Brownlow's Twitter Mailbag: Can Florida State live up to the hype, long lost ACC teams and more

By Lauren Brownlow, WRALSportsFan contributor

It's Mailbag time again, and the takes were hot in all of your questions this week! Way to bring it. This week, you all wanted to know whether or not Florida State is overrated going into next season and the POLL is not even out yet! There's no off-season in this region. We also get into whether or not the Hurricanes are Virginia basketball (not that there's anything wrong with that!) and which non-ACC team actually belongs in The Footprint. Oh, and a question to make women of a certain age (mine) feel old, but maybe didn't work.

Let's get into it!

Phew, we're hopping right in here! Listen, if there's any ACC program not named Miami likely to be overrated in the preseason, it's going to be Florida State. There are years I've thought Florida State was ranked too high in the preseason, and more of those are recent years of course. I saw them No. 7 in a way-too-early poll (broke my personal rule against reading those since it literally says it's too early in the headline), and I don't think that seems crazy. Maybe because they were one spot behind LSU, a team they beat last year and a team that I'm not super sold on myself (at least not at No. 6).

I think anyone putting FSU in the top 4 is jumping the gun a bit, but all three of FSU's losses last year were to ranked teams at the time (Wake when Wake was still playing well, NC State and Clemson). The Seminoles return their quarterback in Jordan Travis, one of the best in the league, and plenty of weapons on both sides of the ball. Where should a team that went 10-3 last year, beat Florida and Oklahoma to end the season and returns a lot be ranked? I'd say top 15 at a minimum. So if you've seen them higher than 7, I get why there's some hesitation there but otherwise? I'm a believer. I'm probably the wrong person to ask though as I have gone hard in the paint for both Travis and head coach Mike Norvell for awhile because I am a believer in both, even when they were struggling. Travis has that special intangible QB quality where he just finds a way to make a play, and I love Norvell's offensive mind. Sometimes, they both think themselves into some tricky situations (or don't think) but what both can do when they're at their best is special.

Knowing ACC football's luck, though, FSU loses its season-opener to Georgia Tech in Ireland. A faceplant right out of the gate. I don't think they will, though. The letdown maybe comes with a blowout loss to LSU or something but not in Ireland. I don't think. Never mind; I fear I will speak it into existence.

Let me just say this: NC State fans, while they likely factually make up the highest number of local Canes' fans, aren't the only local fanbase that love the Canes. And from plenty of anecdotal experience, Duke and UNC fans would resent the UVa comparison just as much as NC State fans. I did ask for elaboration on the question and got a bit more:

SO GLAD WE CLEARED THAT UP! Like Virginia, though, plenty of people enjoy their style of play. Or maybe I'm the only weirdo who does outside of Charlottesville. I do think the question comes up in part because some NC State fans have said they'd rather lose than watch that style of play every night if it were their coach doing it. I know how badly NC State fans want to win so I find that semi-hard to believe, but I also know that they are among the most stubbornly principled fans out there, so there's that.

But just as art as subjective, so is playing style. There is probably some insane person out there who loves watching Iowa football play beyond the car-crash-gawking mentality. For me, their offense seems almost intentionally terrible. People say that about Virginia, but it isn't true. There are actually college basketball teams out there that seem to abhor playing offense, so I find the Virginia cracks almost insulting when those teams are spared. I'm a little biased because 8-9 years ago, Malcolm Brogdon sat down with me and literally broke down everything UVa is trying to do offensively and I was RAPT. Now that I know, I don't see it the same way. I see them the way boxing fans see Floyd Mayweather but I just can't. I see the art in it. I think it's beautiful personally, but it's far more beautiful when they have players like Malcolm, who moved without the ball as well as any player I've ever seen. But their entire philosophy on both ends of the court works to serve to wear teams down, and it often works.

I don't like watching UVa play EVERYONE, mind you. UVa-Clemson? Nope. UVa-UNC? Gross, every year. Duke-UVa? Must-see TV. UVa-NC State is often exciting. UVa can bring out the best in you, but it can also bring out the worst.

Oh wait, this question was about hockey. Well, the answer seems to be at least in part that Canes' fans don't feel they are like UVa in style of play, and I can see why they think that. They do shoot a lot and while they value defense, it's not at the expense of offense. I don't know a whole lot about hockey but I've watched the Canes under Rod Brind'Amour and I've enjoyed it aesthetically, personally. So I guess the answer is they're just fine.

I featured both of these questions because they're so similar, of course, but also because I wanted to include a mention of a team that Ryan's question would not have allowed me to: South Carolina. I don't know that I'd peg the Gamecocks as the likeliest FANBASE to be in the ACC, but the way their team is is #goacc all the way. This is a team that will beat great teams and lose to terrible ones, which is a prerequisite for ACC membership.

I mean, in 2019, this South Carolina team won three games against FBS teams and one of them was GEORGIA. That was Georgia's only other loss was to a juggernaut LSU! That loss maybe didn't keep them out of the College Football Playoff, but it would've for me. To beat Georgia and lose to everyone else marginal is peak #goacc. Their results even within the same season are often nonsensical. Last year, two of their five Power 5 wins came against teams that finished in the top 13. Two of their five P5 losses came to teams that finished below .500. Other than losing a close one to Notre Dame in the Gator Bowl and getting blown out by Georgia, all of their losses (Florida, Missouri, Arkansas) were far more winnable than Tennessee and Clemson, at least on paper. But if you beat teams that are better than you and fall on your face the next week, you are INCREDIBLY #goacc. And when South Carolina is on the cusp of something in a game, it can often find creative ways to fall on its face.

What holds the Gamecocks back from a slam-dunk ACC member is that their fanbase is not self-deprecating. In fact, they are incredibly serious. So serious that CLEMSON fans, of all people, are like "dude, calm down". Oh, and per Ryan's question, they're also former members, so they don't count. And I can't throw Maryland into the mix, either. I can't quite shake Stanford for some reason: great at the Olympic sports, solid at football and basketball at times but also inexplicably bad for far too long at others for a school as well off as they are. Oh, and if you questioned their value to the league, someone would point straight to academics or their Olympic sports, as if television cares about either. Texas is another one that comes to mind but that's mostly from a Miami/Virginia Tech POV in football as they have been "back" for over a decade now without actually being back and it makes everyone laugh at them outside of their own fans. Kentucky did too by having a great basketball program and being middling in football, but their fans are ... largely not self-deprecating.

So I think my answer would be Stanford. I saw some suggest Purdue, but ACC programs generally *win* national titles in basketball. Or at least get to Final Fours.

I know this question was sent to me because I am a woman of a certain age, which also means my blood runs hot for Joshua Jackson and has since around, say, 1994 or so. I also know it was directed at me because I often lament how old certain milestones make me feel, not the least of which is players I covered IN COLLEGE either retiring or their children starting to hit the recruiting circuit. Normally, this sort of thing would horrify me.

But it doesn't. In fact, it doesn't even ruffle my feathers. I think a big reason for that is I actually found Michael Douglas incredibly sexy in Fatal Attraction. I didn't see it until a bit later in life because I was not really, um, of age when it came out. But once I did, I honestly thought he was hot in it and I'm not really into him at any stage of his career. Like, he's fine, but I didn't think he could do an erotic thriller as well as he did and just make me really believe it.

Josh, meanwhile, has transitioned his once-youthful career to one that has plenty of serious and adult projects like this one. My little Charlie from Mighty Ducks has blossomed into the dude who played lead in The Affair, and it all started with how unbelievably hot he was in Dawson's Creek. He aged well, took good roles and has stayed .... I almost said sultry. Can I say that? Well, I just did. But it was this natural progression from childhood innocence to ... well, Fatal Attraction. I know it means Josh is old now, but so am I. And he's still older than I am. And still hot.