(08-26-2012 09:13 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 08:46 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 08:21 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-25-2012 11:21 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

(08-25-2012 10:56 PM)esayem Wrote:  Of your five listed schools I put Clemson in with Miami and VaTech. Plus you would get GT as a crossover.

FSU and Clemson are the biggest draws in football.

FSU, yes...Clemson, no.
Right now the two biggest draws in the ACC for television would be FSU and Virginia Tech.

Butts in the seats.

Put Clemson and VT on equal footing and ask our bowl partners who they want. $2 bills with Tiger Paws on them make an impression on the local business leaders.
NY Times

VT has had no trouble filling 80,000 at FedEx, Atlanta or Charlotte. We're quite capable of putting butts in the seats.

Really?

Amazing since none of those venues has 80k seats.

Fedex Field - 79k
Bank of America Stadium - 73k
Georgia Dome - 71k

(08-26-2012 08:46 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 08:21 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-25-2012 11:21 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

(08-25-2012 10:56 PM)esayem Wrote:  Of your five listed schools I put Clemson in with Miami and VaTech. Plus you would get GT as a crossover.

FSU and Clemson are the biggest draws in football.

FSU, yes...Clemson, no.
Right now the two biggest draws in the ACC for television would be FSU and Virginia Tech.

Butts in the seats.

Put Clemson and VT on equal footing and ask our bowl partners who they want. $2 bills with Tiger Paws on them make an impression on the local business leaders.
NY Times

You are the one who keeps talking about how other teams don't bring enough fans to fill up Clemson's great big stadium.
If there were butts in the seats at Clemson, the Tigers would be selling out every game with Clemson fans.
Selling out at Virginia Tech does not seem to be a problem and they don't seem to have to rely on visitors from other schools.

(08-26-2012 09:18 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 09:13 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 08:46 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 08:21 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-25-2012 11:21 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  FSU and Clemson are the biggest draws in football.

FSU, yes...Clemson, no.
Right now the two biggest draws in the ACC for television would be FSU and Virginia Tech.

Butts in the seats.

Put Clemson and VT on equal footing and ask our bowl partners who they want. $2 bills with Tiger Paws on them make an impression on the local business leaders.
NY Times

VT has had no trouble filling 80,000 at FedEx, Atlanta or Charlotte. We're quite capable of putting butts in the seats.

Really?

Amazing since none of those venues has 80k seats.

Fedex Field - 79k
Bank of America Stadium - 73k
Georgia Dome - 71k

To be fair - it's mostly about TV... ACC teams can put butts in seats, at least the "big-time" ones can... We know this. VT, FSU, Clemson, Miami, UVA, UNC, etc. all can put on crowds of 60k+ quite easily, with crowds approaching 80k in some cases.

(08-26-2012 09:18 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 09:13 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 08:46 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 08:21 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-25-2012 11:21 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  FSU and Clemson are the biggest draws in football.

FSU, yes...Clemson, no.
Right now the two biggest draws in the ACC for television would be FSU and Virginia Tech.

Butts in the seats.

Put Clemson and VT on equal footing and ask our bowl partners who they want. $2 bills with Tiger Paws on them make an impression on the local business leaders.
NY Times

VT has had no trouble filling 80,000 at FedEx, Atlanta or Charlotte. We're quite capable of putting butts in the seats.

Really?

Amazing since none of those venues has 80k seats.

Fedex Field - 79k
Bank of America Stadium - 73k
Georgia Dome - 71k

2004 vs USC in Fedex 91,655
2010 vs Boise in Fedex 86,587
2009 vs Alabama 74,954 (highest attended kickoff game)
2009 Chick fil a bowl 73,777
2006 Chick fil a bowl 75,406
2011 ACC championship 73,675
2010 ACC championship 72,379
2008 ECU in BoA 72,000

Despite your ill informed response VT has been right at capacity for those venues and even exceeding them at times.

I would be shocked at anyone suggesting that splitting up FSU/Clemson makes the conference better if it weren't a Carolina fan doing the posting....

This conference has done a lot wrong in regards to football. The rivalries being split up are just wrong to say the least. Miami/BC should play. FSU/GT should play. Maryland and Pitt should be together as well in some form to start that off. The league is clueless on how to get the best out of their football product.

Clueless is some rogue fan claiming that the world is going to come to and end because his adopted school has to play 9 conference games.
Rivalries being split up are just a fact of conference expansion. We all know that a 9 or 10 team league would be better than 12 or 14. And round-robin play is much more preferable than playing a split schedule. Each team has made sacrifices, even Carolina. We have a 104 game history with Wake Forest and now only play them twice every six years (the same holds true with Maryland our 5th most played opponent). Every school has had to give up something for the good of the conference. Some fans just want to ***** about it (all of the time).
The Tiger fans are still mad about the fumblerooski that Florida State pulled on Clemson before the 'noles joined the ACC and think they deserve an opportunity to get revenge as often as possible.

(08-26-2012 09:20 PM)mtsufan561 Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 09:18 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 09:13 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 08:46 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 08:21 PM)XLance Wrote:  FSU, yes...Clemson, no.
Right now the two biggest draws in the ACC for television would be FSU and Virginia Tech.

Butts in the seats.

Put Clemson and VT on equal footing and ask our bowl partners who they want. $2 bills with Tiger Paws on them make an impression on the local business leaders.
NY Times

VT has had no trouble filling 80,000 at FedEx, Atlanta or Charlotte. We're quite capable of putting butts in the seats.

Really?

Amazing since none of those venues has 80k seats.

Fedex Field - 79k
Bank of America Stadium - 73k
Georgia Dome - 71k

To be fair - it's mostly about TV... ACC teams can put butts in seats, at least the "big-time" ones can... We know this. VT, FSU, Clemson, Miami, UVA, UNC, etc. all can put on crowds of 60k+ quite easily, with crowds approaching 80k in some cases.

Virginia and Miami easily fill 60+K? Since when? Miami's sitting around 45K the last 5 or so years.

UNC and NC State are both around 60K in capacity and while I don't know how frequently they actually get to capacity they definitely deserve mention over Miami and UVA.

(08-27-2012 08:39 AM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 09:20 PM)mtsufan561 Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 09:18 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 09:13 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 08:46 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  Butts in the seats.

Put Clemson and VT on equal footing and ask our bowl partners who they want. $2 bills with Tiger Paws on them make an impression on the local business leaders.
NY Times

VT has had no trouble filling 80,000 at FedEx, Atlanta or Charlotte. We're quite capable of putting butts in the seats.

Really?

Amazing since none of those venues has 80k seats.

Fedex Field - 79k
Bank of America Stadium - 73k
Georgia Dome - 71k

To be fair - it's mostly about TV... ACC teams can put butts in seats, at least the "big-time" ones can... We know this. VT, FSU, Clemson, Miami, UVA, UNC, etc. all can put on crowds of 60k+ quite easily, with crowds approaching 80k in some cases.

Virginia and Miami easily fill 60+K? Since when? Miami's sitting around 45K the last 5 or so years.

UNC and NC State are both around 60K in capacity and while I don't know how frequently they actually get to capacity they definitely deserve mention over Miami and UVA.

Miami will have at least 2 sellouts this year, more than likely, with FSU and VT. That means 2 crowds at around 75k. Then we also have UNC, NCSU, and USF, which should all be good crowds as well, hopefully over 60k. The point is that these schools can definitely put in good crowds.

(08-27-2012 08:33 AM)XLance Wrote:  Clueless is some rogue fan claiming that the world is going to come to and end because his adopted school has to play 9 conference games.
Rivalries being split up are just a fact of conference expansion. We all know that a 9 or 10 team league would be better than 12 or 14. And round-robin play is much more preferable than playing a split schedule. Each team has made sacrifices, even Carolina. We have a 104 game history with Wake Forest and now only play them twice every six years (the same holds true with Maryland our 5th most played opponent). Every school has had to give up something for the good of the conference. Some fans just want to ***** about it (all of the time).
The Tiger fans are still mad about the fumblerooski that Florida State pulled on Clemson before the 'noles joined the ACC and think they deserve an opportunity to get revenge as often as possible.

See this is bullcrap. North Carolina got their best case scenario when the 2 6 team divisions happened. Duke and Virginia are your main rivals. You got them both. 2 high profile adds in expansion with Miami/Va Tech and you guys got them both in the division. Then you got the ATL market with another good football school in Georgia Tech.

For your crossover, you got NC State (another rival). The 6 team divisions couldn't have worked out better for North Carolina to be honest. Then when Pitt/Syracuse were added, you guys got Pitt who is the bigger football name now and how the way better recruiting state.

What else are we going to talk about in these threads on the divisions? It is easy to say we complain all the time when teams like UNC/Va Tech make out like bandits with these divisions. FSU got the shaft big time with alignment. It is as if UNC/Duke/UVA got together to pick their division and then threw the rest to the other division.

EDIT: And enough on the adopted school crap. With your way of rooting for teams, nobody could have a college football team until they turned 18. And really a Carolina fan talking about this? How many UNC basketball fans are there that didn't go to Chapel Hill? Heck I bet there are some of those on here. I have been a fan of FSU sports since I started watching college sports. And it isn't like I hide where I went. I have the helmet in my sig....

Also I am not a rogue fan. I post on 3 FSU message board. The overwhelming majority hates how the ACC treats FSU and hates the alignment of the divisions. The minority are the ones that disagree with both of these thoughts. You are just ignorant of the fanbase as a whole

(08-27-2012 08:42 AM)mtsufan561 Wrote:  

(08-27-2012 08:39 AM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 09:20 PM)mtsufan561 Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 09:18 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

(08-26-2012 09:13 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  VT has had no trouble filling 80,000 at FedEx, Atlanta or Charlotte. We're quite capable of putting butts in the seats.

Really?

Amazing since none of those venues has 80k seats.

Fedex Field - 79k
Bank of America Stadium - 73k
Georgia Dome - 71k

To be fair - it's mostly about TV... ACC teams can put butts in seats, at least the "big-time" ones can... We know this. VT, FSU, Clemson, Miami, UVA, UNC, etc. all can put on crowds of 60k+ quite easily, with crowds approaching 80k in some cases.

Virginia and Miami easily fill 60+K? Since when? Miami's sitting around 45K the last 5 or so years.

UNC and NC State are both around 60K in capacity and while I don't know how frequently they actually get to capacity they definitely deserve mention over Miami and UVA.

Miami will have at least 2 sellouts this year, more than likely, with FSU and VT. That means 2 crowds at around 75k. Then we also have UNC, NCSU, and USF, which should all be good crowds as well, hopefully over 60k. The point is that these schools can definitely put in good crowds.

I'm just going to disagree with you. Only FSU will sell out.

In 2010 none of UNC, USF or VT had an attendance over 50,000.
USF: 41,148
UNC: 43,584
VT: 46,497

And considering Miami might have another pretty poor year, I don't see the interest being there to raise attendance much higher than those figures from 2 years.

Obviously people with a lot more knowledge of the situation decided FSU/CU/GT should not be in the same division.

FSU-U
CU-GT
NCSU-UNC
WF-Duke
VT-UVA
Pitt-UMD
SU-BC

That's definitely not as balanced. So I'm sticking with my first alignment.

Some observations, then I'll slide on out of the way...

1) FSU, supposedly, got the "easier" division in the new alignment, as NC State, Wake, BC, or Maryland are not seen as FB "heavies", so in theory, all FSU has to do is beat Clemson and they are a shoo-in for the ACCCG. How's that working out?

2) FSU is playing its main rival, Miami, each season. No one is going to dig through the archives and uncover "classic" FSU/Clemson games pre-ACC. However, FSU and Miami had a fantastic rivalry that pre-dated the ACC.

3) North Carolina, Virginia and Duke are stuck at the hip. Not saying I like it, but it is what it is. Even then, Virginia and Carolina don't play every year in basketball. Oh, my bad, this is supposed to be a "football" talk.

4) The school that has a beef in all this is Wake Forest, as it had to see it's longstanding series with Carolina reduced to a "2 games every 6 seasons", and now "2 games every 7 seasons".

5) Yes, GT and FSU have had some classics. However, it appears folks in the GT offices wanted its rivalry with Clemson more than it's rivalry with FSU.

6) NC State vs. Maryland = "most underrated rivalry in the ACC, and likely the south".

7) Sure, I'd like to see NC State play Virginia Tech more often because it's an electric atmosphere when the fans get together.

8) On paper, it would easier to just swap Clemson and GT. However, apparently, school officials at both Clemson and NC State prefer to contest the "Textile Bowl" each season.

Out.

(08-28-2012 07:53 AM)esayem Wrote:  Obviously people with a lot more knowledge of the situation decided FSU/CU/GT should not be in the same division.

FSU-U
CU-GT
NCSU-UNC
WF-Duke
VT-UVA
Pitt-UMD
SU-BC

That's definitely not as balanced. So I'm sticking with my first alignment.

Switching Pitt and BC, even as a standalone change, might make a lot of sense. Not sure BC has any big rivals in the Atlantic except SU, which can become a cross over. The switch would restore BC vs. the U as an annual and introduce UMD-Pitt as an annual, which I believe has promise. Switching UMD and VPI, though, would not work at this time because of division strength issues.

(08-28-2012 09:58 AM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  4) The school that has a beef in all this is Wake Forest, as it had to see it's longstanding series with Carolina reduced to a "2 games every 6 seasons", and now "2 games every 7 seasons".

It will now be 2 games every 6 seasons. Cross overs are 2 games annually against 6 rotating opponents plus one permanent crossover. Previously it was 2 games annually against 5 rotating opponents, plus one permanent cross over, so you had 2 games every 5 years.

(08-28-2012 09:58 AM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  Some observations, then I'll slide on out of the way...

1) FSU, supposedly, got the "easier" division in the new alignment, as NC State, Wake, BC, or Maryland are not seen as FB "heavies", so in theory, all FSU has to do is beat Clemson and they are a shoo-in for the ACCCG. How's that working out?

You call it easier. I call it UNC/Duke/UVA picking their division and then just tossing the rest in the other division....

BTW the divisions are actually pretty competitive record wise. I think it was about even all time when the stats came up in terms of W/L.

Call it whatever you need to call it, but I doubt the school presidents were going to sign off on a plan that prevented annual FB games between "Carolina/Virginia" and "Carolina/Duke".

I believe those two games, plus the following were going to be protected by every means possible:

Clemson/NC State
NC State/North Carolina
Wake Forest/NC State
Wake Forest/Duke (why? I have no idea)
Virginia/Maryland
FSU/Miami
Virginia/Virginia Tech
Maryland/NC State

FWIW, the only real critique I have with the current divisions is that FSU and Carolina don't play annually because it's both a great TV game and, for the two times I've seen it live, a great live game.

FWIW, I thought the divisions would have been better w/ Pitt in the Atlantic (with VT as cross-over) and Syracuse in the Coastal (w/ BC as crossover) - in that case the rivalries could have looked like this animated map:



It doesn't solve the Ga Tech / FSU issue, but it does eliminate a long annual trip by Atlantic division teams to Boston and replace it with a shorter trip to Pittsburgh.

I don't think flying to Boston is any harder than flying to Pittsburgh.

(08-28-2012 11:34 AM)4x4hokies Wrote:  I don't think flying to Boston is any harder than flying to Pittsburgh.

True, but while you are in Western Pennsylvania you can recruit actual football players; in Massachusettes, not so much - so it's a more productive trip. (That's also one reason I would prefer using the cross-over arrangement to keeps VT playing Pitt; I also like the rivalry potential).

(08-28-2012 11:22 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  FWIW, I thought the divisions would have been better w/ Pitt in the Atlantic (with VT as cross-over) and Syracuse in the Coastal (w/ BC as crossover) - in that case the rivalries could have looked like this animated map:



It doesn't solve the Ga Tech / FSU issue, but it does eliminate a long annual trip by Atlantic division teams to Boston and replace it with a shorter trip to Pittsburgh.

Sweet!! WVU, Ohio State, Auburn, Tennessee and Cincy are all potential ACC targets. I wouldn't have thought Ohio state, Tennessee and Auburn would be interested.

edit: Nice graphic by the way.

(08-28-2012 06:21 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  Sweet!! WVU, Ohio State, Auburn, Tennessee and Cincy are all potential ACC targets. I wouldn't have thought Ohio state, Tennessee and Auburn would be interested.

edit: Nice graphic by the way.

Potential OOC rivals... not expansion targets