ACC’s NFL draft success continues to be unappreciated

Alums NCS Football35

In 2006, the Atlantic Coast Conference produced seven of the first fifteen selections in the NFL Draft en route to setting the all-time record of first round draft choices from a single conference with twelve. Additionally, the ACC generated 25 of the 97 selections on the draft’s first day and had 51 total players selected in the draft — again the most of any conference in the history. (Crushing the previous record of 36 selections, also set by the ACC in April 2005, the spring after our first season with eleven teams) (Link to interesting entry from two years ago.

This year the ACC didn’t send as many players as recent years to the NFL, but the conference was able to continue its success amongst the best of the best by placing another two of the top three picks.

The Charlotte Observer highlighted the following interesting statistic:

With Virginia’s Chris Long (chosen second) and Boston College’s Matt Ryan (chosen third), the Atlantic Coast Conference is the first conference to have two of the top four picks in the NFL Draft for three straight years.

The others were:

2006 – NC State’s Mario Williams (first) and Virginia’s D’Brickashaw Ferguson (fourth)

2007 – Georgia Tech’s Calvin Johnson (second) and Clemson’s Gaines Adams (fourth)

The ACC gets a lot of criticism for supposedly playing football below the standards of most of the other top conferences, even when the conference is statistically rated as the toughest conference in the country by the Sagarin computer for two consecutive years.

Related #1: ACC ranked toughest conference again with ESPN’s subjective rankings.

Related #2: SFN link from April of 2007

Update: May 23, 2008: ACC lacking victories in BCS era

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

Alums NCS Football

35 Responses to ACC’s NFL draft success continues to be unappreciated

  1. b 04/28/2008 at 2:23 AM #

    I wish the NCAA would promote more of the interconference showcases, a’ la ACC/Big Ten challenge, in both main sports. Since conference strength plays such a big role in the minds of voters, it would be nice for them to have SOME objective information on relative conference strength.

    Of course the Big 10 and Pac 10 would be at the bottom of that list every year so no way is it ever gonna happen. Just like a playoff, whats best for the Big 10/Pac 10 trumps wahts good for college football.

  2. Wufpacker 04/28/2008 at 2:50 AM #

    Not sure I agree with you that the Big 10/PAC 10 are the chief opponents to a playoff system. My guess is that all six BCS conferences have a dog in that fight if for no other reason than to retain a hold on the money by way of the BCS bowls. But thats just my guess.

    I do agree that the Big 10 teams, with few exceptions, play a brand of football that doesn’t hold up against “equal” out of conference teams.

    The main thing I wish, however, is that at the very least the country realize that the ACC is on par with the other BCS conferences. I think most people who do not bother to look at the numbers have the kneejerk reaction that the SEC is tops, with the Big 12 and Big 10 close seconds, and that the ACC, Pac 10 and Big East have a few good teams at the top and the rest are of mid major quality.

    I really believe that the overall balance of the ACC is overlooked, and that ACC teams beating up on each other during the season often takes the luster off of the conference. I’d love to see some sort of set up where the ACC takes on another conference, team for team, and see how it plays out (especially if it replaced a I-AA or mid major OOC game). The big problem with this is scheduling, as out of conference schedules are often completed years in advance. Perhaps if ESPN got involved (to appease any OOC teams that would need to be dropped…maybe give them a guaranteed TV game in return for releasing a game to make it work) it might be easier to work it out.

    Win or lose I’d love to see it happen, and it would do nothing but help with OOC resume and exposure for recruiting purposes.

  3. Wulfpack 04/28/2008 at 6:18 AM #

    “The main thing I wish, however, is that at the very least the country realize that the ACC is on par with the other BCS conferences.”

    I just do not see the ACC being anywhere close to the SEC and Big 12. Recent bowl results will support this. We’ve had some tremendous individual talents come through, but with the demise of FSU and Miami, we have had nobody step in to fill that national contender position. It would probably be VT, but the Hokies have remained steady with Beamer ball for years now. But they are not a Florida, Ohio State, Southern Cal, Texas, etc. I’ll say it again, when Wake Forest wins your conference, you have serious problems. When your championships game is 1/2 full, the image that comes across is that this is a weak conference. And guess what? In recent years, it has been.

  4. choppack1 04/28/2008 at 8:21 AM #

    Great players don’t make great teams. Unfortunately the ACC is a great example of this. Mario Williams was a defensive star for a team that went 3-5 in conference and 7-5 overall. As much as anything, the last few drafts, coupled w/ the lack of success out of conference for the conference, is an indictment of the overall coaching of the league. Coaches are doing a good job getting and developing individual talent, but doing a poor job of molding it together. I would also tell you that for a coaches who have been at their respective employers more than 2 years, only 2 coaches – Grobe and Beamer – would draw interest nationally. I think the additions of TOB, Butch Davis and Paul Johnson may change this. Tommy Bowden keeps on getting more and more talent, he just can’t seem to get his team to execute w/ the necessary precision and intensity for 12 games. In addition, if Miami and FSU ever get their crap together again, I don’t think we’ll see the Wake Forests and BCs of the world winning conference titles.

  5. Noah 04/28/2008 at 8:44 AM #

    The only opponent to a playoff system that matters are the TV networks. The day that you figure out how to make more money for them off a playoff system is the day the BCS will be scrapped.

    Until then, everything else really doesn’t matter.

    Remember, you’re taking away a SIGNIFICANT number of hours from them with a playoff system and you have to fill that with some sort of original programming, which is ridiculously expensive compared to the cost of a football game and which rarely produces similar ratings.

    Television is never going to want FEWER games and that’s what a playoff system represents.

  6. choppack1 04/28/2008 at 9:14 AM #

    Noah – There would still be bowl games, there would just be much less interest in them. Most of the problems that I’ve seen w/ a proposed playoff system from the MSM is that it’s way too small. A 32 game playoff would have 31 games – unlike the current bowl system, those are 31 games a large % of the country would be interested in watching.

    Of course, a 32 team playoff would mean you have to play 5 games which creates logistical problems of its own.

    I’m not a huge proponent of a college football playoff. I think college football’s current format his contributed to it’s popularity – which only seems to grow and grow. However, I think the $$ generated by a college football playoff would dwarf any sporting event we see today – at least for the first couple of years.

  7. Daily Update 04/28/2008 at 9:18 AM #

    The ACC’s problem biggest issue has been crappy QB play.

  8. StateFans 04/28/2008 at 9:30 AM #

    ^ Crappy QB play AND the absence of a legit powerhouse team the last 4 or 5 years.

  9. packbackr04 04/28/2008 at 9:41 AM #

    enter Mike Glennon and the Wolfpack of 2010

  10. SuperStuff 04/28/2008 at 9:55 AM #

    Win more bowl games and win a few Championships and the ACC will be taken more seriously in football by the press. I still say the SEC is the toughest football conference top to bottom.

  11. StateFans 04/28/2008 at 10:22 AM #

    ^ I agree…EXCEPT, when Florida State was clearly the the best program in the entire country for a decade, all we heard was how weak the rest of the ACC was. It is kind of paradoxical. Having it both ways.

    Sure FSU was beating everyone in the ACC. They were also beating everyone in the country. When we had a power we were weak; and when we don’t have a power we are weak.

    I am certainly not positing that the ACC has been a top three conference over the last 2 years. But, I do firmly believe that we were a top 3 conference (especially based on the strength and depth of our mid-tier) for years where didn’t get the kind of publicity and national recognition that we deserved.

  12. Wulfpack 04/28/2008 at 10:47 AM #

    ^I think that has a lot to do with attendance. Clemson is carrying the banner for us there. But when you consistently see 80,000+ stadiums on tv in the SEC (Tennessee @110k+, LSU, Florida, Georgia, Auburn, Alabama, So. Carolina) and Big 12 (Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M, Nebraska) it does something to our perceptions. Conversely, you see stadiums like GT, UVA, UNC, Maryland, BC, Miami (I won’t even touch Wake and Duke)– it’s just a whole other ball game. Not saying it is right. Man, FSU was good back in those days, and I think our league as a whole was as well. But right now, I just do not see a whole lot of solid teams top to bottom. A lot of “good” teams (25-50 ranking), but not great (top 15 teams).

  13. haze 04/28/2008 at 11:05 AM #

    It’s coaching and, specifically, a near complete inability to manage QB play. How can we have 12 teams and only 2-3 decent QB’s? There are real talent identification and development issues here, especially at Miami and FSU.

    I agree that TOB, Butch and PJ are all coaching upgrades for their respective teams but I don’t see the same pluses in Jags or Shannon. If the former 3 pan out and the latter 2 bomb, are we better as a conference 3 years from now?

    As far as fan support goes, we are not in the same class with the SEC, Big Ten or Big 12. We have some good fans (esp. Clemson & VT) but we don’t have the monster stadiums, the spring game turnouts or the media focus you find in the top football conferences. We’ll have to win first and develop later.

    SFN: Agreed. We also don’t have the same size student bodies and alumni bases as many of these other schools. And, we definitely don’t have a friendly environment for the students to support the program but only so much…especially in light of the fact that we can’t even get the students into the games before halftime.

  14. packbackr04 04/28/2008 at 11:20 AM #

    no haze, you are very wrong, you need to buy Lee Fowlers book on managment. Its called “Ruining an athletic department for Dummies”…. If you build the 100,000 seat stadium, then you start winning games. how can you expect more than 15,000 people to show up for a spring game when your stadium only holds 58,000. Just be patient. “Coach” will build us the facilites we need to win football games.

  15. b 04/28/2008 at 1:02 PM #

    The problem with a big playoff is travel costs for university and fans, because the championship team has to win 5 games (possibly all on the road) out of a 32 team field. That’s the most cogent argument I’ve heard.

    As far as the TV revenue, I doubt seriously it would change. I imagine the cost of Ad time would be the concern, as much as replacing programming. They could always run another Seinfeld marathon on a Wednesday night in December to replace the Motor City Bowl, and would only have to pay syndication fees. Heck, its Christmas! Just run Christmas Story and Miracle on 34th St. fifty-leven MORE times. But they couldn’t charge as much to advertisers then.

    I think (I’m no Broadcasting guru, now) you just balance this by charging more for the more concentrated weekend scheduling, kind of like they do during the rest of the season. They would be able to charge more for a first round game than they could for the Boise Bowl anyway.

  16. b 04/28/2008 at 5:18 PM #

    Mel Kiper mentioned and ESPN has been running a graphic about the ACC and SEC showing well in the draft.

  17. Noah 04/28/2008 at 6:47 PM #

    As far as the TV revenue, I doubt seriously it would change. I imagine the cost of Ad time would be the concern, as much as replacing programming.

    You would be very, very wrong. The bowls make a ton of money for the networks. They cost nothing and you can stack them evenly throughout mid-December through the first week of January. You don’t get a dwindling number of games. You can run ’em throughout the week and you get a whole month of nothing but profits.

    It’s not travel costs, it’s not figuring out the logistics. D-Iaa can do it because no one gives a damn about them.

  18. b 04/29/2008 at 6:53 AM #

    How would that money change if the distinction is that the games are playoffs?

  19. StateFans 04/29/2008 at 8:21 AM #

    (1) there would be significantly less games.

    (2) the games would all be on the same day or so and therefore more concentrated (not all in primetime) and not staggered through weeks and weeks in primetime (where cost of advertising is more)

  20. Ed89 04/29/2008 at 9:14 AM #

    The “plus 1” system or 8 team playoff is most likely. It will keep the rest of the bowl system in place, but add either 1 or 3 additional games. It will happen eventually, IMO. It’s just a matter of time. And as far as TV revenue, those 3 or 1 additional game(s) will attract alot more national attention than the current BCS bowl games. If it’s not the national championship, and your team isn’t playing, who cares???

  21. b 04/29/2008 at 12:28 PM #

    In a 32 team field, there would be one less game. That’s not significant to me. In addition, every game would yield considerably more significance and ultimately a larger ad cost.

    Besides, an event like the College Football Playoffs (damn that sounds nice) would name its price to advertisers who would continue to trip over their own feet to pay. The Super Bowl isn’t played during the week, yet it is consistently the highest ad price year in year out.

    The scheduling issue is another matter. I don’t pretend to have a good solution. There’s simply no way to space out the games like Bowl games without giving an advantage to one team over another along the way. But speaking from my perspective, I am not able to watch games during the week in most cases (thank goodness for DVR), so it’s actually an improvement to my tastes. I don’t enjoy a game as much when I know the outcome. But like the rest of you, even though I would like a tweek, I’ve no intention of missing the football orgy on New Years regardless.

    I know this was a shamelesss thread jack on my part, so I’ll stop now (likely too late!) regardless of any reply. Thanks for your patience with me and the high quality of your arguments.

  22. choppack1 04/29/2008 at 1:29 PM #

    b – The scheduling part isn’t that hard. If you eliminated the conference championships (I know, I know) – you could start that week or the next and be down to 8 teams before the 3rd week of Christmas…Now, back to more realistic talk…

    I imagine the best solution is that the first 16 games could take place the 2nd or 3rd week of December…This and the Christmas holiday are the most difficult week due to exams and well, duh…New Years weekend have the next 8 games, then 4 games the next week, 2 the next and 1 the next. So, you’re Sweet 16 is January 1st, your Final 8 January 8, Your Final 4, January 15, and your final January 22nd. This only extends the regular season 2 more weekends than the current schedule. The big difference is that the winner will now play 4 more games.

    Ed89 – I think the scenario you propose, while not necessarily unlikely, is the worst possible solution. You get the impact of watering down the bowl games, while not generating a whole lot of new interest. You also still have the likelihood that deserving teams would be left out of a “Plus 1” scenario.

    And now I’ll jump into those waters – funny that college football’s popularity keeps growing w/out a playoff, while other sports w/ playoffs aren’t really growing.

  23. Noah 04/29/2008 at 1:29 PM #

    In the current bowl system, the bowls are fairly evenly distributed throughout the month. There are several days that have six and nine hour windows where there’s football on a couple of networks. You can spend the entire day flipping around and never have to watch anything but football.

    In a playoff system, you have one or two days (saturday or sunday) that are loaded with games…and then every week, there’s fewer and fewer games.

    Are you going to spread the games out? or will one network get all of the games? I can’t think of a situation where multiple networks cover one tournament in any sport. But if you’re looking at one network getting the rights to the games, you’re talking about significantly less money being thrown into the pot for the total value of the post-season.

    Talk to anyone in television about this and they just shake their heads. The logistics on where to play the games and everything else can all be worked out. They do it in D1aa…but like I said earlier, no one gives a crap about them. They could flip a coin to determine the winners and no one would care.

    There’s absolutely no momentum whatsoever for a playoff system in college football. The only argument that I even hear in favor of a playoff system is, “Well, everyone ELSE has one!” Okay, well every pro sport has a best-of series. Why doesn’t the NFL adopt a best-of-seven mentality? Why is the Super Bowl on a neutral site? No one else plays their championship on a neutral site? Why does football use an oblong ball? Everyone else plays with a round ball. And on and on and on…

  24. b 04/29/2008 at 2:03 PM #

    Don’t look now, but McShay has a 2009 mock draft already. As unbelievable as that is, I find it more unreasonable he projects only 4 ACC players in his first round. James Davis is a first rounder to me and he’s not mentioned, neither is Greg Carr though I can understand that to a point considering FSU’s QB issues. But a 6’6″ receiver that can run will draw some interest, and he projects Heyward-Bey as a mid 1st rounder.

    From State’s roster I can see Hill and AM Cash being first rounders if they have solid seasons, and Cash decides to go pro of course. Anybody else I might have overlooked?

  25. choppack1 04/29/2008 at 2:13 PM #

    “In the current bowl system, the bowls are fairly evenly distributed throughout the month. There are several days that have six and nine hour windows where there’s football on a couple of networks. You can spend the entire day flipping around and never have to watch anything but football.”

    The only day where you can really watch more than 2 games is New Years Day – and they’ve even watered that down some. (Still, for a college football fan, it’s about as close to Nirvana as you can get.) Several days have 2 games, but other than New Years eve I can’t think of any days where there is more than 1 game that would generate a lot of interest.

    “In a playoff system, you have one or two days (saturday or sunday) that are loaded with games…and then every week, there’s fewer and fewer games. ”

    Actually, I think Sunday is likely off limits. I think you’d see games on Thursday, Friday and Saturday. I think the key would to be spread out a 16 game 1st round over several days to mimic the current bowl system.

    “Are you going to spread the games out? or will one network get all of the games? I can’t think of a situation where multiple networks cover one tournament in any sport. ”

    The NFL certainly uses multiple networks for its tournament. If I was king this is the model I’d use – selling “regions” or packages to the TV networks.

    “There’s absolutely no momentum whatsoever for a playoff system in college football. ”

    I used to think the same thing. However, w/ the internet, ESPN and 24 Hour sports radios banging the drum constantly and even the creation of the BCS, the emergence of one becomes more and more likely.

    Keep in mind, this doesn’t mean I want one, just that the clamouring can become so loud and a consensus can become “so broad and universal” w/out an actual look at the impact of the solutions, that action becomes inevitable…kind of like another issue of our time.

1 2

Leave a Reply