+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: ACCbbs (/forum-381.html)
+---- Forum: ACC Conference Talk (/forum-351.html)
+---- Thread: Could the ACC get aggressive? (/thread-767689.html)
Pages: 1 2
Could the ACC get aggressive? - krux - 01-22-2016 07:37 PM
I made a post on the realignment board theorizing a ripped apart ACC with the SEC, Big 10 and Big 12 working together. (I love the ACC I REALLY don't want that to happen) However, with Boren's recent comments, what if the ACC got aggressive and expanded to 20 teams by picking apart the Big 12? Break into geographic Pods.
ACC Northeast:
BC
Syracuse
Pitt
Virginia
VT
ACC Central:
Duke
UNC
Wake
NC State
*WVU
ACC Southeast:
Clemson
GT
FSU
Miami
Louisville
ACC West:
*Texas
*Texas Tech/TCU
*Baylor
*Oklahoma
*Oklahoma State
We'd have to go to 9 games in conference. Play your POD plus 1 of the others on a rotating basis. I know that's an issue with Louisville, FSU, GT and Clemson in the current set up but I think it's a little more acceptable with the football strength added under this one.
RE: Could the ACC get aggressive? - krux - 01-22-2016 07:40 PM
Double post. Could one of the mods delete one of these? Thanks!
RE: Could the ACC get aggressive? - ecuacc4ever - 01-22-2016 07:52 PM
1. Your pods would never fly.
2. The ACC doesn't need Oklahoma State, TCU, and Texas Tech
3. Oklahoma is likely closer to B1G membership.
4. Points for Texas
Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk
RE: Could the ACC get aggressive? - Wolfman - 01-22-2016 08:41 PM
It has some potential. The pods need some work. You forgot Notre Dame.
RE: Could the ACC get aggressive? - krux - 01-22-2016 09:05 PM
Notre Dame isn't a full member and I did the Pods geographically. Texas has a "tech" problem so that's why I added them. Also no OU without OK State. If we could take Texas and OU only that'd be ideal. How would you rearrange the pods?
RE: Could the ACC get aggressive? - Hokie Mark - 01-22-2016 09:25 PM
1. Swap UVa and WVU; swap VT and Louisville, too.
2. Add Kansas, keep Texas and Oklahoma, drop one of the others in the West.
3. Keep it 8 games/year like this: your podmates (4), 1 permanent cross-over, plus 1 from each of the other pods
4. Keep all permanent cross-overs as NE vs West or Central vs SE
5. If the other conference won't allow a CCG like that, just don't have one.
Do all that and it could work.. but probably not.
RE: Could the ACC get aggressive? - ecuacc4ever - 01-22-2016 10:41 PM
The ACC doesn't have a "Texas Tech" problem, so why do we have to inherit it?
The ACC doesn't need Oklahoma State. If that keeps OU where they are, so be it.
Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk
Could the ACC get aggressive? - Lenvillecards - 01-22-2016 10:43 PM
Probably not ideal or likely but the ACC could take 8 to dissolve the Big 12. Split into 3 7 team division with ND & Texas as partial. Keep Atlantic & Coastal the same & put Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Kansas, WV, TCU, TT & Iowa St in a western division. That leaves Baylor & Kansas St out.
Or tweak the divisions a bit.
Atlantic- FSU, Clemson, WV, Pitt, NC State, WF, BC
Coastal- Miami, GT, VT, NC, Duke, Virginia, Syracuse
Inland- Oklahoma, Louisville, Oklahoma St, Kansas, TCU, TT, Iowa State
No permanent crossovers & play 8 or play rivals & play 9. Texas & ND play 6 games every year, Texas play TT as a 7th game.
Rivals
FSU-Miami
NC-NC St
Duke-WF
Clemson-GT
Oklahoma-WV
Pitt-Iowa St
VT-Louisville
Syracuse-Kansas
BC-TCU
Virginia-Oklahoma St
TT gets Texas every year.
Or go crazy with divisions.
North- Pittsburgh, Syracuse, BC, Iowa St, WV, Kansas
South- Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Miami, TCU, TT, Louisville, WF
East- FSU, Clemson, NC, Duke, Virginia, VT, NC State
RE: Could the ACC get aggressive? - nzmorange - 01-22-2016 10:45 PM
(01-22-2016 10:41 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote: The ACC doesn't have a "Texas Tech" problem, so why do we have to inherit it?
The ACC doesn't need Oklahoma State. If that keeps OU where they are, so be it.
Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk
I don't know, man. We're pretty into techs...
RE: Could the ACC get aggressive? - nzmorange - 01-22-2016 10:48 PM
Since they're better at football down south, and "south" is a relative term, we should add a bunch of Canadian schools to make our northern schools more southern (relatively) and thereby relatively better at football. I'm thinking that McGill would be a solid add. They're basically the Harvard of Canada, and Harvard is the Oxford of the US, and Oxford is the Heidelberg of the UK. So adding them would be like adding a really good very North American of a kind of North American version of a British school that's like a German school (and/or the other way around). Think about that! Anyway, I hear really, really good things about Montreal - like really good.
Also, think of the untapped markets.....
RE: Could the ACC get aggressive? - texasorange - 01-22-2016 11:55 PM
Are we too big already?
RE: Could the ACC get aggressive? - krux - 01-23-2016 12:00 AM
I prefer status quo, really. Just kind of a "what if" topic to kick around.
RE: Could the ACC get aggressive? - Hokie Mark - 01-23-2016 08:20 AM
Want to be aggressive? How about taking ESPN to mediation over their decision not to launch an ACC Cable Network this coming year...
RE: Could the ACC get aggressive? - nzmorange - 01-23-2016 11:20 AM
(01-23-2016 08:20 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote: Want to be aggressive? How about taking ESPN to mediation over their decision not to launch an ACC Cable Network this coming year...
If you want to be really aggressive, we could take them to arbitration instead!
RE: Could the ACC get aggressive? - Wilkie01 - 01-23-2016 12:59 PM
Of course you would need at least 16 team playoff!
RE: Could the ACC get aggressive? - esayem - 01-23-2016 01:07 PM
If there is any expansion without Notre Dame, it should include Texas. Maybe Texas and UConn (for their national basketball appeal), or Texas and some other school they want to be travel partners with in their region like Rice.
Texas and Rice would get us into Texas and reinforce our academic mission, and we would have nice geographic clusters:
BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Notre Dame, Louisville
UVa, VaTech, UNC, Duke
Wake, NC State, Clemson, GaTech
FSU, Miami, Texas, Rice
Could the ACC get aggressive? - Lenvillecards - 01-23-2016 01:20 PM
TCU & Baylor are both top 80 in USN rankings & have better athletics than Rice. Houston is 180-190 range in the rankings but would also be a good consideration with Texas.
RE: Could the ACC get aggressive? - esayem - 01-23-2016 03:36 PM
(01-23-2016 01:20 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote: TCU & Baylor are both top 80 in USN rankings & have better athletics than Rice. Houston is 180-190 range in the rankings but would also be a good consideration with Texas.
I did not know that about Baylor and TCU as far as their academic profile. I know SMU is up there, and I would be in favor of them, but who knows how many years Brown has left in him.
RE: Could the ACC get aggressive? - omniorange - 01-23-2016 03:48 PM
(01-22-2016 07:37 PM)krux Wrote: I made a post on the realignment board theorizing a ripped apart ACC with the SEC, Big 10 and Big 12 working together. (I love the ACC I REALLY don't want that to happen) However, with Boren's recent comments, what if the ACC got aggressive and expanded to 20 teams by picking apart the Big 12? Break into geographic Pods.
ACC Northeast:
BC
Syracuse
Pitt
Virginia
VT
ACC Central:
Duke
UNC
Wake
NC State
*WVU
ACC Southeast:
Clemson
GT
FSU
Miami
Louisville
ACC West:
*Texas
*Texas Tech/TCU
*Baylor
*Oklahoma
*Oklahoma State
We'd have to go to 9 games in conference. Play your POD plus 1 of the others on a rotating basis. I know that's an issue with Louisville, FSU, GT and Clemson in the current set up but I think it's a little more acceptable with the football strength added under this one.
If they did do something like this, it would likely have WVU and Louisville in the Northeast, push UVa and VT to the Central (what might be called Mid-Atlantic), and slide WF down to the South.
Cheers,
Neil
RE: Could the ACC get aggressive? - nole - 01-23-2016 07:55 PM
(01-22-2016 11:55 PM)texasorange Wrote: Are we too big already?
Yes.....with too much dead weight on top of it.