(04-12-2022 08:10 PM)esayem Wrote:  Anybody email the commish lately and ask if they’re getting rid of the stupid divisions?

This is much better:

BC (CU)
Syracuse (State)
Pitt (GT)
Louisville (FSU)
Virginia (UNC)
Virginia Tech (Miami)
Wake Forest (Duke)

Carolina (UVa)
NC State (SU)
Duke (Wake)
Clemson (BC)
Georgia Tech (Pitt)
Florida State (Louis)
Miami (VT)

I’d actually match Syracuse-Miami and VaTech-State, but I’m circumventing Gobbler grievances with this pairing.

While I understand your reasoning, there is zero chance that the northern schools will cut themselves off from Florida recruiting. Yearly exposure there helps teams recruit.

(04-14-2022 09:55 AM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  

(04-12-2022 08:10 PM)esayem Wrote:  Anybody email the commish lately and ask if they’re getting rid of the stupid divisions?

This is much better:

BC (CU)
Syracuse (State)
Pitt (GT)
Louisville (FSU)
Virginia (UNC)
Virginia Tech (Miami)
Wake Forest (Duke)

Carolina (UVa)
NC State (SU)
Duke (Wake)
Clemson (BC)
Georgia Tech (Pitt)
Florida State (Louis)
Miami (VT)

I’d actually match Syracuse-Miami and VaTech-State, but I’m circumventing Gobbler grievances with this pairing.

While I understand your reasoning, there is zero chance that the northern schools will cut themselves off from Florida recruiting. Yearly exposure there helps teams recruit.

Bang for the buck on an away football trip:

1. Miami - you get South Florida and Miami
2. Florida State - you get Florida and Floribama
3. GT - you get Georgia and Atlanta
4. Clemson - you get SC and SW NC
5. UNC - you get NC and Tidewater Va
6. VT - you get VA, WVa, NW NC and DC
7. NC State - you get NC and Southside VA
8. Pitt - you get Western PA and Pittsburgh
9. Va - you get Va

By bang for the buck I am spitballing the recruits in the immediate region of the game, the state, the publicity, etc., etc. If you don't produce a lot of P-5 recruits, you fall down the list. If no one watches or cares who you are playing you go down on the list.

There just aren't a lot of recruits in Mass, NY State, and Kentucky. In fact no one in the ACC should even be competitive with greater Louisville area recruits since that territory essentially belongs to Ohio State and Notre Dame, first and foremost.

If you play at Wake Forest you are going to get coverage by the Winston Salem media and North to Floyd Va, and South to Charlotte.

That leaves Duke, Syracuse, and Boston as the "dog" trips. BC does have Boston. Boston makes Syracuse and Derm look like open sewers. However if you play at Syracuse you will be covered by the NY State media and the results will be broadcast out to Northern PA, Northern NJ, and VT.

Unless State and Carolina are off that weekend, you will not even know a football game happened in Derm.

Who people want to play is just one side of the equation. The other side is who they do not want to play. NC State would be perfectly happy playing BC and Syracuse every other year. Louisville and Pitt would make a good every other year pair. Appearing in Virginia and Georgia, however, is damn important.

(04-14-2022 09:55 AM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  

(04-12-2022 08:10 PM)esayem Wrote:  Anybody email the commish lately and ask if they’re getting rid of the stupid divisions?

This is much better:

BC (CU)
Syracuse (State)
Pitt (GT)
Louisville (FSU)
Virginia (UNC)
Virginia Tech (Miami)
Wake Forest (Duke)

Carolina (UVa)
NC State (SU)
Duke (Wake)
Clemson (BC)
Georgia Tech (Pitt)
Florida State (Louis)
Miami (VT)

I’d actually match Syracuse-Miami and VaTech-State, but I’m circumventing Gobbler grievances with this pairing.

While I understand your reasoning, there is zero chance that the northern schools will cut themselves off from Florida recruiting. Yearly exposure there helps teams recruit.

Currently, no schools play in Florida on a yearly basis, besides the Florida schools. So, I guess that's fair?

Basically, the northern schools would be playing in Florida twice every six years (in different locations) vs three times every six years (same location). Although, BC, Syracuse, Louisville, and Wake would be playing in Atlanta more often than now.

(04-14-2022 01:36 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-14-2022 09:55 AM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  

(04-12-2022 08:10 PM)esayem Wrote:  Anybody email the commish lately and ask if they’re getting rid of the stupid divisions?

This is much better:

BC (CU)
Syracuse (State)
Pitt (GT)
Louisville (FSU)
Virginia (UNC)
Virginia Tech (Miami)
Wake Forest (Duke)

Carolina (UVa)
NC State (SU)
Duke (Wake)
Clemson (BC)
Georgia Tech (Pitt)
Florida State (Louis)
Miami (VT)

I’d actually match Syracuse-Miami and VaTech-State, but I’m circumventing Gobbler grievances with this pairing.

While I understand your reasoning, there is zero chance that the northern schools will cut themselves off from Florida recruiting. Yearly exposure there helps teams recruit.

Currently, no schools play in Florida on a yearly basis, besides the Florida schools. So, I guess that's fair?

Basically, the northern schools would be playing in Florida twice every six years (in different locations) vs three times every six years (same location). Although, BC, Syracuse, Louisville, and Wake would be playing in Atlanta more often than now.

Guarantee @Miami, @FSU, or @GT 3 out of 7 years, then add a neutral site game in Florida 1 out of 7 (vs. Duke, I guess?) and you might have a deal. Point is, there's a way to keep it every other year.

ACC should add 4. Thus, 3 six-team FB divisions.

Strategically add: Cincinnati, UCF, West Virginia, USF. This should put a final torpedo into the side of the B12.

Place one Florida team in each division. One division will get 2.

Place one North Carolina team in each division. One division will get 2.

Go to a 9-game schedule.

Play the other 5in your own division annually, plus rotate all teams in the other 2 divisions so that each team is played once every third season.

See if Notre Dame will add a 6th game beginning after a few years of schedule stabilization.

Using ESPN, interlock one guaranteed SEC opponent each season. Four ACC teams already have a lock-in.

Work with Big Ten to get one guaranteed B10 opponent for each ACC team each season.

Get ESPN to adjust ACC contract upward based on savings from B12 elimination.

Add Sugar Bowl when contractually possible.

Lock in Orange Bowl. When possible.

Extend GOR's 10 years to 2046, in return for ESPN guaranteeing ACC media deal to be indexed at 90% of SEC deal.

Things to follow:

1. Rule change on the divionless model: the rule change would be better.

2. The BIG’s next media contract: the ESPN not signing with the BIG would be better.

3. The B12’s next media contract: the ESPN not signing with the B12 would be better.

Even if all three happens, the ESPN may not want to reopen the current ACC contract. But at least it would increase the possibility.

The best realistic move the ACC could make would be to dump WF for Cincy. It’s not going to happen but it would add the most value outside adding another P5 school.

Concerning division, going division less would be the best option. However, rearranging the current divisions would help.

FSU-Miami
GT-Pitt
Clemson-Louisville
NC-NC St
Duke-Syracuse
WF-BC
Virginia-VT


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(04-17-2022 09:18 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  The best realistic move the ACC could make would be to dump WF for Cincy. It’s not going to happen but it would add the most value outside adding another P5 school.

Concerning division, going division less would be the best option. However, rearranging the current divisions would help.

FSU-Miami
GT-Pitt
Clemson-Louisville
NC-NC St
Duke-Syracuse
WF-BC
Virginia-VT


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why dump Wake Forest? They’ve been in the top of the standings for football and basketball. More like dump Boston College or Syracuse. Or Louisville, gasp.

(04-17-2022 06:08 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-17-2022 09:18 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  The best realistic move the ACC could make would be to dump WF for Cincy. It’s not going to happen but it would add the most value outside adding another P5 school.

Concerning division, going division less would be the best option. However, rearranging the current divisions would help.

FSU-Miami
GT-Pitt
Clemson-Louisville
NC-NC St
Duke-Syracuse
WF-BC
Virginia-VT


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why dump Wake Forest? They’ve been in the top of the standings for football and basketball. More like dump Boston College or Syracuse. Or Louisville, gasp.

It is more likely for Louisville to be voted out than Wake Forest. Wake's Football itself is not the problem. Duke football is the real disaster. Duke should not be playing ACC football. It helps no one.

I ran an interesting experiment sort of a rough calculation of the relative value of each school within the context of the ACC. Having a great football program in a great TV market/state is better than having a suck program or being the 4th program inside the same footprint. I did the same for basketball and then looked at it from an 80/20 football basketball split. I used 14 as a base since there are 14 schools. That means the worst football program for the league got 8 points for being 14th that and the best got 112. Basketball's best got 28 points and the worst got 2.

On an 80/20 split I got

1. Florida State - 120 points (2nd Football, 7th Basketball)
2. Clemson - 116 Points (1st Football, 13th Basketball)
Tie 2. Miami - 116 (3rd Football, 5th Basketball)
4. VT - 110 (4th Football, 9th Basketball)
5. UNC - 106 (5th Football, 2nd Basketball)
6. NC State - 86 (6th Football, 8th Basketball)
7. Syracuse - 78 (8th Football, 4th Basketball)
8. Pitt - 74 (7th Football, 10th Basketball)
9. Louisville 64 (10th Football, 3rd Basketball)
Tie 9. BC 64 (9th Football, 12th Basketball)
11. UVa 50 (11th Football, 6th Basketball)
12. Duke 36 (14th Football, 1st Basketball)
13. GT 32 (12th Football, 11th Basketball)
14. WF 18 (13th Football, 14th Basketball)

Again the above is based on the last 5-6 years and the market they play in as well their actual results. It shows that football really is the be all, end all. The biggest problem Wake has is so much direct competition in the local DMA and adjoining DMA's. They have to compete with NC State and UNC football. That have to compete with VT and UVa football. They have to compete with Clemson and SC football and they have to do it at a small school that also has NFL football in the adjacent DMA. Wake has more value in the SEC or Big 10 or B12 if they are the only NC school in those leagues.

Duke basketball does not make up for a lack of Duke football and Duke football has all the market issues that Wake Forest has in addition to direct DMA competition from NC State and UNC. Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, and BC can suck at football for a while because they play in as the only ACC entry in their DMA, and adjoining DMA's. GT faces all four professional sports and Georgia in their DMA, and Clemson, Auburn, Tennessee, Florida State, and Florida in surrounding DMA's. GT has become more valuable to the Big 10 than it is for the ACC.

One thing that immediately comes to mind is that a lot of older ACC folks have not internalized the collapse of basketball so here are those same rankings in a 50/50 football, basketball split:

1. Miami 110
2. FSU 105
Tie 3. UNC and Syracuse 90
Tie 5. VT, Duke, and Louisville 85
8. Clemson 80
Tie 9. NC State, Pitt, and UVa 65
12. BC 45
13. GT 35
14. Wake 15

This is why basketball schools with success have an outsized sense of self within the context of the league. Cut free of the NCAA we could likely increase the basketball side of the equation to 30/70 basketball to football, but right now the NCAA is stealing those funds.

(04-17-2022 07:56 PM)Statefan Wrote:  I ran an interesting experiment sort of a rough calculation of the relative value of each school within the context of the ACC. Having a great football program in a great TV market/state is better than having a suck program or being the 4th program inside the same footprint. I did the same for basketball and then looked at it from an 80/20 football basketball split. I used 14 as a base since there are 14 schools. That means the worst football program for the league got 8 points for being 14th that and the best got 112. Basketball's best got 28 points and the worst got 2.

On an 80/20 split I got

1. Florida State - 120 points (2nd Football, 7th Basketball)
2. Clemson - 116 Points (1st Football, 13th Basketball)
Tie 2. Miami - 116 (3rd Football, 5th Basketball)
4. VT - 110 (4th Football, 9th Basketball)
5. UNC - 106 (5th Football, 2nd Basketball)
6. NC State - 86 (6th Football, 8th Basketball)
7. Syracuse - 78 (8th Football, 4th Basketball)
8. Pitt - 74 (7th Football, 10th Basketball)
9. Louisville 64 (10th Football, 3rd Basketball)
Tie 9. BC 64 (9th Football, 12th Basketball)
11. UVa 50 (11th Football, 6th Basketball)
12. Duke 36 (14th Football, 1st Basketball)
13. GT 32 (12th Football, 11th Basketball)
14. WF 18 (13th Football, 14th Basketball)

Again the above is based on the last 5-6 years and the market they play in as well their actual results. It shows that football really is the be all, end all. The biggest problem Wake has is so much direct competition in the local DMA and adjoining DMA's. They have to compete with NC State and UNC football. That have to compete with VT and UVa football. They have to compete with Clemson and SC football and they have to do it at a small school that also has NFL football in the adjacent DMA. Wake has more value in the SEC or Big 10 or B12 if they are the only NC school in those leagues.

Duke basketball does not make up for a lack of Duke football and Duke football has all the market issues that Wake Forest has in addition to direct DMA competition from NC State and UNC. Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, and BC can suck at football for a while because they play in as the only ACC entry in their DMA, and adjoining DMA's. GT faces all four professional sports and Georgia in their DMA, and Clemson, Auburn, Tennessee, Florida State, and Florida in surrounding DMA's. GT has become more valuable to the Big 10 than it is for the ACC.

One thing that immediately comes to mind is that a lot of older ACC folks have not internalized the collapse of basketball so here are those same rankings in a 50/50 football, basketball split:

1. Miami 110
2. FSU 105
Tie 3. UNC and Syracuse 90
Tie 5. VT, Duke, and Louisville 85
8. Clemson 80
Tie 9. NC State, Pitt, and UVa 65
12. BC 45
13. GT 35
14. Wake 15

This is why basketball schools with success have an outsized sense of self within the context of the league. Cut free of the NCAA we could likely increase the basketball side of the equation to 30/70 basketball to football, but right now the NCAA is stealing those funds.

Only 2 stats matter much:
1. Revenue Generation
2. Viewership

There are 9 ACC schools which generate more annual revenue than N.C. State which is lower than 48th position nationally.

FSU, Louisville, Clemson, Miami, Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech, and Pittsburgh all finished in that order in the top 48.

In Football Viewership Clemson, Florida State, Miami, Virginia Tech, Syracuse, Pittsburgh and Louisville all finish in the top 48. N.C. State is 49th.

So in the 2 stats that matter most:
FSU, Clemson, Miami, Virginia Tech and Louisville make both lists. Duke, North Carolina and Virginia acquit themselves well enough since a post NCAA will see more than a doubling of hoops revenue, and they have the bonus of AAU / and/or State Flagship status. And because their only deficits were football viewership.

You still using that TV rating guide that listed NC State's game with JMU as one of only 2-3 data points one year?

https://medium.com/run-it-back-with-zach...c03c689e50

Even the guy who posted it listed numerous flaws with his analysis, such as no ACC network, and the grabbing of odd, outlier games.

It's funny, for the last decade or so we have had a half dozen or so Noon kicks in Raleigh. Then the Conference leadership changes and the first new year we have zero noon kicks. We may even get a home P-5 this year if something bad does not happen to Texas Tech (in 2016 Hurricane Mathew made the ND game unwatchable on TV. In 2018 a Hurricane cancelled WVa's visit to Raleigh. In 20 the Pandemic cancelled Mississippi State's trip to Raleigh.

If NC had been able to get televised over the 5 year window, and real games were used instead of ringers like JMU, I suspect we would be around 41-42 in viewers. Of course those that crunch numbers for money will use real numbers and not compare apples to raisins because it's the easiest low hanging fruit. I also thought it interesting that ESPN felt obliged to explain why we were not in the FPI top 25 while UNC without a QB easily found its way in using the continuation of the last season as the excuse. Isn't that remarkable? We beat them. UCLA runs and hides from our Bowl Game. They lose their best QB in the last 50 years and we return most folks and they are FPI ranked about 4-5 spots higher.

We aren't dumb, we get it. It's not like we don't know the origin of so many folks in the media.

Here's the ACC's revenue generation per school in based on 2020 Equity in Athletics Reports. Wonder when their year closes? June 30, September 30, or December 31st? This is for actual sports not construction projects, etc.:

1. Duke $68 M
Tie. Miami (Isn't this unusual?)
3. Louisville $61 M (gotta love that YUM center)
4. Clemson $59 M
Tie. Syracuse (Do you suppose a dollar goes further in Clemson SC than Syracuse NY?)
6. BC $58 M (talk about nothing to show for it)
7. UVA $56 M (gotta love that $800 annual student athletic fee)
8. UNC $50 M (gosh UNC looks poor)
9. FSU $49 M
Tie. Wake Forest $49 M (makes you wonder doesn't it?)
11. NC State $47 M (this is where real poverty starts)
Tie. GT
13. Pitt $46 M
14. VT $45 M (who knew VT was the poorest school in the league?)

But that above is all real revenue or at least what someone wrote down on a form. I trust the NC State, GT, BC, Clemson, and VT numbers.

Here's what they claim they made on football:

1. Clemson 43 M
2. Syracuse 39 M (the Hell you say)
3. Duke 37 M (now we know something ain't quite right)
4. VT 35 M
5. UNC 34 M
Tie Miami 34 M
7. NC State 33 M
8. UVa 31 M
9. Pitt 29 M
10. BC 28 M
11. Louisville 23 M
Tie FSU 23 M
Tie GT 23 M
Tie WF 23 M

Syracuse, Duke, and Louisville are collecting basketball related money and pegging toward football. It's done in different ways sometimes with contributions, sometimes with other fees, etc. Schools have various reasons to doctor their reports about money they raise. The Clemson and VT booster clubs are set up around football so almost all "contributions" get recognized through football. UNC and NC State are somewhat forced to keep them separated somewhere because of the accounting practices required by the State of NC. UVa has to "bleed in" and nearly $18 million a year in forced student contributions and the recognize athletic scholarship endowment revenue against football. I don't doubt that GT and WF only made $23 million off football, but I know damn well FSU is telling a lie. FSU tends to run capital projects through their annual budget in strange ways but I guess anything goes in Florida.

I dug this out because JR talked about programs and "revenue generation".

If revenue generation means interfund transfers shown as revenue, that's not revenue to me. If you coerced or stole it, that's not revenue to me. If you received from a trust to pay for scholarships that's not really revenue as most people see it. I personally define revenue as cash in hand for that time period, paid for something we made or sold or delivered - otherwise you will mask normal demand signals and all will look well and dandy but no real income will be coming in for a long time before you finally discover it.

Schools like UVa, Duke, ND, and BC can "generate revenue" for the books at a moments notice. A $10 million bond payment can be shown as a revenue coming in from discrete account and being paid to a contractor or a bank, but it's not revenue, it's the money that was already sitting there to pay that bill.

Oh the things you can do with accounting.

(04-17-2022 08:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-17-2022 07:56 PM)Statefan Wrote:  I ran an interesting experiment sort of a rough calculation of the relative value of each school within the context of the ACC. Having a great football program in a great TV market/state is better than having a suck program or being the 4th program inside the same footprint. I did the same for basketball and then looked at it from an 80/20 football basketball split. I used 14 as a base since there are 14 schools. That means the worst football program for the league got 8 points for being 14th that and the best got 112. Basketball's best got 28 points and the worst got 2.

On an 80/20 split I got

1. Florida State - 120 points (2nd Football, 7th Basketball)
2. Clemson - 116 Points (1st Football, 13th Basketball)
Tie 2. Miami - 116 (3rd Football, 5th Basketball)
4. VT - 110 (4th Football, 9th Basketball)
5. UNC - 106 (5th Football, 2nd Basketball)
6. NC State - 86 (6th Football, 8th Basketball)
7. Syracuse - 78 (8th Football, 4th Basketball)
8. Pitt - 74 (7th Football, 10th Basketball)
9. Louisville 64 (10th Football, 3rd Basketball)
Tie 9. BC 64 (9th Football, 12th Basketball)
11. UVa 50 (11th Football, 6th Basketball)
12. Duke 36 (14th Football, 1st Basketball)
13. GT 32 (12th Football, 11th Basketball)
14. WF 18 (13th Football, 14th Basketball)

Again the above is based on the last 5-6 years and the market they play in as well their actual results. It shows that football really is the be all, end all. The biggest problem Wake has is so much direct competition in the local DMA and adjoining DMA's. They have to compete with NC State and UNC football. That have to compete with VT and UVa football. They have to compete with Clemson and SC football and they have to do it at a small school that also has NFL football in the adjacent DMA. Wake has more value in the SEC or Big 10 or B12 if they are the only NC school in those leagues.

Duke basketball does not make up for a lack of Duke football and Duke football has all the market issues that Wake Forest has in addition to direct DMA competition from NC State and UNC. Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, and BC can suck at football for a while because they play in as the only ACC entry in their DMA, and adjoining DMA's. GT faces all four professional sports and Georgia in their DMA, and Clemson, Auburn, Tennessee, Florida State, and Florida in surrounding DMA's. GT has become more valuable to the Big 10 than it is for the ACC.

One thing that immediately comes to mind is that a lot of older ACC folks have not internalized the collapse of basketball so here are those same rankings in a 50/50 football, basketball split:

1. Miami 110
2. FSU 105
Tie 3. UNC and Syracuse 90
Tie 5. VT, Duke, and Louisville 85
8. Clemson 80
Tie 9. NC State, Pitt, and UVa 65
12. BC 45
13. GT 35
14. Wake 15

This is why basketball schools with success have an outsized sense of self within the context of the league. Cut free of the NCAA we could likely increase the basketball side of the equation to 30/70 basketball to football, but right now the NCAA is stealing those funds.

Only 2 stats matter much:
1. Revenue Generation
2. Viewership

There are 9 ACC schools which generate more annual revenue than N.C. State which is lower than 48th position nationally.

FSU, Louisville, Clemson, Miami, Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech, and Pittsburgh all finished in that order in the top 48.

In Football Viewership Clemson, Florida State, Miami, Virginia Tech, Syracuse, Pittsburgh and Louisville all finish in the top 48. N.C. State is 49th.

So in the 2 stats that matter most:
FSU, Clemson, Miami, Virginia Tech and Louisville make both lists. Duke, North Carolina and Virginia acquit themselves well enough since a post NCAA will see more than a doubling of hoops revenue, and they have the bonus of AAU / and/or State Flagship status. And because their only deficits were football viewership.

Well JR if the SEC invited the 5 teams that made both lists to go to 20 minus Vanderbilt, that would leave a 10 team ACC of:

Vanderbilt, Georgia Tech, NC State, Carolina and Wake Forest
Boston College, Syracuse, Duke, Pitt and UVa

Exclusive Club Level:

Bama, Georgia, Texas, TAMU, Florida, LSU, Oklahoma, PSU, Ohio State, Michigan, MSU, Wisky, USC, Oregon, Washington, Clemson, Miami, Florida State, ND, Auburn, Nebraska, and Tennessee.

With the exception of Oregon and Miami which are special cases, the rest of these schools fill an 82K to 110K seat football stadium. This is just 22 schools.

Outside this group who could realistically compete and make a playoff - having to play a schedule with at least 8 of the above? Perhaps pick 2 of Baylor? Ok State? VT? Pitt? Utah?.

That leaves some 40 of the P-5 who can't compete: MD, Rutgers, BC, Syracuse, UVa, UNC, NC State, GT, Duke, WF, Vandy, Ole Miss, MSU, Mizzou, Arkansas, ISU, Kansas, KSU, TT, WSU, OSU, Colorado, ASU, UA, Stanford, Cal, TCU, Indiana, Purdue, NW, Illinois, Minnesota, Cincy, UCF, BYU, Houston, West Va., etc.

However there are a few non P-5 that could compete with the 40 or so - Navy, Army, Air Force, Colorado State, SDSU, Tulane, SMU, etc.

So if you have an elite 24 or so. That means 50-60 available for a completive league.

The best thing the ACC can do to improve its self is do away of divisions. Move to a 9game conference format, and start looking at scenarios of expansion that would help break the ESPN contract. The ACC needs IMO at start having at least half or more teams eligible for better bowls than they are currently aligned with. It’s time for FSU, Miami, Louisville, UNC, State, Pitt, VT to step up and join Clemson and I guess as of late Wake to bring the ACC upward. If schools don’t start making a better effort then eventually these other conferences and their money are going to draw the interest in who they would like to bring in, and guess what your finally going to see schools to start to leave like Maryland did regardless being a charter members or not.

(04-15-2022 08:33 AM)IHAVETRIED Wrote:  ACC should add 4. Thus, 3 six-team FB divisions.

Strategically add: Cincinnati, UCF, West Virginia, USF. This should put a final torpedo into the side of the B12.

Place one Florida team in each division. One division will get 2.

Place one North Carolina team in each division. One division will get 2.

Go to a 9-game schedule.

Play the other 5in your own division annually, plus rotate all teams in the other 2 divisions so that each team is played once every third season.

See if Notre Dame will add a 6th game beginning after a few years of schedule stabilization.

Using ESPN, interlock one guaranteed SEC opponent each season. Four ACC teams already have a lock-in.

Work with Big Ten to get one guaranteed B10 opponent for each ACC team each season.

Get ESPN to adjust ACC contract upward based on savings from B12 elimination.

Add Sugar Bowl when contractually possible.

Lock in Orange Bowl. When possible.

Extend GOR's 10 years to 2046, in return for ESPN guaranteeing ACC media deal to be indexed at 90% of SEC deal.

Won't happen, but I was thinking the ACC should add Cincy and WVU full membership, then add UCONN Olympic sports to compliment ND Olympic sports and offer their football a 3 game scheduling agreement. An alternative to adding UCONN could be stay at 17 in Olympic sports or test the Big East and try to go after Villanova or Georgetown for 18 in Olympic sports.

SEC could grab Oklahoma St. and Kansas to get to 18 if the ACC is off limits and ESPN is trying to get a chunk the Big 12. SEC could return to their traditional 6 team divisions and give the 6 former Big 12 teams their own division as a starting point for 5 protected rivalries and adjust where it is needed to preserve annual rivalries. I could also see the SEC potentially use the 9th conference game to stage a conference championship semifinals. ACC and Big Ten could consider this as well.

UCF should be considered, but I think they only get in if the ACC is raided. That's probably the case for USF and WVU. Adding Cincy now though would make sense.

(04-19-2022 11:59 AM)GoBuckeyes1047 Wrote:  

(04-15-2022 08:33 AM)IHAVETRIED Wrote:  ACC should add 4. Thus, 3 six-team FB divisions.

Strategically add: Cincinnati, UCF, West Virginia, USF. This should put a final torpedo into the side of the B12...

Won't happen, but I was thinking the ACC should add Cincy and WVU full membership, then add UCONN Olympic sports to compliment ND Olympic sports and offer their football a 3 game scheduling agreement. An alternative to adding UCONN could be stay at 17 in Olympic sports or test the Big East and try to go after Villanova or Georgetown for 18 in Olympic sports.

PROBLEM: finding 3 ACC teams interested in playing UConn football every year.

(04-19-2022 11:59 AM)GoBuckeyes1047 Wrote:  

(04-15-2022 08:33 AM)IHAVETRIED Wrote:  ACC should add 4. Thus, 3 six-team FB divisions.

Strategically add: Cincinnati, UCF, West Virginia, USF. This should put a final torpedo into the side of the B12.

Place one Florida team in each division. One division will get 2.

Place one North Carolina team in each division. One division will get 2.

Go to a 9-game schedule.

Play the other 5in your own division annually, plus rotate all teams in the other 2 divisions so that each team is played once every third season.

See if Notre Dame will add a 6th game beginning after a few years of schedule stabilization.

Using ESPN, interlock one guaranteed SEC opponent each season. Four ACC teams already have a lock-in.

Work with Big Ten to get one guaranteed B10 opponent for each ACC team each season.

Get ESPN to adjust ACC contract upward based on savings from B12 elimination.

Add Sugar Bowl when contractually possible.

Lock in Orange Bowl. When possible.

Extend GOR's 10 years to 2046, in return for ESPN guaranteeing ACC media deal to be indexed at 90% of SEC deal.

Won't happen, but I was thinking the ACC should add Cincy and WVU full membership, then add UCONN Olympic sports to compliment ND Olympic sports and offer their football a 3 game scheduling agreement. An alternative to adding UCONN could be stay at 17 in Olympic sports or test the Big East and try to go after Villanova or Georgetown for 18 in Olympic sports.

Those schools might be in the footprint but they're not going to bring enough $$ to warrant expansion. Plus, the conference is too large already; see UNC scheduling Wake OOC or Miami and BC hardly playing despite BC following them here. Either Cincinnati or WVU would have been acceptable as a Maryland replacement, but that ship sailed.

(04-19-2022 12:41 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 11:59 AM)GoBuckeyes1047 Wrote:  

(04-15-2022 08:33 AM)IHAVETRIED Wrote:  ACC should add 4. Thus, 3 six-team FB divisions.

Strategically add: Cincinnati, UCF, West Virginia, USF. This should put a final torpedo into the side of the B12...

Won't happen, but I was thinking the ACC should add Cincy and WVU full membership, then add UCONN Olympic sports to compliment ND Olympic sports and offer their football a 3 game scheduling agreement. An alternative to adding UCONN could be stay at 17 in Olympic sports or test the Big East and try to go after Villanova or Georgetown for 18 in Olympic sports.

PROBLEM: finding 3 ACC teams interested in playing UConn football every year.

Well 6 current members currently have at least home & home scheduled with UCONN from 2022-28 (BC, CUSE, UNC, Wake, Duke, NC State). If this did happen, ACC could negotiate it down to 2 games per season, but if there is 16 football members, I figured with 5 ND games per season, adding 3 UCONN games to get 8 ND/UCONN games seemed reasonable plus UCONN would have Army and UMASS to also help with late season scheduling.