The 2017-18 season ended with 4 ACC teams ranked in the top 25 - 2 in the Atlantic division, 2 in the Coastal division. Balanced, right? Not exactly. Look at the Massey rankings for the whole conference:
Massey________ Division
5. Clemson_____ Atlantic
13. Miami______ Coastal
19. NC State___ Atlantic
23. Va Tech____ Coastal
29. Wake Forest Atlantic
32. Louisville_ Atlantic
34. Boston Coll Atlantic
35. Florida St_ Atlantic
44. Duke_______ Coastal
51. Ga Tech____ Coastal
62. Pittsburgh_ Coastal
72. Virginia___ Coastal
74. Syracuse___ Atlantic
90. N Carolina_ Coastal
PROBLEM: the Atlantic division has 6 of the top 8 teams, while the Coastal has 5 of the bottom 6. Anything but balanced!
When (not if) FSU gets back on track, that just makes matters worse.
PROPOSAL: What if the ACC divisions were Atlantic (i.e. old ACC teams) and "East" (i.e. old Big East teams, plus Wake Forest)? Here's what it would look like...
Massey________ Division
5. Clemson_____ Atlantic
13. Miami______ East
19. NC State___ Atlantic
23. Va Tech____ East
29. Wake Forest East
32. Louisville_ East
34. Boston Coll East
35. Florida St_ Atlantic
44. Duke_______ Atlantic
51. Ga Tech____ Atlantic
62. Pittsburgh_ East
72. Virginia___ Atlantic
74. Syracuse___ East
90. N Carolina_ Atlantic
The Atlantic would still have 2 of the top 3, but now the East would have 5 of the top 7 and only half of the bottom 4 - much better balance, not to mention better rivalries.
I posted this on my blog, but this is everything except my conclusion. If you want to read that,
click here. If you want to post your own conclusions, I'd like to read them...
THOUGHTS?
What's the five year average look like? Last season provided several extreme outliers with NC State and Miami having a great season for them compared to UNC and FSU having poor season based on their norm.
(07-04-2018 08:02 AM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ]What's the five year average look like? Last season provided several extreme outliers with NC State and Miami having a great season for them compared to UNC and FSU having poor season based on their norm.
Good idea. I'll have time to do that later today.
As a Cardinal fan, with memories still fresh on where we used to play, I am happy to be in any formation the conference wants to go.
Having said that ...
Your breakdown is intriguing, and may be a good way to divide things up, given the current rules governing how conferences must structure themselves. I like what you propose, but I also like playing in the Atlantic the way it is. Having two heavy weights to overcome is a challenge I think every Louisville fan relishes.
Ideally though, I would hope that the rules governing conference structure would change, allowing a more flexible scheduling pattern, resulting in a quicker rotation through the entire conference.
(The much proposed message board solution for 14 member conferences, where everyone had 3 permanent opponents, with 5 others that would play home and away in 2 years, then go to the other 5 in a home and away. Meaning every 4 year player would see every other conference member home and away in their career).
I think that would strengthen the conference more ... but ....
Your breakdown does some very good things too, given the current constraints.
The schools that left the Big East did so to become integrated into the ACC, this is a step backwards.
Using five year Sagarin ratings, the Atlantic has the three highest ranked and the Coastal has the next five. The Atlantic has 3 of the bottom 4.
In order, they are:
Clemson
Florida State
Louisville
Miami
Virginia Tech
Georgia Tech
North Carolina
Pitt
NC State
Duke
Boston College
Wake Forest
Syracuse
Virginia
One has to remember that these divisions are used for sports other than football, too.
Old Big East
Boston College or Connecticut (your opinion on which one)
Syracuse
Pittsburgh
West Virginia
Cincinnati
Louisville
Virginia Tech
Miami
Old ACC
Virginia
North Carolina
North Carolina State
Duke
Wake Forest
Clemson
George Tech
Florida State
(07-04-2018 10:44 AM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ]One has to remember that these divisions are used for sports other than football, too.
Not for basketball.
Not for baseball.
To which sports are you referring?
(07-04-2018 12:48 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote: [ -> ]
Old Big East
Boston College or Connecticut (your opinion on which one)
Syracuse
Pittsburgh
West Virginia
Cincinnati
Louisville
Virginia Tech
Miami
Old ACC
Virginia
North Carolina
North Carolina State
Duke
Wake Forest
Clemson
George Tech
Florida State
FIFY. I like it this way, but it requires expanding to 16 teams, one of which is bound by a GoR.
(07-04-2018 01:28 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ] (07-04-2018 10:44 AM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ]One has to remember that these divisions are used for sports other than football, too.
Not for basketball.
Not for baseball.
To which sports are you referring?
Technically baseball does use divisions but it's not really necessary since the ACC does absolutely nothing to protect the higher seeded teams in the tournament making winning your division meaningless. Just give each team three yearly protected games and rotate through the rest. Rank them 1-14 by conference record and be done with it.
(07-04-2018 12:48 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote: [ -> ]
Old Big East
Boston College or Connecticut (your opinion on which one)
Syracuse
Pittsburgh
West Virginia
Cincinnati
Louisville
Virginia Tech
Miami
Old ACC
Virginia
North Carolina
North Carolina State
Duke
Wake Forest
Clemson
George Tech
Florida State
Which is why I think we will see some B1G/ACC combo in the future broken down into three divisions.
UVa
VT
Carolina
Dook
Wake
State
Clemson
GT
FSU
Miami
BC
Syracuse
Pitt
Penn State
Maryland
Rutgers
Louisville
UConn/Temple
Cincinnati
West Virginia
Ohio State
Indiana
Purdue
Michigan
Michigan State
Illinios
Northwestern
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Iowa
Notre Dame stays semi independent and plays at least two teams per division per year
(07-04-2018 01:41 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ] (07-04-2018 01:28 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ] (07-04-2018 10:44 AM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ]One has to remember that these divisions are used for sports other than football, too.
Not for basketball.
Not for baseball.
To which sports are you referring?
Yes baseball.
https://theacc.com/standings.aspx?path=baseball
men's soccer
http://www.theacc.com/standings.aspx?standings=6
ET AL
I stand corrected - those sports DO use the same divisions. I don't see why it's necessary for them to be the same... or for that matter, as Kap stated, why they need divisions at all in those sports?
Still, if we accept that (a) baseball and soccer need divisions and (b) they MUST use the same divisions as football... what's so special about the ones we have now?
(07-04-2018 03:38 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ] (07-04-2018 01:41 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ] (07-04-2018 01:28 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ] (07-04-2018 10:44 AM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ]One has to remember that these divisions are used for sports other than football, too.
Not for basketball.
Not for baseball.
To which sports are you referring?
Yes baseball.
https://theacc.com/standings.aspx?path=baseball
men's soccer
http://www.theacc.com/standings.aspx?standings=6
ET AL
I stand corrected - those sports DO use the same divisions. I don't see why it's necessary for them to be the same... or for that matter, as Kap stated, why they need divisions at all in those sports?
Still, if we accept that (a) baseball and soccer need divisions and (b) they MUST use the same divisions as football... what's so special about the ones we have now?
But we do have divisions and they are used for more than just football. If you have a problem, take it up with the Presidents.
I don't support the characterization of VT as an old Big East school when VT was a conference mate of NC State and UNC-Ch from 1907 to 1953. Maryland, and Clemson had them thrown out and then UVa and SC banned together to keep them out. I would think VT is closer to an old ACC school than FSU.
The original Southern Conference schools are Georgia Tech, UNC-Ch, NC State, VT, UVa, and Clemson. Duke(Trinity) joined in 28 and WF in 36.
There is no way to satisfactorily address the problem with 16 schools and divisions of 8. You need 15 or 18 schools and divisions of 3. As it is now, the divisions are set up to make UNC-Ch, Duke, and UVa happy. Those three get the weakest Florida school and the recruiting grounds in Pa and Georgia.
The real disadvantage to the Atlantic is having to go to NY, Mass, and Ky where they are few recruits and being shut out of Atlanta and Virginia and Pa. Having Maryland was a balm to some of that, but when MD left, someone in the Coastal should have been moved.
I'd like to see a set up where NC State played Clemson and Duke every other year which ought to make some Clemson fans happy because if State only went to Clemson once every four years, it would be a more unique trip. Likewise, playing Duke once every 6 years is crazy.
As far as football political pull in the league it goes something like - FSU, Clemson, UNC, ND, and VT. After they are happy it's not easy to make the others happy.
(07-04-2018 05:08 PM)Statefan Wrote: [ -> ]I'd like to see a set up where NC State played Clemson and Duke every other year which ought to make some Clemson fans happy because if State only went to Clemson once every four years, it would be a more unique trip. Likewise, playing Duke once every 6 years is crazy.
I'd be ducking the 70% chance of a loss too if I were you.
Perhaps it would actually be the rivalry people tried to make it out to be if your school could win more than 3 out of 10.
Maybe after a few years of the Big 12 title game in a divisionless conference the idea will be normalized enough we can get the rule changed at go that way. Three annual opponents, the rest rotated, creates the best schedule possible.
The only drawback to that to me is that coaches really love the opportunity to compete for a division for contract and job security purposes. I'd be intrigued by the idea of non-static divisions that rotated every two years say, so in a given year you still had a divisional race. Just take the words "Atlantic" and "Coastal" off the banners, call them division titles...I think it could work.
The truth is Pitt is Syracuse's most played opponent (Syracuse is Pitt's third behind WVU and PSU) and instead of forcing the BC-Syracuse game during rivalry week, and continuing on with unbalanced zipper divisions, BC and Pitt should trade spots. Pitt replaces Miami with FSU, GT with Clemson, keeps Virginia Tech as a cross-division game and gains Louisville for some Ohio River duel and Syracuse during rivalry week.
BC gets Miami back on the schedule every year—the main reason they wanted to join the ACC in the first place—and balances the zipper to please Clemson and FSU. They also keep Virginia Tech, for whatever that is worth, and add games with Duke, which has a large alumni base in Boston.
I think the BC-Syracuse game as a cross-division works better because the game could be scheduled in October right after baseball season in the Bronx or at Fenway Pahk.
(07-05-2018 08:44 AM)Lou_C Wrote: [ -> ]Maybe after a few years of the Big 12 title game in a divisionless conference the idea will be normalized enough we can get the rule changed at go that way. Three annual opponents, the rest rotated, creates the best schedule possible.
The only drawback to that to me is that coaches really love the opportunity to compete for a division for contract and job security purposes. I'd be intrigued by the idea of non-static divisions that rotated every two years say, so in a given year you still had a divisional race. Just take the words "Atlantic" and "Coastal" off the banners, call them division titles...I think it could work.
That's what I was thinking. Better yet, in place of "division title" coaches could have "ACC CG team" as their incentive. Same thing, different name.