Ga Tech -- this win was more impressive for perception purposes. They beat USC...the mighty Trojans...the preseason #1 team. It looks great on paper. However, if you watched the game, you saw a backup QB who was nothing short of awful AND a Pac 12 team who clearly didn't want to be there.

Clemson -- They played hard & inspired. Definitely a good win for the league. Though, luck played a role. LSU had an EASY pass completion on a 2nd & 2 to get a first down & put the game away...but couldn't execute. For the ACC's sake, it is a good thing they didn't.

I'll give Clemson a lot of credit for playing a very good game. Even if they lost, they still played well. Other than that...well...color me unimpressed. 4-2 had more to do with the opposition IMO...especially N. Illinois, Rutgers, and an uninspired USC team with a crappy QB.

---------------------------------------------

You're just a ray of sunshine to start off the new year.

---------------------------------------------
--- RetiredCoach01 wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- RoyIsTheBest wrote:

The league can thank the Clemson comeback for a good bowl season. Otherwise, there wasn't really anything impressive about it.

dook choked

State looked dreadful

Virginia Tech looked horrible in victory...in one of the worst bowl games I've ever seen

Florida St. drew N. Illinois...a team that had no business in a BCS game. If our league champion couldn't win this one, then the BCS should've made a rule not to invite the ACC Champion for 5 years.

Ga Tech -- this win was more impressive for perception purposes. They beat USC...the mighty Trojans...the preseason #1 team. It looks great on paper. However, if you watched the game, you saw a backup QB who was nothing short of awful AND a Pac 12 team who clearly didn't want to be there.

Clemson -- They played hard & inspired. Definitely a good win for the league. Though, luck played a role. LSU had an EASY pass completion on a 2nd & 2 to get a first down & put the game away...but couldn't execute. For the ACC's sake, it is a good thing they didn't.

I'll give Clemson a lot of credit for playing a very good game. Even if they lost, they still played well. Other than that...well...color me unimpressed. 4-2 had more to do with the opposition IMO...especially N. Illinois, Rutgers, and an uninspired USC team with a crappy QB.

---------------------------------------------

You're just a ray of sunshine to start off the new year.

---------------------------------------------

Just telling it like it really is. If you disagree with any of my comments, feel free to correct my analysis.

The ACC was a horrible league this season & has been for awhile. Those are the facts. I'm thinking it is cyclical & the league will get back to respectability soon. In the meantime, this year's bowl performance was due to crappy opponents...Clemson's win notwithstanding.

Clemson winning was the key. It was the only real statement game. GT beating USc is no small feat either. GT was supposed to struggle in bowls when a team has so much time to prepare. Thanks Lane!

Talking heads were very complimentary of the ACC and will continue to be given our bowl record. Maybe we can even tack a little pride on a Louisville win over Florida...

---------------------------------------------
--- RoyIsTheBest wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- RetiredCoach01 wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- RoyIsTheBest wrote:

The league can thank the Clemson comeback for a good bowl season. Otherwise, there wasn't really anything impressive about it.

dook choked

State looked dreadful

Virginia Tech looked horrible in victory...in one of the worst bowl games I've ever seen

Florida St. drew N. Illinois...a team that had no business in a BCS game. If our league champion couldn't win this one, then the BCS should've made a rule not to invite the ACC Champion for 5 years.

Ga Tech -- this win was more impressive for perception purposes. They beat USC...the mighty Trojans...the preseason #1 team. It looks great on paper. However, if you watched the game, you saw a backup QB who was nothing short of awful AND a Pac 12 team who clearly didn't want to be there.

Clemson -- They played hard & inspired. Definitely a good win for the league. Though, luck played a role. LSU had an EASY pass completion on a 2nd & 2 to get a first down & put the game away...but couldn't execute. For the ACC's sake, it is a good thing they didn't.

I'll give Clemson a lot of credit for playing a very good game. Even if they lost, they still played well. Other than that...well...color me unimpressed. 4-2 had more to do with the opposition IMO...especially N. Illinois, Rutgers, and an uninspired USC team with a crappy QB.

---------------------------------------------

You're just a ray of sunshine to start off the new year.

---------------------------------------------

Just telling it like it really is. If you disagree with any of my comments, feel free to correct my analysis.

The ACC was a horrible league this season & has been for awhile. Those are the facts. I'm thinking it is cyclical & the league will get back to respectability soon. In the meantime, this year's bowl performance was due to crappy opponents...Clemson's win notwithstanding.

---------------------------------------------
But if a 6-7 SEC team beat Southern Cal, we'd probably be getting a different spin. When a representative from any league goes into a Bowl game with 7 losses and considered very much middle-of-the-pack in their league and proceeds to beat a pre-season #1, that team deserves applause. Sure there were extenuating circumstances but the same case could probably be made against FSU playing who they did. But they still won by 3 TD's.

Plus the observation that USC wasn't into the game is an opinion not a fact.

---------------------------------------------
--- ChancellorHouse wrote:

---------------------------------------------
But if a 6-7 SEC team beat Southern Cal, we'd probably be getting a different spin. When a representative from any league goes into a Bowl game with 7 losses and considered very much middle-of-the-pack in their league and proceeds to beat a pre-season #1, that team deserves applause. Sure there were extenuating circumstances but the same case could probably be made against FSU playing who they did. But they still won by 3 TD's.

Plus the observation that USC wasn't into the game is an opinion not a fact.

---------------------------------------------

USC was the pre-season #1 based on Matt Barkley returning to school. The QB USC had out on the field in the Sun Bowl was as horrible as Barkley was good. He overthrew wide-open WR's all over the field.

USC finished with a 7-6 record themselves...losing 5 of their last 6.

And...what was your opinion on USC's motivation to a Bowl Game they didn't want to attend? Heck, they didn't even show up for the dinner on time.

Some of you are never happy!

---------------------------------------------
--- ChancellorHouse wrote:

But if a 6-7 SEC team beat Southern Cal, we'd probably be getting a different spin.
---------------------------------------------

That is right! Plus, dook choking against a 10 win Cincy team isn't all that disappointing. We're talking about the 6-7 Devils with a 3-5 league record.

I agree with RITB in that Clemson was the only good win; only the State loss was bad. I would say the VT win was bad as well, but it was still nice for a terrible VT team to win a bowl game.

ACC was bad this year, but I think that fact makes the record more impressive. FSU had title hopes and they could've mailed it in like UGA did against Boise a few years back, but they took care of business. If they had lost, it wouldn't be dismissed as easily as the GT win over an uninterested USC team.

Now that the bowl season is largely over, I'm wondering which bowl game UNC might have gone to were it not on probation. Any guesses? I know we played crappy at times, but as I watched on and off many of the bowl games, I didn't see many teams that would be out of Carolina's class . . .

When it comes to bowl records perception is on the ACC's side. We should all be happy it is. Any conference's bowl record could be torn to shreds under similar scrutiny.

---------------------------------------------
--- P1967 wrote:

Now that the bowl season is largely over, I'm wondering which bowl game UNC might have gone to were it not on probation. Any guesses? I know we played crappy at times, but as I watched on and off many of the bowl games, I didn't see many teams that would be out of Carolina's class . . .

---------------------------------------------

Well, we win the Coastal Division on a tie-breaker, so...

If we beat FSU in the Title Game, obviously it would've been N Illinois in the Orange Bowl.

If not, then I think we would've recieved Ga Tech's bid for the Sun Bowl vs. USC. (GT lost in the Title Game to FSU).

It's all speculation, of course.

---------------------------------------------
--- RoyIsTheBest wrote:


---------------------------------------------
--- ChancellorHouse wrote:

---------------------------------------------
But if a 6-7 SEC team beat Southern Cal, we'd probably be getting a different spin. When a representative from any league goes into a Bowl game with 7 losses and considered very much middle-of-the-pack in their league and proceeds to beat a pre-season #1, that team deserves applause. Sure there were extenuating circumstances but the same case could probably be made against FSU playing who they did. But they still won by 3 TD's.

Plus the observation that USC wasn't into the game is an opinion not a fact.

---------------------------------------------

USC was the pre-season #1 based on Matt Barkley returning to school. The QB USC had out on the field in the Sun Bowl was as horrible as Barkley was good. He overthrew wide-open WR's all over the field.

USC finished with a 7-6 record themselves...losing 5 of their last 6.

And...what was your opinion on USC's motivation to a Bowl Game they didn't want to attend? Heck, they didn't even show up for the dinner on time.

---------------------------------------------
I don't have a big problem with any of that. I would counter that USC probably recruits more 4 and 5 star guys than any other school in the country and their #1 pre-season ranking had a lot more to it than just an outstanding QB.

I also think once a football game starts, motivation may be a factor but not as much as many fans credit for a poor performance.

I don't think USC was a top 10 type team this post season. I simply think a 7 loss ACC team beating a brand as strong as Southern Cal is a nice feather in our cap.

---------------------------------------------
--- ChancellorHouse wrote:


I don't think USC was a top 10 type team this post season. I simply think a 7 loss ACC team beating a brand as strong as Southern Cal is a nice feather in our cap.

---------------------------------------------

From a perception standpoint, I would agree totally.

From a 'reality' standpoint, I truly believe dook would've had a shot to beat the USC team on that Sun Bowl field. When your QB can't throw accurately in a passing offense, you have a lot of problems.

The bowl season was good enough to at least keep the ACC relevant in the national conversation. Clearly the Clemson win was big even if it qualified as an escape. Of course, LSU escaped against the Heels in 2010 in the pre-season opener even though the Heels sat many starters that game.

---------------------------------------------
--- tarheelmiracle wrote:

Some of you are never happy!

---------------------------------------------

To some, the glass is always half empty. Like my mother in law. She's not comfortable unless she's complaining about something.

After down year, ACC finishes off a surprisingly successful bowl season:
hamptonroads.com/2013/01/after...ful-bowl-season

Would South Carolina's credit be diminished for beating Michigan when Michigan's QB missed their WR's in the numerous times they ran open against the SC secondary?

Furthermore, it's not like Wittek is a scrub. And Rutgers was 9-3 against a 6-6 VT team in the same way that Cincy was 9-3 against the 6-6 dook team they struggled against..

Not saying anyone did any world beating, but I don't know that it needs to picked apart either. This is especially when you consider that the #3 and #4 teams of the league weren't even involved.

Finally, the problem for many in evaluating the ACC is they often only do it vs. the SEC instead of looking at it versus all the conferences.

---------------------------------------------
--- RoyIsTheBest wrote:


From a perception standpoint, I would agree totally.

From a 'reality' standpoint, I truly believe dook would've had a shot to beat the USC team on that Sun Bowl field. When your QB can't throw accurately in a passing offense, you have a lot of problems.

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------
--- DCRich wrote:

The bowl season was good enough to at least keep the ACC relevant in the national conversation. Clearly the Clemson win was big even if it qualified as an escape.

---------------------------------------------

Agreed. And as national conversations go, 2-3 years out from now, the sports media will reflect on the 2012 bowl season by talking in aggregate about conference records, not individual games so much or whether a team under-performed in a win, etc., etc.

A 4-2 bowl record with a high-profile Clemson win is good material between now and the next bowl season. Particularly on the heels of an underwhelming ACC regular season.

(BTW, after years of lurking, I'm excited to actually contribute to the forum here.)

Now for Louisville to humble the Gators.

i loved it. to watch dook choke away their first bowl win in 51 years was absolutely priceless.

---------------------------------------------
--- RetiredCoach01 wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- RoyIsTheBest wrote:

The league can thank the Clemson comeback for a good bowl season. Otherwise, there wasn't really anything impressive about it.

dook choked

State looked dreadful

Virginia Tech looked horrible in victory...in one of the worst bowl games I've ever seen

Florida St. drew N. Illinois...a team that had no business in a BCS game. If our league champion couldn't win this one, then the BCS should've made a rule not to invite the ACC Champion for 5 years.

Ga Tech -- this win was more impressive for perception purposes. They beat USC...the mighty Trojans...the preseason #1 team. It looks great on paper. However, if you watched the game, you saw a backup QB who was nothing short of awful AND a Pac 12 team who clearly didn't want to be there.

Clemson -- They played hard & inspired. Definitely a good win for the league. Though, luck played a role. LSU had an EASY pass completion on a 2nd & 2 to get a first down & put the game away...but couldn't execute. For the ACC's sake, it is a good thing they didn't.

I'll give Clemson a lot of credit for playing a very good game. Even if they lost, they still played well. Other than that...well...color me unimpressed. 4-2 had more to do with the opposition IMO...especially N. Illinois, Rutgers, and an uninspired USC team with a crappy QB.

---------------------------------------------

You're just a ray of sunshine to start off the new year.

---------------------------------------------

There is always someone who finds negativity in everything. If you'd told me before the first bowl that the ACC could go 4-2 with the two losses being Moo and dook, I'd have taken that in a second. Beating LSU and So Cal is a hell of an achievement, regardless of how good those two teams actually were this year.

4-2 is good under any circumstances. Certainly better than previous years. I agree we don't need to start calling ourselves world beaters, but we can be a little proud.

Now let's toughen up our OOC schedules and do the same thing in September. That's what it'll take to get more national respect for the conference.

---------------------------------------------
--- GOHEELS86 wrote:

4-2 is good under any circumstances. Certainly better than previous years...

---------------------------------------------

The best thing is that only the W-L result matters. How they won/lost really won't matter come pre-season. It DOES make the ACC more relevant, especially since we've (the league) been getting really good pub from the talking heads this bowl season for the most part. That in and of itself is a plus.

I don't have a big problem with what you said...other than Wittek not being a scrub. He certainly played like a scrub vs. GT...and it wasn't due to GT's 'vaunted defense'. The kid had a horrible game...he's not ready for 'prime time' yet for sure.

---------------------------------------------
--- 110OldEast wrote:

Would South Carolina's credit be diminished for beating Michigan when Michigan's QB missed their WR's in the numerous times they ran open against the SC secondary?

Furthermore, it's not like Wittek is a scrub. And Rutgers was 9-3 against a 6-6 VT team in the same way that Cincy was 9-3 against the 6-6 dook team they struggled against..

Not saying anyone did any world beating, but I don't know that it needs to picked apart either. This is especially when you consider that the #3 and #4 teams of the league weren't even involved.

Finally, the problem for many in evaluating the ACC is they often only do it vs. the SEC instead of looking at it versus all the conferences.

---------------------------------------------
--- RoyIsTheBest wrote:


From a perception standpoint, I would agree totally.

From a 'reality' standpoint, I truly believe dook would've had a shot to beat the USC team on that Sun Bowl field. When your QB can't throw accurately in a passing offense, you have a lot of problems.

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------
--- bartholemew wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- RetiredCoach01 wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- RoyIsTheBest wrote:

The league can thank the Clemson comeback for a good bowl season. Otherwise, there wasn't really anything impressive about it.

dook choked

State looked dreadful

Virginia Tech looked horrible in victory...in one of the worst bowl games I've ever seen

Florida St. drew N. Illinois...a team that had no business in a BCS game. If our league champion couldn't win this one, then the BCS should've made a rule not to invite the ACC Champion for 5 years.

Ga Tech -- this win was more impressive for perception purposes. They beat USC...the mighty Trojans...the preseason #1 team. It looks great on paper. However, if you watched the game, you saw a backup QB who was nothing short of awful AND a Pac 12 team who clearly didn't want to be there.

Clemson -- They played hard & inspired. Definitely a good win for the league. Though, luck played a role. LSU had an EASY pass completion on a 2nd & 2 to get a first down & put the game away...but couldn't execute. For the ACC's sake, it is a good thing they didn't.

I'll give Clemson a lot of credit for playing a very good game. Even if they lost, they still played well. Other than that...well...color me unimpressed. 4-2 had more to do with the opposition IMO...especially N. Illinois, Rutgers, and an uninspired USC team with a crappy QB.

---------------------------------------------

You're just a ray of sunshine to start off the new year.

---------------------------------------------

There is always someone who finds negativity in everything. If you'd told me before the first bowl that the ACC could go 4-2 with the two losses being Moo and dook, I'd have taken that in a second. Beating LSU and So Cal is a hell of an achievement, regardless of how good those two teams actually were this year.

---------------------------------------------

Beating LSU was a nice achievement. Clemson played well.

Beating this year's 7-6 USC team was not a 'hell of an acheivement' by any means...not in reality...maybe in perception.

If you have a big problem with my negativity, please tell me where you would disagree with what I've said.

---------------------------------------------
--- RoyIsTheBest wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- bartholemew wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- RetiredCoach01 wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- RoyIsTheBest wrote:

The league can thank the Clemson comeback for a good bowl season. Otherwise, there wasn't really anything impressive about it.

dook choked

State looked dreadful

Virginia Tech looked horrible in victory...in one of the worst bowl games I've ever seen

Florida St. drew N. Illinois...a team that had no business in a BCS game. If our league champion couldn't win this one, then the BCS should've made a rule not to invite the ACC Champion for 5 years.

Ga Tech -- this win was more impressive for perception purposes. They beat USC...the mighty Trojans...the preseason #1 team. It looks great on paper. However, if you watched the game, you saw a backup QB who was nothing short of awful AND a Pac 12 team who clearly didn't want to be there.

Clemson -- They played hard & inspired. Definitely a good win for the league. Though, luck played a role. LSU had an EASY pass completion on a 2nd & 2 to get a first down & put the game away...but couldn't execute. For the ACC's sake, it is a good thing they didn't.

I'll give Clemson a lot of credit for playing a very good game. Even if they lost, they still played well. Other than that...well...color me unimpressed. 4-2 had more to do with the opposition IMO...especially N. Illinois, Rutgers, and an uninspired USC team with a crappy QB.

---------------------------------------------

You're just a ray of sunshine to start off the new year.

---------------------------------------------

There is always someone who finds negativity in everything. If you'd told me before the first bowl that the ACC could go 4-2 with the two losses being Moo and dook, I'd have taken that in a second. Beating LSU and So Cal is a hell of an achievement, regardless of how good those two teams actually were this year.

---------------------------------------------

Beating LSU was a nice achievement. Clemson played well.

Beating this year's 7-6 USC team was not a 'hell of an acheivement' by any means...not in reality...maybe in perception.

If you have a big problem with my negativity, please tell me where you would disagree with what I've said.

---------------------------------------------

I'm not sure the USC team that we beat in 1993 was any better than this year's USC team, yet that victory was supposedly the statement game that launched our success under Mack Brown. Yet, it is all perception, but that can be a powerful thing. This year's bowl results can only help the ACC's perception leading into next year.

---------------------------------------------
--- RoyIsTheBest wrote:

Beating this year's 7-6 USC team was not a 'hell of an acheivement' by any means...not in reality...maybe in perception.

---------------------------------------------

When you consider a 6-7 Ga Tech team from the ACC beat a 7-5 USC team from the Pac 10, it puts it in a different perspective. Not worth howling at the moon, but deserving of some credit.

I think clemson played the best game, but my favorite ACC win waws g techs. Lane kiffin is approaching wuffie territory on my hate meter. It didn't matter that you didn't want to be there. You coached like s$*#, your team played like s$&@. I guess he still expected a bcs bowl. But I digress. I honestly expected the ACC to have a 1-5 record, 2-4 at the very best. And the fact that dook and the wuffies were the two teams that lost, just make it all the better. Can't wait for next year when the Heels are out there slugging it out.

---------------------------------------------
--- GOHEELS86 wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- RoyIsTheBest wrote:

Beating this year's 7-6 USC team was not a 'hell of an acheivement' by any means...not in reality...maybe in perception.

---------------------------------------------

When you consider a 6-7 Ga Tech team from the ACC beat a 7-5 USC team from the Pac 10, it puts it in a different perspective. Not worth howling at the moon, but deserving of some credit.

---------------------------------------------

If Barkley was the QB, I would agree. Heck, if their backup played better, I would agree. You had to watch that game to see how absolutely awful USC's #2 QB was. The USC WR's were just shaking their heads all day.

---------------------------------------------
--- RoyIsTheBest wrote:

Just telling it like it really is. If you disagree with any of my comments, feel free to correct my analysis.

The ACC was a horrible league this season & has been for awhile. Those are the facts. I'm thinking it is cyclical & the league will get back to respectability soon. In the meantime, this year's bowl performance was due to crappy opponents...Clemson's win notwithstanding.

---------------------------------------------

I don't disagree, but we have been on the other side of bad matchups in the past as well and nobody is there saying that we should get more credit due to the circumstances etc. It looks good on paper and that is what forms perception. It helps, even if only a little.

p.s. lol @ state

---------------------------------------------
--- RoyIsTheBest wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- RetiredCoach01 wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- RoyIsTheBest wrote:

The league can thank the Clemson comeback for a good bowl season. Otherwise, there wasn't really anything impressive about it.

dook choked

State looked dreadful

Virginia Tech looked horrible in victory...in one of the worst bowl games I've ever seen

Florida St. drew N. Illinois...a team that had no business in a BCS game. If our league champion couldn't win this one, then the BCS should've made a rule not to invite the ACC Champion for 5 years.

Ga Tech -- this win was more impressive for perception purposes. They beat USC...the mighty Trojans...the preseason #1 team. It looks great on paper. However, if you watched the game, you saw a backup QB who was nothing short of awful AND a Pac 12 team who clearly didn't want to be there.

Clemson -- They played hard & inspired. Definitely a good win for the league. Though, luck played a role. LSU had an EASY pass completion on a 2nd & 2 to get a first down & put the game away...but couldn't execute. For the ACC's sake, it is a good thing they didn't.

I'll give Clemson a lot of credit for playing a very good game. Even if they lost, they still played well. Other than that...well...color me unimpressed. 4-2 had more to do with the opposition IMO...especially N. Illinois, Rutgers, and an uninspired USC team with a crappy QB.

---------------------------------------------

You're just a ray of sunshine to start off the new year.

---------------------------------------------

Just telling it like it really is. If you disagree with any of my comments, feel free to correct my analysis.

The ACC was a horrible league this season & has been for awhile. Those are the facts. I'm thinking it is cyclical & the league will get back to respectability soon. In the meantime, this year's bowl performance was due to crappy opponents...Clemson's win notwithstanding.

---------------------------------------------

I agree I am not impressed by the bowls, but dont think you can say the ACC is crappy but then blame the wins on playing crappy teams also.

---------------------------------------------
--- bounty37h wrote:

---------------------------------------------

I agree I am not impressed by the bowls, but dont think you can say the ACC is crappy but then blame the wins on playing crappy teams also.

---------------------------------------------

I think if you watched the VT-Rutgers 'classic', you most certainly could.

I think if you saw our league champion draw a N. Illinois team that had no business being in a BCS game, you most certainly could.

I think if you saw the USC QB perform in the Sun Bowl, you most certainly could.

Clemson, OTOH, played very well & deserved the victory over a really good LSU team.

---------------------------------------------
--- ChancellorHouse wrote:

---------------------------------------------
But if a 6-7 SEC team beat Southern Cal, we'd probably be getting a different spin. When a representative from any league goes into a Bowl game with 7 losses and considered very much middle-of-the-pack in their league and proceeds to beat a pre-season #1, that team deserves applause. Sure there were extenuating circumstances but the same case could probably be made against FSU playing who they did. But they still won by 3 TD's.

Plus the observation that USC wasn't into the game is an opinion not a fact.

---------------------------------------------
If a 6-7 SEC team or a team like Vandy/MSST/Ole Miss beat them you would hear "oh, look at the depth of the conference and look how impressive it is that a mid tier SEC team dominated the mighty preseason USC Trojans. I'm not buying the USC didn't want to be there. That was the last game for Mariquise Lee and Robert Woods and I know they wanted to win. Max Wittek got rattled early and he wanted to prove to the country that he would be an elite quarterback next year, so he definitely wanted to win. So did Lane Kiffin. He knew if he lost that game it wouldn't sit well with the LA times and the AD.

---------------------------------------------
--- bartholemew wrote:

...This year's bowl results can only help the ACC's perception leading into next year.

---------------------------------------------

Exactly what I was saying above. Right now, here are the BCS Conference records in this season's Bowl Games:

ACC 4-2 (done)
B1G 2-5 (done)

Others with games still to play:

Big East 2-1 (2 left)
Big XII 4-3 (2 left)
Pac 12 3-4 (1 left)
SEC 3-2 (4 left)