ACC schedule change coming?

[Moontan]

If the other conferences go 9+1 there won’t be enough to fill those 2 in an 8+2. Unless we start counting the PAC as a power conference. Then it will be easy.

More long trips won't make it easy.

If we could get semi-frequent 1-1's with Rutgirls (puke), WVU, Indiana, Purdue, & Cincy then it could work out. Add in a decennial 1-1 with a PAC team and that would be OK.

Going to 9+1 would still allow FSU, Loserville, GT, and Clempsun to maintain their annual in-state rivalry games. Clempsun could get in a bad spot... 9+SC+ND would be a tough annual schedule.

 

[Scooch]

Someone want to explain why the conference needs to expand to go to 9 games? I don’t follow the math.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Someone want to explain why the conference needs to expand to go to 9 games? I don’t follow the math.

17 X 9 / 2 teams per game =76.5 games. Can’t have 1/2 a game.

 

[longtimefan]

17 X 9 / 2 teams per game =76.5 games. Can’t have 1/2 a game.

I think any odd number yields that problem.

 

[sufandu]

This is all so stupid. These conferences are so stupid. OOC games are fun. But I guess we shouldn't bother with fun at all in sports.

Not only should everyone be playing more OOC games, they should have some of them midseason. But I give up. Let's just play all games in conference.

 

[sutomcat]

I think any odd number yield that problem.

Correct. I agree it also.seems untenable for all ACC schools to schedule 2 P4 opponents every season. Not with the other P4 conferences going to,9 games. Best case it is going to lead to a lot of expensive buy outs of existing contracted games and a lot more travel for ACC schools.

I think the ACC is extremely likely to go to 9 conference games as well. It will lead to more and better content for the ACCN and help build rivalries and make the ACC more of a conference and less of a confederation.

Assuming the league expanded to 18 schools for football, I would like to see the ACC assign each school 2 rivals. They would play these schools every season.

They would play 7 of the other 15 schools in the league each year. So you would play every school but one at least every other season. You wouldn’t skip a given school 2 years in a row except once every 15 years.

That would be a true conference.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Correct. I agree it also.seems untenable for all ACC schools to schedule 2 P4 opponents every season. Not with the other P4 conferences going to,9 games. Best case it is going to lead to a lot of expensive buy outs of existing contracted games and a lot more travel for ACC schools.

I think the ACC is extremely likely to go to 9 conference games as well. It will lead to more and better content for the ACCN and help build rivalries and make the ACC more of a conference and less of a confederation.

Assuming the league expanded to 18 schools for football, I would like to see the ACC assign each school 2 rivals. They would play these schools every season.

They would play 7 of the other 15 schools in the league each year. So you would play every school but one at least every other season. You wouldn’t skip a given school 2 years in a row except once every 15 years.

That would be a true conference.

Too many schools would be upset with just 2 perms I would think. 1+8 would be the best too.

 

[sufandu]

Correct. I agree it also.seems untenable for all ACC schools to schedule 2 P4 opponents every season. Not with the other P4 conferences going to,9 games. Best case it is going to lead to a lot of expensive buy outs of existing contracted games and a lot more travel for ACC schools.

I think the ACC is extremely likely to go to 9 conference games as well. It will lead to more and better content for the ACCN and help build rivalries and make the ACC more of a conference and less of a confederation.

Assuming the league expanded to 18 schools for football, I would like to see the ACC assign each school 2 rivals. They would play these schools every season.

They would play 7 of the other 15 schools in the league each year. So you would play every school but one at least every other season. You wouldn’t skip a given school 2 years in a row except once every 15 years.

That would be a true conference.

A true conference would have 9 teams, so everyone played everyone every year (and you'd have a full double round robin in basketball). There would be no arguments about who had the tougher non-conference schedule and no need for a conference championship game. Take each conference champion and put them in a playoff.

I know none of this will ever happen again.

 

[orangmannc1]

Correct. I agree it also.seems untenable for all ACC schools to schedule 2 P4 opponents every season. Not with the other P4 conferences going to,9 games. Best case it is going to lead to a lot of expensive buy outs of existing contracted games and a lot more travel for ACC schools.

I think the ACC is extremely likely to go to 9 conference games as well. It will lead to more and better content for the ACCN and help build rivalries and make the ACC more of a conference and less of a confederation.

Assuming the league expanded to 18 schools for football, I would like to see the ACC assign each school 2 rivals. They would play these schools every season.

They would play 7 of the other 15 schools in the league each year. So you would play every school but one at least every other season. You wouldn’t skip a given school 2 years in a row except once every 15 years.

That would be a true conference.

Could a ACC team play another ACC team that does not count in the standing solve the 2 P4 opponents concern? I think NC State vs Virginia this week does not count in the standing.

 

[Rufus_13th]

Could a ACC team play another ACC team that does not count in the standing solve the 2 P4 opponents concern? I think NC State vs Virginia this week does not count in the standing.

I mean...just go to 9 conference game then?

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Could a ACC team play another ACC team that does not count in the standing solve the 2 P4 opponents concern? I think NC State vs Virginia this week does not count in the standing.

Yes, but that make the ACC look silly. Might as well go to 9 games for 16 of 17 teams. Yes, that too is silly but IMO not as silly as OOC ACC vs ACC games. Especially without round robin play. You could have a team in 3rd beat a team in 2nd OOC so it keeps the team in 3rd out of the ACC CG.

Having a once in 17 years you only play 8 games while everyone else plays 9 games isn't the worst thing in the world. But the most proactive thing IMO would be to add a team (USF?) in 2028. Which means you can go to 9 now for all but one team in 2026, and one team in 2027. Not a big deal.

 

[cusefan88]

A true conference would have 9 teams, so everyone played everyone every year (and you'd have a full double round robin in basketball). There would be no arguments about who had the tougher non-conference schedule and no need for a conference championship game. Take each conference champion and put them in a playoff.

I know none of this will ever happen again.

What makes Cuse interesting in that scenario is that fans would want wildly different groupings for football vs basketball of course.

 

[richmondcuse03]

Yes, but that make the ACC look silly. Might as well go to 9 games for 16 of 17 teams. Yes, that too is silly but IMO not as silly as OOC ACC vs ACC games. Especially without round robin play. You could have a team in 3rd beat a team in 2nd OOC so it keeps the team in 3rd out of the ACC CG.

Having a once in 17 years you only play 8 games while everyone else plays 9 games isn't the worst thing in the world. But the most proactive thing IMO would be to add a team (USF?) in 2028. Which means you can go to 9 now for all but one team in 2026, and one team in 2027. Not a big deal.

Doing 9 games for all but one team seems like the easier short term solution. Start with the two west coast teams, then one of the crappy Carolina schools. Gives you a few years and by that point the conference is raided or something else happens.

All of this reinforces that a super league of the top 64 teams or whatever number is decided who wants to spend the most money is the clear logical answer….then let them agree to a cap on spending. But seems doubtful to happen at this point.

 

[Moontan]

All of this reinforces that a super league of the top 64 teams or whatever number is decided who wants to spend the most money is the clear logical answer….then let them agree to a cap on spending. But seems doubtful to happen at this point.

Maybe 72 would work. 24 in the SEC, 24 in the B1G and 24 in the ACC/B12 merger.

The ACC/B12 merger could be split into two 12-school groups (East, West). Each of those could be split into 2 divisions. Play your 5 division members every year, the other 6 in your group every other year and 1 from the other side of the country. 5+3+1=9.

In a 16 team CFP the SEC could get 3, the B1G gets 3 and the ACC/B12 get 2 (East & West champs?) + 1 for the other FCS conferences = 9, leaving 7 for the remaining highest ranked schools.

 

[richmondcuse03]

Maybe 72 would work. 24 in the SEC, 24 in the B1G and 24 in the ACC/B12 merger.

The ACC/B12 merger could be split into two 12-school groups (East, West). Each of those could be split into 2 divisions. Play your 5 division members every year, the other 6 in your group every other year and 1 from the other side of the country. 5+3+1=9.

In a 16 team CFP the SEC could get 3, the B1G gets 3 and the ACC/B12 get 2 (East & West champs?) + 1 for the other FCS conferences = 9, leaving 7 for the remaining highest ranked schools.

This is all too logical.

One part it doesn't address the point that the 72 should negotiate TV contracts together to maximize the collective pie, but seems like that's not going happen.

 

[cusefan88]

Maybe 72 would work. 24 in the SEC, 24 in the B1G and 24 in the ACC/B12 merger.

The ACC/B12 merger could be split into two 12-school groups (East, West). Each of those could be split into 2 divisions. Play your 5 division members every year, the other 6 in your group every other year and 1 from the other side of the country. 5+3+1=9.

In a 16 team CFP the SEC could get 3, the B1G gets 3 and the ACC/B12 get 2 (East & West champs?) + 1 for the other FCS conferences = 9, leaving 7 for the remaining highest ranked schools.

If we could get WVU Miami BC Pitt Va Tech annually that would be a beautiful thing.

 

[JDemo]

With 17 league members, why not just skip 9 games and go right to 10? 5 home/away. Still 2 out of conference games of which 1 could be P4.

 

[FloridaCuse]

More long trips won't make it easy.

If we could get semi-frequent 1-1's with Rutgirls (puke), WVU, Indiana, Purdue, & Cincy then it could work out. Add in a decennial 1-1 with a PAC team and that would be OK.

Going to 9+1 would still allow FSU, Loserville, GT, and Clempsun to maintain their annual in-state rivalry games. Clempsun could get in a bad spot... 9+SC+ND would be a tough annual schedule.

9 + 1 would not allow FSU, L'ville, GT & Clemson to play their P4 rival every year and ND in rotation.