(11-06-2021 06:52 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-06-2021 03:06 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Well the dream of Wake winning the ACC just took a hit, UNC 58 Wake 55. Oh no wait it didn't hurt at all in the standings, because thanks to the ridiculous ACC divisions the schools had to schedule a nonconference game in order to play this year...while Wake "enjoys" guaranteed annual matchups with Syracuse & Boston College and the Tarheels are "treated" to an annual tilt with Pitt.

Perfect example of one negative thing the ACC absolutely has control over and COULD change, but refuses to do so. This game DOES virtually ensure no ACC team is playoff bound this year, so by all means keep supporting your sour grapes alliance friends and resisting the change to 12 teams. It makes about as much sense as "Atlantic" and "Coastal".

Right, the ACC needs to follow my sub-divisions:

BC, Syracuse, Pitt
Louisville, UVa, VaTech
Wake, UNC, Duke, State
Clem, GaTech, FSU, Miami

ACC Coastal
Clemson
Wake
UNC
NC State
Duke
UVA
VA Tech

ACC Atlantic
FSU
Miami
GA Tech
Louisville
Syracuse
Pittsburgh
Boston College

Why doesn’t the ACC do a Carolinas-Virginia division and a seperate division like the old Big East?

If enough members of the ACC want different divisions, they can change them. Just like any other conference.

(11-08-2021 08:31 AM)ken d Wrote:  If enough members of the ACC want different divisions, they can change them. Just like any other conference.

Thank you. Some of us were questioning why the divisions are why they are or what should be changed.

(11-08-2021 08:34 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 08:31 AM)ken d Wrote:  If enough members of the ACC want different divisions, they can change them. Just like any other conference.

Thank you. Some of us were questioning why the divisions are why they are or what should be changed.

There have been more than one thread at CSNBBS/ACCBBS about the topic.

(11-08-2021 09:06 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 08:34 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 08:31 AM)ken d Wrote:  If enough members of the ACC want different divisions, they can change them. Just like any other conference.

Thank you. Some of us were questioning why the divisions are why they are or what should be changed.

There have been more than one thread at CSNBBS/ACCBBS about the topic.

I don’t have the time to dig thru thousand days of pages. I’ll just accept the divisions for what they are.

(11-08-2021 09:09 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 09:06 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 08:34 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 08:31 AM)ken d Wrote:  If enough members of the ACC want different divisions, they can change them. Just like any other conference.

Thank you. Some of us were questioning why the divisions are why they are or what should be changed.

There have been more than one thread at CSNBBS/ACCBBS about the topic.

I don’t have the time to dig thru thousand days of pages. I’ll just accept the divisions for what they are.

While it hasn't always been so since the ACC went to 12 teams, the current divisional alignment is now enshrined in the ACC bylaws. That means that at least 11 of the 14 schools eligible to vote (Notre Dame is not eligible) approved them the way they are, and it would take 11 members to change them now. The likelihood that they will be changed is remote unless the league expands or contracts in the future.

(11-08-2021 10:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 09:09 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 09:06 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 08:34 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 08:31 AM)ken d Wrote:  If enough members of the ACC want different divisions, they can change them. Just like any other conference.

Thank you. Some of us were questioning why the divisions are why they are or what should be changed.

There have been more than one thread at CSNBBS/ACCBBS about the topic.

I don’t have the time to dig thru thousand days of pages. I’ll just accept the divisions for what they are.

While it hasn't always been so since the ACC went to 12 teams, the current divisional alignment is now enshrined in the ACC bylaws. That means that at least 11 of the 14 schools eligible to vote (Notre Dame is not eligible) approved them the way they are, and it would take 11 members to change them now. The likelihood that they will be changed is remote unless the league expands or contracts in the future.

Ken, as I understand it, the divisions were baked into the by-laws BEFORE Pitt and Syracuse were added (and maybe before Miami, VT and BC were added). You are correct about one thing, though: a simple majority isn't enough to change them - it requires a supermajority.

(11-08-2021 03:05 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 10:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 09:09 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 09:06 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 08:34 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  Thank you. Some of us were questioning why the divisions are why they are or what should be changed.

There have been more than one thread at CSNBBS/ACCBBS about the topic.

I don’t have the time to dig thru thousand days of pages. I’ll just accept the divisions for what they are.

While it hasn't always been so since the ACC went to 12 teams, the current divisional alignment is now enshrined in the ACC bylaws. That means that at least 11 of the 14 schools eligible to vote (Notre Dame is not eligible) approved them the way they are, and it would take 11 members to change them now. The likelihood that they will be changed is remote unless the league expands or contracts in the future.

Ken, as I understand it, the divisions were baked into the by-laws BEFORE Pitt and Syracuse were added (and maybe before Miami, VT and BC were added). You are correct about one thing, though: a simple majority isn't enough to change them - it requires a supermajority.

Doesn't the ACC want to get rid of divisions? Jim Phillips said at some point they'll try again to get the rule changed. Next year seems like a good time to push for that with all the changes afoot.

(11-08-2021 03:05 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 10:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 09:09 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 09:06 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 08:34 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  Thank you. Some of us were questioning why the divisions are why they are or what should be changed.

There have been more than one thread at CSNBBS/ACCBBS about the topic.

I don’t have the time to dig thru thousand days of pages. I’ll just accept the divisions for what they are.

While it hasn't always been so since the ACC went to 12 teams, the current divisional alignment is now enshrined in the ACC bylaws. That means that at least 11 of the 14 schools eligible to vote (Notre Dame is not eligible) approved them the way they are, and it would take 11 members to change them now. The likelihood that they will be changed is remote unless the league expands or contracts in the future.

Ken, as I understand it, the divisions were baked into the by-laws BEFORE Pitt and Syracuse were added (and maybe before Miami, VT and BC were added). You are correct about one thing, though: a simple majority isn't enough to change them - it requires a supermajority.

Some divisions may have been in the bylaws before Pitt and Syracuse joined, but not the current divisions (which include them). That could only have been done by an amendment to the bylaws which requires the 75% supermajority. So, at least 11 of the current 14 schools had to approve it.

I don't think the ACC ever makes such votes public, so we'll probably never know which schools, if any, opposed these divisions (or what alternative they preferred). If the league were to expand to 16, it would take 12 votes to approve the new divisions.

What's not clear to me is whether a change by the NCAA to allow divisionless scheduling (I doubt they would mandate it) automatically negates the ACC bylaw. I think that would still require a vote.

(11-04-2021 10:59 AM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  Similarly, while the B1G could conceivably make a play for the quartet of Georgia Tech, Virginia, Duke, and UNC in the future, Clemson, VT, FSU, and Miami will never be candidates for that league.

If those 4 want to bolt to the backfilled Big XII, well, good luck with that. I'm sure FSU and Miami fans would love to share a league with UCF and that Clemson fans will be amenable to swapping Iowa State for NC State and Texas Tech for Georgia Tech.

I think you egregiously underestimate the Georgia Tech vs Clemson game. And you won't be able to find a single Tiger fan anywhere that would say, yes, let's flip GT for TTU on the schedule. Have a $2 bill and think it over.

Regarding GT to the B1G: It would take FSU and Clemson no longer being in the ACC to make GT mobile to a destination other than the SEC.

(11-10-2021 01:30 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-04-2021 10:59 AM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  Similarly, while the B1G could conceivably make a play for the quartet of Georgia Tech, Virginia, Duke, and UNC in the future, Clemson, VT, FSU, and Miami will never be candidates for that league.

If those 4 want to bolt to the backfilled Big XII, well, good luck with that. I'm sure FSU and Miami fans would love to share a league with UCF and that Clemson fans will be amenable to swapping Iowa State for NC State and Texas Tech for Georgia Tech.

I think you egregiously underestimate the Georgia Tech vs Clemson game. And you won't be able to find a single Tiger fan anywhere that would say, yes, let's flip GT for TTU on the schedule. Have a $2 bill and think it over.

Regarding GT to the B1G: It would take FSU and Clemson no longer being in the ACC to make GT mobile to a destination other than the SEC.

(11-08-2021 03:34 PM)chester Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 03:05 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 10:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 09:09 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  

(11-08-2021 09:06 AM)schmolik Wrote:  There have been more than one thread at CSNBBS/ACCBBS about the topic.

I don’t have the time to dig thru thousand days of pages. I’ll just accept the divisions for what they are.

While it hasn't always been so since the ACC went to 12 teams, the current divisional alignment is now enshrined in the ACC bylaws. That means that at least 11 of the 14 schools eligible to vote (Notre Dame is not eligible) approved them the way they are, and it would take 11 members to change them now. The likelihood that they will be changed is remote unless the league expands or contracts in the future.

Ken, as I understand it, the divisions were baked into the by-laws BEFORE Pitt and Syracuse were added (and maybe before Miami, VT and BC were added). You are correct about one thing, though: a simple majority isn't enough to change them - it requires a supermajority.

Doesn't the ACC want to get rid of divisions? Jim Phillips said at some point they'll try again to get the rule changed. Next year seems like a good time to push for that with all the changes afoot.

What the ACC wants and what UNC/Duke/UVa want is two separate things. The divisional split was made to service them. UNC/Duke/UVa are not hurt by divisionless play. What they did not want was to loose control over the State of Va, Atlanta and the ability to avoid traveling to Boston and Syracuse. They also got to avoid FSU. Avoiding Clemson was just luck. And yes, you will know how everyone voted because Syracuse and FSU are not inclined to keep all the league's old secrets. They will tell it, and then reporters will call up VT, BC, and Miami to check the story. That's how it works, or at least how it used to work.