The move to deregulate the conference championship game would let the ACC adopt a 3+5 season model, which would greatly benefit the conference. However, holding out and not pushing for that could cause the following:

1. It could cause a systemic ACC edge over the Big XII for a playoff spot because 12-1>11-1.

2. It could cause the Big XII to expand with less than desirable schools, watering down the conference because it's been said that all remaining available schools would decrease payouts.

3. It could cause the Big XII to pay (monetary, favors, etc.) the ACC for support pushing through the legislation if they're more desperate than we are.

So, what do we do?

I'm not sure that hurting the Big XII is the same as helping the ACC.
Personally, I just want the 3+5 schedule; I don't care what the Big XII does.

I still say seek the rule change.

The Big 12 teams got really hurt by their appalling out of conference strength of schedule. I mean truly hideous. Duke caliber OOC scheduling.

(12-07-2014 02:18 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  I still say seek the rule change.

The Big 12 teams got really hurt by their appalling out of conference strength of schedule. I mean truly hideous. Duke caliber OOC scheduling.

I would imagine that the winner TCU-Baylor 2.0 would beat out OSU. Assuming that both those schools were in opposite divisions (which may or may not be a valid assumption), then the no CCG buried them.

(12-07-2014 02:03 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  I'm not sure that hurting the Big XII is the same as helping the ACC.
Personally, I just want the 3+5 schedule; I don't care what the Big XII does.

I think that this is a zero sum game. There are 4 slots and 5 people need to eat, so somebody loses. Ensuring that someone is below you dramatically enhances your chances of eating.

(12-07-2014 02:31 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 02:03 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  I'm not sure that hurting the Big XII is the same as helping the ACC.
Personally, I just want the 3+5 schedule; I don't care what the Big XII does.

I think that this is a zero sum game. There are 4 slots and 5 people need to eat, so somebody loses. Ensuring that someone is below you dramatically enhances your chances of eating.

Why do you assume that 5 people need to eat? Just because this year there were 6 people who needed to eat? What if Georgia Tech had won last night? Then the ACC wouldn't be at the table. Same thing with Wisconsin. Trying to outguess what may or may not happen in the future is a fool's errand.

The P5 could become the P4 or P3 if they all got together and divided in an orderly fashion. We could go to conference semi finals and win your way to the playoff. There is money being left on the table by having so many conferences competing with each other instead of working together.

Whatever helps the ACCN the best.

(12-07-2014 05:50 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 02:31 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 02:03 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  I'm not sure that hurting the Big XII is the same as helping the ACC.
Personally, I just want the 3+5 schedule; I don't care what the Big XII does.

I think that this is a zero sum game. There are 4 slots and 5 people need to eat, so somebody loses. Ensuring that someone is below you dramatically enhances your chances of eating.

Why do you assume that 5 people need to eat? Just because this year there were 6 people who needed to eat? What if Georgia Tech had won last night? Then the ACC wouldn't be at the table. Same thing with Wisconsin. Trying to outguess what may or may not happen in the future is a fool's errand.

5 people need to eat because there are 5 people in the room; B1G, SEC, Pac, Big XII, and ACC.

Even 5-1-2 would help.

(12-07-2014 07:41 PM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote:  Even 5-1-2 would help.

How does that work?

(12-07-2014 09:45 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 07:41 PM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote:  Even 5-1-2 would help.

How does that work?

Yeah, what is 5-1-2? 5 in division, 1 permanent partner and 2 from the remaining 6 in the other division?