Per McMurphy: 8 or 9 game schedule decision to come later

[ThePanthers]

Sources said that the 8 or 9 game schedule decision did not get finalized today. ADs will provide more info and make a decision at a later date.

Definitely not a slam dunk one way or another.

 

[TIGER-PAUL]

Wonder how Barnes voted?

 

[QuitCallingMeWanny]

Wonder how Barnes voted?

I don't think they voted at all

 

[ThePanthers]

They didn't vote. Will discuss further and probably make decision during October fall meetings.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

They didn't vote. Will discuss further and probably make decision during October fall meetings.

I think 9 would win but do you want 9 games at the expense of FSU and Clemson being pi$$ed off? Their has to be a compromise. Asking 10 ACC teams to find 2 quality P5 opponents every year will be difficult. Asking FSU and Clemson to give up a home game and playing 11 P5s is difficult.

This is why I say they should play 9 but compensate the 4 for lost home games. I cant think of a more fair way.

So, if Pitt wants a little more FSU and Clemson, they dont get it for free. Their ACC share would get cut a little to make FSU and Clemson whole.

 

[QuitCallingMeWanny]

Couldn't they expand the pool of teams by including the AAC and maybe the Mountain West?

 

[ThePanthers]

I think 9 would win but do you want 9 games at the expense of FSU and Clemson being pi$$ed off? Their has to be a compromise. Asking 10 ACC teams to find 2 quality P5 opponents every year will be difficult. Asking FSU and Clemson to give up a home game and playing 11 P5s is difficult.

This is why I say they should play 9 but compensate the 4 for lost home games. I cant think of a more fair way.

So, if Pitt wants a little more FSU and Clemson, they dont get it for free. Their ACC share would get cut a little to make FSU and Clemson whole.

You are going to then have other schools ask why they aren't being compensated for missing home games. Sure, their stadiums and capacities are not as large, but they are also going to miss out some years.

This isnt' the Big XII where certain schools get special treatment.

What is voted on will be for the good of the ENTIRE conference and that is how things will move going forward.

 

[ThePanthers]

Couldn't they expand the pool of teams by including the AAC and maybe the Mountain West?

It's up to what they agreed to with TV execs. The whole reason for this change is related to the ACC Network.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

You are going to then have other schools ask why they aren't being compensated for missing home games. Sure, their stadiums and capacities are not as large, but they are also going to miss out some years.

This isnt' the Big XII where certain schools get special treatment.

What is voted on will be for the good of the ENTIRE conference and that is how things will move going forward.

It would have to be for all teams who play only 6 home games. If Wake ends up with only 6 home games because they play 9 ACC, ND, and lets say Indiana, then they get a check for their lost home game with Louisiana-Monroe. Maybe that's $1 million. FSU's check for losing a G5 home game would probably be around $5 million.

 

[Joe Magarac]

I think 9 would win but do you want 9 games at the expense of FSU and Clemson being pi$$ed off? Their has to be a compromise. Asking 10 ACC teams to find 2 quality P5 opponents every year will be difficult. Asking FSU and Clemson to give up a home game and playing 11 P5s is difficult.

This is why I say they should play 9 but compensate the 4 for lost home games. I cant think of a more fair way.

So, if Pitt wants a little more FSU and Clemson, they dont get it for free. Their ACC share would get cut a little to make FSU and Clemson whole.

No one school is above another.
That is the whole idea of a being in a conference. Strength in numbers. Not in celebrity of a few.
The Big 12 is weakened by the arrogance and hubris of Texas and therefore the conference is not strong.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

No one school is above another.
That is the whole idea of a being in a conference. Strength in numbers. Not in celebrity of a few.
The Big 12 is weakened by the arrogance and hubris of Texas and therefore the conference is not strong.

I am sorry but the ACC is not in a position to make enemies with FSU and Clemson. The GOR can be tested in court and Delaney is still out there. Compensating ALL teams (not just FSU and Clemson) for losing home games seems very reasonable. If we wind up with 6, we get a check also.

 

[pittdan77]

I think it's smart to see what the Big 12 does before making any decisions. At one point, expansion was supposed to be a done deal before the season but it's gotten kind of quiet out there.

I guess my point is, if the Big 12 hasn't expanded or extended their GOR by October, the ACC can factor that into TV/schedule discussions. The B1G is already going to the 9 game schedule with 14 schools. If Big 12 expansion is in disarray, it's entirely possible that the ACC could try to leverage itself with the help of the networks and do something to shake things up even more (assuming the SEC isn't already thinking the same thing).

I now that's just a wild a$$ theory but there's no point in doing anything right this second and stranger things have happened.

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

Frankly, I don't care what Florida State or Clemson thinks. This isn't about them, it's about doing what's best for Pitt and the ACC.

They each have superior football programs to us right now but that doesn't mean they get extra considerations. They don't have any leverage to do anything so they can act in their own best interests and we should act in ours.

That said, from the University of Pittsburgh's perspective, it is definitely best to remain at 8+2. The ninth conference game doesn't really help us and it could hurt us.

Pitt is in a unique position in that it is the only P5 school that I can think of whose three primary rivals - Penn State, West Virginia and Notre Dame - do not compete in its conference. That's problematic if you limit your opportunities to play against those teams.

Everyone focuses on more games versus Florida State and Clemson but they are only two out of seven teams in that division. In addition to more games against the Seminoles and the Tigers, we are also going to get more games against Boston College, Wake Forest, NC State, and Louisville. We already play Syracuse every year.

That's fine, I don't mind playing those teams – even Wake Forest. I just don't think it's in our best interest to lock ourselves into those games when we may be able to forge home-and-home series against our rivals and/or attractive non-rivals.

 

[ThePanthers]

I am sorry but the ACC is not in a position to make enemies with FSU and Clemson. The GOR can be tested in court and Delaney is still out there. Compensating ALL teams (not just FSU and Clemson) for losing home games seems very reasonable. If we wind up with 6, we get a check also.

So FSU and Clemson are going to leave a conference that wants to play 9 games to go to a conference that plays 9 games? Makes sense.

Plus the schools delay actually wants are the ones pushing for 9 games, uncle and Uva.

Ps no one is challenging anything right now over one extra game.

 

[Joe Magarac]

I am sorry but the ACC is not in a position to make enemies with FSU and Clemson. The GOR can be tested in court and Delaney is still out there. Compensating ALL teams (not just FSU and Clemson) for losing home games seems very reasonable. If we wind up with 6, we get a check also.

And the ACC will not be in a position to grow stronger if favoratism is valued over unity.
Sure FSU and Clemson are strong now. How will they look 20 years from now? No one can say.
GOR is a deterant, not a guarantee. Anything can be litigated. The ACC is in a very good position among its fellow Power 5 brethren. I would not trade Pitt's position in any other conference. Pitt is not a "win at all costs" program; and hopefully it will never be one of those programs.

 

[topdecktiger]

You are going to then have other schools ask why they aren't being compensated for missing home games. Sure, their stadiums and capacities are not as large, but they are also going to miss out some years.

This isnt' the Big XII where certain schools get special treatment.

What is voted on will be for the good of the ENTIRE conference and that is how things will move going forward.

The other schools will not lose games. That's the point. The other 10 schools, even under 9+1, can ensure that they get 7 home games every year. The only way the southern schools can ensure 7 home games every year is to never play other P5 teams OOC.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

So FSU and Clemson are going to leave a conference that wants to play 9 games to go to a conference that plays 9 games? Makes sense.

The thought will be: "if we are going to have to be locked into 9 games, we might as well go to the Big Ten and make more money. Plus, we can substitute ND for OSU and Michigan."

Frankly, I dont think anybody besides ND and Texas would ever turn down a Big Ten invite but if you are nice to FSU, maybe they would, I dont know.

 

[ThePanthers]

The thought will be: "if we are going to have to be locked into 9 games, we might as well go to the Big Ten and make more money. Plus, we can substitute ND for OSU and Michigan."

Frankly, I dont think anybody besides ND and Texas would ever turn down a Big Ten invite but if you are nice to FSU, maybe they would, I dont know.

You have a lot of weird thoughts go through your head.

 

[PittMan 72]

You have a lot of weird thoughts go through your head.

I guess we just have to realize that the gloom & doom, fear mongering, etc. will never stop for some of the alarmists, regardless of what actually happens. According to them, there can - and will - always be something bad lurking out there that may cause a possible catastrophe for Pitt.

Think maybe a lot of it could be due to a "misery loves company" syndrome.

 

[pittdan77]

If FSU and Clemson have shown us anything, it's that they believe in the ACC and have stayed pretty solid in their commitment to the conference.

Conference will do whatever yields the most TV money.

 

[PittMan 72]

If FSU and Clemson have shown us anything, it's that they believe in the ACC and have stayed pretty solid in their commitment to the conference.

Conference will do whatever yields the most TV money.

Agree. This topic was discussed during the ACC network negotiations and the member schools were all apprised of it before all of them signed the GOR extension. This will get worked out to everyone's best interests and satisfaction.

 

[pittdan77]

Agree. This topic was discussed during the ACC network negotiations and the member schools were all apprised of it before all of them signed the GOR extension. This will get worked out to everyone's best interests and satisfaction.

Which does make it a little weird that this isn't an open and shut case. Feels like something is up but the conference is quite stable.

 

[PittMan 72]

Which does make it a little weird that this isn't an open and shut case. Feels like something is up but the conference is quite stable.

Don't think it's all that surprising that there would be some possible different preferences. I don't know for sure exactly how long the express optional conditions that ESPN wants as part of the linear network were known.

So the teams may want some additional time to explore things a bit to determine what their best opportunities may be in terms of scheduling. Taking more time to try to assess things is never a bad idea when that time is available.

 

[Piranha]

9 conference games, sign a H/H with a good opponent in which the Home game is played when we only have 4 Home Conference games, and then play 2 other home games against MAC type teams.

 

[pittdan77]

Don't think it's all that surprising that there would be some possible different preferences. I don't know for sure exactly how long the express optional conditions that ESPN wants as part of the linear network were known.

So the teams may want some additional time to explore things a bit to determine what their best opportunities may be in terms of scheduling. Taking more time to try to assess things is never a bad idea when that time is available.

Someone floated a little snippet in an article a week or so ago that the ACC might beat the Big 12 to expansion. Not sure what to think of that but it's out there.

 

[topdecktiger]

9 conference games, sign a H/H with a good opponent in which the Home game is played when we only have 4 Home Conference games, and then play 2 other home games against MAC type teams.

You can't do that if you have a permanent opponent, like Clemson, Florida St, Georgia Tech, and Louisville do.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Don't think it's all that surprising that there would be some possible different preferences. I don't know for sure exactly how long the express optional conditions that ESPN wants as part of the linear network were known.

So the teams may want some additional time to explore things a bit to determine what their best opportunities may be in terms of scheduling. Taking more time to try to assess things is never a bad idea when that time is available.

You are kidding yourself if you dont think FSU and Clemson would seriously, seriously consider Big Ten invites if they ever come. Their fans all wanted the Big 12, so much so that their BOT actually had to discuss it in public meetings.

 

[topdecktiger]

You are kidding yourself if you dont think FSU and Clemson would seriously, seriously consider Big Ten invites if they ever come. Their fans all wanted the Big 12, so much so that their BOT actually had to discuss it in public meetings.

Florida St possibly, Clemson no. The fan base at Clemson didn't want the Big 12, or to leave the ACC, for that matter

 

[TIGER-PAUL]

If the majority votes for 9, what about the 6-2-1 model someone proposed?
Keep the divisions the same, implement a nine game schedule, and allow two permanent rivals:

UNC-NCSU, WF
Duke-WF, NCSU
Miami-FSU, Syracuse
UVA-Louisville, BC
VT-BC, Clemson
GT-Clemson, FSU
Pitt-Syracuse, Louisville

Gives FSU,Clem their most wanted other coastal annually and rotates the others a little more than now I think?

 

[PittMan 72]

If the majority votes for 9, what about the 6-2-1 model someone proposed?
Keep the divisions the same, implement a nine game schedule, and allow two permanent rivals:

UNC-NCSU, WF
Duke-WF, NCSU
Miami-FSU, Syracuse
UVA-Louisville, BC
VT-BC, Clemson
GT-Clemson, FSU
Pitt-Syracuse, Louisville

Gives FSU,Clem their most wanted other coastal annually and rotates the others a little more than now I think?

There are various ways to work it out, and they will. Think one thing that some would like to see in this age of the CFP is some uniformity in the number of P5 games that every other P5 team is required to play, in order for the playing field to be kept at least somewhat level with respect to schedules. So think maybe the ACC is buying some time to see how this all plays out before committing to something.

 

[topdecktiger]

If the majority votes for 9, what about the 6-2-1 model someone proposed?
Keep the divisions the same, implement a nine game schedule, and allow two permanent rivals:

UNC-NCSU, WF
Duke-WF, NCSU
Miami-FSU, Syracuse
UVA-Louisville, BC
VT-BC, Clemson
GT-Clemson, FSU
Pitt-Syracuse, Louisville

Gives FSU,Clem their most wanted other coastal annually and rotates the others a little more than now I think?

You could do it, but I don't see the purpose. The issue for Clemson and Florida St doesn't have anything to do with playing Coastal teams more. That's not something they care about now. The other thing is, it doesn't solve the issue of all the teams playing more frequently. Making 2 games permanent just erases what you gained with the 9th game. In other words, Pitt wouldn't get to play Clemson and Florida St any more than they do right now.

 

[TIGER-PAUL]

I'm just saying if 9 approved, it would give clem,fsu their more desired coastal more than the others.
In the 6-1-1-1 model, you play 7 teams every year, 2 teams every other year, and the remaining four teams once every four years and at least could say every player could at least play every team at least once.
Again, just ideas if majority vote 9.

 

[Kevw1]

If it was not for Notre Dame playing teams every two to three years there would easily be a nine game schedule. If G Tech, Clemson,Louisville and Fla State are upset that the years they play ND they have eleven mandatory games tell them not to play ND.That would mean the other teams will play ND more often. The ACC can require the conference teams to pool their ND money to offset any revenue loss to those four teams. Once again ND screws the whole thing up and gives nothing to the ACC. I am so tired of everyone kissing their ass. The old big East got absolutely nothing from ND. They just use these conferences. They will never join. In fact Pitt and BC lost Notre Dame games because of this stupid arrangement which has now completely screwed up ACC scheduling

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

If it was not for Notre Dame playing teams every two to three years there would easily be a nine game schedule. If G Tech, Clemson,Louisville and Fla State are upset that the years they play ND they have eleven mandatory games tell them not to play ND.That would mean the other teams will play ND more often. The ACC can require the conference teams to pool their ND money to offset any revenue loss to those four teams. Once again ND screws the whole thing up and gives nothing to the ACC. I am so tired of everyone kissing their ass. The old big East got absolutely nothing from ND. They just use these conferences. They will never join. In fact Pitt and BC lost Notre Dame games because of this stupid arrangement which has now completely screwed up ACC scheduling

ND has nothing to do with this. FSU and Clemson dont want a 9 game schedule because it would mean they'd have 10 P5 games (counting their SEC rival) leaving no room for another P5 game. Clemson likes to play other SEC teams and FSU likes the Week 1 Bowl games. If they did those with a 9 game ACC schedule (even without ND), they'd still wind up with 6 home games in some years.

 

[Kevw1]

ND has nothing to do with this. FSU and Clemson dont want a 9 game schedule because it would mean they'd have 10 P5 games (counting their SEC rival) leaving no room for another P5 game. Clemson likes to play other SEC teams and FSU likes the Week 1 Bowl games. If they did those with a 9 game ACC schedule (even without ND), they'd still wind up with 6 home games in some years.

Nd has everything to do with this. In fact before the ND arrangement the ACC had agreed to go to a nine game schedule. That is a fact. You cannot blame the four schools for being upset that they have eleven out of twelve games dictated for them. ALL because of ND. In the non ND years those schools have two games to work with.

 

[ThePanthers]

Stop trolling.

 

[topdecktiger]

If it was not for Notre Dame playing teams every two to three years there would easily be a nine game schedule. If G Tech, Clemson,Louisville and Fla State are upset that the years they play ND they have eleven mandatory games tell them not to play ND.That would mean the other teams will play ND more often. The ACC can require the conference teams to pool their ND money to offset any revenue loss to those four teams. Once again ND screws the whole thing up and gives nothing to the ACC. I am so tired of everyone kissing their ass. The old big East got absolutely nothing from ND. They just use these conferences. They will never join. In fact Pitt and BC lost Notre Dame games because of this stupid arrangement which has now completely screwed up ACC scheduling

Nd has everything to do with this. In fact before the ND arrangement the ACC had agreed to go to a nine game schedule. That is a fact. You cannot blame the four schools for being upset that they have eleven out of twelve games dictated for them. ALL because of ND. In the non ND years those schools have two games to work with.

No, that's not why Clemson, Florida St, Georgia Tech and Louisville are upset. It's not because of having 11 mandatory games. It's because they can't schedule other teams with 9 conference games. They will have the same problem, whether they schedule Notre Dame, Auburn, Georgia, Oklahoma St, or whoever. It's not because of Notre Dame. When you said they have 2 games to work with in non-Notre Dame years, that's incorrect. They don't have any games to work with, because both of those games always have to be home games.

 

[TIGER-PAUL]

Barnes is supposed to meet with media today. Maybe someone will ask him about this and where Pitt stands.

 

[TIGER-PAUL]

Andrea AdelsonESPN Staff Writer
ACC commissioner John Swofford said Wednesday the ongoing discussion about future conference scheduling would be on the agenda when the athletic directors meet again in October, but was unsure whether a vote would be taken. ADs must decide by December whether to stay at eight conference games with the addition of two Power 5 nonconference games, or move to nine conference games plus one Power 5 nonconference opponent. The ACC would begin using the new scheduling model in 2019, when the ACC Network debuts.

ACC commissioner John Swofford said he does not know which way the conference scheduling vote will go once it is taken. If the vote is deadlocked at 7-7, the conference would remain at eight conference games. "It's very hard to handicap that because of the closeness of the actual votes and the straw votes that we've had over the years on this issue," Swofford said. "The only prediction I would make is whatever the vote is, it's probably going to be close unless we end up voting on something that's a little different than what's on the table at the moment."

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Andrea AdelsonESPN Staff Writer
ACC commissioner John Swofford said Wednesday the ongoing discussion about future conference scheduling would be on the agenda when the athletic directors meet again in October, but was unsure whether a vote would be taken. ADs must decide by December whether to stay at eight conference games with the addition of two Power 5 nonconference games, or move to nine conference games plus one Power 5 nonconference opponent. The ACC would begin using the new scheduling model in 2019, when the ACC Network debuts.

ACC commissioner John Swofford said he does not know which way the conference scheduling vote will go once it is taken. If the vote is deadlocked at 7-7, the conference would remain at eight conference games. "It's very hard to handicap that because of the closeness of the actual votes and the straw votes that we've had over the years on this issue," Swofford said. "The only prediction I would make is whatever the vote is, it's probably going to be close unless we end up voting on something that's a little different than what's on the table at the moment."

Barnes said they are conducting an in-house study of all potential P5 teams that could be scheduled. Without saying it exactly, he was indicating he realized how difficult scheduling 2 P5s would be when the other 4 P5 conferences only schedule 1.