Report: ACC wants to 'deregulate' conference championship games | Syracusefan.com

Report: ACC wants to 'deregulate' conference championship games

SmilinBob

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 30, 2011
Messages
10,106
Like
7,644
I know we have talked about this multiple times but having one division and scheduling in pods would make me very happy. Taking the top two teams...fantastic move by the ACC. I'd prefer getting rid of the CCG and go straight to a playoff for the conference winners but big steps like this are a wonderful thing in my opinion.
 

Chip

Creature of Bad Habits
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Messages
26,203
Like
65,886
They want to deregulate a rule that is built on nothing, makes little sense, and is a classic example of having a rule for rule's sake?

Yeah, good luck.
 

RCDICK44

Walk On
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
134
Like
197
I know we have talked about this multiple times but having one division and scheduling in pods would make me very happy. Taking the top two teams...fantastic move by the ACC. I'd prefer getting rid of the CCG and go straight to a playoff for the conference winners but big steps like this are a wonderful thing in my opinion.


I didn't read it that they wanted to have 1 division , only that they wanted to have their 2 highest rated teams compete for the championship.Now we get involved with strength of schedule.
 

HtownOrange

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
11,262
Like
13,107
I do not see this as a good thing for Syracuse
If Syracuse wins 11 or 12 games, Syracuse will be in the discussions for ACC Champion. If we win less than 10 games, we, like everyone else, does not deserve to be in that discussion.

Just win! Go Orange!
 

omniorange

All Conference
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
2,759
Like
3,037
So the NCAA would end a rule that was THE cause of conference realignment for 20 years.

After realignment is basically over.

Outstanding!

:bat:

Funny, but only partially true.

The rule itself is probably only truly responsible for:

Arkansas and South Carolina to the SEC
Miami, VT, and BC to the ACC
Nebraska to the Big Ten.

TV was responsible for:

PSU to the Big Ten
FSU to the ACC
Big East football forming
Big 8/SWC merger
Colorado and Utah to the Pac-12
Texas A&M and Mizzou to the SEC
Pitt and SU to the ACC
Maryland and Rutgers to the Big Ten

Realignment itself was responsible for:

Louisville, Cincy, and USF to the Big East
WVU and TCU to the Big 12
Louisville to the ACC

I'm sure I'm missing something.

Cheers,
Neil
 

Moontan

2017 ESPN College Bowl Pick’em Winner
Joined
Aug 20, 2011
Messages
9,555
Like
8,683
Realignment itself was responsible for:
...
I'm sure I'm missing something.
  • 85 teams moving to the AAC (to backfill TCU, SU, Pitt, WVU and Louisville departures)
  • the end of WAC football
 

Scooch

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
13,863
Like
38,776
Funny, but only partially true.

The rule itself is probably only truly responsible for:

Arkansas and South Carolina to the SEC
Miami, VT, and BC to the ACC
Nebraska to the Big Ten.

TV was responsible for:

PSU to the Big Ten
FSU to the ACC
Big East football forming
Big 8/SWC merger
Colorado and Utah to the Pac-12
Texas A&M and Mizzou to the SEC
Pitt and SU to the ACC
Maryland and Rutgers to the Big Ten

Realignment itself was responsible for:

Louisville, Cincy, and USF to the Big East
WVU and TCU to the Big 12
Louisville to the ACC

I'm sure I'm missing something.

Cheers,
Neil

Well, I was certainly working in a bit of hyperbole. But, generally speaking many of the moves you attribute to TV went down the way they did because of the 12-team NCAA rule and the necessity of needing a magic 12 to make a conference championship game happen (which just so happens to bring in large TV dollars). Certainly the Big 8/SWC merger. And Nebraska to the B1G, which exacerbated the instability in the Big XII, which led to the Pac-12 scooping up Colorado on the way to 12, etc.

I mean without that stupid, arbitrary rule the SEC may have never added Arkansas, hell maybe the ACC stops at Miami, and things end up playing out a lot differently over the last decade-plus.
 

omniorange

All Conference
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
2,759
Like
3,037
Well, I was certainly working in a bit of hyperbole. But, generally speaking many of the moves you attribute to TV went down the way they did because of the 12-team NCAA rule and the necessity of needing a magic 12 to make a conference championship game happen (which just so happens to bring in large TV dollars). Certainly the Big 8/SWC merger. And Nebraska to the B1G, which exacerbated the instability in the Big XII, which led to the Pac-12 scooping up Colorado on the way to 12, etc.

I mean without that stupid, arbitrary rule the SEC may have never added Arkansas, hell maybe the ACC stops at Miami, and things end up playing out a lot differently over the last decade-plus.

The Pac was about getting to 16 for a Conference TV Network to compete with the Big Ten. They settled for 12 when Texas bowed out, but the prime motivator in that move was their network.

The Big 8/SWC merger took into consideration a championship game, but there was a $60 million offer on the table whether they played a championship game or not. That offer was about combining the markets of Texas with Colorado and Missouri. Improved markets and the crumbling of the SWC were the prime motivators but a secondary one was the potential for a championship game.

Cheers,
Neil
 

omniorange

All Conference
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
2,759
Like
3,037
  • 85 teams moving to the AAC (to backfill TCU, SU, Pitt, WVU and Louisville departures)
  • the end of WAC football

I was trying to limit it to BCS conferences. ;)

Cheers,
Neil
 

SmilinBob

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 30, 2011
Messages
10,106
Like
7,644
I didn't read it that they wanted to have 1 division , only that they wanted to have their 2 highest rated teams compete for the championship.Now we get involved with strength of schedule.

Maybe it's just my wishful thinking then because I was thinking this was just step one to a one division thing.
 

Moontan

2017 ESPN College Bowl Pick’em Winner
Joined
Aug 20, 2011
Messages
9,555
Like
8,683
Maybe it's just my wishful thinking then because I was thinking this was just step one to a one division thing.
That was the speculation here when several different scheduling options were shown which were based on 3 fixed annual matchups for each school coupled with 2 sets of 5 alternating opponents. Such a scheduling scheme would ensure that all ACC schools would visit the Dome at least once every four years. Most here were I favor of such a scheme.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
160,490
Messages
4,341,636
Members
5,639
Latest member
GoldyGopher

Online statistics

Members online
71
Guests online
452
Total visitors
523




Top Bottom