This is the latest rumor making its way around the internet. Add these 3 teams to get to 16 and somehow stabilize the ACC from further poaching.
The only way I see this possibly working is to make the divisions Old ACC vs Old Big East
Florida State
Clemson
Georgia Tech
Virginia
North Carolina
NC State
Duke
Wake Forest
Miami
Virginia Tech
Pitt
Louisville
Syracuse
Boston College
UConn
Cincy
Overall, they are pretty well balanced. These divisions would do the most to keep old rivalries. Seriously what big rivalry would not be solved with the simple crossovers for the 8th game?
FSU-Miami
Virginia-Virginia Tech
Are the only for sures on the crossovers. That is how much this makes sense. The crossovers aren't even needed except for 2 cases to keep the rivalries intact.
Va Tech could balk at this but most in the conference would love it. And if they want to leave for the SEC, the chaos will land 8 or 9 of these teams in another conference with more money/better overall teams anyways.
(11-24-2012 11:02 AM)Ragu Wrote: [ -> ]This is the latest rumor making its way around the internet. Add these 3 teams to get to 16 and somehow stabilize the ACC from further poaching.
The only way I see this possibly working is to make the divisions Old ACC vs Old Big East
Florida State
Clemson
Georgia Tech
Virginia
North Carolina
NC State
Duke
Wake Forest
Miami
Virginia Tech
Pitt
Louisville
Syracuse
Boston College
UConn
Cincy
Overall, they are pretty well balanced. These divisions would do the most to keep old rivalries. Seriously what big rivalry would not be solved with the simple crossovers for the 8th game?
FSU-Miami
Virginia-Virginia Tech
Are the only for sures on the crossovers. That is how much this makes sense. The crossovers aren't even needed except for 2 cases to keep the rivalries intact.
Va Tech could balk at this but most in the conference would love it. And if they want to leave for the SEC, the chaos will land 8 or 9 of these teams in another conference with more money/better overall teams anyways.
This makes a lot of sense. This is how these super conferences are going to look in the future. Really like two separate 8 or 9 team conferences. Would love to see this if we go to 16. Also agree that if it doesnt work, there will be a landing spot for many of the schools (especially UNC, which is my main concern.)
(11-24-2012 11:10 AM)samandrea Wrote: [ -> ]This makes a lot of sense. This is how these super conferences are going to look in the future. Really like two separate 8 or 9 team conferences. Would love to see this if we go to 16. Also agree that if it doesnt work, there will be a landing spot for many of the schools (especially UNC, which is my main concern.)
The pod model makes 1,000X more sense to me. Keeping two a division 16 team ACC is essentially like two power conferences (the BIG EAST and the ACC) deciding to give up a BCS bid so that they could negotiate a TV contract together. In a pod model, at least every team plays every other team at one point in time (once every 3 years), and there are two additional division championship games that generate extra revenue, and (hopefully) help SOS's.
Not only would a pod model make the ACC feel more like one conference, but it would also generate a lot more money.
This does not allow for an open position for ND to join should they want to do so and therefore I don't buy it.
(11-24-2012 12:04 PM)nzmorange Wrote: [ -> ] (11-24-2012 11:10 AM)samandrea Wrote: [ -> ]This makes a lot of sense. This is how these super conferences are going to look in the future. Really like two separate 8 or 9 team conferences. Would love to see this if we go to 16. Also agree that if it doesnt work, there will be a landing spot for many of the schools (especially UNC, which is my main concern.)
The pod model makes 1,000X more sense to me. Keeping two a division 16 team ACC is essentially like two power conferences (the BIG EAST and the ACC) deciding to give up a BCS bid so that they could negotiate a TV contract together. In a pod model, at least every team plays every other team at one point in time (once every 3 years), and there are two additional division championship games that generate extra revenue, and (hopefully) help SOS's.
Not only would a pod model make the ACC feel more like one conference, but it would also generate a lot more money.
i think we are going to have to get used to the concept of not playing every team IMO, it's more important to try to keep natural rivalries intack as much as possible & increase the chances of the champion being ranked as high as possible
Well if those schools are added that must mean that FSU and Clemson signed off on the move. I don't quite understand how those moves would prevent those two from leaving, but if they do sign off on the move maybe it does?
If Miami and Va Tech have permanent cross-division rivals, this means that none of the "old Big East" teams will ever get to play FSU or Virginia.
I wouldn't mind that setup but I think you need to go to 9 games then.
(11-24-2012 01:05 PM)ndlutz Wrote: [ -> ]I wouldn't mind that setup but I think you need to go to 9 games then.
FSU and Clemson already balked at a 9 game schedule.
(11-24-2012 01:00 PM)Bearcat_Bounce Wrote: [ -> ]Well if those schools are added that must mean that FSU and Clemson signed off on the move. I don't quite understand how those moves would prevent those two from leaving, but if they do sign off on the move maybe it does?
Clemson has about a 20% chance or less to leave anytime soon. remeber they voted for the exit fee increase. FSU's fan base might won't to leave but i don't remember them complaining when they dominated a weaker ACC& still were able to play in big bowls& national championships.
(11-24-2012 01:07 PM)OrangeXtreme Wrote: [ -> ] (11-24-2012 01:05 PM)ndlutz Wrote: [ -> ]I wouldn't mind that setup but I think you need to go to 9 games then.
FSU and Clemson already balked at a 9 game schedule.
Yes, but that was before GT would have been on their schedule yearly.
(11-24-2012 11:02 AM)Ragu Wrote: [ -> ]This is the latest rumor making its way around the internet. Add these 3 teams to get to 16 and somehow stabilize the ACC from further poaching.
The only way I see this possibly working is to make the divisions Old ACC vs Old Big East
Florida State
Clemson
Georgia Tech
Virginia
North Carolina
NC State
Duke
Wake Forest
Miami
Virginia Tech
Pitt
Louisville
Syracuse
Boston College
UConn
Cincy
Overall, they are pretty well balanced. These divisions would do the most to keep old rivalries. Seriously what big rivalry would not be solved with the simple crossovers for the 8th game?
FSU-Miami
Virginia-Virginia Tech
Are the only for sures on the crossovers. That is how much this makes sense. The crossovers aren't even needed except for 2 cases to keep the rivalries intact.
Va Tech could balk at this but most in the conference would love it. And if they want to leave for the SEC, the chaos will land 8 or 9 of these teams in another conference with more money/better overall teams anyways.
how about we keep current divisions with a few tweaks.
atlantic<-------------------------------------->Coastal
Florida State<--------------------------------->Miami fl
Clemson<-------------------------------------->Virginia Tech
Georgia Tech<---------------------------------->Virginia
Nc State<-------------------------------------->North Carolina
Wake Forest<----------------------------------->Duke
Syracuse<--------------------------------------->Pittsburgh
Boston College<------------------------------->Connecticut
Cincinnati<---------------------------------------->Louisville
you can put louisville/cincy in either division as you prefer.Id go back to a 9 game schedule starting in 2016 giving teams time to get prepared for having nd non conference games by them in addition to 9 game schedule
(11-24-2012 12:39 PM)mj4life Wrote: [ -> ] (11-24-2012 12:04 PM)nzmorange Wrote: [ -> ] (11-24-2012 11:10 AM)samandrea Wrote: [ -> ]This makes a lot of sense. This is how these super conferences are going to look in the future. Really like two separate 8 or 9 team conferences. Would love to see this if we go to 16. Also agree that if it doesnt work, there will be a landing spot for many of the schools (especially UNC, which is my main concern.)
The pod model makes 1,000X more sense to me. Keeping two a division 16 team ACC is essentially like two power conferences (the BIG EAST and the ACC) deciding to give up a BCS bid so that they could negotiate a TV contract together. In a pod model, at least every team plays every other team at one point in time (once every 3 years), and there are two additional division championship games that generate extra revenue, and (hopefully) help SOS's.
Not only would a pod model make the ACC feel more like one conference, but it would also generate a lot more money.
i think we are going to have to get used to the concept of not playing every team IMO, it's more important to try to keep natural rivalries intack as much as possible & increase the chances of the champion being ranked as high as possible
The pod system is just as good at keeping rivalries intact (put the rivals in the same pod, or make them crossover partners), and it is better at giving a team a chance to have a high ranking, because it adds an extra quality game at the end of the year. There really isn't a reason to not use the pod system.
(11-24-2012 01:49 PM)nzmorange Wrote: [ -> ] (11-24-2012 12:39 PM)mj4life Wrote: [ -> ] (11-24-2012 12:04 PM)nzmorange Wrote: [ -> ] (11-24-2012 11:10 AM)samandrea Wrote: [ -> ]This makes a lot of sense. This is how these super conferences are going to look in the future. Really like two separate 8 or 9 team conferences. Would love to see this if we go to 16. Also agree that if it doesnt work, there will be a landing spot for many of the schools (especially UNC, which is my main concern.)
The pod model makes 1,000X more sense to me. Keeping two a division 16 team ACC is essentially like two power conferences (the BIG EAST and the ACC) deciding to give up a BCS bid so that they could negotiate a TV contract together. In a pod model, at least every team plays every other team at one point in time (once every 3 years), and there are two additional division championship games that generate extra revenue, and (hopefully) help SOS's.
Not only would a pod model make the ACC feel more like one conference, but it would also generate a lot more money.
i think we are going to have to get used to the concept of not playing every team IMO, it's more important to try to keep natural rivalries intack as much as possible & increase the chances of the champion being ranked as high as possible
The pod system is just as good at keeping rivalries intact (put the rivals in the same pod, or make them crossover partners), and it is better at giving a team a chance to have a high ranking, because it adds an extra quality game at the end of the year. There really isn't a reason to not use the pod system.
i'm not against the pod system just not sure the ncaa allows you to do this & hold a championship game.
(11-24-2012 01:07 PM)OrangeXtreme Wrote: [ -> ] (11-24-2012 01:05 PM)ndlutz Wrote: [ -> ]I wouldn't mind that setup but I think you need to go to 9 games then.
FSU and Clemson already balked at a 9 game schedule.
Be real. The reason it didn't happen is because Notre Dame didn't want it.
(11-24-2012 01:15 PM)mj4life Wrote: [ -> ] (11-24-2012 01:00 PM)Bearcat_Bounce Wrote: [ -> ]Well if those schools are added that must mean that FSU and Clemson signed off on the move. I don't quite understand how those moves would prevent those two from leaving, but if they do sign off on the move maybe it does?
Clemson has about a 20% chance or less to leave anytime soon. remeber they voted for the exit fee increase. FSU's fan base might won't to leave but i don't remember them complaining when they dominated a weaker ACC& still were able to play in big bowls& national championships.
Maybe because these other conferences weren't having 8-figure conference revenue gaps over FSU at that time?
(11-24-2012 01:49 PM)nzmorange Wrote: [ -> ] (11-24-2012 12:39 PM)mj4life Wrote: [ -> ] (11-24-2012 12:04 PM)nzmorange Wrote: [ -> ] (11-24-2012 11:10 AM)samandrea Wrote: [ -> ]This makes a lot of sense. This is how these super conferences are going to look in the future. Really like two separate 8 or 9 team conferences. Would love to see this if we go to 16. Also agree that if it doesnt work, there will be a landing spot for many of the schools (especially UNC, which is my main concern.)
The pod model makes 1,000X more sense to me. Keeping two a division 16 team ACC is essentially like two power conferences (the BIG EAST and the ACC) deciding to give up a BCS bid so that they could negotiate a TV contract together. In a pod model, at least every team plays every other team at one point in time (once every 3 years), and there are two additional division championship games that generate extra revenue, and (hopefully) help SOS's.
Not only would a pod model make the ACC feel more like one conference, but it would also generate a lot more money.
i think we are going to have to get used to the concept of not playing every team IMO, it's more important to try to keep natural rivalries intack as much as possible & increase the chances of the champion being ranked as high as possible
The pod system is just as good at keeping rivalries intact (put the rivals in the same pod, or make them crossover partners), and it is better at giving a team a chance to have a high ranking, because it adds an extra quality game at the end of the year. There really isn't a reason to not use the pod system.
NCAA rules state that if you are planning on playing a conference championship game, you must have two divisions.
You cannot have 4 pods, 2 divisional championship games, and a CCG.
(11-24-2012 02:01 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote: [ -> ] (11-24-2012 01:15 PM)mj4life Wrote: [ -> ] (11-24-2012 01:00 PM)Bearcat_Bounce Wrote: [ -> ]Well if those schools are added that must mean that FSU and Clemson signed off on the move. I don't quite understand how those moves would prevent those two from leaving, but if they do sign off on the move maybe it does?
Clemson has about a 20% chance or less to leave anytime soon. remeber they voted for the exit fee increase. FSU's fan base might won't to leave but i don't remember them complaining when they dominated a weaker ACC& still were able to play in big bowls& national championships.
Maybe because these other conferences weren't having 8-figure conference revenue gaps over FSU at that time?
the B12's contract is only a couple million different & FSU going there won't change the contract they have enough to make up for the extra travel cost. how would FSU feel about not only having more travel cost & having to wait 3 years to get a full share of the tv pie?
(11-24-2012 02:03 PM)OrangeXtreme Wrote: [ -> ] (11-24-2012 01:49 PM)nzmorange Wrote: [ -> ] (11-24-2012 12:39 PM)mj4life Wrote: [ -> ] (11-24-2012 12:04 PM)nzmorange Wrote: [ -> ] (11-24-2012 11:10 AM)samandrea Wrote: [ -> ]This makes a lot of sense. This is how these super conferences are going to look in the future. Really like two separate 8 or 9 team conferences. Would love to see this if we go to 16. Also agree that if it doesnt work, there will be a landing spot for many of the schools (especially UNC, which is my main concern.)
The pod model makes 1,000X more sense to me. Keeping two a division 16 team ACC is essentially like two power conferences (the BIG EAST and the ACC) deciding to give up a BCS bid so that they could negotiate a TV contract together. In a pod model, at least every team plays every other team at one point in time (once every 3 years), and there are two additional division championship games that generate extra revenue, and (hopefully) help SOS's.
Not only would a pod model make the ACC feel more like one conference, but it would also generate a lot more money.
i think we are going to have to get used to the concept of not playing every team IMO, it's more important to try to keep natural rivalries intack as much as possible & increase the chances of the champion being ranked as high as possible
The pod system is just as good at keeping rivalries intact (put the rivals in the same pod, or make them crossover partners), and it is better at giving a team a chance to have a high ranking, because it adds an extra quality game at the end of the year. There really isn't a reason to not use the pod system.
NCAA rules state that if you are planning on playing a conference championship game, you must have two divisions.
You cannot have 4 pods, 2 divisional championship games, and a CCG.
I would be absolutely amazed if the NCAA said no. When is the last time that the NCAA ever said no to free money?
(11-24-2012 02:19 PM)nzmorange Wrote: [ -> ]I would be absolutely amazed if the NCAA said no. When is the last time that the NCAA ever said no to free money?
2005. When the ACC wanted to play a CCG with only 11 teams.