Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Lou_C, post: 828913, member: 3201"]
The general idea is that based on where things were when the divisions were created that FSU and Miami would be the most desirable CCG, and would be the two most likely powers based on recent history.  So you split the two powers, then split Clemson and VT.  VT with Miami makes sense with their history, and FSU and Clemson.
 
I didn't agree with that then and I don't know.  Two dominant teams in one division is great, this year and last year being a great example.  A Clemson loss in the ACCCG last year or this year would eliminate them from the BCS, instead of them getting in.
 
In the case of playoffs, Clemson at 11-1 had they beaten South Carolina would have been in the hunt for the playoffs, where a 11-2 team taking a loss in the CCG would be less likely.
 
The only problem with them in the same division is for the teams looking up to them.  But historically, FSU and Miami in the same division would be more unfair, and cut off the other division from Florida completely.
 
I don't like the divisions, I would prefer straight north/south, parity be damned.  Parity between divisions has simply proven to not be very important.  Ultimately I think it would much better allow the northern teams, the more disadvantaged teams, to grow and develop.
 
But I also understand the reasons against that, and against every other configuration.  There's simply no good division setup for the ACC and it's even worse now.  Any configuration is going to suck until we can go to 16 or 20 and pods.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?