Pack doesn’t lose! while conference season develops

ACC Teams9

FINALLY!! I Saturday of football passed without NC State losing a game and without one of our opponents winning ACC Player of the Week honors! Great work by Mike Archer for holding the Idle Byes to a big goose egg on the scoreboard.

Speaking of the conference, we’ve got some really interesting items for you…

…..Hopefully you saw the Clemson @ Miami game, which will become one of those ‘unforgettable’ Saturday afternoons for many in the conference.

 

…..In Duke’s victory over Maryland, the Blue Devils won an ACC game but did NOT cover the spread yesterday for the first time since a 1994 defeat of Clemson. That statistic is literally unbelievable. Maryland is clearly in the death spiral. This link will take you to some good articles and conversation about the Terps & the Fridge’s demise. For the record, Duke must go 3-2 the rest of the season to be bowl eligible.

 

…..There were some ‘Awful Announcing’ blunders yesterday that can be seen and are being discussed in this link. Bob Griese recognized the inappropriateness of his ‘Taco’ comment during the game and issued an apology during the broadcast.

 

…..You can review the ACC’s Bowl line-up by clicking here because as you read this article from the Washington Times you will be amazed with the analysis — the ACC could end the season with only five bowl eligible teams just one year after setting a record with TEN bowl teams!!!

ACC teams with 4+ victories: 8
ACC teams with .500+ records: 8
Bowl-eligible ACC teams: Georgia Tech

 

Indian Headress_Chief Butch Davis…..This link will take you to a deep evaluation of Butch Davis from a Tarheel Blog:

At this point two things should not be lost on UNC fans. The first is that Duke, long the punchline of the ACC sports the same record as the Heels and is 2-1 in the ACC versus UNC’s 0-3 conference mark. David Cutcliffe has done a phenomenal job in Durham turning a very bad program around and it is difficult not to glance in their direction as a point of comparison. Secondly, it should be noted, per a reader, that Butch Davis is basically sporting the same record as Carl Torbush at a similar point in their respective tenures at UNC. I understand these things take time but I am fairly certain that UNC is not paying a brand name coach, brand name type money to have him be the equal of Carl Torbush in the record book and behind Duke in the standings.

There in lies the rub. Butch Davis was a brand name coach and UNC ponied up big dollar to not only lure him in but keep him happy after the first year when it was apparent his market value changed. Because of his success at Miami, Davis is considered a top tier coach. When he landed at UNC the assumption was that he would duplicate much of the success he had at Miami. Sure the recruiting would be different but Davis would bring the air of big time college football to Chapel Hill. So far he has done that. The fact UNC relented on the Thursday Night Game and is moving towards major renovations to Kenan Stadium speak to the influence of Butch Davis to move Tar Heel football up a few rungs on the ladder. There is no question he has that part of building the program down. The other part having to do with developing players and winning games seems a tad on the slower side with the biggest issue being the perception that the coaching is average at best. Unfortunately many critics and rival fans warned that Davis was long on recruiting but short when it came to actual game management. The success of Butch Davis at Miami, seems to have been predicated more on bringing in high caliber talent of the NFL variety which mitigates the need for great coaching. At this point in the Davis era, UNC is not sporting that level of talent which means the coaching needs to compensate. From what we have seen that is just not been the case.

About StateFans

'StateFansNation' is the shared profile used by any/all of the dozen or so authors that contribute to the blog. You may not always agree with us, but you will have little doubt about where we stand on most issues. Please follow us on Twitter and FaceBook

ACC Teams

9 Responses to Pack doesn’t lose! while conference season develops

  1. wolfonthehill 10/25/2009 at 11:37 AM #

    I understand the point of that unc-ch blog post… but damn, is it ever poorly-written. How’s about a grammar-check before posting?

  2. sautz 10/25/2009 at 4:18 PM #

    “At this point in the Davis era, UNC is not sporting that level of talent which means the coaching needs to compensate.”

    Coaches compensating for some lack of talent? Preposterous!!!!! From watching State the last few years you obviously have to take square pegs and mash them into your round holes of bad coaching philosophy. If it doesn’t work it’s completely the player’s fault. Coaching compensating for talent level, indeed!

  3. PackerInRussia 10/25/2009 at 5:01 PM #

    It’s not like Carolina’s carting out invalids to play. Their recruiting rankings since ’05 are: 34, 25, 14, 30, and 6. I realize that these rankings are probably relatively low compared to Miami back in the day, but they still reflect the fact that talent is showing up on campus (maybe sometimes a year later than recruited).

  4. PackMaestro-Original 10/25/2009 at 6:16 PM #

    Actually, Duke only needs to win two out of five to be bowl eligible. They lost one of their I-AA games, so they still need Five i-a wins plus the one i-AA win over NCCU. They are 4-3 now, 6-6 gets them in a bowl. With UVA and UNC still on their schedule, the odds are in their favor.

  5. StateFans 10/25/2009 at 6:37 PM #

    NCCU doesn’t count for them this year.

  6. VaWolf82 10/25/2009 at 8:18 PM #

    It’s not like Carolina’s carting out invalids to play. Their recruiting rankings since ‘05 are: 34, 25, 14, 30, and 6.

    The UNC system instituted higher standards for the NC public universities starting in 2006 (4 maths, etc). There was a two-year gap before the NCAA increased the req’ts for core classes nationwide. Bunting fared much better in that two-year “gap” than Amato.

    Starting in 2003, State’s classes (per Scout) ranked 9, 20, 23, 42, 60

    Combine State’s atrocious play after PR left with the increased UNC system standards and it shouldn’t be hard to understand why FB has struggled….and continues to struggle. Using Scout’s rankings, the highest rated class on the current team was ranked 29th…and they are now SO/RS-FR.

  7. Master 10/25/2009 at 11:11 PM #

    VaWolf – I’m somewhat of a newbie when it comes to entrance qualifications vis-a-vis UNC system vs ACC vs NCAA. Is it true that the SEC has a lower hurdle than the ACC which is lower than the UNC system. How can State and UNC expect to compete if this is a liability?

  8. VaWolf82 10/25/2009 at 11:41 PM #

    I’m not sure what the current rules are, but the ACC used to limit the partial qualifiers that a team could accept. But the category “partial qualifiers” has been done away.

    The key thing to investigate would be how the different conferences cover non-qualifiers. I’m not sure that the ACC allows non-qualifiers, but it’s been a long time since I looked at any of this.

    As far as the UNC system admission req’ts, they are not a ton different than the NCAA req’ts for athletes that were put in place in 2008. It’s been a while since I did an entry on all of this….it may be time to clean off the dust on that entry and update it.

  9. Wolf74 10/27/2009 at 7:03 AM #

    “VaWolf – I’m somewhat of a newbie when it comes to entrance qualifications vis-a-vis UNC system vs ACC vs NCAA. Is it true that the SEC has a lower hurdle than the ACC which is lower than the UNC system. How can State and UNC expect to compete if this is a liability?”

    Last time I checked the rules, the ACC allowed a school to take one non-qualifier male and one non-qualifier female in all sports – combined. The NCAA requires that non-qualifier to sit out a year, make progress toward graduation (based on a minimum number of hours) and then they have 4 years of eligibity remaining. The SEC, Big 12, and several other conferences, and many independents allow a school to take as many non-qualifiers as they want. Then they have to follow NCAA guidelines to become eligible to play. That gives then a definite advantage when recruiting because they can offer and guarantee scholarships to many non-qualifiers at one time while an ACC school can only guarantee one non-qualifier. A few years back, the SEC had a similar requirement as the ACC. It was evident it was making them lose their competitive edge so they dropped it. FSU, Miami and VT used to be able to take multiple non-qualifiers before they joined the ACC. Now they cann’t and it appears to have impacted their national level of competitiveness severely.

Leave a Reply