Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
Author Message
Crayton Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,328
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 186
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #81
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
I'm still intrigued by the idea from the other thread where the ACC moves their CCG (Orange Bowl qualifier) to the week BEFORE rivalry week (when the SEC plays their FCS foes), determined solely by divisional record and likely at the home of the better team. Rivalry week then consists of the SEC-ACC games and cross-division games (VT-UVA is now cross-division).

Finally, the last week has flexible matchups, with 7 home teams (one, whole division) and 9 travel teams (the 2nd division + ND and UMass [now, likely, UConn]) and a neutral site game. The conference would try to pair the best 2 teams (though not a rematch of the Orange Bowl qualifier) and the neutral site would get the best teams remaining if not the 2 best. Last year, Clemson and Notre Dame could have been paired Championship Saturday.
07-07-2019 07:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #82
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-07-2019 07:24 AM)Crayton Wrote:  I'm still intrigued by the idea from the other thread where the ACC moves their CCG (Orange Bowl qualifier) to the week BEFORE rivalry week (when the SEC plays their FCS foes), determined solely by divisional record and likely at the home of the better team. Rivalry week then consists of the SEC-ACC games and cross-division games (VT-UVA is now cross-division).

Finally, the last week has flexible matchups, with 7 home teams (one, whole division) and 9 travel teams (the 2nd division + ND and UMass [now, likely, UConn]) and a neutral site game. The conference would try to pair the best 2 teams (though not a rematch of the Orange Bowl qualifier) and the neutral site would get the best teams remaining if not the 2 best. Last year, Clemson and Notre Dame could have been paired Championship Saturday.

I'm not sure I see the advantage of this proposal over the existing schedule and CCG structure. However, in order to ensure all ACC games in rivalry week are either against the SEC or cross-division, then each of Clemson, FSU, GT, and Louisville have to be part of a protected crossover with one of the other 3. This means that FSU and GT have to swap divisions so Clemson can play FSU as a protected crossover and GT in-division. Otherwise, Miami would have to move to the Atlantic in order to retain an annual game with FSU, and having Clemson, FSU, and Miami all in one division is badly unbalanced.

It also means that Louisville has to move to the Coastal to be GT's protected crossover. They can be exchanged with VT to make UVA/VT a protected crossover and to better balance the divisions after FSU moves to the Coastal. You still have the problem of both Florida schools in the same division, but I don't think that can feasibly be avoided here.

One other result of all this is that you either have to break up the Clemson/NCSU annual series or Duke/GT. With Clemson and GT in the Atlantic and with their protected crossovers occupied, both Duke and NC State would have to be in the Atlantic as well, but that means UNC can't play both of them every year.

With all these restrictions in mind, here are two plausible alignment options:

ATLANTIC/COASTAL
Clemson/Florida State
Georgia Tech/Louisville
-----------------------
Boston College/Miami-FL
NC State/North Carolina
Syracuse/Pittsburgh
Virginia Tech/Virginia
Wake Forest/Duke

- OR -

ATLANTIC/COASTAL
Clemson/Florida State
Georgia Tech/Louisville
-----------------------
Boston College/Miami-FL
Duke/North Carolina
Syracuse/Pittsburgh
Virginia Tech/Virginia
Wake Forest/NC State

I might opt for the latter, since both Duke and GT seem to care about their annual series, while only NC State seems to care about the Clemson/NC State series. All in all, though, I don't think this would fly, if only due to the Florida teams not being split.
(This post was last modified: 07-07-2019 11:10 AM by Nerdlinger.)
07-07-2019 08:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,161
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 449
I Root For: Common Sense
Location: Nunnayadamnbusiness
Post: #83
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(01-05-2019 11:47 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Just swap VT and Syracuse with the current divisions and call it a day. It's the perfect zipper at that point.

Each division has a team in Florida.
Each division has a team in SC/GA.
Each division has two teams in NC.
Each division has a team in VA
Each division has a "midwest" team (Pitt & Louisville)
Each division has a team in the NE.

VT gets UVA as their protected rival, Syracuse gets BC & Louisville and Pitt can renew their Big East rivalry.

Respectfully, there is no rivalry between Pitt and Louisville. They were in the Big East for a few years together. Calling that a rivalry is like calling Boston College and Clemson a rivalry.

That doesn’t mean necessarily mean that the ACC should not realign. Perhaps it should? However, I’ve not seen one proposal that improves my team’s schedule, so I’m definitely opposed to it until I see a proposal that is more attractive.

However, if Pitt has to play Louisville every year, that may just need to happen. They are seen as outsiders and they will do as they are told by the insiders. Still, if that’s what’s going to happen, let’s just call it that. Let’s not pretend that it’s a resumption of a bitter eight-year-old rivalry — or whatever it was.

Also, this is another minor point but Louisville would likely consider itself southern and Pittsburgh would definitely consider themselves Easterners/mid-Atlanticers. Neither would consider themselves Midwestern.
07-07-2019 08:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,161
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 449
I Root For: Common Sense
Location: Nunnayadamnbusiness
Post: #84
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
The proposals that I am most opposed to are the ones with the alternating members. No, that’s an absolutely terrible idea and I am not for that at all. Also, I am adamantly opposed to any scenario which chooses the participants in the conference championship game based on a vote of any sort.

That is the exact opposite of what college football needs to do. College football as a whole needs more transparency, greater definition and less arbitrary decision making, not more layers of the same bad things that plague it now.

Every time I hear the phrase “looks test,” I want to vomit in the nearest bucket.

“Oh, Georgia Tech looked really good tonight, but did they do enough to impress the committee? Did they pass the looks test?”

What is this, American freaking Idol?

It’s not about judges or committees or voters, it should be earned on the field based on pre-established criteria. There should be no arbitrary element to this at all. Everyone should know the rules of exactly what they need to do to get in before the first ball is kicked off in September.

Will that lead to some instances in which the second-place team in one division is likely better than the first place team in the other division but is left out of the CCG? Yes, it will almost certainly lead to that.

So what?

That happens in pro sports all the time and nobody bats an eyelash at it. That may not be ideal but it is infinitely better than having the first place in the other team other division bypassed for reasons that have nothing to do with performance.

I have a crazy idea. Why don’t we do it like every nearly every other college sport does it and like every professional sport does it and we define the rules ahead of time. Then, whoever meets the pre-determined criteria wins?

I know, crazy, right? Fairness and transparency. It’s a revolutionary concept that might just be crazy enough to work.
(This post was last modified: 07-07-2019 08:22 PM by Dr. Isaly von Yinzer.)
07-07-2019 08:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IWokeUpLikeThis Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,726
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 1434
I Root For: NIU, Chicago St
Location:
Post: #85
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
Cincy/Pitt wasn’t yet a rivarly because they only met 4 times pre-2005. But put them in the same division and one will organically foster over time with urban schools tied by the Ohio River playing for the Paddlewheel Trophy.

[Image: pg2_a_trophy_576.jpg]

Cincy/Pitt is a natural fit with Midwestern flavor as Reds/Pirates and Steelers/Bengals have shown.
07-07-2019 08:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 16,258
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 1202
I Root For: Olde Ironclad
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #86
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
Option 1:

BC——SU
UVa——Pitt
VaTech——Louisville
UNC——NC State
Duke——Wake
GaTech——Clemson
Miami——FSU

Annual Rivalry Week:

BC vs. Miami
SU vs. Pitt
UVa vs. VaTech
Louisville vs. UK
Wake vs. NC State
UNC vs. Duke
Clemson vs. USC
GaTech vs. UGa
FSU vs. UF

Option 2:

SU——BC
Pitt——Louisville
UVa——VaTech
UNC——NC State
Duke——Wake
GaTech——Clemson
Miami——FSU

Annual Rivalry Week:

*SU vs. BC (possible rematch)
*Pitt vs. Miami
UVa vs. VaTech (possible rematch)
Louisville vs. UK
Wake vs. NC State
UNC vs. Duke
Clemson vs. USC
GaTech vs. UGa
FSU vs. UF

* The years Pitt or Miami face BC as a crossover can allow some Rivalry Week shuffling. This would allow BC vs. Miami, SU vs. Pitt, BC vs. Pitt, and SU vs. Miami. Maybe unlikely, but all could be rematches. This can be done with Option 1 as well.

Option 1 eliminates any possible rematches, but UNC vs. Wake and Duke vs. NC State still need to be scheduled OOC, which tells me divisions need to go ASAP.
07-08-2019 08:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RUScarlets Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,142
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 176
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #87
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-07-2019 07:24 AM)Crayton Wrote:  I'm still intrigued by the idea from the other thread where the ACC moves their CCG (Orange Bowl qualifier) to the week BEFORE rivalry week (when the SEC plays their FCS foes), determined solely by divisional record and likely at the home of the better team. Rivalry week then consists of the SEC-ACC games and cross-division games (VT-UVA is now cross-division).

Finally, the last week has flexible matchups, with 7 home teams (one, whole division) and 9 travel teams (the 2nd division + ND and UMass [now, likely, UConn]) and a neutral site game. The conference would try to pair the best 2 teams (though not a rematch of the Orange Bowl qualifier) and the neutral site would get the best teams remaining if not the 2 best. Last year, Clemson and Notre Dame could have been paired Championship Saturday.

What's the advantage of playing your CCG prior to Thanksgiving weekend? Is it for TV purposes so they are not head up vs the B1G CCG? The B1G used to finish up their season before Thanksgiving and it really affected their bowl performance. Not sure its the best route, but an intriguing thought nonetheless.

Plus all the rivalry games would have to be interconference, so I'm not sure who Pitt, Va Tech, SU, and BC get stuck with. If you can bring back Pitt/WVU, Va Tech/Maryland, SU/Rutgers, BC/PSU, but that's a pipe dream.
(This post was last modified: 07-08-2019 08:19 AM by RUScarlets.)
07-08-2019 08:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crayton Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,328
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 186
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #88
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-08-2019 08:19 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  
(07-07-2019 07:24 AM)Crayton Wrote:  I'm still intrigued by the idea from the other thread where the ACC moves their CCG (Orange Bowl qualifier) to the week BEFORE rivalry week (when the SEC plays their FCS foes), determined solely by divisional record and likely at the home of the better team. Rivalry week then consists of the SEC-ACC games and cross-division games (VT-UVA is now cross-division).

Finally, the last week has flexible matchups, with 7 home teams (one, whole division) and 9 travel teams (the 2nd division + ND and UMass [now, likely, UConn]) and a neutral site game. The conference would try to pair the best 2 teams (though not a rematch of the Orange Bowl qualifier) and the neutral site would get the best teams remaining if not the 2 best. Last year, Clemson and Notre Dame could have been paired Championship Saturday.

What's the advantage of playing your CCG prior to Thanksgiving weekend? Is it for TV purposes so they are not head up vs the B1G CCG? The B1G used to finish up their season before Thanksgiving and it really affected their bowl performance. Not sure its the best route, but an intriguing thought nonetheless.

Plus all the rivalry games would have to be interconference, so I'm not sure who Pitt, Va Tech, SU, and BC get stuck with. If you can bring back Pitt/WVU, Va Tech/Maryland, SU/Rutgers, BC/PSU, but that's a pipe dream.
The rivalry games would also be interdivisional (VT-UVA, Mia-BC, etc), as participation in the mid-November Orange Bowl Qualifier (CCG) would be based solely on intradivisional record.

Moving the CCG (Orange Bowl Qualifier) to mid-November would result in less revenue than in December for that particular game, BUT it would do better than the current mid-November lineup (especially with SEC teams playing bodybag games that weekend) and the Charlotte game in December + 7 other games would likely do better than the current CCG, especially with Notre Dame participating.

The other benefit would be a mid-November bye for 12 teams. All 14 teams would be playing in December so bowl performance shouldn't be affected negatively. So long as the ACC has a playoff-caliber team, they'll do well enough on TV.

To the point raised by Yinzer, conference members would obviously agree on a protocol or rubric on how matchups the final week are determined... these matchups don't determine the conference champ, which would now be determined more equitably (no longer counting cross-division games).
07-08-2019 03:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #89
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-08-2019 03:34 PM)Crayton Wrote:  
(07-08-2019 08:19 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  
(07-07-2019 07:24 AM)Crayton Wrote:  I'm still intrigued by the idea from the other thread where the ACC moves their CCG (Orange Bowl qualifier) to the week BEFORE rivalry week (when the SEC plays their FCS foes), determined solely by divisional record and likely at the home of the better team. Rivalry week then consists of the SEC-ACC games and cross-division games (VT-UVA is now cross-division).

Finally, the last week has flexible matchups, with 7 home teams (one, whole division) and 9 travel teams (the 2nd division + ND and UMass [now, likely, UConn]) and a neutral site game. The conference would try to pair the best 2 teams (though not a rematch of the Orange Bowl qualifier) and the neutral site would get the best teams remaining if not the 2 best. Last year, Clemson and Notre Dame could have been paired Championship Saturday.

What's the advantage of playing your CCG prior to Thanksgiving weekend? Is it for TV purposes so they are not head up vs the B1G CCG? The B1G used to finish up their season before Thanksgiving and it really affected their bowl performance. Not sure its the best route, but an intriguing thought nonetheless.

Plus all the rivalry games would have to be interconference, so I'm not sure who Pitt, Va Tech, SU, and BC get stuck with. If you can bring back Pitt/WVU, Va Tech/Maryland, SU/Rutgers, BC/PSU, but that's a pipe dream.
The rivalry games would also be interdivisional (VT-UVA, Mia-BC, etc), as participation in the mid-November Orange Bowl Qualifier (CCG) would be based solely on intradivisional record.

Moving the CCG (Orange Bowl Qualifier) to mid-November would result in less revenue than in December for that particular game, BUT it would do better than the current mid-November lineup (especially with SEC teams playing bodybag games that weekend) and the Charlotte game in December + 7 other games would likely do better than the current CCG, especially with Notre Dame participating.

The other benefit would be a mid-November bye for 12 teams. All 14 teams would be playing in December so bowl performance shouldn't be affected negatively. So long as the ACC has a playoff-caliber team, they'll do well enough on TV.

To the point raised by Yinzer, conference members would obviously agree on a protocol or rubric on how matchups the final week are determined... these matchups don't determine the conference champ, which would now be determined more equitably (no longer counting cross-division games).

Notre Dame probably won't be participating in ACC rivalry week, since they'll still want to end the season in California. In any case, that would leave one ACC team short a rival.

How would you align the teams into divisions? I presented a couple options, though I couldn't come up with one that would actually be approved by the conference.
07-08-2019 04:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #90
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-08-2019 08:01 AM)esayem Wrote:  Option 1:

BC——SU
UVa——Pitt
VaTech——Louisville
UNC——NC State
Duke——Wake
GaTech——Clemson
Miami——FSU

Annual Rivalry Week:

BC vs. Miami
SU vs. Pitt
UVa vs. VaTech
Louisville vs. UK
Wake vs. NC State
UNC vs. Duke
Clemson vs. USC
GaTech vs. UGa
FSU vs. UF

Option 2:

SU——BC
Pitt——Louisville
UVa——VaTech
UNC——NC State
Duke——Wake
GaTech——Clemson
Miami——FSU

Annual Rivalry Week:

*SU vs. BC (possible rematch)
*Pitt vs. Miami
UVa vs. VaTech (possible rematch)
Louisville vs. UK
Wake vs. NC State
UNC vs. Duke
Clemson vs. USC
GaTech vs. UGa
FSU vs. UF

* The years Pitt or Miami face BC as a crossover can allow some Rivalry Week shuffling. This would allow BC vs. Miami, SU vs. Pitt, BC vs. Pitt, and SU vs. Miami. Maybe unlikely, but all could be rematches. This can be done with Option 1 as well.

Option 1 eliminates any possible rematches, but UNC vs. Wake and Duke vs. NC State still need to be scheduled OOC, which tells me divisions need to go ASAP.

Swapping BC and Pitt is a good idea. Alignment 1 is definitely better than Alignment 2. Moving VT to the Atlantic with Clemson and FSU makes for a very unbalanced conference.

Also, rematches shouldn't be considered a problem.
07-08-2019 06:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #91
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-08-2019 08:19 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  
(07-07-2019 07:24 AM)Crayton Wrote:  I'm still intrigued by the idea from the other thread where the ACC moves their CCG (Orange Bowl qualifier) to the week BEFORE rivalry week (when the SEC plays their FCS foes), determined solely by divisional record and likely at the home of the better team. Rivalry week then consists of the SEC-ACC games and cross-division games (VT-UVA is now cross-division).

Finally, the last week has flexible matchups, with 7 home teams (one, whole division) and 9 travel teams (the 2nd division + ND and UMass [now, likely, UConn]) and a neutral site game. The conference would try to pair the best 2 teams (though not a rematch of the Orange Bowl qualifier) and the neutral site would get the best teams remaining if not the 2 best. Last year, Clemson and Notre Dame could have been paired Championship Saturday.

What's the advantage of playing your CCG prior to Thanksgiving weekend? Is it for TV purposes so they are not head up vs the B1G CCG? The B1G used to finish up their season before Thanksgiving and it really affected their bowl performance. Not sure its the best route, but an intriguing thought nonetheless.

Plus all the rivalry games would have to be interconference, so I'm not sure who Pitt, Va Tech, SU, and BC get stuck with. If you can bring back Pitt/WVU, Va Tech/Maryland, SU/Rutgers, BC/PSU, but that's a pipe dream.

Were VT/UMD, Syracuse/Rutgers, and BC/Penn State ever strong rivalries?
07-08-2019 06:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crayton Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,328
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 186
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #92
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-08-2019 04:56 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(07-08-2019 03:34 PM)Crayton Wrote:  The rivalry games would also be interdivisional (VT-UVA, Mia-BC, etc), as participation in the mid-November Orange Bowl Qualifier (CCG) would be based solely on intradivisional record.

Moving the CCG (Orange Bowl Qualifier) to mid-November would result in less revenue than in December for that particular game, BUT it would do better than the current mid-November lineup (especially with SEC teams playing bodybag games that weekend) and the Charlotte game in December + 7 other games would likely do better than the current CCG, especially with Notre Dame participating.

The other benefit would be a mid-November bye for 12 teams. All 14 teams would be playing in December so bowl performance shouldn't be affected negatively. So long as the ACC has a playoff-caliber team, they'll do well enough on TV.

To the point raised by Yinzer, conference members would obviously agree on a protocol or rubric on how matchups the final week are determined... these matchups don't determine the conference champ, which would now be determined more equitably (no longer counting cross-division games).

Notre Dame probably won't be participating in ACC rivalry week, since they'll still want to end the season in California. In any case, that would leave one ACC team short a rival.

How would you align the teams into divisions? I presented a couple options, though I couldn't come up with one that would actually be approved by the conference.
Notre Dame would play in California rivalry week but against an ACC foe the next week; the ACC would have to make a contract with UMass or UConn for their 12th game to be played that week @ an ACC school as well... probably for a ND-lite home-away commitment earlier in the season (UMass may be more interested than UConn in this annual 2-for-1).

The alignments suffered, as you stated, from the Florida problem. Either Miami and Florida State are in one division or their annual rivalry ends (or is a primary contigent matchup for the December week). You could use the rotating pods to ensure teams continue to play in Florida twice every 4 years... but that is a lot of moving parts. Thanks for processing that idea to its end.
07-09-2019 12:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hokie Mark Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,724
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 1392
I Root For: VT, ACC teams
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #93
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-09-2019 12:21 PM)Crayton Wrote:  
(07-08-2019 04:56 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(07-08-2019 03:34 PM)Crayton Wrote:  The rivalry games would also be interdivisional (VT-UVA, Mia-BC, etc), as participation in the mid-November Orange Bowl Qualifier (CCG) would be based solely on intradivisional record.

Moving the CCG (Orange Bowl Qualifier) to mid-November would result in less revenue than in December for that particular game, BUT it would do better than the current mid-November lineup (especially with SEC teams playing bodybag games that weekend) and the Charlotte game in December + 7 other games would likely do better than the current CCG, especially with Notre Dame participating.

The other benefit would be a mid-November bye for 12 teams. All 14 teams would be playing in December so bowl performance shouldn't be affected negatively. So long as the ACC has a playoff-caliber team, they'll do well enough on TV.

To the point raised by Yinzer, conference members would obviously agree on a protocol or rubric on how matchups the final week are determined... these matchups don't determine the conference champ, which would now be determined more equitably (no longer counting cross-division games).

Notre Dame probably won't be participating in ACC rivalry week, since they'll still want to end the season in California. In any case, that would leave one ACC team short a rival.

How would you align the teams into divisions? I presented a couple options, though I couldn't come up with one that would actually be approved by the conference.
Notre Dame would play in California rivalry week but against an ACC foe the next week; the ACC would have to make a contract with UMass or UConn for their 12th game to be played that week @ an ACC school as well... probably for a ND-lite home-away commitment earlier in the season (UMass may be more interested than UConn in this annual 2-for-1).

The alignments suffered, as you stated, from the Florida problem. Either Miami and Florida State are in one division or their annual rivalry ends (or is a primary contigent matchup for the December week). You could use the rotating pods to ensure teams continue to play in Florida twice every 4 years... but that is a lot of moving parts. Thanks for processing that idea to its end.

Would ND consider dropping Stanford if they were guaranteed to play the finale in Miami whenever USC was a home game?
07-09-2019 12:23 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,299
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #94
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-04-2019 01:34 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(07-04-2019 01:06 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  If the ACC is ever able to just scrap the division structure completely, and simply anoint its two highest-rated teams to play in a CCG, of course they should and would do exactly that. But in the meantime....

Clemson
Duke
NC State
UNC
Virginia
Virginia Tech
Wake Forest

Boston College
Florida State
Georgia Tech
Louisville
Miami/FL
Pittsburgh
Syracuse

No annual cross-over games. Play teams in the other division on all equal frequency.

I like it! However, I think everyone wants access to Florida, so you'd probably have to separate FSU and Miami. Also, no protected crossovers means Clemson can't play either FSU or GT every year, which might be problematic. Duke and GT would have to end their annual series too, but that's not as important.

You could do a simple switch of VT and Pitt for NCSU and Wake.
UNC/Duke/GT/Miami/UVA/NCSU/Wake
FSU/Clemson/UL/SU/BC/Pitt/VT

The only essential cross-overs would be FSU-Miami and UVA-VT. That would mean the other schools in an 8 game conference schedule get FSU and VT or Miami and UVA 2 times in 12 years and everyone else 4 times in 12 years (4X5 teams + 2X2 teams=24 games; 2 games/yr X12 years =24).
07-09-2019 12:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crayton Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,328
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 186
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #95
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-04-2019 12:38 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  (5) Divisionless alignment: Unlike the other scenarios, this would of course require an NCAA rule change to implement if the ACC wants to retain its CCG. However, near maximum schedule variety and minimum conference playthrough time while maintaining the most important annual matchups. Each team has 3 protected opponents (below) and alternates between half the other 10 every 2 years.

Code:
BOSTON COLLEGE  Syracuse        Miami-FL        Pittsburgh    
CLEMSON         Georgia Tech    Florida State   NC State  
DUKE            Wake Forest     Georgia Tech    North Carolina
FLORIDA STATE   Miami-FL        Clemson         Georgia Tech      
GEORGIA TECH    Clemson         Duke            Florida State
LOUISVILLE      Pittsburgh      Virginia Tech   Syracuse
MIAMI-FL        Florida State   Boston College  Virginia Tech
NC STATE        North Carolina  Wake Forest     Clemson
NORTH CAROLINA  NC State        Virginia        Duke
PITTSBURGH      Louisville      Syracuse        Boston College
SYRACUSE        Boston College  Pittsburgh      Louisville
VIRGINIA        Virginia Tech   North Carolina  Wake Forest
VIRGINIA TECH   Virginia        Louisville      Miami-FL
WAKE FOREST     Duke            NC State        Virginia
Finally figured it out!!! You could use the rotating pods in order to accomplish this divisionless alignment without a rule change. The only requirements are (1) at least 2 trios of teams desiring permanent rivalries with one another AND (2) be able to pair off the remaining 8 teams in permanent rivalries. Nerdlinger's list of rivals has 1 solution that satisfies the above 2 requirements.

North: Syracuse (+BC), Pittsburgh (+BC), Louisville (+VT)
South: Georgia Tech (+Duke), Florida St (+Mia), Clemson (+NCSt)
pod A: Boston College (+Syr & Pit), Miami (+FSU & VT)
pod B: Virginia Tech (+Lou & Mia), Virginia (+UNC & WF)
pod C: Duke (+GT & WF), UNC (+UVA & NCSt)
pod D: Wake Forest (+UVA & Duke), NC State (+Clem & UNC)

4 year rotation of pods. The pods that are never in the same division (A&B and C&D) play each other when other permanent rivals are in the same division (for example: Duke will play UNC, GT, and WF annually and, although they will never be in the same division as NC State, they will still play the Wolfpack in years when Georgia Tech is in the same division).

"North" and "South" may be poor name choices with Boston College placed in the South half the time. But, if this were ever a 4 year experimentation, you'd want to set aside "Atlantic" and "Coastal" in the case where this rotation turned out to be a dud.

I may take some time later this week, reworking some of these rivalries to see if there is a more balanced, less North vs. South arrangement.
(This post was last modified: 07-09-2019 02:26 PM by Crayton.)
07-09-2019 01:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 16,258
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 1202
I Root For: Olde Ironclad
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #96
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-09-2019 01:11 PM)Crayton Wrote:  Finally figured it out!!! You could use the rotating pods in order to accomplish this divisionless alignment without a rule change. The only requirements are (1) at least 2 trios of teams desiring permanent rivalries with one another AND (2) be able to pair off the remaining 8 teams in permanent rivalries. Nerdlinger's list of rivals has 1 solution that satisfies the above 2 requirements.

Post #26 from: https://csnbbs.com/thread-877041-page-2.html

This is how I’d set-up quads. Tobacco and Palm are always the opposite divisions, but rotate two opponents every two years. For instance, UNC would have a home/home with Clemson and FSU, then home/home with GT and Miami.

Tobacco: UNC, Duke, Wake, NC State

Palmetto: Clemson, GT, FSU, Miami


Colonial/Yankee: BC, Syracuse, Pitt

Commonwealth: UVa, VaTech, Louisville

Then you figure in the rotating of these two quads every two years as well. These quads also rotate through games against each other, but it will be staggered, so they’ll see one another more often.

Let’s take BC, for example:

Year 1 home- Virginia away- VaTech
Year 2 home- VaTech away- Louisville
Year 3 home- Louisville away- Virginia

UNC-UVa could be scheduled OOC during the two off years. As could Duke-GT and NCSU-Clemson, if necessary.
(This post was last modified: 07-09-2019 02:32 PM by esayem.)
07-09-2019 02:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,876
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 895
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Grayson Highlands
Post: #97
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-09-2019 12:23 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(07-09-2019 12:21 PM)Crayton Wrote:  
(07-08-2019 04:56 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(07-08-2019 03:34 PM)Crayton Wrote:  The rivalry games would also be interdivisional (VT-UVA, Mia-BC, etc), as participation in the mid-November Orange Bowl Qualifier (CCG) would be based solely on intradivisional record.

Moving the CCG (Orange Bowl Qualifier) to mid-November would result in less revenue than in December for that particular game, BUT it would do better than the current mid-November lineup (especially with SEC teams playing bodybag games that weekend) and the Charlotte game in December + 7 other games would likely do better than the current CCG, especially with Notre Dame participating.

The other benefit would be a mid-November bye for 12 teams. All 14 teams would be playing in December so bowl performance shouldn't be affected negatively. So long as the ACC has a playoff-caliber team, they'll do well enough on TV.

To the point raised by Yinzer, conference members would obviously agree on a protocol or rubric on how matchups the final week are determined... these matchups don't determine the conference champ, which would now be determined more equitably (no longer counting cross-division games).

Notre Dame probably won't be participating in ACC rivalry week, since they'll still want to end the season in California. In any case, that would leave one ACC team short a rival.

How would you align the teams into divisions? I presented a couple options, though I couldn't come up with one that would actually be approved by the conference.
Notre Dame would play in California rivalry week but against an ACC foe the next week; the ACC would have to make a contract with UMass or UConn for their 12th game to be played that week @ an ACC school as well... probably for a ND-lite home-away commitment earlier in the season (UMass may be more interested than UConn in this annual 2-for-1).

The alignments suffered, as you stated, from the Florida problem. Either Miami and Florida State are in one division or their annual rivalry ends (or is a primary contigent matchup for the December week). You could use the rotating pods to ensure teams continue to play in Florida twice every 4 years... but that is a lot of moving parts. Thanks for processing that idea to its end.

Would ND consider dropping Stanford if they were guaranteed to play the finale in Miami whenever USC was a home game?

I doubt it. ND sees Stanford as its "aspirational peer" (according to then president Monk Malloy) and wants a final game in California every year for recruiting exposure and so that the coaches can stay out there and recruit the West Coast.
(This post was last modified: 07-09-2019 03:32 PM by TerryD.)
07-09-2019 03:30 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #98
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-09-2019 01:11 PM)Crayton Wrote:  
(07-04-2019 12:38 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  (5) Divisionless alignment: Unlike the other scenarios, this would of course require an NCAA rule change to implement if the ACC wants to retain its CCG. However, near maximum schedule variety and minimum conference playthrough time while maintaining the most important annual matchups. Each team has 3 protected opponents (below) and alternates between half the other 10 every 2 years.

Code:
BOSTON COLLEGE  Syracuse        Miami-FL        Pittsburgh    
CLEMSON         Georgia Tech    Florida State   NC State  
DUKE            Wake Forest     Georgia Tech    North Carolina
FLORIDA STATE   Miami-FL        Clemson         Georgia Tech      
GEORGIA TECH    Clemson         Duke            Florida State
LOUISVILLE      Pittsburgh      Virginia Tech   Syracuse
MIAMI-FL        Florida State   Boston College  Virginia Tech
NC STATE        North Carolina  Wake Forest     Clemson
NORTH CAROLINA  NC State        Virginia        Duke
PITTSBURGH      Louisville      Syracuse        Boston College
SYRACUSE        Boston College  Pittsburgh      Louisville
VIRGINIA        Virginia Tech   North Carolina  Wake Forest
VIRGINIA TECH   Virginia        Louisville      Miami-FL
WAKE FOREST     Duke            NC State        Virginia
Finally figured it out!!! You could use the rotating pods in order to accomplish this divisionless alignment without a rule change. The only requirements are (1) at least 2 trios of teams desiring permanent rivalries with one another AND (2) be able to pair off the remaining 8 teams in permanent rivalries. Nerdlinger's list of rivals has 1 solution that satisfies the above 2 requirements.

North: Syracuse (+BC), Pittsburgh (+BC), Louisville (+VT)
South: Georgia Tech (+Duke), Florida St (+Mia), Clemson (+NCSt)
pod A: Boston College (+Syr & Pit), Miami (+FSU & VT)
pod B: Virginia Tech (+Lou & Mia), Virginia (+UNC & WF)
pod C: Duke (+GT & WF), UNC (+UVA & NCSt)
pod D: Wake Forest (+UVA & Duke), NC State (+Clem & UNC)

4 year rotation of pods. The pods that are never in the same division (A&B and C&D) play each other when other permanent rivals are in the same division (for example: Duke will play UNC, GT, and WF annually and, although they will never be in the same division as NC State, they will still play the Wolfpack in years when Georgia Tech is in the same division).

"North" and "South" may be poor name choices with Boston College placed in the South half the time. But, if this were ever a 4 year experimentation, you'd want to set aside "Atlantic" and "Coastal" in the case where this rotation turned out to be a dud.

I may take some time later this week, reworking some of these rivalries to see if there is a more balanced, less North vs. South arrangement.

I like the thinking, but I tried to work out the nuts and bolts of this and ran into a problem. For example, there will be a year wherein the divisions are as follows:

North (incl. Pods A & D): BC, Mia, NCSt, WF, Lou, Pitt, Syr
South (incl. Pods B & C): UVA, VT, Duke, UNC, Clem, FSU, GT

NC State is locked into playing its division for 6 games plus protected crossovers UNC and Clemson. But you say when Duke shares a division with GT, which it does here, Duke plays NC State. This would give NC State 9 conference games.

You can almost certainly work out a functional schedule for a 3/2/2 pod system, but I don't know if you'd be able to protect all the necessary rivalries. Plus, it's even more confusing to fans than a 2/5 or 3/4 pod system. But I think you've got a good start here, so if you can figure it out, more power to you.

Also, in any case, it's not technically divisionless if you still have divisions. 03-wink
(This post was last modified: 07-09-2019 09:12 PM by Nerdlinger.)
07-09-2019 09:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #99
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-09-2019 12:40 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(07-04-2019 01:34 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(07-04-2019 01:06 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  If the ACC is ever able to just scrap the division structure completely, and simply anoint its two highest-rated teams to play in a CCG, of course they should and would do exactly that. But in the meantime....

Clemson
Duke
NC State
UNC
Virginia
Virginia Tech
Wake Forest

Boston College
Florida State
Georgia Tech
Louisville
Miami/FL
Pittsburgh
Syracuse

No annual cross-over games. Play teams in the other division on all equal frequency.

I like it! However, I think everyone wants access to Florida, so you'd probably have to separate FSU and Miami. Also, no protected crossovers means Clemson can't play either FSU or GT every year, which might be problematic. Duke and GT would have to end their annual series too, but that's not as important.

You could do a simple switch of VT and Pitt for NCSU and Wake.
UNC/Duke/GT/Miami/UVA/NCSU/Wake
FSU/Clemson/UL/SU/BC/Pitt/VT

The only essential cross-overs would be FSU-Miami and UVA-VT. That would mean the other schools in an 8 game conference schedule get FSU and VT or Miami and UVA 2 times in 12 years and everyone else 4 times in 12 years (4X5 teams + 2X2 teams=24 games; 2 games/yr X12 years =24).

I don't think that'll work, as you're loading up an already loaded division by adding VT to the Atlantic. I think any feasible locked 2-division alignment of the current 14 ACC football schools would have to have Clemson and FSU in one division and Miami and VT in the other.
07-09-2019 09:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #100
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-09-2019 02:31 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(07-09-2019 01:11 PM)Crayton Wrote:  Finally figured it out!!! You could use the rotating pods in order to accomplish this divisionless alignment without a rule change. The only requirements are (1) at least 2 trios of teams desiring permanent rivalries with one another AND (2) be able to pair off the remaining 8 teams in permanent rivalries. Nerdlinger's list of rivals has 1 solution that satisfies the above 2 requirements.

Post #26 from: https://csnbbs.com/thread-877041-page-2.html

This is how I’d set-up quads. Tobacco and Palm are always the opposite divisions, but rotate two opponents every two years. For instance, UNC would have a home/home with Clemson and FSU, then home/home with GT and Miami.

Tobacco: UNC, Duke, Wake, NC State

Palmetto: Clemson, GT, FSU, Miami


Colonial/Yankee: BC, Syracuse, Pitt

Commonwealth: UVa, VaTech, Louisville

Then you figure in the rotating of these two quads every two years as well. These quads also rotate through games against each other, but it will be staggered, so they’ll see one another more often.

Let’s take BC, for example:

Year 1 home- Virginia away- VaTech
Year 2 home- VaTech away- Louisville
Year 3 home- Louisville away- Virginia

UNC-UVa could be scheduled OOC during the two off years. As could Duke-GT and NCSU-Clemson, if necessary.

Good thoughts here, but the biggest problem I see is that the Palmetto Division is going to be much stronger than the Tobacco Division no matter which trios are where. Additionally, schools are not going to vote for an alignment or schedule where their "necessary" in-conference rivals have to be scheduled OOC.
07-09-2019 09:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.