Doc Gross leading the charge for ACC division realignment?

[CuseOnly]

I think they should expand to 13 regular season games, got to 9 conference games and give up the permanent crossover. Everyone in 1 division would pretty much play everyone in the other division every 2-3 years max.

The 13 game thing won't happen unless the TV contract is increased for the additional content and approved by the NCAA which with the P5 conferences is on it's way out anyways. Once the P5 leagues realize they can/will get more money from their TV partners, they will jump on it and go to 13 game regular season, then CCG and if you make it to the playoff will be 16 games total.

Just my thoughts.

 

[orange79]

Nope.

People now say the other schools want them split up so they have an annual Florida opponent.

I think this will be the overriding argument, and this will be what happens. What else? Who knows? But at the end of the day, I will bet Marsh's UConn memorabilia collection that FSU and Miami will be in different divisions.

 

[TexanMark]

If Cuse wants more Florida exposure play FAU/FIU/USF or UCF The first two are preferable

 

[Lou_C]

Anything you do with 7 x 2 divisions is going to have negative consequences for every problem it "solves." It can't be made right mathematically.

The end goal is simple...nobody in this conference needs more than 3-4 mandated annual games. That protects the most important rivals, and cycles through the rest of the conference in a few years, and allows for the 8 game schedule which is vital to the football schools and to OCC schedules. Nobody actually wants more ACC football, they want more frequent matchups with the other ACC teams.

But although the goal is simple, getting there is messy, requiring innovative thinking, a bit of a leap of faith, and some rule changes. But it can be done, and needs to be done for this conference to max out it's potential. Static divisions have got to go.

 

[Alsacs]

If you want in this discussion its happening on Ga.Tech $cout board in the ACC Conference Business/Sports Business Lounge pt.3 thread and Tech, UNC, Duke, NC State, FSU, Clemson fans are discussing it as well me.

This current situation from what I can gather and posted

Syracuse wants to play 2 teams more Georgia Tech(even though they kicked the absolute crap out of us this year) because it has tried to recruit GA more recently and Miami. Those are the media markets Dr. Gross is talking about. Syracuse-Miami was the best(non-WVU-Pitt) Big East rivalry in 90's/00's and would prefer to play Miami over the 900 lb guerrilla Florida State.

Realignment is happening for 2 things 1. too split UVA/VPI and 2. to get Florida State with Georgia Tech.

That is why I have repeatedly stated realignment with start with this built in

Division 1
Duke
North Carolina
Virginia

Division 2
NC State
Virginia Tech
Wake Forest

then the remaining 8 will get chopped off as mirrors, SU/BC, UM/FSU will be mirrors for sure the thing I bet that is being discussed heavily is whether CU/GT, Pitt/UL are mirrors or CU/UL, Pitt/GT will be mirrors because if its the latter FSU can get Clemson, GT, and Miami all in 1 season.

 

[Lou_C]

If you want in this discussion its happening on Ga.Tech $cout board in the ACC Conference Business/Sports Business Lounge pt.3 thread and Tech, UNC, Duke, NC State, FSU, Clemson fans are discussing it as well me.

This current situation from what I can gather and posted

Syracuse wants to play 2 teams more Georgia Tech(even though they kicked the absolute crap out of us this year) because it has tried to recruit GA more recently and Miami. Those are the media markets Dr. Gross is talking about. Syracuse-Miami was the best(non-WVU-Pitt) Big East rivalry in 90's/00's and would prefer to play Miami over the 900 lb guerrilla Florida State.

Realignment is happening for 2 things 1. too split UVA/VPI and 2. to get Florida State with Georgia Tech.

That is why I have repeatedly stated realignment with start with this built in

Division 1
Duke
North Carolina
Virginia

Division 2
NC State
Virginia Tech
Wake Forest

then the remaining 8 will get chopped off as mirrors, SU/BC, UM/FSU will be mirrors for sure the thing I bet that is being discussed heavily is whether CU/GT, Pitt/UL are mirrors or CU/UL, Pitt/GT will be mirrors because if its the latter FSU can get Clemson, GT, and Miami all in 1 season.

What do you mean with the mirrors. That those pairs will bounce between divisions every two years? Not following.

 

[Alsacs]

What do you mean with the mirrors. That those pairs will bounce between divisions every two years? Not following.

Mirrors mean cross-over rivals in the same region that should be in separate division.
Syracuse-Boston College are mirrors because both are Northeastern schools that should be in separate divisions, but play as cross-over rivals.

UNC-NC State
Duke-Wake Forest
Virginia-Virginia Tech
Miami-Florida State
would all be mirrors of each other in separate divisions that would play as cross-over rivals.

The problem is does Florida State have to play BOTH Clemson and Georgia Tech as division rivals each year because if the answer is Yes then this is only the solution

Division 1
Boston College/Syracuse
Clemson
Duke
Georgia Tech
Florida State
North Carolina
Virginia

Division 2
Boston College/Syracuse
Louisville
Miami
NC State
Pittsburgh
Virginia Tech
Wake Forest

cross-over games
BC-SU
Duke-Wake
Clemson-Louisville
GT-Pitt
FSU-Miami
UNC-NCSU
UVA-VPI


In the end game, Florida State is going to end up with Georgia Tech annually I believe, and I think Gross will get Syracuse with Miami and not both Miami and Georgia Tech.

 

[bnoro]

No one will approve this. The North teams like the southern exposure. No one wants to play in the OLD BE, had they wanted too, they wouldnt have left.

Honestly, the ACC needs to get forward thinking here with a variation of the pod system that has been floated around here numerous times.

Can't have a conference championship game with pods.

 

[Chip]

First step in this entire process is that someone needs to lobby the NCAA to eliminate their specific rules for a conference championship game. Once you do that, it should make it much easier to do scenarios.

I would think 4 of the P5 could get together on that. Then force B12 to have some sort of conf championship.

Each conference can then make up its own rules.

 

[Alsacs]

Can't have a conference championship game with pods.

You can HAVE a championship game with pods you just need to combine pods each season and give them a divisional name.
If the ACC had 4 groups of teams 2 4 team groups and 2 3 team groups and re-arranged every year or 2 years and called them Coastal/Atlantic it would be okay. I just don't think pods work unless you have 16.

 

[omniorange]

Sometimes it helps to actually see a set-up before one can get an idea as to how it might actually be viable:

UofLgrad07 over on the ACC csnbbs board presented this attached set-up that I thought has some possibilities.

He added the following which will make more sense after the viewing the image

- All teams would play 8 conference games per season

- Divisional teams, except Duke and Wake, would play the following schedule:
1) four games against teams within their own division
2) two games against the rotating pod teams in their division
3) two games against teams from the opposite division (divisional teams only)

- Duke and Wake would play the following schedule:
1) four games against teams within their division
2) two games against the rotating pod teams within their division
3) one game against each other (protected cross divisional game)
4) one game against teams from the opposite division

- Pod teams would play the following schedule:
1) five games against divisional teams (whichever division their pod is in for that year)
2) two games against teams in the opposite pod
3) one game against the team within their own pod

Here's the link to ACC csnbbs.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-666037-page-15.html


Now I realize it's "outside the box" type thinking, but I think it should at least be up for discussion by the ACC ADs.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[Alsacs]

The best pod idea I have seen comes from KingOttoIII who nails it IMO and I wish the ACC would follow this.

Just use pods now.

Atlantic always has FSU
Coastal always has Miami

North pod: BC, Pitt, SU
South pod: Clemson, Ga Tech, NC St
East pod: Duke, UNC, UVA
West pod: Louisville, Va Tech, Wake

Year 1 put N & S with FSU E&W with Miami
Year 2 put N & E S&W with Miami
Year 3 put N & W E&S with Miami
Year 4 put E & W N& S with Miami
Year 5 put S & W N&E with Miami
Year 6 put S & E N&W with Miami

So everyone will play FSU or Miami every year. Over 6 years 3x each. You play pod mates every year and other pod teams once in 3 years, which is better than 1 in 6 currently. Since you have 6 division games that allows 2 cross over games a year. So when UVA and Va Tech are not in the same division they will be cross over games. FSU gets Miami every year plus one cross over game (Clemson, etc). Under this system just about everybody would be happy


This is KingOtto's idea and I love it.

 

[omniorange]

The best pod idea I have seen comes from KingOttoIII who nails it IMO and I wish the ACC would follow this.

Just use pods now.

Atlantic always has FSU
Coastal always has Miami

North pod: BC, Pitt, SU
South pod: Clemson, Ga Tech, NC St
East pod: Duke, UNC, UVA
West pod: Louisville, Va Tech, Wake

Year 1 put N & S with FSU E&W with Miami
Year 2 put N & E S&W with Miami
Year 3 put N & W E&S with Miami
Year 4 put E & W N& S with Miami
Year 5 put S & W N&E with Miami
Year 6 put S & E N&W with Miami

So everyone will play FSU or Miami every year. Over 6 years 3x each. You play pod mates every year and other pod teams once in 3 years, which is better than 1 in 6 currently. Since you have 6 division games that allows 2 cross over games a year. So when UVA and Va Tech are not in the same division they will be cross over games. FSU gets Miami every year plus one cross over game (Clemson, etc). Under this system just about everybody would be happy


This is KingOtto's idea and I love it.

Any pod system that doesn't have FSU, Miami, Clemson, and GT all playing each other annually is missing the boat, imho.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[Alsacs]

Any pod system that doesn't have FSU, Miami, Clemson, and GT all playing each other annually is missing the boat, imho.

Cheers,
Neil

It is FLAT OUT IMPOSSIBLE for BOTH Miami and Florida State to play Georgia Tech and Clemson annually. One of Florida State/Miami could, but not both and I have already stated the divisional alignment for FSU to play all 3 annually, but Miami can't as well. If they followed the KingOtto pod idea the 4 would play a lot more frequently than now. Clemson would play Miami more often and Georgia Tech the same with Florida State.

 

[omniorange]

It is FLAT OUT IMPOSSIBLE for BOTH Miami and Florida State to play Georgia Tech and Clemson annually. One of Florida State/Miami could, but not both and I have already stated the divisional alignment for FSU to play all 3 annually, but Miami can't as well. If they followed the KingOtto pod idea the 4 would play a lot more frequently than now. Clemson would play Miami more often and Georgia Tech the same with Florida State.

Actually, it's not impossible since a traditional two divisional format with a 9-game schedule and two permanent cross-over rivals allows for it. The sticking point is that FSU and Clemson only want an 8 game conference schedule, which is basically (along with cycling through the conference at a quicker pace) at the heart of these "pods within rotating divisions" models

Were you able to view the attachment to my post on UofLgrad07's set-up along with how the schedule would work in italics?

That set-up keeps both the 8 game conference schedule and allows for 4 of the 5 major football programs to play each other annually.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[OrangeXtreme]

How has the SEC managed to exist all these years with static divisions?

The P12 hasn't changed it's divisional alignment since Colorado and Utah were added.

The B1G is planning on static East/West divisions next year when Rutgirls and Maryland are added.

Yet the answer to all the ACC's problems is to have 6-8 teams change divisions every season? You'll never get ACC fans to buy in.

 

[riskylogic]

Durham? I wouldn't care if we ever played Duke. They're stadium and gameday atmosphere is pathetic, and they have no football history.

1942 Rose Bowl:

 

[Scooch]

First step in this entire process is that someone needs to lobby the NCAA to eliminate their specific rules for a conference championship game. Once you do that, it should make it much easier to do scenarios.

I would think 4 of the P5 could get together on that. Then force B12 to have some sort of conf championship.

Each conference can then make up its own rules.

I've gotten up on this soapbox many times before, but the NCAA's decision to enforce a DIVISION THREE rule about needing 12 teams in two, 6-team division to have a conference championship game has been one of the most disruptive and destructive decisions made in D1 sports in decades.

The 2-division rule needs to be dumped yesterday. Kill that and scheduling becomes immensely easier and better for every conference.

ACC schedule could be great if we just lined up 1 to 14 and maybe had 2-3 protected annual games for each team. Figure SU would play BC and Pitt annually, just for the northeast connection, so we'd end up playing the rest of the conference at least once every two years. Plus it'd give the league flexibility to schedule high-profile matchups for TV. Let's say Clemon and UNC were both pre-season top 10 -- well in this lousy division alignment the likelihood is high that they wouldn't play each other in the regular season, but in a 1-14 setup you could make sure that game is on the schedule for a primo TV slot in September/October.

Conference championship game would simply be #1 vs. #2.

 

[Alsacs]

How has the SEC managed to exist all these years with static divisions?

The P12 hasn't changed it's divisional alignment since Colorado and Utah were added.

The B1G is planning on static East/West divisions next year when Rutgirls and Maryland are added.

Yet the answer to all the ACC's problems is to have 6-8 teams change divisions every season? You'll never get ACC fans to buy in.

The Pac-12 alignment has worked because the 8 other Pac-12 schools agreed to give USC/UCLA- Stanford/Cal protected rivalry status each year even though both are in different divisions and conference has a 9 game conference schedule.

The B1G divisions weren't liked by all because Iowa/Wisconsin/Minnesota weren't all playing each other annually, the SEC worked out because Missouri agreed to be in the SEC East to get out of the Big XII even though Auburn, Alabama are closer to the SEC East schools than Missouri.

The ACC needs to adjust its divisions to throw FSU a bone and get them Georgia Tech more frequently and split up the Virginia schools so each team can play in that state. The ACC made a mistake originally when it didn't split UVA and VPI in 2003.

 

[omniorange]

How has the SEC managed to exist all these years with static divisions?

The P12 hasn't changed it's divisional alignment since Colorado and Utah were added.

The B1G is planning on static East/West divisions next year when Rutgirls and Maryland are added.

Yet the answer to all the ACC's problems is to have 6-8 teams change divisions every season? You'll never get ACC fans to buy in.

The SEC is THE SEC. Nuff said there.

Pac-12 is only at 12 and they do a 9-game conference schedule, so they cycle through quickly.

The BiG's static East/West alignment is already under attack by the fans for not having enough conference big name teams on the home schedule (and the number of big-time programs they have is greater than the number the ACC has). They also intend to go to a 9 game conference schedule in 2016 so that might help them eventually as well.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[Chip]

I've gotten up on this soapbox many times before, but the NCAA's decision to enforce a DIVISION THREE rule about needing 12 teams in two, 6-team division to have a conference championship game has been one of the most disruptive and destructive decisions made in D1 sports in decades.

The 2-division rule needs to be dumped yesterday. Kill that and scheduling becomes immensely easier and better for every conference.

ACC schedule could be great if we just lined up 1 to 14 and maybe had 2-3 protected annual games for each team. Figure SU would play BC and Pitt annually, just for the northeast connection, so we'd end up playing the rest of the conference at least once every two years. Plus it'd give the league flexibility to schedule high-profile matchups for TV. Let's say Clemon and UNC were both pre-season top 10 -- well in this lousy division alignment the likelihood is high that they wouldn't play each other in the regular season, but in a 1-14 setup you could make sure that game is on the schedule for a primo TV slot in September/October.

Conference championship game would simply be #1 vs. #2.

It's insane. Even reading some of the recent posts in this thread. To paraphrase, 'well as long as the 2 pods are then combined to create a division, then you can have a championship game'. Oh, ok then. That makes perfect sense.

Dumb, outdated rule.

 

[Chip]

The Pac-12 alignment has worked because the 8 other Pac-12 schools agreed to give USC/UCLA- Stanford/Cal protected rivalry status each year even though both are in different divisions and conference has a 9 game conference schedule.

Am I completely reading this comment wrong? Because USC and UCLA are in the same division. So are Stanford/Cal. Or are you saying that, for example, USC will play both Stanford and Cal every year?

 

[omniorange]

I've gotten up on this soapbox many times before, but the NCAA's decision to enforce a DIVISION THREE rule about needing 12 teams in two, 6-team division to have a conference championship game has been one of the most disruptive and destructive decisions made in D1 sports in decades.

The 2-division rule needs to be dumped yesterday. Kill that and scheduling becomes immensely easier and better for every conference.

ACC schedule could be great if we just lined up 1 to 14 and maybe had 2-3 protected annual games for each team. Figure SU would play BC and Pitt annually, just for the northeast connection, so we'd end up playing the rest of the conference at least once every two years. Plus it'd give the league flexibility to schedule high-profile matchups for TV. Let's say Clemon and UNC were both pre-season top 10 -- well in this lousy division alignment the likelihood is high that they wouldn't play each other in the regular season, but in a 1-14 setup you could make sure that game is on the schedule for a primo TV slot in September/October.

Conference championship game would simply be #1 vs. #2.

But to paraphrase a certain poster, who shall go nameless , unless a one-divisional set-up works for the SEC, forget about it.

SEC may like the two divisional format since they have 3-4 power teams in each division, a luxury that isn't true in any other conference. What incentive do they have to give up that advantage?

Cheers,
Neil

 

[Chip]

The SEC is THE SEC. Nuff said there.

Pac-12 is only at 12 and they do a 9-game conference schedule, so they cycle through quickly.

The BiG's static East/West alignment is already under attack by the fans for not having enough conference big name teams on the home schedule (and the number of big-time programs they have is greater than the number the ACC has). They also intend to go to a 9 game conference schedule in 2016 so that might help them eventually as well.

Cheers,
Neil

Yeah, each conference has its own unique scenarios. And the SEC had quite a few conversations about what to do with the 14 team league. It wasn't just put aTm here, put Mizzou there, and be done with it. They have been discussing some of the same issues, and will probably move to a 9 game schedule. Their divisions work out well because they have long standing rivalries and some geographic sense to it.

 

[Scooch]

But to paraphrase a certain poster, who shall go nameless , unless a one-divisional set-up works for the SEC, forget about it.

SEC may like the two divisional format since they have 3-4 power teams in each division, a luxury that isn't true in any other conference. What incentive do they have to give up that advantage?

Cheers,
Neil

Well they wouldn't have to drop divisions, it'd just be an option.

I know it won't happen, which adds to my frustration.