On each other.

UNC, Wake Agree to non-ACC series

Do you consider this a game changer? A case of the ACC getting tired of Wake losing to G5s?

(01-26-2015 02:20 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  On each other.

UNC, Wake Agree to non-ACC series

Do you consider this a game changer? A case of the ACC getting tired of Wake losing to G5s?

Just sounds like lazy scheduling to me.

weird

too bad GS and ULL don't have an open date next season for an OOC matchup.

Keep money in conference and not help smaller schools pay the cost of attendance...?

I hate this idea.

Boring

The NCAA should not allow this to happen. It should count towards the conference standings, even if it does mean they have more games then other teams. Back in the day Alabama always started the season against Vandy, they played an extra conference game some years to keep that game as it was. But it always counted towards conference standings. If you don't like not playing regional rivals each year, change the way your conference handles these games, but this games should count towards ACC standings and the NCAA should get involved.

Side effect of having so many teams in a conference.

They are 80 miles apart. Its very smart. Schedule a sellout.

(01-26-2015 02:20 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  On each other.

UNC, Wake Agree to non-ACC series

Do you consider this a game changer? A case of the ACC getting tired of Wake losing to G5s?

Overall philosophy is lame. You could be creating basically scrimmage programs for the better teams in the conference. I am sure the entire SEC West would love to always have Vandy on the schedule but Vandy would turn into the SEC practice squad.

How long before we get an Auburn/Alabama game on openning weekend that doesn't count towards the SEC???

(01-26-2015 03:55 PM)Usajags Wrote:  How long before we get an Auburn/Alabama game on openning weekend that doesn't count towards the SEC???

probably never since they are in the same division.

This is so stupid. Thanks again conference realignment!

(01-26-2015 03:49 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 02:20 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  On each other.

UNC, Wake Agree to non-ACC series

Do you consider this a game changer? A case of the ACC getting tired of Wake losing to G5s?

Overall philosophy is lame. You could be creating basically scrimmage programs for the better teams in the conference. I am sure the entire SEC West would love to always have Vandy on the schedule but Vandy would turn into the SEC practice squad.

I am sure that the reason for this is why not schedule a cross division rival that is 80 miles away considering that a majority of both schools alumni live within a 100 mile radius?

They should have thought of this before they agreed to the current make-up and divisions of their conference.

(01-26-2015 04:26 PM)panama Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 03:49 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 02:20 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  On each other.

UNC, Wake Agree to non-ACC series

Do you consider this a game changer? A case of the ACC getting tired of Wake losing to G5s?

Overall philosophy is lame. You could be creating basically scrimmage programs for the better teams in the conference. I am sure the entire SEC West would love to always have Vandy on the schedule but Vandy would turn into the SEC practice squad.

I am sure that the reason for this is why not schedule a cross division rival that is 80 miles away considering that a majority of both schools alumni live within a 100 mile radius?

At first I was going to say UNC has owned them, what rivalry? But upon further review Wake has had the upper hand over the past 15 years.

UNC - Wake Rivalry

Can't have it both ways.

TAMU and Texas break their series because of realignment, that's tragedy.

Wake and UNC want to keep alive a series played 105 times dating back to 1888 despite realignment and that's a tragedy too. They have even played twice in a season a few times though no one who saw that is likely still alive.

I happen to think its smart scheduling.

I like that Wake went home and home with ULM but home and home with UNC means more to their fans and will produce more revenue.

It is a little odd, but I'm in the "it's smart" camp, just hoping it doesn't become another reason P5s avoid scheduling G5s. FWIW, I'm pretty sure either Colorado or Utah had a conference-game-but-not-really with someone in their first year in the PAC-12 (scheduled before the conference switch), and it didn't seem to be an issue. May as well let conferences treat it however they think is appropriate.

EDIT: arkstfan's "can't have it both ways" argument is solid.

WOW....this is absolutely ridiculous. They're ACC members...how can they NOT let this be counted as a conference game?