http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...all-season

(08-31-2015 12:44 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(08-31-2015 12:30 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-31-2015 12:26 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-31-2015 12:04 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(08-31-2015 10:54 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Correct, 3x5 works pretty good.

ND, BC, Pitt, Cuse, Ville

FSU, Clemson, GT, Miami, VT

NC, Duke, NC St, WF, Virginia

I'm fine with this as long as the winner of the FSU division is guaranteed an ACC CG spot. The Crapbacco Road division is weaker than my pinky finger.

deregulation does not mean 3 divisions, it means NO divisions.

We won't know what it means until somebody makes a decision about it.

my best guess...

WHEN deregulation passes, we'll continue with the status quo.

after that...

IF Notre Dame joins without a 16th, we'll go divisionless.

IF Notre Dame joins with a 16th, we'll go with 2 divisions with rotating pods of 4.

When all is said and done, I don't believe the ACC is that far away from having a schedule that everybody could be fairly happy with with the rules just the way they are. If the league has also come to that same conclusion, they might not be a sure bet to vote for deregulation.

I think one small adjustment in the divisions would answer a lot of scheduling concerns. I would do nothing except switch Miami and Wake Forest. Here is what that one move accomplishes.

The northern schools from the OBE now would get to play Miami every year. BC, Syracuse and Louisville because they are in the same division, and Pitt which gets the Canes as their permanent crossover.

FSU, Clemson and Louisville get an improved (that is to say, tougher) division schedule. FSU and Clemson's schedules can be further enhanced by letting them alternate between VT and GT as their permanent crossovers (VT one year, GT the next).

The core group of GT, UNC, Duke and Virginia get to stay together, and they get kindred spirits like Pitt, VT and Wake for a reasonably geographically compact group. Wake gets UNC every year, which they seem to want badly enough to schedule the Heels OOC. They also get VT and UVa every year, which is I believe almost as big a plus for them as UNC is.

NC State has UNC as their permanent rival, while Wake and Duke can alternate BC and Syracuse the way VT and GT alternate. By alternating between BC and Cuse, the southern schools in the Atlantic division only have to make one trip a year to the far north. If the league is smart, they will have FSU and Miami travel north in September and host those two in November. Same principle with Miami and Pitt.

So who needs deregulation, anyway?

(08-31-2015 01:29 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  I prefer championships that are won on the field and not by opinions!

You're probably a fan of the wrong sport then. The majority of College Football's history has been run by the opinions of writers and coaches.

(08-31-2015 02:34 PM)ken d Wrote:  When all is said and done, I don't believe the ACC is that far away from having a schedule that everybody could be fairly happy with with the rules just the way they are. If the league has also come to that same conclusion, they might not be a sure bet to vote for deregulation.

I think one small adjustment in the divisions would answer a lot of scheduling concerns. I would do nothing except switch Miami and Wake Forest. Here is what that one move accomplishes.

The northern schools from the OBE now would get to play Miami every year. BC, Syracuse and Louisville because they are in the same division, and Pitt which gets the Canes as their permanent crossover.

FSU, Clemson and Louisville get an improved (that is to say, tougher) division schedule. FSU and Clemson's schedules can be further enhanced by letting them alternate between VT and GT as their permanent crossovers (VT one year, GT the next).

The core group of GT, UNC, Duke and Virginia get to stay together, and they get kindred spirits like Pitt, VT and Wake for a reasonably geographically compact group. Wake gets UNC every year, which they seem to want badly enough to schedule the Heels OOC. They also get VT and UVa every year, which is I believe almost as big a plus for them as UNC is.

NC State has UNC as their permanent rival, while Wake and Duke can alternate BC and Syracuse the way VT and GT alternate. By alternating between BC and Cuse, the southern schools in the Atlantic division only have to make one trip a year to the far north. If the league is smart, they will have FSU and Miami travel north in September and host those two in November. Same principle with Miami and Pitt.

So who needs deregulation, anyway?

I could go with this.

(08-31-2015 03:30 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(08-31-2015 02:34 PM)ken d Wrote:  When all is said and done, I don't believe the ACC is that far away from having a schedule that everybody could be fairly happy with with the rules just the way they are. If the league has also come to that same conclusion, they might not be a sure bet to vote for deregulation.

I think one small adjustment in the divisions would answer a lot of scheduling concerns. I would do nothing except switch Miami and Wake Forest. Here is what that one move accomplishes.

The northern schools from the OBE now would get to play Miami every year. BC, Syracuse and Louisville because they are in the same division, and Pitt which gets the Canes as their permanent crossover.

FSU, Clemson and Louisville get an improved (that is to say, tougher) division schedule. FSU and Clemson's schedules can be further enhanced by letting them alternate between VT and GT as their permanent crossovers (VT one year, GT the next).

The core group of GT, UNC, Duke and Virginia get to stay together, and they get kindred spirits like Pitt, VT and Wake for a reasonably geographically compact group. Wake gets UNC every year, which they seem to want badly enough to schedule the Heels OOC. They also get VT and UVa every year, which is I believe almost as big a plus for them as UNC is.

NC State has UNC as their permanent rival, while Wake and Duke can alternate BC and Syracuse the way VT and GT alternate. By alternating between BC and Cuse, the southern schools in the Atlantic division only have to make one trip a year to the far north. If the league is smart, they will have FSU and Miami travel north in September and host those two in November. Same principle with Miami and Pitt.

So who needs deregulation, anyway?

I could go with this.

sounds good, but I'd hate to not play GT every year. I really look forward to that game.

(08-31-2015 03:33 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(08-31-2015 03:30 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(08-31-2015 02:34 PM)ken d Wrote:  When all is said and done, I don't believe the ACC is that far away from having a schedule that everybody could be fairly happy with with the rules just the way they are. If the league has also come to that same conclusion, they might not be a sure bet to vote for deregulation.

I think one small adjustment in the divisions would answer a lot of scheduling concerns. I would do nothing except switch Miami and Wake Forest. Here is what that one move accomplishes.

The northern schools from the OBE now would get to play Miami every year. BC, Syracuse and Louisville because they are in the same division, and Pitt which gets the Canes as their permanent crossover.

FSU, Clemson and Louisville get an improved (that is to say, tougher) division schedule. FSU and Clemson's schedules can be further enhanced by letting them alternate between VT and GT as their permanent crossovers (VT one year, GT the next).

The core group of GT, UNC, Duke and Virginia get to stay together, and they get kindred spirits like Pitt, VT and Wake for a reasonably geographically compact group. Wake gets UNC every year, which they seem to want badly enough to schedule the Heels OOC. They also get VT and UVa every year, which is I believe almost as big a plus for them as UNC is.

NC State has UNC as their permanent rival, while Wake and Duke can alternate BC and Syracuse the way VT and GT alternate. By alternating between BC and Cuse, the southern schools in the Atlantic division only have to make one trip a year to the far north. If the league is smart, they will have FSU and Miami travel north in September and host those two in November. Same principle with Miami and Pitt.

So who needs deregulation, anyway?

I could go with this.

sounds good, but I'd hate to not play GT every year. I really look forward to that game.

I would let the four schools work that out for themselves. I'd bet if GT had to pick either Clemson or FSU, they would also pick Clemson. If FSU could live with having VT as their permanent partner, everybody would be happy. But I'd bet they want to play GT more often than once every three years. I saw this as a compromise.

I would also consider the possibility of having ND always play 3 against the Atlantic and 2 against the Coastal every two years instead of alternating. Not sure if the Irish would go for that.

With the SEC rivalry games added to the above, the ACC champ probably isn't going to have to apologize for its schedules very often.

(08-31-2015 02:50 PM)Hitman Hart Wrote:  

(08-31-2015 01:29 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  I prefer championships that are won on the field and not by opinions!

You're probably a fan of the wrong sport then. The majority of College Football's history has been run by the opinions of writers and coaches.

You are very wrong. the current system has conference playoffs. The new way that many want would sent the same few teams to the playoff in the future. It is not going to happen. In fact P5 playoff will be 8 teams in the very near future.

(08-31-2015 02:50 PM)Hitman Hart Wrote:  

(08-31-2015 01:29 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  I prefer championships that are won on the field and not by opinions!

You're probably a fan of the wrong sport then. The majority of College Football's history has been run by the opinions of writers and coaches.

Fortunately it is changing. I wouldn't mind an expanded playoff system, but I am fine with what we have. It beats the old days.

(08-31-2015 12:26 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-31-2015 12:04 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(08-31-2015 10:54 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(08-31-2015 10:35 AM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(08-31-2015 10:27 AM)nole Wrote:  VERY few schools would add value.

There aren't many revenue difference makers out there.

The Penn States, Texas, Notre Dame etc of the world.........those are the only types that would justify an add in the ACC


The schools mentioned on this board area almost always just dead weight adds.

as much fun as it is to entertain this scenario or that scenario, the bottom line is what you just said - the only additions that make any sense to the ACC are ND, PSU and Texas (with our without tagalongs). if ND decided to go all in, I suspect we would stay at 15 unless PSU or Texas wanted to join with ND. if and when deregulation passes, we don't need an even number anymore.

Correct, 3x5 works pretty good.

ND, BC, Pitt, Cuse, Ville

FSU, Clemson, GT, Miami, VT

NC, Duke, NC St, WF, Virginia

I'm fine with this as long as the winner of the FSU division is guaranteed an ACC CG spot. The Crapbacco Road division is weaker than my pinky finger.

deregulation does not mean 3 divisions, it means NO divisions.

Ok, but I'm not the one that suggested three 5-team divisions.

Personally, I preferred it when the AP picked their mythical champion at the end of the regular season, before any bowls were played. Of course, not every qualified team elected to play in a bowl back then, and it wasn't uncommon for a national champ to lose its bowl game.

At least then, we didn't pretend that it was possible to pick the right two, or four, teams for a playoff.