Decision on future SEC football schedules expected in early May

[OrangeXtreme]

David Teel‏@DavidTeelatDP 9m
#ACC likely to follow suit in mid-May. RT @bmarcello: Decision on future SEC football schedules expected in early May.

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2014/04/decision_on_future_sec_footbal.html

 

[Scooch]

I'm a broken record on this, but I would greatly prefer 9 conference games and realigning so that there is no permanent divisional cross-over opponent. It'd be nice to feel like we are actually in the same conference as the 7 teams in the Coastal Division.

And if the ACC is hellbent on keeping Miami and FSU in different divisions then just let them have a permanent crossover and everyone else can work around it.

 

[Chip]

I'm a broken record on this, but I would greatly prefer 9 conference games and realigning so that there is no permanent divisional cross-over opponent. It'd be nice to feel like we are actually in the same conference as the 7 teams in the Coastal Division.

And if the ACC is hellbent on keeping Miami and FSU in different divisions then just let them have a permanent crossover and everyone else can work around it.

Yep, permanent crossover should be optional, if agreed up on by both parties. Yeah, I know we've played Pitt forever, but if the cost of ending that series is to actually play other teams in the Coastal, then I'm ok with losing the trip to Heinz Field that I've never actually taken. 75% of the SU and Pitt fanbases wouldn't even notice we weren't playing anymore.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

I can see why nobody is in a hurry to expand to 16 teams. Too many logistical headaches.

 

[Alsacs]

SEC will go 9 conference games because that was part of the deal they promised ESPN when ESPN agreed to the SEC Network. The additional conference games gives that Network more premiere content to get cable companies to get or keep SEC network.

The ACC will eventually go 9 games if they are going to have a network. Also, Miami/Florida State must be in separate divisions if the ACC is going to have divisions so that every member gets a game in FL every 2 years for recruiting purposes.

 

[Chris02M]

divisions will probably go away as I'd think ncaa will approve the big 12/acc legislation

 

[Scooch]

divisions will probably go away as I'd think ncaa will approve the big 12/acc legislation

I'd prefer a divisionless alignment but the ACC said previously that's not what they wanted -- rather they just want more flexibility. Personally I'd line up 1 to 14 and give each team 3 permanent opponents. The other 5 games would rotate through the remaining 10 teams (assuming they stick with 8 conference games, I'm still skeptical FSU and Clemson will give in to 9).

 

[Chris02M]

fsu and Clemson won't relent to 9 games until there sec rivals are playing 9 games

 

[OrangeXtreme]

fsu and Clemson won't relent to 9 games until there sec rivals are playing 9 games

Which is why the ACC is letting the SEC make the first move next month.

 

[TexanMark]

With 14 teams and no divisions:

an 8 game conference schedule is very doable with each school having 3 permanent rivals and the other 5 games rotated through 10 teams. Remember Notre Dame complicates anything for the ACC and a 9 game conference schedule with ND games too gets intrusive for schools with other nonconference rivals.

 

[orange79]

With 14 teams and no divisions:

an 8 game conference schedule is very doable with each school having 3 permanent rivals and the other 5 games rotated through 10 teams. Remember Notre Dame complicates anything for the ACC and a 9 game conference schedule with ND games too gets intrusive for schools with other nonconference rivals.

So, since no one is playing the same schedule anyway, why not count ND as conference games in the standings? The only down side I see is that it might take 3 years to play every other team (of the 3 non-permanent rivals) instead of two.

 

[Scooch]

So, since no one is playing the same schedule anyway, why not count ND as conference games in the standings? The only down side I see is that it might take 3 years to play every other team (of the 3 non-permanent rivals) instead of two.

If I were the ACC I would have made one of the conditions of ND's schedule arrangement be that they would be listed in the conference standings, with an asterisk that notes they are not eligible for the conference championship. Just a PR move to further associate them with the conference.

 

[SmilinBob]

So, since no one is playing the same schedule anyway, why not count ND as conference games in the standings? The only down side I see is that it might take 3 years to play every other team (of the 3 non-permanent rivals) instead of two.

Be a helluva tie breaker. One team is 7-1 (10-2) and the other 8-1 (11-1) and one played an extra game vs ND. I'd love to be a fly on the wall for that one. I suppose as long as the best two teams play in the ACC Championship game it wouldn't matter but if they keep the foolish division thing and say those two teams were FSU and Syracuse while GT wins the other with a 6-2 record...ouch, that sucks.