8+2 or 9+1 ACC fb vote coming next week

[TIGER-PAUL]

The ACC’s athletic directors will vote at their fall meeting, set for Oct. 5-6, on one of two options for future football scheduling, at ESPN’s behest. The league can remain at eight games while committing to play two Power 5 nonconference opponents each season, or go to nine ACC games and one Power 5 opponent

Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/luke-decock/article102029872.html#storylink=cpy

 

[ThePanthers]

Should be interesting.

 

[PhPanther1]

I hope it's 9 ACC games. They need to increase their amount of games with meaning.

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

I agree that they need to increase meaningful games but I don't think you do that with more ACC games. Rather than getting an opportunity to play Clemson and Florida State slightly more often than we do now, I would MUCH rather play an annual home-and-home with West Virginia.

And, if Penn State is game, it gives you flexibility to play them annually as well.

Nine conference games works better for some ACC programs but Pitt is better served by sticking with the 8+2 model.

 

[Jpripper88]

I think either is stupid. I'd prefer 9 games and no OOC mandate.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

8 has 4 votes. Cutcliffe is opposed to 9 but dont know if his AD agrees. DeCock from the Raleigh paper thinks UNC and will vote for 8 but NCSU and Wake will vote 9. Pitt will vote 9. Im sure Syr and BC also will.

So, it could come down to the Virginia schools.

If 9 wins, I do feel that ANY school that only got 6 home games should he compensated for the lost home game.

 

[Mikefln]

I hope that 8 wins. Honestly, other than Clemson and FSU there is no one in the Atlantic I would want to play more regular then we currently do. I would rather see Pitt get PSU/WVU on the schedule more. I would also like to see more games against the PAC 12. I am dying to see Pitt play Arizona St with TG still as coach. I know there would be no current players who played for him, but us fans that would be awesome. I think Pitt is better off with the 8 +2 rather than the 9 + 1.

 

[California Panther]

8 has 4 votes. Cutcliffe is opposed to 9 but dont know if his AD agrees. DeCock from the Raleigh paper thinks UNC and will vote for 8 but NCSU and Wake will vote 9. Pitt will vote 9. Im sure Syr and BC also will.

So, it could come down to the Virginia schools.

If 9 wins, I do feel that ANY school that only got 6 home games should he compensated for the lost home game.

Wonder if we cut back the OOC if they go to 9, there are several years in the future where we already have 2 P5 games scheduled. With 9 conf games and then 2 P5 OOC, that only leaves 1 non P5 game in the entire schedule, which would be a tough schedule.

 

[Piranha]

WV will always want to play Pitt, so it does not matter if it is 8 or 9 in regards to them. PS will find an excuse not to play us.

 

[pittdan77]

How is ESPN voting?

 

[ThePanthers]

How is ESPN voting?

ESPN is fine with either. They just want 10 P5 games for each ACC team for the new ACC Network prior to 2019 launch.

That is why there is a 9+1 or 10+2 mandate.

 

[mdpitt]

The ACC’s athletic directors will vote at their fall meeting, set for Oct. 5-6, on one of two options for future football scheduling, at ESPN’s behest. The league can remain at eight games while committing to play two Power 5 nonconference opponents each season, or go to nine ACC games and one Power 5 opponent

Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/luke-decock/article102029872.html#storylink=cpy

Selfishly speaking, I hope it's 9 games for two reasons. First, we have very little tradition with the Southern ACC not on our side of the Conference. The only way to improve that is to increase the meetings. It will take time but it will be worth it. Secondly, I have a slight distrust that Pitt will schedule well if they have 4 games to fill. Minimize the variables. If we played one MAC team and a rotation of PSU or WVU and then spin a wheel for any other team, I would be thrilled.

 

[ThePanthers]

Why is there a distrust in their scheduling? I think they schedule pretty decent OOC.

 

[NTOP]

I agree that they need to increase meaningful games but I don't think you do that with more ACC games. Rather than getting an opportunity to play Clemson and Florida State slightly more often than we do now, I would MUCH rather play an annual home-and-home with West Virginia.

And, if Penn State is game, it gives you flexibility to play them annually as well.

Nine conference games works better for some ACC programs but Pitt is better served by sticking with the 8+2 model.

The 9+1 means a minimum of 1 P5 OOC. You could play the nits & hoopies plus one rent=a=victim. Might not be smart, but allowable.

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

Well, yeah. If that's an option I would favor that.

However, I am assuming that we will have two non-P5 OOC games per year. We probably need to do that to make sure that we have at least six home games every year, which is an absolute must.

So, if you assume that we are looking at two lesser opponents per year and at least eight ACC opponents per year, the window for remaining teams is obviously very small.

I'm just not willing to make it smaller to play far more games against teams like NC State and Boston College than we will the likes of Clemson and Florida State.

This will basically replace those games with annual games against West Virginia and maybe Penn State. That's what I favor.

 

[Jpripper88]

Selfishly speaking, I hope it's 9 games for two reasons. First, we have very little tradition with the Southern ACC not on our side of the Conference. The only way to improve that is to increase the meetings. It will take time but it will be worth it. Secondly, I have a slight distrust that Pitt will schedule well if they have 4 games to fill. Minimize the variables. If we played one MAC team and a rotation of PSU or WVU and then spin a wheel for any other team, I would be thrilled.

I mean, if it is 8+2, they will have to play 2 P5 teams out of conference, so there would only be two non P5 (supposed to be) cupcake games. In either scenario it is overwhelmingly likely Pitt would play 10 P5 opponents, 1 G5 opponent, and 1 FCS opponent. I'd prefer to stick to the current setup without the mandates, in case our program needs easier wins. I'd, also, rather have wins than more "intriguing" matchups or great road trips/home games.

 

[TheSeldomSeenKid]

Why does it need to be 9+1 and not 9+2? I would think that you can balance the schedule to get 7 Home Games, by making sure that the year that PITT(or any other team) only has 4 Home Conference Games but 5 Away Conference Games, can schedule their OOC Games at Home(although if going to 9 Conference Games happens sooner than later, it might take a few years to balance out the Home Schedule).

It seems pointless to be in a league with Florida State and Clemson, when those Schools only travel to PITT once every 12 years(and vice versa), as other OOC Schools will travel to PITT more than once every 12 years.

I think all P-5 Schools should only be playing one School outside the P-5 Conferences anyways to have more competitive balance in every School's Total Schedule, so play 11 Power-5 Schools(although, I am sure 'Unrivaled' will have Iowa State, Vanderbilt and whoever resides at the bottom of the ACC & PAC 12 on Speed Dial-it helps them get back to the 'Success Despite No Honor' scheduling 7-8 automatic Wins, just on their Talent Advantage). Of Course the ACC & SEC Schools would have Purdue, Rutgers & Illinois on Speed Dial. The first game of the year can be played against a school from the other FBS Conferences(no more FCS Schools please).

 

[Piranha]

As more conferences move towards playing 9 conference games, that is going to limit ND's opportunities of playing a good schedule. I wonder if they will factor into the decision.

 

[PhPanther1]

Why would you not want to play an extra division game that helps you decide your champion? Those games have true meaning to the outcome of the team. Whether you get bragging rights during cooler talk should be secondary.

 

[pittdan77]

This whole discussion is just a great reminder of why college football has the dumbest way of deciding a champion of any sport. Virtually no incentive to create a system or schedule that puts the best games on the field.

 

[CorsosRevenge]

I hope that 8 wins. Honestly, other than Clemson and FSU there is no one in the Atlantic I would want to play more regular then we currently do. I would rather see Pitt get PSU/WVU on the schedule more. I would also like to see more games against the PAC 12. I am dying to see Pitt play Arizona St with TG still as coach. I know there would be no current players who played for him, but us fans that would be awesome. I think Pitt is better off with the 8 +2 rather than the 9 + 1.

By the time we got to the game it would be 2024 and Godd Graham would be Gone Graham.

 

[Jpripper88]

Why would you not want to play an extra division game that helps you decide your champion? Those games have true meaning to the outcome of the team. Whether you get bragging rights during cooler talk should be secondary.

We wouldn't play an extra division game. We would play an extra conference game and that means more games against schools like Wake, NC State, and BC than it does FSU and Clemson.

 

[fitzburgh]

This whole discussion is just a great reminder of why college football has the dumbest way of deciding a champion of any sport. Virtually no incentive to create a system or schedule that puts the best games on the field.

Agree, should be more major conferences (8!) and within each conference have each team play the others. Then winners meet in an 8 team playoff...

 

[Jpripper88]

Agree, should be more major conferences (8!) and within each conference have each team play the others. Then winners meet in an 8 team playoff...

Problem there is there aren't enough competitive programs for 8 conferences (would need to be at least 9 teams in a conference) and not as much revenue for how they would have to set up the quarterfinals in those scenarios. Tiebreakers could add a lot of strife as well.

 

[UptownPrivileges]

8 in conference + 2 rivals (st penn & wvucc) 1 interesting matchup tO$U and nova should be good.

 

[mehinpgh]

my vote is 8 ACC games to leave the possibility of renewing the backyard brawl and pitt/psu annually. those would be my favorite two games on the schedule every year. i just don't care about acc schools very much...i get fired up to contend for conference titles, but really don't care about virginia/wake forest/nc/ncsu/gtech/etc

 

[PhPanther1]

We wouldn't play an extra division game. We would play an extra conference game and that means more games against schools like Wake, NC State, and BC than it does FSU and Clemson.

It's the same thing. All acc games cary the same weight when determining the division champion. Those games are the most important ones on the schedule. Achieving goals that have actual rewards is the most important part of sports. This isn't beer league flag football where the most important thing is beating "your rival".

 

[revampedpanthers]

I mean, if it is 8+2, they will have to play 2 P5 teams out of conference, so there would only be two non P5 (supposed to be) cupcake games. In either scenario it is overwhelmingly likely Pitt would play 10 P5 opponents, 1 G5 opponent, and 1 FCS opponent. I'd prefer to stick to the current setup without the mandates, in case our program needs easier wins. I'd, also, rather have wins than more "intriguing" matchups or great road trips/home games.

I would rather see 8+2 and get rid of the corss division rivalry game. That would give you a game against clemson and florida every other year. ND game every three years would mean in a 9+1 you would basically not be able to play psu or wvu on a annual basis unless you wanted to kill your team and play 11 p5 teams in the ND years.

 

[topdecktiger]

Why does it need to be 9+1 and not 9+2?

The only reason they are doing it is because ESPN wants 10 P5 games. That's why it's either 8+2 or 9+1.

I would think that you can balance the schedule to get 7 Home Games, by making sure that the year that PITT(or any other team) only has 4 Home Conference Games but 5 Away Conference Games, can schedule their OOC Games at Home

Florida St, Clemson, Georgia Tech, and Louisville can't do that, because of their rivalry games.

I would rather see 8+2 and get rid of the corss division rivalry game.

Won't happen. Too many schools would bitch.

 

[Mikefln]

It's the same thing. All acc games cary the same weight when determining the division champion. Those games are the most important ones on the schedule. Achieving goals that have actual rewards is the most important part of sports. This isn't beer league flag football where the most important thing is beating "your rival".

Guess what the reward of winning the division and conference are still the same with 8+2 or 9+1. So if that is the case, I would rather see Pitt play 8 ACC teams and the +2. Other than Florida St or Clemson (Louisville is having a great year, but you saw what happened to them after Petrino left, they are the late 90's early 2000' Kansas St of the day) who else would you like to see Pitt play more often from the Atlantic? BC? Wake Forest? NC St? i would rather Pitt with the 8+2 use one of the 2 games to play either WVU or PSU, as one of them should be on the schedule every year. Then the other game to play an Oklahoma St, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M, Tenn, Florida, USC, Washington, Ohio St., Arizona St.etc you get the point. So many possible match ups that are way more appealing than BC/Wake/NC St/Louisville. Hell I think playing a Vanderbilt,Washington St or Maryland is more appealing than playing those Atlantic Division schools.