ACC Meetings ...

[WoadBlue]

Great news.

It makes so much sense that only a college athletics conference would take 10 years to implement it.

It was an NCAA rule. A few years back it could have been changed, but the BT was opposed and the SEC then voted with the BT.

 

[WoadBlue]

Until FSU gets their Sheet together, the game is meaningless. What is best for the ACC is to have an ACC Championship game with a Top 10 FSU vs a Top 10 Clemson. That won't happen often if they play each other yearly. Every other year is plenty enough. If ESPN pushes for the game then go to the 4+ model.


Edit

For example if they didn't play each other in 2013 then...

ACC CG #1 FSU vs #7 Clemson (instead of #13)

That was the logic behind Miami and FSU in different divisions.

The ACC has only 2 teams able to fill an 80,000 seat stadium. That one game has become a fixture ever since FSU joined. It needs to remain annual.

 

[cusefan88]

Really excited to see this go through. Will freshen up the schedule and we'll get to see Miami and VT more regularly. Combine that with Pitt and BC and it's enough to satisfy my Big East nostalgia.

Would love to get WVU back on the schedule. Even a three-game series with one neutral site game at an NFL stadium is fine (Baltimore, DC, Philly).

 

[Toga]

Sounds like they are going for the 3+5/5 model. I really hope we get UVA as our 3rd team. That gives us a nice balance of opposites each year.

Year 1- FSU, GA Tech, UNC, Duke, VA Tech
Year 2- Miami, Clemson, NC State, Wake, Louisville

So over 4 years that would give us 4 games (1 every year) in NC, 3 games in VA, 2 games each in FL, MA, and PA (every other year), a game in GA (hopefully in non FL year), a game in SC (hopefully in non FL year), and a game in KY.



It would make the most sense for everyone to pair off by opposites.

BC - SU
Louisville - Pitt
UVA - VA Tech
UNC - NC State
Duke - Wake
Clemson - GA Tech
FSU - Miami

So for UNC they get Duke, NC State, UVA yearly then...

Year 1- BC, Pitt, Clemson, Miami, VA Tech
Year 2- SU, Louisville, GA Tech, FSU, Wake

For the 3 rivals I would go...

SU- 1. Pitt (77), 2. BC (54), 11. UVA (5)
BC- 1. SU (54), 2. Pitt (32), 4. Miami (30)
Clemson- 1. Wake (87), 2. NC State (86), 3. GA Tech (85)
Duke- 1. UNC (101), 2. Wake (97), 3. GA Tech (89)
FSU- 1. Miami (64), 6. GA Tech (25), 9. Louisville (19)
GA Tech- 1. Duke (89), 2. Clemson (85), 8. FSU (25)
Louisville- 2. FSU (19), 3. Pitt (18), 9. VA Tech (8)
Miami- 1. FSU (64), 3. VA Tech (39), 4. BC (30)
UNC- 1. UVA (116), 3. Duke (101), 4. NC State (101)
NC State- 1. Wake (114), 2. Clemson (86), 3. Duke (83)
Pitt- 1. SU (77), 3. BC (32), 6. Louisville (18)
UVA- 1. UNC (116), 2. VA Tech (98), 13. SU (5)
VA Tech- 1. UVA (98), 3. Miami (39), 13. Louisville (8)
Wake- 1. NC State (114), 3. Duke (97), 4. Clemson (87)

So everyone except Louisville gets their most played ACC opponent. And 7 of the 14 teams get 3 out of their Top 4. Also 7 of 14 get their Top 2. FSU would be the only school without 2 of their Top 4. The outlier games are SU vs UVA, FSU vs GA Tech, FSU vs Louisville, Louisville vs VA Tech. You can reduce the outliers by having SU and UVA play Louisville, and FSU play VA Tech. That would just leave FSU vs GA Tech and UVA vs Louisville as games not played very often. But IMO SU and UVA have nothing in common with Louisville and neither should play them yearly.

I was told there wouldn't be math.

 

[Chip]

Great news.

It makes so much sense that only a college athletics conference would take 10 years to implement it.

Scrapping the two division format is "expected to have little pushback in the legislative process."

They are also expecting little pushback in the legislative process for a motion to move away from flip phones.

 

[Scooch]

It was an NCAA rule. A few years back it could have been changed, but the BT was opposed and the SEC then voted with the BT.

Meh. I’ve been saying for years that the ACC should just do what they think is best and let the NCAA act. What were the real consequences going to be?

Conferences and schools have played chicken with the NCAA for years.

 

[kcsu]

Really excited to see this go through. Will freshen up the schedule and we'll get to see Miami and VT more regularly. Combine that with Pitt and BC and it's enough to satisfy my Big East nostalgia.

Would love to get WVU back on the schedule. Even a three-game series with one neutral site game at an NFL stadium is fine (Baltimore, DC, Philly).

Should the ACC try to use the schedule change as a way to increase the payout from ESPN

 

[Orijinal]

Should the ACC try to use the schedule change as a way to increase the payout from ESPN

Yes. And a substantial increase

 

[sutomcat]

Should the ACC try to use the schedule change as a way to increase the payout from ESPN

I am sure they are trying to do just that right now.

What can we do to get more money?

Remember when the Big East was desperate for cash and let ESPN play a major role in setting the men’s basketball schedule? Syracuse played all the teams expected to be top notch in the conference. That was when ND, who played almost no good teams, would beat up the really crappy teams in the conference and contend for conference titles. It was awful. Schedules were incredibly unfair.

I could see ESPN agreeing to modest increases in fees if they were allowed to pick the 3 opponents for each school using the 3-5-5 model.

Probably would end up like this:

Clemson: Miami, Florida State, UNC
Florida State: Clemson, Miami, Georgia Tech
Miami: Clemson, Florida State, BC
UNC: Clemson, Duke, NC State
Georgia Tech: Clemson, Duke, Syracuse
BC: Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Miami
Syracuse: BC, Pittsburgh, Georgia Tech
Duke: UNC, Georgia Tech, Wake Forest
Wake Forest: Duke, NC State. Virginia Tech
Virginia Tech: Virginia, UL, Wake Forest
Virginia: Virginia Tech, Pittsburgh,
Pittsburgh: BC, UL Syracuse
NC State: UNC, UL, Wake Forest
Louisville: NC State, Pittsburgh, Virginia Tech

It would probably be better for Syracuse but would be the worse setup possible if the goal is to get an ACC team into the college football playoff. If it expands as expected, probably not quite as big of a deal but you want to give schools in your conference the best possible chance to win an NC.

This would not do that. At all.

The ACC has a long and distinguished history though of making awful long term decisions for minor short term money. Let’s see if they have learned anything from all the mistakes.

 

[kcsu]

I am sure they are trying to do just that right now.

What can we do to get more money?

Remember when the Big East was desperate for cash and let ESPN play a major role in setting the men’s basketball schedule? Syracuse played all the teams expected to be top notch in the conference. That was when ND, who played almost no good teams, would beat up the really crappy teams in the conference and contend for conference titles. It was awful. Schedules were incredibly unfair.

I could see ESPN agreeing to modest increases in fees if they were allowed to pick the 3 opponents for each school using the 3-5-5 model.

Probably would end up like this:

Clemson: Miami, Florida State, UNC
Florida State: Clemson, Miami, Georgia Tech
Miami: Clemson, Florida State, BC
UNC: Clemson, Duke, NC State
Georgia Tech: Clemson, Duke, Syracuse
BC: Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Miami
Syracuse: BC, Pittsburgh, Georgia Tech
Duke: UNC, Georgia Tech, Wake Forest
Wake Forest: Duke, NC State. Virginia Tech
Virginia Tech: Virginia, UL, Wake Forest
Virginia: Virginia Tech, Pittsburgh,
Pittsburgh: BC, UL Syracuse
NC State: UNC, UL, Wake Forest
Louisville: NC State, Pittsburgh, Virginia Tech

It would probably be better for Syracuse but would be the worse setup possible if the goal is to get an ACC team into the college football playoff. If it expands as expected, probably not quite as big of a deal but you want to give schools in your conference the best possible chance to win an NC.

This would not do that. At all.

The ACC has a long and distinguished history though of making awful long term decisions for minor short term money. Let’s see if they have learned anything from all the mistakes.

I think we will see a schedule close to this and a decent increase.

 

[Orijinal]

I am sure they are trying to do just that right now.

What can we do to get more money?

Remember when the Big East was desperate for cash and let ESPN play a major role in setting the men’s basketball schedule? Syracuse played all the teams expected to be top notch in the conference. That was when ND, who played almost no good teams, would beat up the really crappy teams in the conference and contend for conference titles. It was awful. Schedules were incredibly unfair.

I could see ESPN agreeing to modest increases in fees if they were allowed to pick the 3 opponents for each school using the 3-5-5 model.

Probably would end up like this:

Clemson: Miami, Florida State, UNC
Florida State: Clemson, Miami, Georgia Tech
Miami: Clemson, Florida State, BC
UNC: Clemson, Duke, NC State
Georgia Tech: Clemson, Duke, Syracuse
BC: Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Miami
Syracuse: BC, Pittsburgh, Georgia Tech
Duke: UNC, Georgia Tech, Wake Forest
Wake Forest: Duke, NC State. Virginia Tech
Virginia Tech: Virginia, UL, Wake Forest
Virginia: Virginia Tech, Pittsburgh,
Pittsburgh: BC, UL Syracuse
NC State: UNC, UL, Wake Forest
Louisville: NC State, Pittsburgh, Virginia Tech

It would probably be better for Syracuse but would be the worse setup possible if the goal is to get an ACC team into the college football playoff. If it expands as expected, probably not quite as big of a deal but you want to give schools in your conference the best possible chance to win an NC.

This would not do that. At all.

The ACC has a long and distinguished history though of making awful long term decisions for minor short term money. Let’s see if they have learned anything from all the mistakes.

People are gonna hate that you put Georgia Tech as a Syracuse annual

 

[orange79]

It would probably be better for Syracuse but would be the worse setup possible if the goal is to get an ACC team into the college football playoff. If it expands as expected, probably not quite as big of a deal but you want to give schools in your conference the best possible chance to win an NC.

This would not do that. At all.

The ACC has a long and distinguished history though of making awful long term decisions for minor short term money. Let’s see if they have learned anything from all the mistakes.

 

[Chris02M]

 

[Chris02M]

supposedly the fsu ad really wants us as 3rd permanent

 

[OrangeXtreme]

supposedly the fsu ad really wants us as 3rd permanent

He must have a taste for Dinosaur BBQ every two years.

 

[Chris02M]

He must have a taste for Dinosaur BBQ every two years.

im on the anyone but Louisville team

 

[GoSU96]

supposedly the fsu ad really wants us as 3rd permanent

Why, other they see it as booking a win.

 

[WoadBlue]

Should the ACC try to use the schedule change as a way to increase the payout from ESPN

Yes.

 

[TexanMark]

Selfishly I'd love FSU...but Nole fan's heads would explode.

 

[AngryOtto]

Selfishly I'd love FSU...but Nole fan's heads would explode.

Especially when we start beating them every year.

 

[sutomcat]

People are gonna hate that you put Georgia Tech as a Syracuse annual

For the record, I did not. I am speculating here about what ESPN would do, if it was up to them.

 

[elimunelson]

A 150 million dollar fundraising campaign doesn't scream downsizing.

I spoke to someone who would know at BC. BC, UNC, Duke, Stanford, ND, Northwesfern, Syracuse are chatting more than you think. At the president level.

It may not be a traditional Downsize but when the teams that splinter their football teams into money makers(think SEC), we will be with the above schools in some sort of consortium that emphasize sports and academics within college framework.

We will be fine but we will keep sports with college ecosystem

I don’t think the ND AD spoke without something behind it on timing and future.

 

[WoadBlue]

Yeah, we've been through that.

We're done giving up home games for NYC - especially biannually.

If you had a home field that seats even just 60K and you filled it almost every week, then that answer would make sense. But you do not, and your local TV market is very small, and there is the glaring history of NYC people seeing upstate NY as akin to a foreign country, a backward foreign country.

If Syracuse did become NY's CFB team, then Syracuse would gain a good deal of clout within the sport. That cannot come to pass unless Syracuse is playing at least 1 game biannually in NYC - a game that would matter to more than a handful of NYC people. As you have so many alums living within a 2 hour drive of NYC, and Miami also has a large number of alums living in the area, playing each other in NYC could be very good for both.

 

[HtownOrange]

If you had a home field that seats even just 60K and you filled it almost every week, then that answer would make sense. But you do not, and your local TV market is very small, and there is the glaring history of NYC people seeing upstate NY as akin to a foreign country, a backward foreign country.

If Syracuse did become NY's CFB team, then Syracuse would gain a good deal of clout within the sport. That cannot come to pass unless Syracuse is playing at least 1 game biannually in NYC - a game that would matter to more than a handful of NYC people. As you have so many alums living within a 2 hour drive of NYC, and Miami also has a large number of alums living in the area, playing each other in NYC could be very good for both.

It would have to be annually, similar to the UT/OU game in Dallas. SU would have to return to annual prominence as at least ranked and Miami would need more of a contender. Even then, that is not likely enough of a draw.

I like the concept but at this time I am not seeing the selling points.

 

[CousCuse]

If you had a home field that seats even just 60K and you filled it almost every week, then that answer would make sense. But you do not, and your local TV market is very small, and there is the glaring history of NYC people seeing upstate NY as akin to a foreign country, a backward foreign country.

If Syracuse did become NY's CFB team, then Syracuse would gain a good deal of clout within the sport. That cannot come to pass unless Syracuse is playing at least 1 game biannually in NYC - a game that would matter to more than a handful of NYC people. As you have so many alums living within a 2 hour drive of NYC, and Miami also has a large number of alums living in the area, playing each other in NYC could be very good for both.

There is an extreme antipathy towards the athletic director who tried to brand Syracuse as NY's college team as any idea he came up with, for good reasons. What your saying does have a lot of merit, though the TV market for Syracuse sports stretches across upstate New York.