or possible alternatives-
http://www.ajc.com/news/sports/college/accs-interesting-alternative-to-potential-nine-gam/nsBhn/
http://www.ajc.com/news/sports/college/accs-interesting-alternative-to-potential-nine-gam/nsBhn/
9 game fb schedule vote coming
- Thread starter TIGER-PAUL
- Start date
Are there a lot of teams in ACC that don't play 2 P5 OOC teams? That's weak if so. On the surface, I like the 9 ACC games but only if we keep 2 P5 games OOC.
I don't want us to replace our typical P5 OOC match ups (Iowa, ok state, tenn) with a wake forest or NC state. I want us to replace our fcs scrimmages with wake forest or nc state.
I don't want us to replace our typical P5 OOC match ups (Iowa, ok state, tenn) with a wake forest or NC state. I want us to replace our fcs scrimmages with wake forest or nc state.
The irish are getting a full share of the accn. Tell them to play another game to help.
I don't like the non-conference acc vs acc idea. That could be confusing. Although I see how it could be hard to find two free power 5 teams to play with all these 9 game schedules. Would be nice if they could set up a challenge game like hoops does with acc vs big ten
I think even with a 9-game ACC schedule, teams should be playing 1-2 P5 teams a year, if not more. That's how you make the playoffs in today's game, and the ACC should be encouraging it. Besides, it's a better ticket and creates more interest. I always thought it'd be cool if conferences did challenges against each other like they do in basketball.
Last edited:
How sweet would it be if the ACC signed a contract for challenge games with Sec or Big ten for like the next tens years? Sign me up for that
The SEC or PAC 12. I do not care about playing The Fat 10(errr.-14). Although, would not mind playing Ohio State and Michigan once in awhile, if PITT can upgrade their Talent Base in the next 3-5 years.
Regardless of how they vote every ACC team needs to be playing 2 Non-Conference Games a year against Power 5 teams. I would prefer the 8 plus 2 model but 9 plus 2 isn't a disaster either.
Lets get realistic everyone! What we might like to see and what we will get are two entirely different things.
For every additional ACC conference game you will lose an OOC P5 conference game from the schedule. You can bank on it!!
Want to schedule more games in the future vs PSU and WVU--the odds of that happening will drop with the addition of a 9th ACC game.
Thinking the MAC teams will go instead of the P5 opponents from the OOC is delusional thinking.
For every additional ACC conference game you will lose an OOC P5 conference game from the schedule. You can bank on it!!
Want to schedule more games in the future vs PSU and WVU--the odds of that happening will drop with the addition of a 9th ACC game.
Thinking the MAC teams will go instead of the P5 opponents from the OOC is delusional thinking.
WVU sure, i'll play them.
PSU...pass. I'd rather play a MAC school.
Regardless of who you squeeze into out of conference games, I want more ACC games so I get to see Clemson and FSU more often.
PSU...pass. I'd rather play a MAC school.
Regardless of who you squeeze into out of conference games, I want more ACC games so I get to see Clemson and FSU more often.
You could always try making the ACC Championship every year. Just kidding. What I would like to see happen to make what you are talking about happen is to realign the divisions according to Geography and do away with the permanent crossover game. If you do that then you play every team in the opposite division every 3.5 years instead of every 6 years. With Geography you would have the following divisions.
ACC North:
Louisville
Syracuse
Pitt
Boston College
Virginia Tech
Virginia
North Carolina
ACC South:
FSU
Miami
Clemson
Georgia Tech
Duke
Wake Forest
NC State
You might say the competitive balance is not the same between divisions. But not necessarily. Louisville, Virginia Tech, Pitt and UNC would need to take the next step to become yearly Top 25 teams and that would take care of competitive balance. If Notre Dame ever joins Full Time you could stick then in the ACC North and whoever gets added as the 16th team would be put in the ACC South.
Sad but true. I could live with an fcs scrimmage with 2 P5 OOC games and 9 conference games. God forbid grambling and New Hampshire don't get their best down payouts to find their ath. Dept budget.
PITT has been playing 2 Power Teams in their OOC Schedule. The problem is that both the 3rd & 4th games are versus very low level teams(although Marshall could prove to be dangerous this year).
ACC needs to got to 9 Games because if PITT is only playing FSU & Clemson at Home one time every 12 years, then what is the point of being in the same conference as that is less than some of PITT's past Non Conference Power 5 Teams rotated onto their schedule. I think that there should be all Power 5 Schools on the Schedule(or also include 1 Game versus the Other 6 Conferences, as certainly some AAC & MAC Teams have proven to be worthy opponents), and maybe schedule just a Preseason Scrimmage versus the FCS Schools(like Villanova on PITT's schedule this year).
Then get a 16 Team Playoffs and make all At Large Teams Selected after the Conference Winners(All Power 5 and one slot to the best of the other 6 Conferences) based on not only W-L Records but SOS, so Teams do not cherry pick the bottom Power 5 Teams. Actually, Houston is now better than 80%, if not more, of the Power 5 Schools and most likely will be as long as they can keep their current HC and usually the Top 3-4 MAC Schools depending on the year are better than half of the FAT 10 Conference, as they beat them on the Road-PITT also has been on the losing end to MAC Schools, so not just bashing the FAT 10, but the MAC Schools usually plays them with some degree of success despite the lower budgets in their Programs-if Frankie '1 Finger' gets canned by PSU or run out of Crappy Valley by The CULT(which will happen if he does not start going 500% versus Ohio State, Michigan & Michigan State by 2017-18), and his next Coaching Job is in the MAC, how will he survive without his Helicopter for Recruiting?.
Also Notre Dame should be playing PITT more than the near future scheduling allows for, based on the history between those 2 schools. I am not absolutely positive, but think after USC, Navy & Michigan State, that PITT has played the most Games against Notre Dame(maybe Purdue also played more Games being an Indiana School, not sure).
Last edited:
You do not have to change the Divisions based on Geography to play other Division Schools more often, but just get rid of the Crossover Game as you mentioned(nice try though to sneak in your agenda there to have FSU, Da U & Clemson in the same Division-sorry but you cannot really know if or when Notre Dame would become a Full Time FB Member, so that is not a valid consideration for balance of power at this point, so putting the most Talent Rich 3 Schools in the same Division in the name of Geography is not going to happen-just pretend if you attended PITT, BC, Syracuse, then honestly tell us that you would agree to your own Division Changes).
And if Notre Dame joined as a Full Time Member, try seeing how they would react to having FSU, Da U & Clemson in the other Division if assuming getting ND would require staying at 8 Conference Games, so they could continue to play USC, Stanford, Navy & Michigan State(or one other National Level School in a different area) each year. Now then again eliminating the Crossover Game that you mentioned would help solve the 1 Home Game every 12 Years Problem that some Schools currently have with certain other Schools.
I still think it would be better for ALL SCHOOLS to feel like they are part of the same Conference though by going to 9 Conference Games.
Also, FSU Fans who traveled to Pittsburgh a few years ago seemed to mention that they loved the city and wish it would not be another 12 years until the next visit. Becoming a good enough Program to be playing in a Conference Title Game still does not solve the issue of actually playing at or hosting a school from the other Division more than once every 12 Years(based on the current scheduling setup).
I dont mind a non-con game against an ACC school if the entire league did it on the same date (say Week 2). That way everyone knows its a non-con. So when NC St beats UVa in Week 2, you know it doesnt count. If that game is played in Oct or Nov, nobody would realize its a non-con game.
Agree, For Pitt, I think Barnes will vote for 9. It rotates fsu,clem more and one less game to find.I think Pitt would also like staying at 8 but dropping the crossovers.
But this pisses off the southern fb schools.
The occ acc game doesn't help us as all we really want is fsu,clem more and odds near zero we could get an extra game with them.
But this pisses off the southern fb schools.
The occ acc game doesn't help us as all we really want is fsu,clem more and odds near zero we could get an extra game with them.
GaTech, Clemson, Florida State...these schools will want 8+2 just because they have their in-state SEC rivalry game. That's important (or it should be).
I say go to 10 conference games. That way each school could play an in-state rival or a power conference team and a non power conference team. Everyone, especially the fans, win.
This is s win, win, win, win situation for all involved.
This is s win, win, win, win situation for all involved.
Expand to 16 teams and break into 4 pods. Play 2 pods + your 3 for an 11 game regular season. Then the 4 pod winners play a championship playoff game and the 2 winners play in the championship for game #13. Screw out of conference games.
Well when West Virginia, according to TheDudeofWVU, joins the SEC, there is our crossover SEC opponent
With the GOR and ACCN in toe, there is no longer a threat of FSU and Clemson getting mad and leaving (if there ever really was a threat). I would expect the 4 teams who have SEC rivalry games to vote against it. The other 10 will vote for it so it'll pass.
They also need to eliminate most crossover rivalries.
The only protected rivalry games should be:
FSU/Miami
Clem/GT (maybe, dont know enough about that "rivalry")
UNC/UVa (oldest rivalry in the South)
Pitt/Syr, Lou/Uva, VT/BC, and Duke/Wake dont need protected. With a 9 game schedule, they'd play almost every other year anyway. That's enough.
They also need to eliminate most crossover rivalries.
The only protected rivalry games should be:
FSU/Miami
Clem/GT (maybe, dont know enough about that "rivalry")
UNC/UVa (oldest rivalry in the South)
Pitt/Syr, Lou/Uva, VT/BC, and Duke/Wake dont need protected. With a 9 game schedule, they'd play almost every other year anyway. That's enough.
8 voted to stay at 8 last time including Pitt, Va tech. I think Pitt could also go with dropping the crossover, but if FSU,Clem stay protected, doesn't matter to Pitt as much. I'm guessing Barnes votes 9 this time but not sure. But the southern fb schools will be pissed.
That was when there was more pressure from FSU and Clemson to vote their way and before the B10 announced a 9 game schedule meaning its going to get more difficult to schedule P5s.
Per another article the majority of ACC AD's aren't in favor of 9 games. Would prefer 8 games plus 1 power five conference game. Which Pitt has covered with PSU & OSU for the next few years. GT AD just resigned to make a move to Purdue so that could change but I know GT wanted to keep it at 8
That's not the reality of the ACC. UNC/NC State crossover isn't going anywhere. Neither school is giving that up that game. It doesn't matter if you don't consider it a rivalry. They do, and they simply aren't giving it up. Duke/Wake Forest also aren't giving up their game, and certainly not Florida St/Miami. You could make crossover games optional, but some schools simply aren't giving up their crossover games.
I meant the NCSU/UNC game should be protected. UNC/UVa doesnt nees protection because they are in the same division.
As for Duke/Wake, look at their attendance for that "rivalry" game over the years. Its pretty apparent their fans dont care about that game.
Simply incorrect. This is a lack of understanding of ACC politics. Duke and Wake Forest are not giving up their crossover game. You can't go by how many fans attend the game. The administrations of both schools simply want to play the game. That's just the reality.
The vote shouldn't affect the crossover games either way. From what the article says, the only proposal is the number of conference games.
Exactly, TopDeckTiger.
I personally like Pitt's crossover game with Syracuse (they've played 70 times, they're tied with Notre Dame as Pitt's 3rd most frequently played opponent; behind Penn State and West Virginia).
Also, SeanMF, I have 5 "No" votes from SEC:
- Florida wouldn't want another Florida school (Florida State or Miami)
- South Carolina would want Clemson
- Kentucky wouldn't want Louisville
- Georgia wouldn't want Georgia Tech
- Texas A&M wouldn't want another Texas school (Especially Texas)
Well that's stupid. Duke and Wake fans dont care about the Duke/Wake game as evidenced by the annual horrible attendance.......but the administrators demand it be played? Makes sense.
In any event, Pitt/Syr, Lou/UVa, and VT/BC must not be protected. I would rather play Louisville and BC a little more and Syracuse a little less.
For me, FSU/Miami needs to be protected. FSU/Clemson needs to be protected. Anything beyond that is fine with me.
Christ if the Big Ten can figure out that geographically aligned divisions is the way to go, how the hell can the ACC not see it......It's cleaner and makes it easier for everyone
Great point, and why Miami with FSU with Duke, Wake, UNC, NCS, and GT, make more sense but UNC's Alumnus Swofford is just dumb on that subject, in y opinion. BC, Cuse, PITT, Uva, VT, ULou, & Clemson are a better fit!
Additionally, Notre Dame has far more Traditional Rivalry with Pitt and BC than any other ACC program. Swofford should announce his retirement like Big ten Jim Delany did and the sooner the better.
