As a newbie I don't have long time rivalries that might get affected...but I kinda like just 8 games from a Cuse perspective:

4 Home ACC
4 Away ACC
1 Home vs 1-aa/low major (guaranteed game)
1 annual home/away game versus a Big Boy BCS school (many of these at the Meadowlands)
1 annual home/away versus a decent midmajor or lower end BCS team
1 annual game versus a Service Academy or a 2 for 1 with a MAC school

I'd like to try to play a Big East school every year if possible.

8 Games

4 ACC Home
4 ACC Away
1 Notre Dame Home/Away
1 WVU/PSU or Big Name BCS school Home/Away
2 Home Games against Mac Schools

4 home ACC games
4 away ACC games
1 home FCS game (Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Villanova, etc)
1 neutral site BCS game (Notre Dame, Penn State, Michigan, West Virginia, USC, BYU, etc)
1 home/away BCS game (Rutgers, Navy, Stanford, Vanderbilt, Northwestern, etc)
1 home non-BCS game (Akron, Army, Buffalo, Eastern Michigan, Bowling Green, etc)


I see a nine game conference schedule though.

Expand the regular season to 14 games, play 13 conference games and 1 OOC.

I definitely prefer 8 games .. but I fully expect a 9 game conference schedule with the new TV contract (after it's renegotiated with Pitt and SU part of the conference)

I don't think 9 conference games is too many. Figure one OOC rival per team, one "cupcake", and one to play with. If the school needs money they can schedule for money (e.g. Notre Dame @ Wake, Alabama @ Duke). If they need respect they can schedule a beatable name team (e.g. Auburn @ Clemson, Ohio St. @ Miami, Va Tech vs. Nebraska 2 years ago).

I agree with Chris that more total games is best solution, though I think he forgot to take his medicine with the whole 13 conference games thing... Actually 13 games might be nice -- that way there wouldn't be as many bowl teams with .500 records.

I vote 9

Sorry you have to pick between ap state and arky state...how will we ever survive?

I know Pitt would prefer 8 so they can keep ND and WVU on the schedule. I am assuming it will be 9 though and that's ok with me. It sounds like Pitt may try to keep ND on the schedule and drop WVU to a periodical opponent.

I generally like the idea of playing fewer conference games, if possible, because it allows schools to maximize scheduling flexibility. However, the best solution for the ACC, IMO, is to go to 9 conference games in order to preserve as many rivalry games as possible plus still allow the schools to cycle through playing everyone in the conference. Ten conference games is simply too much and it restricts the ACC schools from being able to effectively measure themselves against other conferences.

(11-19-2011 09:54 PM)ndlutz Wrote:  I know Pitt would prefer 8 so they can keep ND and WVU on the schedule. I am assuming it will be 9 though and that's ok with me. It sounds like Pitt may try to keep ND on the schedule and drop WVU to a periodical opponent.

VT had to drop WVU because they are too hostile.


I guess since they made it into the b12 they might not be as hostile towards Pitt. You never know how their fans will react though.

(11-19-2011 10:04 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(11-19-2011 09:54 PM)ndlutz Wrote:  I know Pitt would prefer 8 so they can keep ND and WVU on the schedule. I am assuming it will be 9 though and that's ok with me. It sounds like Pitt may try to keep ND on the schedule and drop WVU to a periodical opponent.

VT had to drop WVU because they are too hostile.


I guess since they made it into the b12 they might not be as hostile towards Pitt. You never know how their fans will react though.

WVU will always be hostile against Pitt. I think VT would experience the same treatment. In fact, I would expect it to be even worse because of the pent up frustration of having no natural rivalries in conference for WVU.

Yeah it absolutely doesn't matter with WVU...their fans will be hostile to Pitt fans until the end of time. That hostility is just kind of what goes along with a heated rivalry I guess. I do think things could have been really ugly had they not gotten an invitation to another conference. I wouldn't go to the brawl anyhow but I think tensions would have been particularly high this year.

(11-20-2011 12:02 AM)ndlutz Wrote:  I wouldn't go to the brawl anyhow but I think tensions would have been particularly high this year.

Not with West Virginia leaving now too. If they were still left behind their fans would go batsh@t.

I would prefer to see a 8 game ACC schedule:
- 4 ACC home games
- 4 ACC away games
- 1 game against a BCS "high profile team" - (USC, Penn State, Notre Dame etc)
- 1 games against Big East teams (preferably: UConn, Rutgers or WVU)
- 1 game against other BCS teams (B1G team or another Big East team)
- 1 game against the MAC (to help with recruiting)

I suspect the new agreement will call for 9 ACC games per year so that would cut down on the possible game against a MAC team.

The only way I see Clemson, GT, and FSU supporting a 9 game conference schedule is for it to be mandatory that all ACC teams play at least one non-conference BCS team OOC. No "gentleman's agreement" because those bastiges on Tabakky Rd are anything but. Make it where if you don't play a BCS level team OOC then you are ineligible for the ACCCG. Otherwise keep it at 8 games.

The funny thing is the teams that from the beginning of divisional play who have been the most concerned about preserving "rivalries" are the same ones who only use football as a diversion until hoops season.