(10-31-2023 07:11 PM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  I don't think they tried to maximize the number of best tv ratings games...they could have done much better. They preserved northeast rivals and the Carolina rivals instead of creating some more toppish tier matchups that tv would like to see....

why create additional better matchups when espn wont pay for it

(10-31-2023 05:58 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  Pitt will be an ACC member for 15 years before we host Wake. We have been to Wake twice.

its taking us quite a while to host miami too thankfully there on the schedule next yr

Starting next year, ESPN and Fox channels ratings for games will spike quiet a bit, especially in October thru mid November.....with the 12 team playoff, several more schools will remain in the hunt for 3-6 weeks coming out of September....I wish ESPN would have offered to tweak our contract for the TV Ratings "Shared" Keep What You Kill.....What normally might be a 2, 3, or 4 rating might spike to 5, 6, 7 rating now for two teams playing both in the hunt in mid/late October....where normally that might have only been a game with one team in the hunt.

(11-01-2023 06:45 PM)Chris02m1 Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 07:11 PM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  I don't think they tried to maximize the number of best tv ratings games...they could have done much better. They preserved northeast rivals and the Carolina rivals instead of creating some more toppish tier matchups that tv would like to see....

why create additional better matchups when espn wont pay for it

Exactly. The opposite of the Big Ten and Big XII moves (fewer and much fewer rivalries), which frankly suck in my opinion.

(11-02-2023 07:37 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-01-2023 06:45 PM)Chris02m1 Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 07:11 PM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  I don't think they tried to maximize the number of best tv ratings games...they could have done much better. They preserved northeast rivals and the Carolina rivals instead of creating some more toppish tier matchups that tv would like to see....

why create additional better matchups when espn wont pay for it

Exactly. The opposite of the Big Ten and Big XII moves (fewer and much fewer rivalries), which frankly suck in my opinion.

The counterpoint to that would be to build up a library of better than paid for matchups, for when its time to go to market again for the new deal.....And/or do it, get the results/ratings, and shove it in ESPNs face to force some additional revenues. It feels like a conference legal team/negotiating team wouldn't have a clause in the contract to boost the revenue if ratings blow thru the roof...

People say that Swafford protected us with the longer contract as tv bubbles burst, but one counter to that would be this 12 team playoff and how it would naturally keep more teams fanbases attention longer into the year.

Annual matchups:

(11-05-2023 11:25 AM)schmolik Wrote:  Annual matchups:

We are all set until 2030.

The only outstanding item is whether ND-Stanford series will be renewed or not. I guess the ACC office doesn’t have anything to do with that decision at least until 2037 when Stanford may join the rotation.

Wouldn’t NBC want ND to drop the Stanford series and start a new series with a B10 team such as UCLA? Having said that I see UCLA has no opening for 2025 and 2026.

So we will see.

(10-30-2023 06:11 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 05:48 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  That’s more permanent rivals than were expected. UNC, NC State, and Duke max out with three permanent games. The original Big East football members (BC, Syracuse, Pitt, VT, and Miami) all have two permanent rivals. On the other hand, GT and Louisville seem like orphans without any permanent rivals…odd that Clemson v GT is not an annual game.

At least Louisville plays the Northeast trio (Cuse, BC, Pitt) as well as GT five times.

GT probably didn’t want to face Clemson annually. Not sure why Textile bowl is gone.

Playing Northeast teams isn't a plus or a minus to us

(10-30-2023 07:26 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 07:18 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Duke, UNC, NCSU and Wake only play SU and BC x2.

The more things change the more things stay the same.

Your own administration is the reason Clemson is no longer annual

(11-05-2023 04:36 PM)ColumbusCard Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 07:26 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 07:18 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Duke, UNC, NCSU and Wake only play SU and BC x2.

The more things change the more things stay the same.

Your own administration is the reason Clemson is no longer annual

The only way that makes any sense is if J Batt already knows GT isn't going to be in the ACC any more when this scheduling setup has run its course.

(11-06-2023 11:35 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-05-2023 04:36 PM)ColumbusCard Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 07:26 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 07:18 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Duke, UNC, NCSU and Wake only play SU and BC x2.

The more things change the more things stay the same.

Your own administration is the reason Clemson is no longer annual

The only way that makes any sense is if J Batt already knows GT isn't going to be in the ACC Championship race any more when this scheduling setup has run its course.

FIFY

(11-06-2023 11:35 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-05-2023 04:36 PM)ColumbusCard Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 07:26 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 07:18 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Duke, UNC, NCSU and Wake only play SU and BC x2.

The more things change the more things stay the same.

Your own administration is the reason Clemson is no longer annual

The only way that makes any sense is if J Batt already knows GT isn't going to be in the ACC any more when this scheduling setup has run its course.

No. It makes sense if GT football coach doesn't want to face UGA, FSU and Clemson every year.

(11-06-2023 04:07 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(11-06-2023 11:35 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-05-2023 04:36 PM)ColumbusCard Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 07:26 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 07:18 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Duke, UNC, NCSU and Wake only play SU and BC x2.

The more things change the more things stay the same.

Your own administration is the reason Clemson is no longer annual

The only way that makes any sense is if J Batt already knows GT isn't going to be in the ACC any more when this scheduling setup has run its course.

No. It makes sense if GT football coach doesn't want to face UGA, FSU and Clemson every year.

+1
(If any of you is confused, this is probably the REAL reason)

(11-06-2023 04:07 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(11-06-2023 11:35 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-05-2023 04:36 PM)ColumbusCard Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 07:26 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 07:18 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Duke, UNC, NCSU and Wake only play SU and BC x2.

The more things change the more things stay the same.

Your own administration is the reason Clemson is no longer annual

The only way that makes any sense is if J Batt already knows GT isn't going to be in the ACC any more when this scheduling setup has run its course.

No. It makes sense if GT football coach doesn't want to face UGA, FSU and Clemson every year.

Penny wise pound foolish if true. And I'd like to point out under the current model they don't play all three every year.

(11-06-2023 05:04 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-06-2023 04:07 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(11-06-2023 11:35 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-05-2023 04:36 PM)ColumbusCard Wrote:  

(10-30-2023 07:26 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  The more things change the more things stay the same.

Your own administration is the reason Clemson is no longer annual

The only way that makes any sense is if J Batt already knows GT isn't going to be in the ACC any more when this scheduling setup has run its course.

No. It makes sense if GT football coach doesn't want to face UGA, FSU and Clemson every year.

Penny wise pound foolish if true. And I'd like to point out under the current model they don't play all three every year.

But it could happen occasionally, and they don’t want that. Or Clemson doesn’t want you all anymore.