CSNbbs

http://msn.foxsports.com/carolinas/story...ngs-051614

of note, based on prior discussion, "A decision on divisions likely won't be made until after August" after the NCAA legislation is approved.

further...
"And that would, of course, lead to the ACC potentially deciding to scrap divisions altogether. But plenty of coaches have come out against that idea, and so it remains to be seen if it would even pass were it proposed. But it's on the horizon."

(05-16-2014 04:01 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote: [ -> ]http://msn.foxsports.com/carolinas/story...ngs-051614

of note, based on prior discussion, "A decision on divisions likely won't be made until after August" after the NCAA legislation is approved.

further...
"And that would, of course, lead to the ACC potentially deciding to scrap divisions altogether. But plenty of coaches have come out against that idea, and so it remains to be seen if it would even pass were it proposed. But it's on the horizon."

But that doesn't fit the narrative Paco. . .

(05-16-2014 04:01 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote: [ -> ]http://msn.foxsports.com/carolinas/story...ngs-051614

of note, based on prior discussion, "A decision on divisions likely won't be made until after August" after the NCAA legislation is approved.

further...
"And that would, of course, lead to the ACC potentially deciding to scrap divisions altogether. But plenty of coaches have come out against that idea, and so it remains to be seen if it would even pass were it proposed. But it's on the horizon."

I'll bet the majority of these coaches are in the Coastal Division.

Cheers,
Neil

They know its going to pass.
I have no clue, but I think if there was enough push (if any at all), they would have already done it.

(05-17-2014 01:13 PM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote: [ -> ]They know its going to pass.
I have no clue, but I think if there was enough push (if any at all), they would have already done it.

Why? Why would they vote on something which is still against NCAA rules?

If they all the ACC to decide it Champion any way it chooses please go to the 3 "Locked" games and 5 Rotating Games....split the Florida/Virginia/North Carolina schools for the other schools on a rotating basis...

(05-17-2014 01:45 PM)Maize Wrote: [ -> ]If they all the ACC to decide it Champion any way it chooses please go to the 3 "Locked" games and 5 Rotating Games....split the Florida/Virginia/North Carolina schools for the other schools on a rotating basis...

DONE.



Va Tech's schedule for 2015 might look like this:

(05-17-2014 01:43 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2014 01:13 PM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote: [ -> ]They know its going to pass.
I have no clue, but I think if there was enough push (if any at all), they would have already done it.

Why? Why would they vote on something which is still against NCAA rules?

Are they not allowed to have a plan in place until after the NCAA passes it? Is that some obscure NCAA/ACC bylaw?

(05-17-2014 03:01 PM)Marge Schott Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2014 01:43 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2014 01:13 PM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote: [ -> ]They know its going to pass.
I have no clue, but I think if there was enough push (if any at all), they would have already done it.

Why? Why would they vote on something which is still against NCAA rules?

Are they not allowed to have a plan in place until after the NCAA passes it? Is that some obscure NCAA/ACC bylaw?

They may have one, but why in the world would they need to tell us what it is?

maybe, but also floating the extra 'non conf' acc games idea kind of makes me think the 3+5 no divisions thing not really close right now.

the playing non conference acc games seems to me to be if for some reason ncaa denies the legislation since acc can't get enough support to adjust the divisions while maintaining 8 games while having to play everyone in division every year. ACC is saying NCAA you better approve this or we will schedule OOC ACC games. Even if they want to keep divisions and play 8 games just make it not mandatory to play everyone in your division yearly(5 division games,1 perm rival from other division then rotate 2 per year from other division so you play everyone every 3 years. You would play teams from your division 10 times over 12 years)

(05-17-2014 06:01 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2014 03:01 PM)Marge Schott Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2014 01:43 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2014 01:13 PM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote: [ -> ]They know its going to pass.
I have no clue, but I think if there was enough push (if any at all), they would have already done it.

Why? Why would they vote on something which is still against NCAA rules?

Are they not allowed to have a plan in place until after the NCAA passes it? Is that some obscure NCAA/ACC bylaw?

They may have one, but why in the world would they need to tell us what it is?

Your second question is completely different from your first. The first one is a terrible "point" several others think they've been making, too.

The second is a valid question. But what good is being done by not telling "us"? Seriously, what benefit is there to it, and what harm are they preventing from occurring? I'm not saying they need to have all of the details figured out and announced, but there really shouldn't be an issue stating whether the ACC will pursue an alternative scheduling/championship arrangement or not. And in general I think a consortium comprised of a bunch of tax-exempt, taxpayer-funded institutions should be more forthright in its proceedings.

(05-17-2014 06:52 PM)Marge Schott Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2014 06:01 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2014 03:01 PM)Marge Schott Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2014 01:43 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2014 01:13 PM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote: [ -> ]They know its going to pass.
I have no clue, but I think if there was enough push (if any at all), they would have already done it.

Why? Why would they vote on something which is still against NCAA rules?

Are they not allowed to have a plan in place until after the NCAA passes it? Is that some obscure NCAA/ACC bylaw?

They may have one, but why in the world would they need to tell us what it is?

Your second question is completely different from your first. The first one is a terrible "point" several others think they've been making, too.

The second is a valid question. But what good is being done by not telling "us"? Seriously, what benefit is there to it, and what harm are they preventing from occurring? I'm not saying they need to have all of the details figured out and announced, but there really shouldn't be an issue stating whether the ACC will pursue an alternative scheduling/championship arrangement or not. And in general I think a consortium comprised of a bunch of tax-exempt, taxpayer-funded institutions should be more forthright in its proceedings.

I don't know how it makes sense to spend time voting on something involving a hypothetical rule change; and it is even dumber to waste time on it if they know it isn't going to pass. All public indications were that nothing concerning divisions was going to pass if it was voted on this past week, so proponents of division change should be happy they punted it down the road in order to give it more time to garner support. And just because it doesn't happen now, or in the fall, or whenever, doesn't mean it won't be revisited in the future. Nor does that mean it will ever happen. One thing for sure, no change was going to happen for the 2014 season anyway.

But this notion that fans should know about latest inside machinations of the conference at the moment which they demand is just plain juvenile impetuosity. No conference operates like that. And if you think that they do because you've read some blabberings of self-proclaimed message board insiders, then you can't be helped. It is a certainty that the most important and sensitive things that were discussed, and dealing with divisions certainly could be sensitive, won't ever get into the media or onto the message boards, nor should they.

And tax exempt does not mean "public". Seven ACC schools aren't subject to public sunshine laws and neither is the conference itself. If you want to hamstring the conference, then by all means, let it be subject to "openness" that no other sports league in the country is subjected to. Otherwise, if one can't stop themselves from stomping their feet and holding their breath for not getting the inside information that they want when they want it, feel free to use a public records request to retrieve documents from places like FSU.