If 9 conference games are adopted, it might be that the 9th game is not a simple rotation such that you go through you non-rivals over the course of three years. It could be a 6-1 (Annual Rival) - 1 (Bi-Annual Rivals) - 1 Rotate remaining 4.

This setup could get at the GT/FSU, UNC/Clemson, Clemson/UVa, NC State/Duke, NC State/VT, WF/UNC issue.

6 1 1 1

FSU - Atlantic - Miami - GT/Pitt - UVa/Duke/UNC/VT
CU - Atlantic - GT - UNC/UVA - Duke/Pitt/VT/Miami
NC State - Atlantic - UNC - Duke/VT - GT/Pitt/UVa/Miami
Louis - Atlantic - UVa - Miami/GT - UNC/Duke/Pitt/VT
WF - Atlantic - Duke - UNC/VT - Louis/Pitt/UVa/Miami
Syr - Atlantic - Pitt - Miami/Duke - UNC/GT/VT/UVa
BC - Atlantic - VT - UVa/Pitt - UNC/GT/Miami/Duke


UNC - Coastal - NC State - WF/Clemson - FSU/BC/Louis/Syr
Miami - Coastal - FSU - Louis/Syr - NC State/WF/BC/Clemson
Duke - Coastal - WF - NC State/Syr - FSU/CU/BC/Louis
VT - Coastal - BC - WF/NC State - Clemson/FSU/Louis/Syr
UVa - Coastal - Louis - BC/Clemson - FSU/Syracuse/WF/NC State
Pitt - Coastal - Syr - FSU/BC - NC State/WF/Louis/Clemson
GT - Coastal - CU - FSU/Louis - NC State/WF/BC/Syr

In some sense this is unfair, but it reduces the time to see all schools from six year to four and reduces home and away turnaround from 12 year to 8. An improvement. It also increases the number of crossover games that many programs have clamored about and wanted either for regional closeness, old rivalries, or just good road trips and TV.

Clemson, UVa, and UNC would be able to reconnect. Wake and UNC and Duke and NC State would be partially restored. An ideal connection between WF and VT would be established due to their close proximity. FSU would be in Atlanta every four years. Syracuse would restore it's connection with Miami. Louisville would be able to build on it's proximity to Atlanta. VT picks up what it wants most - games in the State of NC. While NC State gets back to having reasonable access to the State of VA.

We all know that some schools really don't want to play each other every year and for various reasons, just as some schools do want to play each other as often as possible. We'll see what happens.

Looks like the acc is going to punish their football schools yet again with this bs 9th game. Yet another example of this crappy conference hurting its football product

(08-11-2016 09:37 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  If 9 conference games are adopted, it might be that the 9th game is not a simple rotation such that you go through you non-rivals over the course of three years. It could be a 6-1 (Annual Rival) - 1 (Bi-Annual Rivals) - 1 Rotate remaining 4.

This setup could get at the GT/FSU, UNC/Clemson, Clemson/UVa, NC State/Duke, NC State/VT, WF/UNC issue.

6 1 1 1

FSU - Atlantic - Miami - GT/Pitt - UVa/Duke/UNC/VT
CU - Atlantic - GT - UNC/UVA - Duke/Pitt/VT/Miami
NC State - Atlantic - UNC - Duke/VT - GT/Pitt/UVa/Miami
Louis - Atlantic - UVa - Miami/GT - UNC/Duke/Pitt/VT
WF - Atlantic - Duke - UNC/VT - Louis/Pitt/UVa/Miami
Syr - Atlantic - Pitt - Miami/Duke - UNC/GT/VT/UVa
BC - Atlantic - VT - UVa/Pitt - UNC/GT/Miami/Duke


UNC - Coastal - NC State - WF/Clemson - FSU/BC/Louis/Syr
Miami - Coastal - FSU - Louis/Syr - NC State/WF/BC/Clemson
Duke - Coastal - WF - NC State/Syr - FSU/CU/BC/Louis
VT - Coastal - BC - WF/NC State - Clemson/FSU/Louis/Syr
UVa - Coastal - Louis - BC/Clemson - FSU/Syracuse/WF/NC State
Pitt - Coastal - Syr - FSU/BC - NC State/WF/Louis/Clemson
GT - Coastal - CU - FSU/Louis - NC State/WF/BC/Syr

In some sense this is unfair, but it reduces the time to see all schools from six year to four and reduces home and away turnaround from 12 year to 8. An improvement. It also increases the number of crossover games that many programs have clamored about and wanted either for regional closeness, old rivalries, or just good road trips and TV.

Clemson, UVa, and UNC would be able to reconnect. Wake and UNC and Duke and NC State would be partially restored. An ideal connection between WF and VT would be established due to their close proximity. FSU would be in Atlanta every four years. Syracuse would restore it's connection with Miami. Louisville would be able to build on it's proximity to Atlanta. VT picks up what it wants most - games in the State of NC. While NC State gets back to having reasonable access to the State of VA.

We all know that some schools really don't want to play each other every year and for various reasons, just as some schools do want to play each other as often as possible. We'll see what happens.

I like it!!!

I would be very surprised if it was anything other than 6-1-2.

(08-11-2016 10:01 PM)Ragu Wrote:  Looks like the acc is going to punish their football schools yet again with this bs 9th game. Yet another example of this crappy conference hurting its football product

I know it's going to make me rethink my IPTAY commitment level. Why should I pay at such a high level to get a slate full of unexciting home games? I spend a great deal of money between tickets, parking, tailgating, travel, etc. for essentially two tickets a year: GT/FSU/OOC big game in the odd numbered years and South Carolina in the even, and now they are going to make it where there's only 1 1/2 interesting game a year.

(08-11-2016 10:01 PM)Ragu Wrote:  Looks like the acc is going to punish their football schools yet again with this bs 9th game. Yet another example of this crappy conference hurting its football product

Right on cue. I guess since the network is going to happen and the expected money level is to be very close to Big and SEC money, scheduling is the only thing you can
B!$(# about. Never mind the fact that the conference is trying to create more inventory so that we can have the money and network you and fans like yourself B!$(#ed prior to the announcement.

(08-11-2016 09:37 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  If 9 conference games are adopted, it might be that the 9th game is not a simple rotation such that you go through you non-rivals over the course of three years. It could be a 6-1 (Annual Rival) - 1 (Bi-Annual Rivals) - 1 Rotate remaining 4.

This setup could get at the GT/FSU, UNC/Clemson, Clemson/UVa, NC State/Duke, NC State/VT, WF/UNC issue.

6 1 1 1

FSU - Atlantic - Miami - GT/Pitt - UVa/Duke/UNC/VT
CU - Atlantic - GT - UNC/UVA - Duke/Pitt/VT/Miami
NC State - Atlantic - UNC - Duke/VT - GT/Pitt/UVa/Miami
Louis - Atlantic - UVa - Miami/GT - UNC/Duke/Pitt/VT
WF - Atlantic - Duke - UNC/VT - Louis/Pitt/UVa/Miami
Syr - Atlantic - Pitt - Miami/Duke - UNC/GT/VT/UVa
BC - Atlantic - VT - UVa/Pitt - UNC/GT/Miami/Duke


UNC - Coastal - NC State - WF/Clemson - FSU/BC/Louis/Syr
Miami - Coastal - FSU - Louis/Syr - NC State/WF/BC/Clemson
Duke - Coastal - WF - NC State/Syr - FSU/CU/BC/Louis
VT - Coastal - BC - WF/NC State - Clemson/FSU/Louis/Syr
UVa - Coastal - Louis - BC/Clemson - FSU/Syracuse/WF/NC State
Pitt - Coastal - Syr - FSU/BC - NC State/WF/Louis/Clemson
GT - Coastal - CU - FSU/Louis - NC State/WF/BC/Syr

In some sense this is unfair, but it reduces the time to see all schools from six year to four and reduces home and away turnaround from 12 year to 8. An improvement. It also increases the number of crossover games that many programs have clamored about and wanted either for regional closeness, old rivalries, or just good road trips and TV.

Clemson, UVa, and UNC would be able to reconnect. Wake and UNC and Duke and NC State would be partially restored. An ideal connection between WF and VT would be established due to their close proximity. FSU would be in Atlanta every four years. Syracuse would restore it's connection with Miami. Louisville would be able to build on it's proximity to Atlanta. VT picks up what it wants most - games in the State of NC. While NC State gets back to having reasonable access to the State of VA.

We all know that some schools really don't want to play each other every year and for various reasons, just as some schools do want to play each other as often as possible. We'll see what happens.

Intrigued. I'd rather not have 9 games, but if we have to, that would soften the blow I think. For FSU, if half the time that extra game is GT, rather than UVA or Pitt let's say, that goes along way.

Is this something even under consideration, or is this just an idea of yours? It's a much better solution I think.

(08-12-2016 08:55 AM)Indytarheel Wrote:  

(08-11-2016 10:01 PM)Ragu Wrote:  Looks like the acc is going to punish their football schools yet again with this bs 9th game. Yet another example of this crappy conference hurting its football product

Right on cue. I guess since the network is going to happen and the expected money level is to be very close to Big and SEC money, scheduling is the only thing you can
B!$(# about. Never mind the fact that the conference is trying to create more inventory so that we can have the money and network you and fans like yourself B!$(#ed prior to the announcement.

Yep right on cue to you as well. Coastal teams getting what they want as usual to the detriment of fsu and Clemson. And then telling us just to take it or we are complaining

Easy not to complain when basketball schools get their way on football issues so much

It's better for college football to have great ooc matchups instead of more weak acc games.

(08-12-2016 09:06 AM)Ragu Wrote:  

(08-12-2016 08:55 AM)Indytarheel Wrote:  

(08-11-2016 10:01 PM)Ragu Wrote:  Looks like the acc is going to punish their football schools yet again with this bs 9th game. Yet another example of this crappy conference hurting its football product

Right on cue. I guess since the network is going to happen and the expected money level is to be very close to Big and SEC money, scheduling is the only thing you can
B!$(# about. Never mind the fact that the conference is trying to create more inventory so that we can have the money and network you and fans like yourself B!$(#ed prior to the announcement.

Yep right on cue to you as well. Coastal teams getting what they want as usual to the detriment of fsu and Clemson. And then telling us just to take it or we are complaining

Easy not to complain when basketball schools get their way on football issues so much

It's better for college football to have great ooc matchups instead of more weak acc games.

1. 1st expansion brought in football first schools; even Syracuse tout a rich football history. Football driven
2. FSU fans clamoured for Miami to be opposite them and not in their division. Football driven
3. FSU fans clamoured for ACC championship game to be in FL. Epic fail especially the Tampa game when FSU didn't make it to the title. Football driven
4. FSU complained about cost to travel to championship game in Charlotte, so instead of pairing down who they brought, ACC office game FSU extra money to cover cost and cost of going to BCS and playoff games. Football driven
5. FSU fans b!$(# and moaned about a network and the arms race gap if the ACC didn't get a network. ACC gets a network. Football driven
6. U of L brought into ACC instead of UConn (thank God) and placed in Atlantic division. Football driven
   

Again, please explain how the conference and basketball schools are hurting the football schools. You sound more like a spoiled child.

(08-12-2016 09:04 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(08-11-2016 09:37 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  If 9 conference games are adopted, it might be that the 9th game is not a simple rotation such that you go through you non-rivals over the course of three years. It could be a 6-1 (Annual Rival) - 1 (Bi-Annual Rivals) - 1 Rotate remaining 4.

This setup could get at the GT/FSU, UNC/Clemson, Clemson/UVa, NC State/Duke, NC State/VT, WF/UNC issue.

6 1 1 1

FSU - Atlantic - Miami - GT/Pitt - UVa/Duke/UNC/VT
CU - Atlantic - GT - UNC/UVA - Duke/Pitt/VT/Miami
NC State - Atlantic - UNC - Duke/VT - GT/Pitt/UVa/Miami
Louis - Atlantic - UVa - Miami/GT - UNC/Duke/Pitt/VT
WF - Atlantic - Duke - UNC/VT - Louis/Pitt/UVa/Miami
Syr - Atlantic - Pitt - Miami/Duke - UNC/GT/VT/UVa
BC - Atlantic - VT - UVa/Pitt - UNC/GT/Miami/Duke


UNC - Coastal - NC State - WF/Clemson - FSU/BC/Louis/Syr
Miami - Coastal - FSU - Louis/Syr - NC State/WF/BC/Clemson
Duke - Coastal - WF - NC State/Syr - FSU/CU/BC/Louis
VT - Coastal - BC - WF/NC State - Clemson/FSU/Louis/Syr
UVa - Coastal - Louis - BC/Clemson - FSU/Syracuse/WF/NC State
Pitt - Coastal - Syr - FSU/BC - NC State/WF/Louis/Clemson
GT - Coastal - CU - FSU/Louis - NC State/WF/BC/Syr

In some sense this is unfair, but it reduces the time to see all schools from six year to four and reduces home and away turnaround from 12 year to 8. An improvement. It also increases the number of crossover games that many programs have clamored about and wanted either for regional closeness, old rivalries, or just good road trips and TV.

Clemson, UVa, and UNC would be able to reconnect. Wake and UNC and Duke and NC State would be partially restored. An ideal connection between WF and VT would be established due to their close proximity. FSU would be in Atlanta every four years. Syracuse would restore it's connection with Miami. Louisville would be able to build on it's proximity to Atlanta. VT picks up what it wants most - games in the State of NC. While NC State gets back to having reasonable access to the State of VA.

We all know that some schools really don't want to play each other every year and for various reasons, just as some schools do want to play each other as often as possible. We'll see what happens.

Intrigued. I'd rather not have 9 games, but if we have to, that would soften the blow I think. For FSU, if half the time that extra game is GT, rather than UVA or Pitt let's say, that goes along way.

Is this something even under consideration, or is this just an idea of yours? It's a much better solution I think.

I only offer my personal opinion. To do otherwise would be unethical.

This my idea of how to make real what I've heard that the ptb at WF, Clemson, UVa, UNC, GT, and State actually want.

I'm sure it's a consideration because at 9 conference games the flexibility begins, so I'm sure it's mirrored by an idea by someone in Greensboro or at one of the schools.

There are legitimate gripes and complaints beyond the knee-jerk complaints.

NC State, WF, and Clemson being locked out the state of Va when they played there every other year or more for nearly a 100 years is legitimate. WF and UNC and NC State and Duke are more examples. FSU needing help to fill their stadium and hence the need to rotate in their closest ACC contact and getting them a traveling contingent from PA that would appreciated going to the Gulf Coast every fourth year, etc.

I don't know the composition of the committee handling this. Usually committee pares options before it goes forward to prevent free-for-alls.

Either way nothing will be fully implemented until 19/20 although it's easier to finagle 9 league games at the last minute. Also keep in mind that some school have long-awaited games with certain programs and will be pissed if a change pokes a hole in their future season ticket offering package.

I will tell you this, when the divisions were formed all things sprang forth from having a school in Florida in both divisions, and preserving UNC's football games with Duke, UVa, and NC State and keeping NC State and Clemson's annual game. Everything radiated out from those three premises. No one has to like that, or agree that it has worked out as planned, but it was as it was.

For the complainers, you can't just pick the 9 games you want and if you want to be the Harlem Globetrotters and get all the glory, don't forget you need the Washington Generals to make you look good.

Um Indy where are you getting that fsu wanted Miami in the other division? The other acc schools wanted them split to get into Florida every other year at least

And unc wanted them for the Miami exposure. Same reason you got Pitt and g tech snd va tech while throwing the 3 recruiting wastelands into the other division

Also lol at Syracuse being football driven. Fsu and Clemson wanted West Virginia. Don't act like cuse was our idea. They were stuck with the 2 power teams and avoided by you guys on purpose

(08-11-2016 09:37 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  If 9 conference games are adopted, it might be that the 9th game is not a simple rotation such that you go through you non-rivals over the course of three years. It could be a 6-1 (Annual Rival) - 1 (Bi-Annual Rivals) - 1 Rotate remaining 4.

This setup could get at the GT/FSU, UNC/Clemson, Clemson/UVa, NC State/Duke, NC State/VT, WF/UNC issue.

6 1 1 1

FSU - Atlantic - Miami - GT/Pitt - UVa/Duke/UNC/VT
CU - Atlantic - GT - UNC/UVA - Duke/Pitt/VT/Miami
NC State - Atlantic - UNC - Duke/VT - GT/Pitt/UVa/Miami
Louis - Atlantic - UVa - Miami/GT - UNC/Duke/Pitt/VT
WF - Atlantic - Duke - UNC/VT - Louis/Pitt/UVa/Miami
Syr - Atlantic - Pitt - Miami/Duke - UNC/GT/VT/UVa
BC - Atlantic - VT - UVa/Pitt - UNC/GT/Miami/Duke


UNC - Coastal - NC State - WF/Clemson - FSU/BC/Louis/Syr
Miami - Coastal - FSU - Louis/Syr - NC State/WF/BC/Clemson
Duke - Coastal - WF - NC State/Syr - FSU/CU/BC/Louis
VT - Coastal - BC - WF/NC State - Clemson/FSU/Louis/Syr
UVa - Coastal - Louis - BC/Clemson - FSU/Syracuse/WF/NC State
Pitt - Coastal - Syr - FSU/BC - NC State/WF/Louis/Clemson
GT - Coastal - CU - FSU/Louis - NC State/WF/BC/Syr

In some sense this is unfair, but it reduces the time to see all schools from six year to four and reduces home and away turnaround from 12 year to 8. An improvement. It also increases the number of crossover games that many programs have clamored about and wanted either for regional closeness, old rivalries, or just good road trips and TV.

Clemson, UVa, and UNC would be able to reconnect. Wake and UNC and Duke and NC State would be partially restored. An ideal connection between WF and VT would be established due to their close proximity. FSU would be in Atlanta every four years. Syracuse would restore it's connection with Miami. Louisville would be able to build on it's proximity to Atlanta. VT picks up what it wants most - games in the State of NC. While NC State gets back to having reasonable access to the State of VA.

We all know that some schools really don't want to play each other every year and for various reasons, just as some schools do want to play each other as often as possible. We'll see what happens.

Have you tested this model to see if it actually works? I can't tell you how often I've had what I thought was a good scheduling solution only to discover it wasn't feasible in practice. When it gets complex, as this one is, there always seems to be a snag.

If you haven't tried to produce a schedule in this format yet, I'll take a stab at it. But it will take a while.

(08-12-2016 09:06 AM)Ragu Wrote:  

(08-12-2016 08:55 AM)Indytarheel Wrote:  

(08-11-2016 10:01 PM)Ragu Wrote:  Looks like the acc is going to punish their football schools yet again with this bs 9th game. Yet another example of this crappy conference hurting its football product

Right on cue. I guess since the network is going to happen and the expected money level is to be very close to Big and SEC money, scheduling is the only thing you can
B!$(# about. Never mind the fact that the conference is trying to create more inventory so that we can have the money and network you and fans like yourself B!$(#ed prior to the announcement.

Yep right on cue to you as well. Coastal teams getting what they want as usual to the detriment of fsu and Clemson. And then telling us just to take it or we are complaining

Easy not to complain when basketball schools get their way on football issues so much

It's better for college football to have great ooc matchups instead of more weak acc games.

Are you really going to be this bitter for the next 20+ years?

Because FSU is in the ACC for at least a couple of more decades.

By the way the 9 conference games wasn't agreed on today. To your shock I'm sure the ACC is trying to find a reasonable solution for the entire conference not just the Coastal Division teams or basketball schools.

If the league makes stupid decisions I won't be happy. And 9 games hurts fsu and Clemson.

If you don't like that then tough. People can name call and bash me on here like crazy and will get away with it but I'm not going to conform to your group think on bad decisions

(08-12-2016 10:11 AM)GTTiger Wrote:  

(08-12-2016 09:06 AM)Ragu Wrote:  

(08-12-2016 08:55 AM)Indytarheel Wrote:  

(08-11-2016 10:01 PM)Ragu Wrote:  Looks like the acc is going to punish their football schools yet again with this bs 9th game. Yet another example of this crappy conference hurting its football product

Right on cue. I guess since the network is going to happen and the expected money level is to be very close to Big and SEC money, scheduling is the only thing you can
B!$(# about. Never mind the fact that the conference is trying to create more inventory so that we can have the money and network you and fans like yourself B!$(#ed prior to the announcement.

Yep right on cue to you as well. Coastal teams getting what they want as usual to the detriment of fsu and Clemson. And then telling us just to take it or we are complaining

Easy not to complain when basketball schools get their way on football issues so much

It's better for college football to have great ooc matchups instead of more weak acc games.

Are you really going to be this bitter for the next 20+ years?

Because FSU is in the ACC for at least a couple of more decades.

By the way the 9 conference games wasn't agreed on today. To your shock I'm sure the ACC is trying to find a reasonable solution for the entire conference not just the Coastal Division teams or basketball schools.

Don't waste your time on him. He's only happy when he thinks he's a victim. Which, apparently, is all the time.

(08-12-2016 10:04 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-11-2016 09:37 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  If 9 conference games are adopted, it might be that the 9th game is not a simple rotation such that you go through you non-rivals over the course of three years. It could be a 6-1 (Annual Rival) - 1 (Bi-Annual Rivals) - 1 Rotate remaining 4.

This setup could get at the GT/FSU, UNC/Clemson, Clemson/UVa, NC State/Duke, NC State/VT, WF/UNC issue.

6 1 1 1

FSU - Atlantic - Miami - GT/Pitt - UVa/Duke/UNC/VT
CU - Atlantic - GT - UNC/UVA - Duke/Pitt/VT/Miami
NC State - Atlantic - UNC - Duke/VT - GT/Pitt/UVa/Miami
Louis - Atlantic - UVa - Miami/GT - UNC/Duke/Pitt/VT
WF - Atlantic - Duke - UNC/VT - Louis/Pitt/UVa/Miami
Syr - Atlantic - Pitt - Miami/Duke - UNC/GT/VT/UVa
BC - Atlantic - VT - UVa/Pitt - UNC/GT/Miami/Duke


UNC - Coastal - NC State - WF/Clemson - FSU/BC/Louis/Syr
Miami - Coastal - FSU - Louis/Syr - NC State/WF/BC/Clemson
Duke - Coastal - WF - NC State/Syr - FSU/CU/BC/Louis
VT - Coastal - BC - WF/NC State - Clemson/FSU/Louis/Syr
UVa - Coastal - Louis - BC/Clemson - FSU/Syracuse/WF/NC State
Pitt - Coastal - Syr - FSU/BC - NC State/WF/Louis/Clemson
GT - Coastal - CU - FSU/Louis - NC State/WF/BC/Syr

In some sense this is unfair, but it reduces the time to see all schools from six year to four and reduces home and away turnaround from 12 year to 8. An improvement. It also increases the number of crossover games that many programs have clamored about and wanted either for regional closeness, old rivalries, or just good road trips and TV.

Clemson, UVa, and UNC would be able to reconnect. Wake and UNC and Duke and NC State would be partially restored. An ideal connection between WF and VT would be established due to their close proximity. FSU would be in Atlanta every four years. Syracuse would restore it's connection with Miami. Louisville would be able to build on it's proximity to Atlanta. VT picks up what it wants most - games in the State of NC. While NC State gets back to having reasonable access to the State of VA.

We all know that some schools really don't want to play each other every year and for various reasons, just as some schools do want to play each other as often as possible. We'll see what happens.

Have you tested this model to see if it actually works? I can't tell you how often I've had what I thought was a good scheduling solution only to discover it wasn't feasible in practice. When it gets complex, as this one is, there always seems to be a snag.

If you haven't tried to produce a schedule in this format yet, I'll take a stab at it. But it will take a while.

OK. I tested it, and found that there is at least one feasible solution. If that's the case, then there are no doubt multiple feasible solutions. Which means we now have something to fill the time waiting for the Big XII to decide what they're going to do. We can argue over who each team's bi-annual rivals should be.

Unless, of course, the league goes back to 8 games.

FSU needing help to fill their stadium and hence the need to rotate in their closest ACC contact

Nice underhanded dig, but FSU wanting GT on the schedule has zero to do with filling the FSU stadium, it's about us having the opportunity to travel to the closest school in the conference more than once every 12 years. We've got this weird thing about liking to road trip to away games...most of you guys won't relate. It's a football school thing.

Getting GT won't do that much to fill up our stadium since they don't fill up their own in a city of 6 million, but we will sure as hell will sell out theirs.

He likes to bash fsu for lack of fan support while touting the sellouts at a huge 58 k capacity stadium. It's hilarious

And I wouldn't bash the acc if they did the right things. The 9 game talk is awful all around

People keep bringing up other conferences going to it. Well those leagues switched to geographic divisions as part of that switch So sure lets do that then to be consistent. Who cares if uva doesn't like it since they are locked in til 2036 with the gor!

I would switch VT and UVA for Clemson. I think that Clemson-VT game would be a bigger tv draw for the conference.

(08-12-2016 11:23 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-12-2016 10:11 AM)GTTiger Wrote:  

(08-12-2016 09:06 AM)Ragu Wrote:  

(08-12-2016 08:55 AM)Indytarheel Wrote:  

(08-11-2016 10:01 PM)Ragu Wrote:  Looks like the acc is going to punish their football schools yet again with this bs 9th game. Yet another example of this crappy conference hurting its football product

Right on cue. I guess since the network is going to happen and the expected money level is to be very close to Big and SEC money, scheduling is the only thing you can
B!$(# about. Never mind the fact that the conference is trying to create more inventory so that we can have the money and network you and fans like yourself B!$(#ed prior to the announcement.

Yep right on cue to you as well. Coastal teams getting what they want as usual to the detriment of fsu and Clemson. And then telling us just to take it or we are complaining

Easy not to complain when basketball schools get their way on football issues so much

It's better for college football to have great ooc matchups instead of more weak acc games.

Are you really going to be this bitter for the next 20+ years?

Because FSU is in the ACC for at least a couple of more decades.

By the way the 9 conference games wasn't agreed on today. To your shock I'm sure the ACC is trying to find a reasonable solution for the entire conference not just the Coastal Division teams or basketball schools.

Don't waste your time on him. He's only happy when he thinks he's a victim. Which, apparently, is all the time.