Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
Author Message
Lenvillecards Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,458
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 376
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #21
Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
(01-25-2016 07:03 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 06:28 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 03:52 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 03:08 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 02:42 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  VT played FB in the conference for 12-13 years. Also many of those schools plyed each other as independents. Miami played Pitt, BC, Cuse and the other NE independents regularly. And i meant traditional Big East in the fact that 6 of those 7 teams were all once BE members and that 5 of them were in the conference together at one time. Only WVU, Temple and Rutgers are missing from that configuration.

VT not playing basketball against BC and Cuse have nothing to do with the fact that they played football together for over a decade.

I'm Ignoring legit excuses for NOT doing this divisional alignment.

FIFY

Name one common sense reason not to do this? "X team wont like it so the other 13 schools have to say okay and scrap that idea." But go ahead and watch more ACC teams play each other in OOC and act like you guys have your act together.

Virginia is not in the North and if they are regulated to playing northern schools with no traditional rivals, then they may as well join the Big 10.

What is the problem with UNC and Wake playing OOC? Give me one common sense reason why that matters at all.

The fact that you don't see an issue with two schools in the same conference in the same state not playing enough so they had to schedule a game themselves tells me all I need to know about the ACC.

Indiana isn't in the east, Mizzou isn't in the east, Colorado isn't in the south...any of these conferences who make more money and are more stable worse off for having that set up?

If UVA has such an issue playing members in it's own conference then they should have thought about that before they invited said members into the conference. You guys are the most dysfunctional and poorly run conference in the FBS. Between the division set up and the Raycom deal it's hard for anyone to argue otherwise.

You are making a far bigger deal about this than anyone in the ACC. If you have noticed there are 4 North Carolina schools in the ACC & they each play 3 of the 4.

Is it so dysfunctional that everyone wants to play everyone more often? There are options to reduce the length of rotations. The B1G not passing divisional deregulation didn't take them all away, just apparently the most popular. As someone said, you can rotate a set of 3 schools every other year & then everyone plays each H&A within 6 years.

The division aren't that complicated, it took me maybe 5 minutes to memorize them. I would struggle in giving the B1G divisions, does that mean that they are dysfunctional? No.

On the ACC board someone came up with a simple solution that pretty much appeases everyone concerns & balances out the recruiting grounds. We can do this by just switching Syracuse & VT.

Here's what the divisions & crossovers would look like.

Atlantic - Coastal
FSU - Miami
Clemson- GT
VT - Virginia
Louisville- Pittsburgh
BC - Syracuse
NC State- N Carolina
WF - Duke
01-25-2016 08:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lenvillecards Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,458
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 376
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #22
Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
(01-25-2016 07:05 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 06:30 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 02:08 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 01:35 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  (Traditional Big East)

Just a pet peeve here: There's no such thing as a "traditional" Big East football conference. It was something spackled together by Tranghese because he thought it would help keep Big East basketball relevant and keep the three FBS Big East schools (BC, Pitt, Syracuse) from leaving the "basketball schools". Miami and Virginia Tech played BE football for only 13 years. The Big East didn't make VT a full member of the conference until the fall of 2000, and VT announced it was leaving for the ACC three years later in the summer of 2003. No tradition there.

Nebraska has already been a full member of the Big Ten for longer than Virginia Tech was a full member of the Big East, and no one would call Nebraska a traditional Big Ten member.

Thank you! Virginia Tech had little to no history with any school in Big East football besides West Virginia and Miami. They were a Southern Independent and were added for football because they had a decent enough program and weren't too far out of the footprint.

So what? You're divisions make no sense and ended up being lopsided even though the sole purpose of them was so they wouldn't be lopsided.

Look at how "lopsided" the SEC east & west have been in strength the past couple of years, should the SEC rework their divisions to balance out the strength?

The ACC divisions do make sense, it's a zipper model. To make it a true zipper however VT would need to move to the Atlantic.
01-25-2016 08:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,301
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
(01-25-2016 08:18 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 07:05 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 06:30 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 02:08 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 01:35 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  (Traditional Big East)

Just a pet peeve here: There's no such thing as a "traditional" Big East football conference. It was something spackled together by Tranghese because he thought it would help keep Big East basketball relevant and keep the three FBS Big East schools (BC, Pitt, Syracuse) from leaving the "basketball schools". Miami and Virginia Tech played BE football for only 13 years. The Big East didn't make VT a full member of the conference until the fall of 2000, and VT announced it was leaving for the ACC three years later in the summer of 2003. No tradition there.

Nebraska has already been a full member of the Big Ten for longer than Virginia Tech was a full member of the Big East, and no one would call Nebraska a traditional Big Ten member.

Thank you! Virginia Tech had little to no history with any school in Big East football besides West Virginia and Miami. They were a Southern Independent and were added for football because they had a decent enough program and weren't too far out of the footprint.

So what? You're divisions make no sense and ended up being lopsided even though the sole purpose of them was so they wouldn't be lopsided.

Look at how "lopsided" the SEC east & west have been in strength the past couple of years, should the SEC rework their divisions to balance out the strength?

The ACC divisions do make sense, it's a zipper model. To make it a true zipper however VT would need to move to the Atlantic.

Zippers only make sense if you want to play the teams close to you less frequently.
01-25-2016 08:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lenvillecards Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,458
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 376
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #24
Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
(01-25-2016 08:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 08:18 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 07:05 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 06:30 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 02:08 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Just a pet peeve here: There's no such thing as a "traditional" Big East football conference. It was something spackled together by Tranghese because he thought it would help keep Big East basketball relevant and keep the three FBS Big East schools (BC, Pitt, Syracuse) from leaving the "basketball schools". Miami and Virginia Tech played BE football for only 13 years. The Big East didn't make VT a full member of the conference until the fall of 2000, and VT announced it was leaving for the ACC three years later in the summer of 2003. No tradition there.

Nebraska has already been a full member of the Big Ten for longer than Virginia Tech was a full member of the Big East, and no one would call Nebraska a traditional Big Ten member.

Thank you! Virginia Tech had little to no history with any school in Big East football besides West Virginia and Miami. They were a Southern Independent and were added for football because they had a decent enough program and weren't too far out of the footprint.

So what? You're divisions make no sense and ended up being lopsided even though the sole purpose of them was so they wouldn't be lopsided.

Look at how "lopsided" the SEC east & west have been in strength the past couple of years, should the SEC rework their divisions to balance out the strength?

The ACC divisions do make sense, it's a zipper model. To make it a true zipper however VT would need to move to the Atlantic.

Zippers only make sense if you want to play the teams close to you less frequently.

Why is that? You can play as a permanent crossover opponent just like FSU & Miami does. The geography of the ACC is pretty confined, except for Louisville & ND. The conference is at least doubled up in 3 states. The zipper provides equal access to the key recruiting grounds.

The B1G east/west split has its downfalls to. The length of time it takes for them to cycle through everyone was a contributing factor in them going to 9 conference games.
01-25-2016 08:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #25
RE: Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
(01-25-2016 08:13 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 07:03 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 06:28 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 03:52 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 03:08 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  FIFY

Name one common sense reason not to do this? "X team wont like it so the other 13 schools have to say okay and scrap that idea." But go ahead and watch more ACC teams play each other in OOC and act like you guys have your act together.

Virginia is not in the North and if they are regulated to playing northern schools with no traditional rivals, then they may as well join the Big 10.

What is the problem with UNC and Wake playing OOC? Give me one common sense reason why that matters at all.

The fact that you don't see an issue with two schools in the same conference in the same state not playing enough so they had to schedule a game themselves tells me all I need to know about the ACC.

Indiana isn't in the east, Mizzou isn't in the east, Colorado isn't in the south...any of these conferences who make more money and are more stable worse off for having that set up?

If UVA has such an issue playing members in it's own conference then they should have thought about that before they invited said members into the conference. You guys are the most dysfunctional and poorly run conference in the FBS. Between the division set up and the Raycom deal it's hard for anyone to argue otherwise.

You are making a far bigger deal about this than anyone in the ACC.

He clearly doesn't understand how the ACC works.
01-25-2016 09:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #26
RE: Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
(01-25-2016 03:52 PM)chess Wrote:  While the SEC was able to severe some historical rivalries (Tennessee and Alabama, Auburn and Georgia), the ACC struggles.

Virginia and North Carolina wish to be the same division. North Carolina and Duke wish to be in the same division. Having four schools in North Carolina makes for a great bus league but has its challenges.

The solution has been to put Duke and North Carolina in one division and State and Wake in the other division.

In addition- Florida State, Georgia Tech, and Clemson wish to be in the same division.

Understanding this- North Carolina, Duke, and Virginia make a core of a division.

Let's say that we set up our division like this-

North
North Carolina, Duke, Virginia Tech, Virginia, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College

South
NC State, Wake Forest, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Florida State, Miami, Louisville

We still have the same issue as the current conference divisions.

Bold: I don't know about Auburn and Georgia off the top of my head, but UTk and Alabama play each other every year.

Underlined: Like the Pac mines Cali and the Big XII mines Texas, the ACC mines Florida. Miami and FSU will always be split up so everyone gets a Florida game every year.
01-25-2016 09:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
The REAL BillyBobby
*

Posts: 11,898
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 502
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #27
RE: Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
(01-25-2016 08:13 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 07:03 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 06:28 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 03:52 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 03:08 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  FIFY

Name one common sense reason not to do this? "X team wont like it so the other 13 schools have to say okay and scrap that idea." But go ahead and watch more ACC teams play each other in OOC and act like you guys have your act together.

Virginia is not in the North and if they are regulated to playing northern schools with no traditional rivals, then they may as well join the Big 10.

What is the problem with UNC and Wake playing OOC? Give me one common sense reason why that matters at all.

The fact that you don't see an issue with two schools in the same conference in the same state not playing enough so they had to schedule a game themselves tells me all I need to know about the ACC.

Indiana isn't in the east, Mizzou isn't in the east, Colorado isn't in the south...any of these conferences who make more money and are more stable worse off for having that set up?

If UVA has such an issue playing members in it's own conference then they should have thought about that before they invited said members into the conference. You guys are the most dysfunctional and poorly run conference in the FBS. Between the division set up and the Raycom deal it's hard for anyone to argue otherwise.

You are making a far bigger deal about this than anyone in the ACC. If you have noticed there are 4 North Carolina schools in the ACC & they each play 3 of the 4.

Is it so dysfunctional that everyone wants to play everyone more often? There are options to reduce the length of rotations. The B1G not passing divisional deregulation didn't take them all away, just apparently the most popular. As someone said, you can rotate a set of 3 schools every other year & then everyone plays each H&A within 6 years.

The division aren't that complicated, it took me maybe 5 minutes to memorize them. I would struggle in giving the B1G divisions, does that mean that they are dysfunctional? No.

On the ACC board someone came up with a simple solution that pretty much appeases everyone concerns & balances out the recruiting grounds. We can do this by just switching Syracuse & VT.

Here's what the divisions & crossovers would look like.

Atlantic - Coastal
FSU - Miami
Clemson- GT
VT - Virginia
Louisville- Pittsburgh
BC - Syracuse
NC State- N Carolina
WF - Duke

"I would struggle in giving the B1G divisions, does that mean that they are dysfunctional? No."--??
I can never remember the ACC divisions either. The PAC is easy. The SEC is easy, the Big 12 was easy (when they had 2 divisions) and the Big is super easy. How do you "struggle in giving the Big divisions???? West: The 7 most western teams. East: The 7 most eastern teams. I suppose one could mix up Purdue and Indiana but come on.......
01-25-2016 09:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #28
RE: Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
(01-25-2016 09:54 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  "I would struggle in giving the B1G divisions, does that mean that they are dysfunctional? No."--??
I can never remember the ACC divisions either. The PAC is easy. The SEC is easy, the Big 12 was easy (when they had 2 divisions) and the Big is super easy. How do you "struggle in giving the Big divisions???? West: The 7 most western teams. East: The 7 most eastern teams. I suppose one could mix up Purdue and Indiana but come on.......

I think that he's saying that he would have a hard time creating balanced divisions with equitable access to recruiting territories, while maintaining historic rivalries.

Having Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, and Penn State all in one division is a little risky and makes the conference lopsided.
01-25-2016 10:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RutgersGuy Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,127
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation: 152
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #29
RE: Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
(01-25-2016 09:27 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 08:13 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 07:03 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 06:28 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 03:52 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Name one common sense reason not to do this? "X team wont like it so the other 13 schools have to say okay and scrap that idea." But go ahead and watch more ACC teams play each other in OOC and act like you guys have your act together.

Virginia is not in the North and if they are regulated to playing northern schools with no traditional rivals, then they may as well join the Big 10.

What is the problem with UNC and Wake playing OOC? Give me one common sense reason why that matters at all.

The fact that you don't see an issue with two schools in the same conference in the same state not playing enough so they had to schedule a game themselves tells me all I need to know about the ACC.

Indiana isn't in the east, Mizzou isn't in the east, Colorado isn't in the south...any of these conferences who make more money and are more stable worse off for having that set up?

If UVA has such an issue playing members in it's own conference then they should have thought about that before they invited said members into the conference. You guys are the most dysfunctional and poorly run conference in the FBS. Between the division set up and the Raycom deal it's hard for anyone to argue otherwise.

You are making a far bigger deal about this than anyone in the ACC.

He clearly doesn't understand how the ACC works.

No one understands how the ACC works. Tell us what it's like trying to find SU basketball games being aired by Raycom?
01-26-2016 09:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RutgersGuy Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,127
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation: 152
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #30
RE: Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
(01-25-2016 10:03 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 09:54 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  "I would struggle in giving the B1G divisions, does that mean that they are dysfunctional? No."--??
I can never remember the ACC divisions either. The PAC is easy. The SEC is easy, the Big 12 was easy (when they had 2 divisions) and the Big is super easy. How do you "struggle in giving the Big divisions???? West: The 7 most western teams. East: The 7 most eastern teams. I suppose one could mix up Purdue and Indiana but come on.......

I think that he's saying that he would have a hard time creating balanced divisions with equitable access to recruiting territories, while maintaining historic rivalries.

Having Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, and Penn State all in one division is a little risky and makes the conference lopsided.

It's not hard, take the 6 most northern schools who have a history together and add in Miami. Then the 7 most southern schools (not counting Miami) who all have historical ties together and BOOM you have 2 divisions that are both balanced and access to Florida recruiting. It makes sense for fans, for the players and the schools. FSU & Miami are permanent rivals and UVA & UNC are permanent rivals. I just solved your issue in two seconds. If UVA doesn't want to play those new schools then why did they invite them into the conference?
01-26-2016 09:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #31
RE: Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
(01-26-2016 09:58 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 10:03 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 09:54 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  "I would struggle in giving the B1G divisions, does that mean that they are dysfunctional? No."--??
I can never remember the ACC divisions either. The PAC is easy. The SEC is easy, the Big 12 was easy (when they had 2 divisions) and the Big is super easy. How do you "struggle in giving the Big divisions???? West: The 7 most western teams. East: The 7 most eastern teams. I suppose one could mix up Purdue and Indiana but come on.......

I think that he's saying that he would have a hard time creating balanced divisions with equitable access to recruiting territories, while maintaining historic rivalries.

Having Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, and Penn State all in one division is a little risky and makes the conference lopsided.

It's not hard, take the 6 most northern schools who have a history together and add in Miami. Then the 7 most southern schools (not counting Miami) who all have historical ties together and BOOM you have 2 divisions that are both balanced and access to Florida recruiting. It makes sense for fans, for the players and the schools. FSU & Miami are permanent rivals and UVA & UNC are permanent rivals. I just solved your issue in two seconds. If UVA doesn't want to play those new schools then why did they invite them into the conference?

Why was RU invited to the B1G? Politics isn't as simple as you're desperately trying to make it. Anyway, the issue isn't that UVA doesn't want to play BIG EAST schools. It's that UVA wants to play key ACC schools. Your "solution" ignores that reality and therefore would never work.
01-26-2016 10:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #32
RE: Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
(01-26-2016 09:54 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 09:27 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 08:13 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 07:03 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 06:28 PM)esayem Wrote:  Virginia is not in the North and if they are regulated to playing northern schools with no traditional rivals, then they may as well join the Big 10.

What is the problem with UNC and Wake playing OOC? Give me one common sense reason why that matters at all.

The fact that you don't see an issue with two schools in the same conference in the same state not playing enough so they had to schedule a game themselves tells me all I need to know about the ACC.

Indiana isn't in the east, Mizzou isn't in the east, Colorado isn't in the south...any of these conferences who make more money and are more stable worse off for having that set up?

If UVA has such an issue playing members in it's own conference then they should have thought about that before they invited said members into the conference. You guys are the most dysfunctional and poorly run conference in the FBS. Between the division set up and the Raycom deal it's hard for anyone to argue otherwise.

You are making a far bigger deal about this than anyone in the ACC.

He clearly doesn't understand how the ACC works.

No one understands how the ACC works. Tell us what it's like trying to find SU basketball games being aired by Raycom?

Bold: No. It's a "just you" problem.
Underlined: It's easier than trying to find a relevant Rutgers game. I think the better question is what's it like trying to find a Rutgers win in anything meaningful?
01-26-2016 10:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RutgersGuy Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,127
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation: 152
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #33
RE: Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
(01-26-2016 10:18 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(01-26-2016 09:54 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 09:27 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 08:13 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 07:03 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  The fact that you don't see an issue with two schools in the same conference in the same state not playing enough so they had to schedule a game themselves tells me all I need to know about the ACC.

Indiana isn't in the east, Mizzou isn't in the east, Colorado isn't in the south...any of these conferences who make more money and are more stable worse off for having that set up?

If UVA has such an issue playing members in it's own conference then they should have thought about that before they invited said members into the conference. You guys are the most dysfunctional and poorly run conference in the FBS. Between the division set up and the Raycom deal it's hard for anyone to argue otherwise.

You are making a far bigger deal about this than anyone in the ACC.

He clearly doesn't understand how the ACC works.

No one understands how the ACC works. Tell us what it's like trying to find SU basketball games being aired by Raycom?

Bold: No. It's a "just you" problem.
Underlined: It's easier than trying to find a relevant Rutgers game. I think the better question is what's it like trying to find a Rutgers win in anything meaningful?

If it's a just me problem then why was the ACC trying to change the rules to make it easier for them to schedule games?

Also then why were you and your other Cuse fans bitching about not getting SU games on TV in upstate NY and had to watch a Miami game?
01-26-2016 10:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RutgersGuy Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,127
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation: 152
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #34
RE: Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
(01-26-2016 10:17 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(01-26-2016 09:58 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 10:03 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 09:54 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  "I would struggle in giving the B1G divisions, does that mean that they are dysfunctional? No."--??
I can never remember the ACC divisions either. The PAC is easy. The SEC is easy, the Big 12 was easy (when they had 2 divisions) and the Big is super easy. How do you "struggle in giving the Big divisions???? West: The 7 most western teams. East: The 7 most eastern teams. I suppose one could mix up Purdue and Indiana but come on.......

I think that he's saying that he would have a hard time creating balanced divisions with equitable access to recruiting territories, while maintaining historic rivalries.

Having Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, and Penn State all in one division is a little risky and makes the conference lopsided.

It's not hard, take the 6 most northern schools who have a history together and add in Miami. Then the 7 most southern schools (not counting Miami) who all have historical ties together and BOOM you have 2 divisions that are both balanced and access to Florida recruiting. It makes sense for fans, for the players and the schools. FSU & Miami are permanent rivals and UVA & UNC are permanent rivals. I just solved your issue in two seconds. If UVA doesn't want to play those new schools then why did they invite them into the conference?

Why was RU invited to the B1G? Politics isn't as simple as you're desperately trying to make it. Anyway, the issue isn't that UVA doesn't want to play BIG EAST schools. It's that UVA wants to play key ACC schools. Your "solution" ignores that reality and therefore would never work.

I forgot that UVA is the Texas of the ACC. Guys, one school has an objection we can;t do it. You guys always have a consensus for every decision?
01-26-2016 10:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lenvillecards Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,458
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 376
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #35
Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
(01-26-2016 09:58 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 10:03 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 09:54 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  "I would struggle in giving the B1G divisions, does that mean that they are dysfunctional? No."--??
I can never remember the ACC divisions either. The PAC is easy. The SEC is easy, the Big 12 was easy (when they had 2 divisions) and the Big is super easy. How do you "struggle in giving the Big divisions???? West: The 7 most western teams. East: The 7 most eastern teams. I suppose one could mix up Purdue and Indiana but come on.......

I think that he's saying that he would have a hard time creating balanced divisions with equitable access to recruiting territories, while maintaining historic rivalries.

Having Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, and Penn State all in one division is a little risky and makes the conference lopsided.

It's not hard, take the 6 most northern schools who have a history together and add in Miami. Then the 7 most southern schools (not counting Miami) who all have historical ties together and BOOM you have 2 divisions that are both balanced and access to Florida recruiting. It makes sense for fans, for the players and the schools. FSU & Miami are permanent rivals and UVA & UNC are permanent rivals. I just solved your issue in two seconds. If UVA doesn't want to play those new schools then why did they invite them into the conference?

Are you counting Louisville as a northern school? Yes the Cards have BE history with Syracuse & Pittsburgh but we were also in the Metro conference with FSU, GT & VT.

Is this what you're suggesting?
North- Miami, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, BC, Louisville, VT & Virginia

South- FSU, Clemson, NC, Duke, NC State, WF, GT

Do you see the problems? You solved nothing. You are leaving out a lot of old rivalries. It's not that Virginia doesn't want to play the northern teams, it's that they want to play their long standing & established rivals. For example, you reestablish NC & WF but you do away with Duke & Virginia. How is this fair to Miami? Their closest division mate is in Virginia, meaning they have to skip the states of Georgia, South Carolina & North Carolina to get there. How does your suggestion speed up the crossover rotation, the biggest complaint? This is something that the B1G & SEC are facing as well.

A good point about the zipper model is that everyone gets into the north, the Carolinas, Virginia & Florida for equal recruiting. The zipper works best for the ACC, maybe it wouldn't work as well for the SEC or B1G but who cares. Perhaps if Rutgers devout as much time to football & basketball as they do worrying about the ACC divisions then they might be able to win a few games a season.
(This post was last modified: 01-26-2016 10:48 AM by Lenvillecards.)
01-26-2016 10:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #36
RE: Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
(01-26-2016 10:27 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-26-2016 10:17 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(01-26-2016 09:58 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 10:03 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 09:54 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  "I would struggle in giving the B1G divisions, does that mean that they are dysfunctional? No."--??
I can never remember the ACC divisions either. The PAC is easy. The SEC is easy, the Big 12 was easy (when they had 2 divisions) and the Big is super easy. How do you "struggle in giving the Big divisions???? West: The 7 most western teams. East: The 7 most eastern teams. I suppose one could mix up Purdue and Indiana but come on.......

I think that he's saying that he would have a hard time creating balanced divisions with equitable access to recruiting territories, while maintaining historic rivalries.

Having Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, and Penn State all in one division is a little risky and makes the conference lopsided.

It's not hard, take the 6 most northern schools who have a history together and add in Miami. Then the 7 most southern schools (not counting Miami) who all have historical ties together and BOOM you have 2 divisions that are both balanced and access to Florida recruiting. It makes sense for fans, for the players and the schools. FSU & Miami are permanent rivals and UVA & UNC are permanent rivals. I just solved your issue in two seconds. If UVA doesn't want to play those new schools then why did they invite them into the conference?

Why was RU invited to the B1G? Politics isn't as simple as you're desperately trying to make it. Anyway, the issue isn't that UVA doesn't want to play BIG EAST schools. It's that UVA wants to play key ACC schools. Your "solution" ignores that reality and therefore would never work.

I forgot that UVA is the Texas of the ACC. Guys, one school has an objection we can;t do it. You guys always have a consensus for every decision?

Nope, decisions don't require consensus, but they do require the buy-in of major members. That's just how politics works.

UVA is in the ACC because they play the teams that they want to play. If that changes they might as well be in another league. In which case, they likely will join one of the other two leagues that wants them and that has more money.

The B1G was in a similar situation with PSU. That's why you're in the conference. It's all politics. The schools with leverage get what they want, and the other schools follow them.
01-26-2016 10:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lenvillecards Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,458
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 376
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #37
Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
If you really want to solve a majority of the issues, I would do something like this;

Atlantic - Coastal
FSU - Miami
Clemson-GT
NC State-NC
WF - Duke
VT - Virginia
Rotate
Pittsburgh-Louisville
Syracuse- BC

This way the permanent teams rotates through the other division in 4 years, H&A in 8.
01-26-2016 11:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #38
RE: Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
(01-26-2016 10:25 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-26-2016 10:18 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(01-26-2016 09:54 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 09:27 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 08:13 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  You are making a far bigger deal about this than anyone in the ACC.

He clearly doesn't understand how the ACC works.

No one understands how the ACC works. Tell us what it's like trying to find SU basketball games being aired by Raycom?

Bold: No. It's a "just you" problem.
Underlined: It's easier than trying to find a relevant Rutgers game. I think the better question is what's it like trying to find a Rutgers win in anything meaningful?

If it's a just me problem then why was the ACC trying to change the rules to make it easier for them to schedule games?

Also then why were you and your other Cuse fans bitching about not getting SU games on TV in upstate NY and had to watch a Miami game?

Bold: It's a just you problem that you don't understand how the conference works. The ACC understands its situation which is why it's pushing for the change to the NCAA rules, as opposed to a change in the divisional setup under the current rules.

Underlined: Probably because, unlike Rutgers in any worth-while sport, we have a relevant program, and those fans were unable to easily find the game on TV.
01-26-2016 11:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 16,264
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 1207
I Root For: Olde Ironclad
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #39
RE: Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
(01-26-2016 09:58 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 10:03 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(01-25-2016 09:54 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  "I would struggle in giving the B1G divisions, does that mean that they are dysfunctional? No."--??
I can never remember the ACC divisions either. The PAC is easy. The SEC is easy, the Big 12 was easy (when they had 2 divisions) and the Big is super easy. How do you "struggle in giving the Big divisions???? West: The 7 most western teams. East: The 7 most eastern teams. I suppose one could mix up Purdue and Indiana but come on.......

I think that he's saying that he would have a hard time creating balanced divisions with equitable access to recruiting territories, while maintaining historic rivalries.

Having Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, and Penn State all in one division is a little risky and makes the conference lopsided.

It's not hard, take the 6 most northern schools who have a history together and add in Miami. Then the 7 most southern schools (not counting Miami) who all have historical ties together and BOOM you have 2 divisions that are both balanced and access to Florida recruiting. It makes sense for fans, for the players and the schools. FSU & Miami are permanent rivals and UVA & UNC are permanent rivals. I just solved your issue in two seconds. If UVA doesn't want to play those new schools then why did they invite them into the conference?

That is foolish. "Let's take the southernmost school and stick them in the North so it increases their travel cost and eliminates a chance at more regional rivalries." Foolish. Miami wants to play Georgia Tech every year, they want to play UNC and Duke every year. The divisions aren't accidental.
01-26-2016 11:03 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,335
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #40
RE: Why Doesn't the ACC go to Geographic Divisions?
Guys, I never thought of the ACC as having a problem until now. But maybe, when a fan of the single most dysfunctional athletic department in the country thinks the ACC is dysfunctional, then I should reconsider.

On the other hand, maybe "Rutgers Guy" is just an alias for Jim Delaney, and he is trying to pry more eastern schools from the ACC to compensate for the suckitude of Rutgers in all sports. Who knows who anybody really is on the internet?
01-26-2016 11:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.