(10-09-2016 05:29 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Now that we have this question put to bed can we switch Louisville crossover from Virginia to VT? It would add another content game & would give U of L's SOS a much needed boost.

I'd like to second that motion!

Got 'er done! VT needs another quality win...

(10-09-2016 01:18 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  So we are stuck with an east/west zipper until and unless something happens with a 16th school that changes the dynamics.

Except what we have is neither east/west nor a zipper. It's an artificial abomination created to benefit UNC with less travel and access to better recruiting areas.

There is a new piece of news that relates to this thread, in a new post by ESPN blogger David Hale, he interviews new Syracuse AD John Wildhack and this little gem was in the article/post:

"Q: One of the issues that favored a nine-game schedule was the challenge of finding enough nonconference opponents every year. Some programs have discussed playing an ACC opponent that is designated as a nonconference game. What are your feelings on that?"

"A: We're allowed to do that, to play an ACC team that's not on our schedule and have that count as a nonconference game. That's one path. I think the other is we've got a series scheduled with Maryland, a return game with Connecticut, a series scheduled with Army -- I think there are games -- good games -- out there. Maybe you've got to be a little more creative, work a little bit harder, but I'm confident that we'll be able to build a nonconference schedule that will be competitive and also one that's realistic for us."

Here is a link to the article:
ESPN Article by David Hale

I believe this is a good compromise for the conference.

(10-14-2016 05:22 PM)JAE_VT Wrote:  There is a new piece of news that relates to this thread, in a new post by ESPN blogger David Hale, he interviews new Syracuse AD John Wildhack and this little gem was in the article/post:

"Q: One of the issues that favored a nine-game schedule was the challenge of finding enough nonconference opponents every year. Some programs have discussed playing an ACC opponent that is designated as a nonconference game. What are your feelings on that?"

"A: We're allowed to do that, to play an ACC team that's not on our schedule and have that count as a nonconference game. That's one path. I think the other is we've got a series scheduled with Maryland, a return game with Connecticut, a series scheduled with Army -- I think there are games -- good games -- out there. Maybe you've got to be a little more creative, work a little bit harder, but I'm confident that we'll be able to build a nonconference schedule that will be competitive and also one that's realistic for us."

Here is a link to the article:
ESPN Article by David Hale

I believe this is a good compromise for the conference.

Well there you go -- FSU can play Georgia Tech to their heart's content without the rest of us having to reassemble the divisions.

Sent from my LG-H810 using Tapatalk

I told you guys back in the Summer Cuse's AD was an 8 game guy.

(10-14-2016 06:49 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  I told you guys back in the Summer Cuse's AD was an 8 game guy.

Obviously an intelligent fellow.

(10-09-2016 09:09 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 01:18 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  So we are stuck with an east/west zipper until and unless something happens with a 16th school that changes the dynamics.

Except what we have is neither east/west nor a zipper. It's an artificial abomination created to benefit UNC with less travel and access to better recruiting areas.

I guess that's because so many of the league's members think it's critical to the league that UNC football be happy. I guess that's also why the league gangs up on NC State and makes sure the referees do everything they can to keep the Wolfpack down. You have to give the Tarheels credit for being able to bring all of the new members in the league in on these conspiracies.

(10-14-2016 05:37 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(10-14-2016 05:22 PM)JAE_VT Wrote:  There is a new piece of news that relates to this thread, in a new post by ESPN blogger David Hale, he interviews new Syracuse AD John Wildhack and this little gem was in the article/post:

"Q: One of the issues that favored a nine-game schedule was the challenge of finding enough nonconference opponents every year. Some programs have discussed playing an ACC opponent that is designated as a nonconference game. What are your feelings on that?"

"A: We're allowed to do that, to play an ACC team that's not on our schedule and have that count as a nonconference game. That's one path. I think the other is we've got a series scheduled with Maryland, a return game with Connecticut, a series scheduled with Army -- I think there are games -- good games -- out there. Maybe you've got to be a little more creative, work a little bit harder, but I'm confident that we'll be able to build a nonconference schedule that will be competitive and also one that's realistic for us."

Here is a link to the article:
ESPN Article by David Hale

I believe this is a good compromise for the conference.

Well there you go -- FSU can play Georgia Tech to their heart's content without the rest of us having to reassemble the divisions.

Sent from my LG-H810 using Tapatalk

I did imagine a different solution, and it would let FSU play Georgia Tech every year. It would require cooperation between the ACC, SEC and ESPN.

In my twisted mind I envision the two leagues making an even trade, no exit fees or other penalties. Swap NC State and South Carolina. State needs to get out of UNC's shadow, and this would help. And the SEC would like to be in North Carolina.

The new ACC divisions could look like this: ACC team (permanent x-over) [OOC rival]:

Atlantic

Florida St...(Miami)...[Florida]
Clemson...(Va Tech)...[Auburn]
South Carolina...(UNC)...[Tennessee]
Georgia Tech...(Duke)...[Georgia]
Pitt...(Louisville)...[Penn State]
Syracuse...(Virginia)...[Rutgers]
BC...(Wake Forest)...[UConn/UMass]

Coastal

Miami...(Florida St)...[ ??? ]
UNC...(South Carolina)...[NC State]
Duke...(Georgia Tech)...[Vandy / NC State]
Wake Forest...(BC)...[NC State / Vandy]
Va Tech...(Clemson)...[ ??? ]
Virginia...(Syracuse)...[Maryland]
Louisville...(Pitt)...[Kentucky]

I'm trying to figure out why Kaplony won't like this. I'm sure he'll find something.

(10-15-2016 09:59 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(10-14-2016 05:37 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(10-14-2016 05:22 PM)JAE_VT Wrote:  There is a new piece of news that relates to this thread, in a new post by ESPN blogger David Hale, he interviews new Syracuse AD John Wildhack and this little gem was in the article/post:

"Q: One of the issues that favored a nine-game schedule was the challenge of finding enough nonconference opponents every year. Some programs have discussed playing an ACC opponent that is designated as a nonconference game. What are your feelings on that?"

"A: We're allowed to do that, to play an ACC team that's not on our schedule and have that count as a nonconference game. That's one path. I think the other is we've got a series scheduled with Maryland, a return game with Connecticut, a series scheduled with Army -- I think there are games -- good games -- out there. Maybe you've got to be a little more creative, work a little bit harder, but I'm confident that we'll be able to build a nonconference schedule that will be competitive and also one that's realistic for us."

Here is a link to the article:
ESPN Article by David Hale

I believe this is a good compromise for the conference.

Well there you go -- FSU can play Georgia Tech to their heart's content without the rest of us having to reassemble the divisions.

Sent from my LG-H810 using Tapatalk

I did imagine a different solution, and it would let FSU play Georgia Tech every year. It would require cooperation between the ACC, SEC and ESPN.

In my twisted mind I envision the two leagues making an even trade, no exit fees or other penalties. Swap NC State and South Carolina. State needs to get out of UNC's shadow, and this would help. And the SEC would like to be in North Carolina.

The new ACC divisions could look like this: ACC team (permanent x-over) [OOC rival]:

Atlantic

Florida St...(Miami)...[Florida]
Clemson...(Va Tech)...[Auburn]
South Carolina...(UNC)...[Tennessee]
Georgia Tech...(Duke)...[Georgia]
Pitt...(Louisville)...[Penn State]
Syracuse...(Virginia)...[Rutgers]
BC...(Wake Forest)...[UConn/UMass]

Coastal

Miami...(Florida St)...[ ??? ]
UNC...(South Carolina)...[NC State]
Duke...(Georgia Tech)...[Vandy / NC State]
Wake Forest...(BC)...[NC State / Vandy]
Va Tech...(Clemson)...[ ??? ]
Virginia...(Syracuse)...[Maryland]
Louisville...(Pitt)...[Kentucky]

I'm trying to figure out why Kaplony won't like this. I'm sure he'll find something.

Leave it to a UNC troll to devise a negative trade for the conference. ACC adds no footprint, SEC adds NC. So typical.

A fair trade between the ACC and SEC for NC State would be either Auburn or Vandy - adds Alabama or Tennessee for North Carolina. The same trade could be with the Big 10 for Purdue or Michigan State.

(10-14-2016 07:45 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 09:09 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 01:18 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  So we are stuck with an east/west zipper until and unless something happens with a 16th school that changes the dynamics.

Except what we have is neither east/west nor a zipper. It's an artificial abomination created to benefit UNC with less travel and access to better recruiting areas.

I guess that's because so many of the league's members think it's critical to the league that UNC football be happy. I guess that's also why the league gangs up on NC State and makes sure the referees do everything they can to keep the Wolfpack down. You have to give the Tarheels credit for being able to bring all of the new members in the league in on these conspiracies.

It is obvious that Raleigh has rubbed off on you and by the way it's Tar Heels.

(10-09-2016 09:09 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 01:18 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  So we are stuck with an east/west zipper until and unless something happens with a 16th school that changes the dynamics.

Except what we have is neither east/west nor a zipper. It's an artificial abomination created to benefit UNC with less travel and access to better recruiting areas.

What would you change?

I feel like VaTech and Syracuse could swap.

UVa-VT
SU-BC
Pitt-Louisville

(10-15-2016 03:09 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 09:09 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 01:18 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  So we are stuck with an east/west zipper until and unless something happens with a 16th school that changes the dynamics.

Except what we have is neither east/west nor a zipper. It's an artificial abomination created to benefit UNC with less travel and access to better recruiting areas.

What would you change?

I feel like VaTech and Syracuse could swap.

UVa-VT
SU-BC
Pitt-Louisville

You want to put Miami on SU's schedule w/o making us give up either BC or Pitt? ... WORKS FOR ME!

(10-15-2016 02:08 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(10-14-2016 07:45 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 09:09 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 01:18 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  So we are stuck with an east/west zipper until and unless something happens with a 16th school that changes the dynamics.

Except what we have is neither east/west nor a zipper. It's an artificial abomination created to benefit UNC with less travel and access to better recruiting areas.

I guess that's because so many of the league's members think it's critical to the league that UNC football be happy. I guess that's also why the league gangs up on NC State and makes sure the referees do everything they can to keep the Wolfpack down. You have to give the Tarheels credit for being able to bring all of the new members in the league in on these conspiracies.

It is obvious that Raleigh has rubbed off on you and by the way it's Tar Heels.

Your sarcasm detector needs a tuneup.

(10-15-2016 04:44 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(10-15-2016 02:08 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(10-14-2016 07:45 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 09:09 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 01:18 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  So we are stuck with an east/west zipper until and unless something happens with a 16th school that changes the dynamics.

Except what we have is neither east/west nor a zipper. It's an artificial abomination created to benefit UNC with less travel and access to better recruiting areas.

I guess that's because so many of the league's members think it's critical to the league that UNC football be happy. I guess that's also why the league gangs up on NC State and makes sure the referees do everything they can to keep the Wolfpack down. You have to give the Tarheels credit for being able to bring all of the new members in the league in on these conspiracies.

It is obvious that Raleigh has rubbed off on you and by the way it's Tar Heels.

Your sarcasm detector needs a tuneup.

X - he's one of yours and keeps it on the QT

With the league now committed to retaining the 8 game league schedule, the problem of having some teams meeting only every six years remains. I would prefer to change to a 6-1-6 model. Here you play your six division mates every year, one OOD opponent every other year, and the other six OOD opponents every fourth year.

To do this, you would have to realign the divisions so that the true permanent rivals that now play as crossovers be placed in the same division as their rival. In this scenario, Georgia Tech would have to be in Clemson's division, Miami in Florida State's, NC State in UNC's, and Pitt in Syracuse's. Virginia and Va Tech are already in the same division.

The result is not a zipper, but a sandwich. The four southern schools would all be in the same division, and the three northeast schools in that same division. They are the bread of the sandwich. The meat is Tobacco Road plus Louisville.

The divisions then look like this, with possible semi-rival (every other year) along side:

Florida State......Va Tech
Clemson............NC State
Georgia Tech......UNC
Miami................Louisville
Pitt...................Virginia
Syracuse...........Duke
BC....................Wake Forest

I'm not married to these pairings. Since it only involves one extra game every four years, it's not that critical or contentious. I would guess that State would want to continue to play Clemson more often, even though the series has become lopsided recently. But Clemson may not care to play State. Georgia Tech might prefer Duke, but for competitive and alumni reasons, the Devils may prefer a northern game.

These divisions are not (currently) balanced strength wise. I'm not sure that's as important as having more schools getting to play the teams they most want to play. And they aren't so imbalanced that they would routinely provide an uninteresting CCG matchup.

I think people need to understand that realigning divisions even halfway geographically is never going to fly in the ACC. First off, it's too important that every team play a game in Florida every year so FSU and Miami will always be in opposite divisions.

I did a quick check - every NC school has about a dozen guys from Florida on their football roster. So, by reducing your footprint, you're also limiting your recruiting base. You might play every team in NC every year, but you're also conceding major recruiting grounds in FL, GA and SC.

The size of the ACC makes it impossible to please everybody. Honestly, I think the best thing that could be done is to provide incentives to schedule "out-of-conference" matchups when teams don't play each other within the conference that year. ESPN would love that from an inventory standpoint. More frequent matchups of Clemson-Miami, Clemson-VT, FSU-VT would be easy to sell on ESPN or ABC, and more Pitt-Syracuse, Pitt-BC, VT-Syracuse, and cross division NC matchups would be excellent for the ACC Network.

Find some way to give Louisville VT more often & we'll be thrilled. Switch them with Virginia as our crossover or switch them with State, WF, BC or Cuse.

Perhaps?
FSU-Miami
Clemson-GT
VT-Virginia
UL-NC
WF-Duke
BC-NC St
Cuse-Pitt (maybe switch them to?)

(10-17-2016 09:55 AM)H.U.S.T.L.E. Wrote:  I think people need to understand that realigning divisions even halfway geographically is never going to fly in the ACC. First off, it's too important that every team play a game in Florida every year so FSU and Miami will always be in opposite divisions.

I did a quick check - every NC school has about a dozen guys from Florida on their football roster. So, by reducing your footprint, you're also limiting your recruiting base. You might play every team in NC every year, but you're also conceding major recruiting grounds in FL, GA and SC.

The size of the ACC makes it impossible to please everybody. Honestly, I think the best thing that could be done is to provide incentives to schedule "out-of-conference" matchups when teams don't play each other within the conference that year. ESPN would love that from an inventory standpoint. More frequent matchups of Clemson-Miami, Clemson-VT, FSU-VT would be easy to sell on ESPN or ABC, and more Pitt-Syracuse, Pitt-BC, VT-Syracuse, and cross division NC matchups would be excellent for the ACC Network.

+1

More of the following:

Clemson / North Carolina
FSU / North Carolina
FSU / Georgia Tech
Virginia Tech / NC State (if only for gate receipts)
Syracuse / North Carolina
Louisville / North Carolina
Louisville / Virginia Tech

I'm surprised that given how Clemson fills a stadium that Duke and Clemson haven't been able to schedule a series. Then again, maybe it's to Duke's advantage NOT to do that.

(10-17-2016 11:13 AM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(10-17-2016 09:55 AM)H.U.S.T.L.E. Wrote:  I think people need to understand that realigning divisions even halfway geographically is never going to fly in the ACC. First off, it's too important that every team play a game in Florida every year so FSU and Miami will always be in opposite divisions.

I did a quick check - every NC school has about a dozen guys from Florida on their football roster. So, by reducing your footprint, you're also limiting your recruiting base. You might play every team in NC every year, but you're also conceding major recruiting grounds in FL, GA and SC.

The size of the ACC makes it impossible to please everybody. Honestly, I think the best thing that could be done is to provide incentives to schedule "out-of-conference" matchups when teams don't play each other within the conference that year. ESPN would love that from an inventory standpoint. More frequent matchups of Clemson-Miami, Clemson-VT, FSU-VT would be easy to sell on ESPN or ABC, and more Pitt-Syracuse, Pitt-BC, VT-Syracuse, and cross division NC matchups would be excellent for the ACC Network.

+1

More of the following:

Clemson / North Carolina
FSU / North Carolina
FSU / Georgia Tech
Virginia Tech / NC State (if only for gate receipts)
Syracuse / North Carolina
Louisville / North Carolina
Louisville / Virginia Tech

Why? It's not a Clemson rivalry and evidently not on the UNC side either since they don't travel to Clemson and there's always plenty of empty seats in Chapel Hill.

UNC/FSU should be played more often, but not necessarily UNC/Clemson. Obviously FSU would also benefit from playing GT and VT, plus probably UVA more often too.

From the Coastal division, Clemson benefits most from playing Miami and VT (maybe Pitt, tbd).

VT would sell-out games against FSU, Clemson, Louisville, Syracuse, probably NC State and Wake Forest - in other words, every Atlantic team except the one we play annually (BC)!

JMO.