(04-18-2014 04:21 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 03:53 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 03:37 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 03:28 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 03:08 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Then if UNC really wants to maintain the UVa and Duke games every year, they could schedule each other as OOC every third year. NC State could do the same with Clemson and play the game in Charlotte. UNC might do the same with UVa in Charlotte, or perhaps Fed Ex. Clemson and FSU could meet every third year in Atlanta, or Jacksonville.

Nah, I wouldn't want to waste an OOC game on someone as uninteresting as NC State. Even if we did y'all can just bring your 3k fans two more hours down I85 South and play us in the Valley every third year. No need for us to go to Charlotte and turn BOA orange when we can do it in Tigertown and keep the money for ourselves.

No ACC-as-OOC games, please! It WOULD be interesting if Clemson and NC State played every year in Charlotte ala the game fka "the World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party". If they did that they'd need a new name - Textile Bowl just seems so outdated.

No thanks.

It might be different if NC State were a draw like a Florida or Georgia, but they aren't. Besides, the ACC does enough to help the economy of the state of NC, no need for Clemson to help the lesser Carolina that much more.

When is Clemson leaving for the SEC? I forgot.

When is NC State going to field a quality football team? I forgot.

just gonna save yall some time........

http://sportspolitico.com/2014/02/15/no-divisions/

(04-18-2014 04:57 PM)john01992 Wrote:  just gonna save yall some time........

http://sportspolitico.com/2014/02/15/no-divisions/

I've linked this before on my blog. EXCELLENT analysis of how to do a schedule without divisions. As the author states, it's virtually mandatory to have exactly 3 annual rivals - no more, no less. You can also see how kludgy the 9-game schedule looks, and how neat the 8-game looks. Just sayin'.

(04-18-2014 03:53 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 03:37 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 03:28 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 03:08 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Then if UNC really wants to maintain the UVa and Duke games every year, they could schedule each other as OOC every third year. NC State could do the same with Clemson and play the game in Charlotte. UNC might do the same with UVa in Charlotte, or perhaps Fed Ex. Clemson and FSU could meet every third year in Atlanta, or Jacksonville.

Nah, I wouldn't want to waste an OOC game on someone as uninteresting as NC State. Even if we did y'all can just bring your 3k fans two more hours down I85 South and play us in the Valley every third year. No need for us to go to Charlotte and turn BOA orange when we can do it in Tigertown and keep the money for ourselves.

No ACC-as-OOC games, please! It WOULD be interesting if Clemson and NC State played every year in Charlotte ala the game fka "the World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party". If they did that they'd need a new name - Textile Bowl just seems so outdated.

No thanks.

It might be different if NC State were a draw like a Florida or Georgia, but they aren't. Besides, the ACC does enough to help the economy of the state of NC, no need for Clemson to help the lesser Carolina that much more.

Clemson is in the LESSER Carolina!

(04-18-2014 03:53 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  ...the ACC does enough to help the economy of the state of NC, no need for Clemson to help the lesser Carolina that much more.

(04-18-2014 05:34 PM)XLance Wrote:  Clemson is in the LESSER Carolina!

You guys remind me of something I've read...

"At the time of the end, the king of the south shall attack him, but the king of the north shall rush upon him like a whirlwind..." - Daniel 11:40

I think both of the Carolina's are pretty great, but North Carolina has more to offer. Better schools (but in their state Clemson academically is FAR superior to the gamecocks). NC does have some great mountains and beaches just hours away from one another, also good BBQ. SC does have Myrtle Beach and Charleston, and honestly Clemson is a nice little town/ Lake Hartwell can be fun if some of you guys have never been. Cant we all get along?

Come on Kaplony I know you really do like playing UNC and State admit it .

(04-18-2014 05:11 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 04:57 PM)john01992 Wrote:  just gonna save yall some time........

http://sportspolitico.com/2014/02/15/no-divisions/

I've linked this before on my blog. EXCELLENT analysis of how to do a schedule without divisions. As the author states, it's virtually mandatory to have exactly 3 annual rivals - no more, no less. You can also see how kludgy the 9-game schedule looks, and how neat the 8-game looks. Just sayin'.

Once you get past the obligatory smack talk and get down to the nitty gritty, it's awfully hard to argue with this.

(04-18-2014 07:05 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 05:11 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 04:57 PM)john01992 Wrote:  just gonna save yall some time........

http://sportspolitico.com/2014/02/15/no-divisions/

I've linked this before on my blog. EXCELLENT analysis of how to do a schedule without divisions. As the author states, it's virtually mandatory to have exactly 3 annual rivals - no more, no less. You can also see how kludgy the 9-game schedule looks, and how neat the 8-game looks. Just sayin'.

Once you get past the obligatory smack talk and get down to the nitty gritty, it's awfully hard to argue with this.

Doh! I thought about adding discussion of having the ninth game be a flex game, but didn't have time. If 9 games are necessary, it is a good alternative to the 1+4+4 that I've described, and potentially better for the reasons described in the blog. Also for the reasons described in the blog, the 3+5 eight game option is very efficient and diminishes the attraction of 9 games.

If all or most of the P5 conferences would go to 8, we could all play 2 P5 OOC games, which would address the same SOS issue and do a much better job establishing the relative strength of the conferences and therefore the conference champions.

I don't agree with all of his suggestions for the ACC. I think Miami should play FSU, VT and either a Pitt or BC. Several other changes would follow from that.

yeah there really is nothing quite like the sportspolitico article. I have yet to see anyone make a scheduling plan like it and for some reason it amazes me that his idea hasn't been picked up by other blogs yet.

I think his match-ups are legit, pretty much all geographically based.

(04-19-2014 10:45 AM)esayem Wrote:  I think his match-ups are legit, pretty much all geographically based.

my only complaint with his matchups are with the SEC. the b10 matchups work out, you can change one or two things, but they are pretty workable. the ACC setup however is perfect.

Yeah I dont think those ACC matchups are perfect at all. Miami really doesn't have a rivalry with Georgia Tech or Clemson. Clemson has more of a rivalry with NC State over Miami. Miami needs Va Tech as a rival and then either Pitt or BC. Georgia Tech will want a NC school like Duke or a school like Virginia besides FSU/GT

The rivalries in the SEC and Big 10 are terrible too. Yeah I am sure OSU would be thrilled to have Indiana and Rutgers as 2 "rivals" and no Penn St. Florida losing Tennessee for Auburn is laughable too.

(04-18-2014 06:58 PM)westmc9th Wrote:  Come on Kaplony I know you really do like playing UNC and State admit it .

The only thing I like about playing either is the fact that a game against them is as close to a sure fire win as possible. Other than that it has no other redeeming value.

(04-19-2014 10:45 AM)esayem Wrote:  I think his match-ups are legit, pretty much all geographically based.

As a louisville fan, I find these potential pods kind of disappointing. I thought that one of the prime reasons we were accepted into the ACC was because of our devotion of resources and our fans interest in football. Yet all of these potential pods have us grouped with Pit, SU, and BC. Not one major football school. Will this not effect our SOS ranking and potential selection for the Conference championship game?

(04-19-2014 11:21 AM)Ragu Wrote:  Yeah I dont think those ACC matchups are perfect at all. Miami really doesn't have a rivalry with Georgia Tech or Clemson. Clemson has more of a rivalry with NC State over Miami. Miami needs Va Tech as a rival and then either Pitt or BC. Georgia Tech will want a NC school like Duke or a school like Virginia besides FSU/GT

The rivalries in the SEC and Big 10 are terrible too. Yeah I am sure OSU would be thrilled to have Indiana and Rutgers as 2 "rivals" and no Penn St. Florida losing Tennessee for Auburn is laughable too.

IU & osu is a trophy game just an fyi. as for rutgers ==> someones gotta play em.

(04-19-2014 11:51 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(04-19-2014 11:21 AM)Ragu Wrote:  Yeah I dont think those ACC matchups are perfect at all. Miami really doesn't have a rivalry with Georgia Tech or Clemson. Clemson has more of a rivalry with NC State over Miami. Miami needs Va Tech as a rival and then either Pitt or BC. Georgia Tech will want a NC school like Duke or a school like Virginia besides FSU/GT

The rivalries in the SEC and Big 10 are terrible too. Yeah I am sure OSU would be thrilled to have Indiana and Rutgers as 2 "rivals" and no Penn St. Florida losing Tennessee for Auburn is laughable too.

IU & osu is a trophy game just an fyi. as for rutgers ==> someones gotta play em.

FYI I live in Ohio and no Ohio State fan gives a bleep about fricken Indiana. Get a clue.

Saying those rivalry games are anything but ridiculous shows a lack of knowledge in college football. There are a ton of elementary level mistakes.

(04-19-2014 07:14 PM)Cody6003 Wrote:  

(04-19-2014 10:45 AM)esayem Wrote:  I think his match-ups are legit, pretty much all geographically based.

As a louisville fan, I find these potential pods kind of disappointing. I thought that one of the prime reasons we were accepted into the ACC was because of our devotion of resources and our fans interest in football. Yet all of these potential pods have us grouped with Pit, SU, and BC. Not one major football school. Will this not effect our SOS ranking and potential selection for the Conference championship game?

While maybe not very recent history, All 3 have Major History in Football success as well as putting some of the Greatest players ever into the NFL.

(04-20-2014 10:43 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  

(04-19-2014 07:14 PM)Cody6003 Wrote:  

(04-19-2014 10:45 AM)esayem Wrote:  I think his match-ups are legit, pretty much all geographically based.

As a louisville fan, I find these potential pods kind of disappointing. I thought that one of the prime reasons we were accepted into the ACC was because of our devotion of resources and our fans interest in football. Yet all of these potential pods have us grouped with Pit, SU, and BC. Not one major football school. Will this not effect our SOS ranking and potential selection for the Conference championship game?

While maybe not very recent history, All 3 have Major History in Football success as well as putting some of the Greatest players ever into the NFL.

No issue whatsoever being in that kind of pod....the schedule will rotate and we will see the FSU, Clemson, Miami and Virginia Tech on the schedule as well...

(04-20-2014 10:19 AM)Ragu Wrote:  

(04-19-2014 11:51 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(04-19-2014 11:21 AM)Ragu Wrote:  Yeah I dont think those ACC matchups are perfect at all. Miami really doesn't have a rivalry with Georgia Tech or Clemson. Clemson has more of a rivalry with NC State over Miami. Miami needs Va Tech as a rival and then either Pitt or BC. Georgia Tech will want a NC school like Duke or a school like Virginia besides FSU/GT

The rivalries in the SEC and Big 10 are terrible too. Yeah I am sure OSU would be thrilled to have Indiana and Rutgers as 2 "rivals" and no Penn St. Florida losing Tennessee for Auburn is laughable too.

IU & osu is a trophy game just an fyi. as for rutgers ==> someones gotta play em.

FYI I live in Ohio and no Ohio State fan gives a bleep about fricken Indiana. Get a clue.

Saying those rivalry games are anything but ridiculous shows a lack of knowledge in college football. There are a ton of elementary level mistakes.

i grew up with the b10 and consider myself a b10 homer and let me clue you in. the b10 gives a bigger cr.ap about preserving history/rivalries than most conferences. while the casual IU/osu fan doesn't care much for the game, the schools/administrations do. go look up the legends/leaders AND the east/west division alignments and tell me where IU & OSU are placed

oh yeah BOTH TIMES they were put in the same division. clearly the b10 has an interest in preserving that rivalry.

get a clue

(04-20-2014 10:46 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-20-2014 10:43 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  

(04-19-2014 07:14 PM)Cody6003 Wrote:  

(04-19-2014 10:45 AM)esayem Wrote:  I think his match-ups are legit, pretty much all geographically based.

As a louisville fan, I find these potential pods kind of disappointing. I thought that one of the prime reasons we were accepted into the ACC was because of our devotion of resources and our fans interest in football. Yet all of these potential pods have us grouped with Pit, SU, and BC. Not one major football school. Will this not effect our SOS ranking and potential selection for the Conference championship game?

While maybe not very recent history, All 3 have Major History in Football success as well as putting some of the Greatest players ever into the NFL.

No issue whatsoever being in that kind of pod....the schedule will rotate and we will see the FSU, Clemson, Miami and Virginia Tech on the schedule as well...

yeah this is what gets overlooked. granted you play the fixed rivals every year, but you play fsu/cu/miami/vtech 2x each every 4 years.