2000 Cotton Bowl: Tennessee- 21 Kansas St- 35 2002 Peach Bowl: Tennessee- 3 Maryland- 30 (ACC) 2003 Peach Bowl: Tennessee- 14 Clemson- 27 (ACC) Are these the bowl records you speak of? Your SEC powerhouse lost to solid/on the rise ACC teams the last 2 years in a row. South Carolina had a solid 2001 season, Ill give you that. However, their only non conference games of merit in any other season since 2000 were against Clemson. 2000: USC- 14 Clemson- 16 (ACC) 2001: USC- 20 Clemson- 15 (ACC) 2002: USC- 20 Clemson- 27 (ACC) 2003: USC- 17 Clemson- 63 (ACC) Granted they did beat Ohio St. in the 2000 and 2001 Outback bowls, though OSU was 8-4 and 7-5 in those years, respectively.
can't discount them beating the eventual NC in OSU but i was speaking overall as a conference vs any teams outside the conference. Bowls included. I can take one team and make a case however I wish but it doesnt take away how good UT has been even though Im no fan of them I am an SEC fan usually.
I agree, I am an SEC fan, too. While I dont care for UT, I did pull for them in both of those Peach Bowl blowouts. I was just illustrating the point that I dont think UT or USC would do much better in the ACC. They have both been bullied by teams from that conference, lately, and I really dont see UT being very good this year. I am actually expecting a pretty good season out of USC. They are returning 9 starters on offense, including 5th year Sr. QB Dondrial Penkins. He isnt NFL material, but he can be a good college QB behind a veteran OL and sophomore Demetris Summers at RB. As a freshman last year, he ran for 638 yards on 124 carries- thats approaching Justin Vincent territory in YPC. They have a big hole to fill at CB with the departure of top 10 draft pick Dunta Robinson, but the offense should be improved enough to take some of the pressure off a defense that wasnt so bad last year.
yes, i know their recent struggles the last couple of years but a struggling year for UT is what? 7 or 8 win season? Something LSU was begging to attain. Obviously it seems we are above them currently and thank god since we endured a lot of hell to get here...i just don't rule out such dominant teams with the same staff in place due to a 2 so called 'down' years. Yes, I was shocked at Penkins who i didnt give any credit to as a QB but the first half of last year improved greatly and he had the team in sync it seemed. Then they hit a wall and kinda fell apart. I think they will be solid but losing Dunta (who the saints needed) will be a big challenge to their defense. Lou was FINALLY forced to get rid of Skip and that can't hurt their play selection.
Thats just it. I dont consider 2003 a down year for UT. They finished the regular season 10-2, which in any year is a great record in the SEC. Then they got blown out by Clemson. Now, that may just be because Clemson is finally turning the corner- something I thought Tommy Bowden was capable of much sooner, but I think if you put UT in the new ACC, they still finish the season 10-2, or 8-5 like 2002, or 11-2 like 2001. Dont get me wrong, I think the SEC is the strongest conference top to bottom, but the largest gap is at the bottom. Our bottom dwellers are further apart from their bottom dwellers than our powerhouses are from theirs. The divisions have been set: Division A: Maryland Clemson NC St Wake FSU BC Division B UVA GT UNC Duke Miami VT If you insert any SEC into either one of those divisions, they will have to play FSU, Maryland, and NC St. every year, or Miami and VT every year, with the possibility of playing all 5. Each of those teams has a legitimate shot at winning the ACC. While the conference may not be as good top to bottom, it will be almost as tough getting through the regular season unscathed as it would in the SEC because of the quality of the conference's elite teams. I know we could have beaten every one of those teams last year, but thats why we're national champs. The top 10-15 ACC representatives in the polls are going to be on par with those from the SEC. In any given year, they may be better. Good discussion, by the way.
ITS UNANAMOUS! I would have thought at least one fan from an ACC team would have stumbled on this forum and voted for the ACC.
Yeah, is there any way we can see the names of the people that voted? I would be interested to see if there were any ACCish names in there.
that's where i disagree...i think the talent level is so deep in the SEC that teams toward the bottom are on par with most any ACC teams. Minus the top tier teams UT and the like would be on top of the ACC having to only get up for one big game is much easier than battling the physical prowess of most all SEC teams week in and week out. Its not coincidence that this conference is 1 or 2 most every year during modern day football. I think you discount the true talent/speed/depth of the SEC over the rest of the conferences.
