Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
Author Message
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 5,503
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 175
I Root For: The Heels
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #101
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-09-2019 09:07 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(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.

Perceived balance of power is offset by strengthening the schedule of others. Plus, TV and attendance goes up with Tobacco Road unity and a Deep South quad with Atlanta as the “capital city”.

My main gripe is the UNC-UVa game. Perhaps it could be a locked game somehow. Not sure the logistics to make it work. I also don’t like the idea of the Duke-GaTech series being broken, although there are a few Tech fans on the ACC board that don’t seem to mind because the’d Rather play FSU. I just don’t think Tech administration feels that way. Duke is an institutional and athletic peer to them.
07-09-2019 09:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Online
Legend
*

Posts: 35,559
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1060
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #102
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-09-2019 09:03 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(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.

I'm not sure VT is VT anymore after Frank Beamer.
07-09-2019 09:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 2,133
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 89
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #103
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-09-2019 09:27 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(07-09-2019 09:07 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(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.

Perceived balance of power is offset by strengthening the schedule of others. Plus, TV and attendance goes up with Tobacco Road unity and a Deep South quad with Atlanta as the “capital city”.

My main gripe is the UNC-UVa game. Perhaps it could be a locked game somehow. Not sure the logistics to make it work. I also don’t like the idea of the Duke-GaTech series being broken, although there are a few Tech fans on the ACC board that don’t seem to mind because the’d Rather play FSU. I just don’t think Tech administration feels that way. Duke is an institutional and athletic peer to them.

If the ACC were to go to 9 conference games, having 2 protected crossovers might be feasible. Consider my "compromise" alignment under this scenario:

Atlantic
Clemson: Georgia Tech, Miami-FL
Florida State: Miami-FL, Georgia Tech
Louisville: Syracuse, Virginia Tech
NC State: Wake Forest, Duke
North Carolina: Duke, Wake Forest
Pittsburgh: Boston College, Syracuse
Virginia: Virginia Tech, Boston College

Coastal
Boston College: Pittsburgh, Virginia
Duke: North Carolina, NC State
Georgia Tech: Clemson, Florida State
Miami-FL: Florida State, Clemson
Syracuse: Louisville, Pittsburgh
Virginia Tech: Virginia, Louisville
Wake Forest: NC State, North Carolina

All 4 NC teams get to play each other every year, as do all 4 southernmost teams, while retaining balanced divisions and without requiring pods. And double conference playthrough (home and away) in 10 years instead of 12.

PS: I just noticed that the Coastal here is the private schools plus the "Tech"s, while the Atlantic is all the non-"Tech" public schools. This was not by design, although I don't much see a downside. It might even help some fans remember the divisions better.
(This post was last modified: 07-09-2019 10:37 PM by Nerdlinger.)
07-09-2019 10:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 5,503
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 175
I Root For: The Heels
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #104
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
You could do that now with the current divisions, but some teams would only have two games to schedule OOC.

Pitt-SU, Louis
UVa- SU, BC
VaTech- Louis, Clemson
UNC- NCSU, Wake
Duke- Wake, NCSU
GaTech- Clemson, FSU
Miami- FSU, BC

BC- Miami, UVa
SU- Pitt, UVa
Louis- VaTech, Pitt
NCSU- UNC, Duke
Wake- Duke, UNC
Clem- GaTech, VaTech
FSU- Miami, GaTech

IDK, it creates arbitrary crossovers and locks teams in with a 10 game schedule. Bad probably outweighs good.
07-09-2019 10:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crayton Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 126
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 17
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #105
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-09-2019 02:31 PM)esayem Wrote:  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
I'd keep UVA-UNC by doing something like this:
North: BC, Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville
South: GT, FSU, Miami, Clemson
Atlantic: VaTech, Wake, NC State
Coastal: UVA, Duke, UNC

The division names can be portmanteaus of these quad names (North Atlantic vs. South Coastal and North Coastal vs. South Atlantic), changing with the rotation. 10,000 times easier and more fan-friendly than the 6-pod system I was slogging through.

Va Tech-UVA, Wake-Duke, and NC State-UNC would be the permanent cross-division games, so all pairs not playing each other permanently would play each other two years on then two years off.

Yes, the South is loaded (look at the South-Atlantic!), but this arguably means more games with better TV ratings. We've already covered that any pod system removes recruiting issues, And, with divisions now featuring 7 teams, the winner of a weak division will still go at least 6-2 in conference play. The biggest switch in this alignment worth considering is giving Miami the option to take Louisville's spot and re-join their old Big East rivals.

IF there is a pod system, something like this is what should be done. I seem to recall more reputable sites than message boards mentioning this type of thing for the SEC when Missouri was joining the conference. But this may bring us back to the fact that the current Atlantic and Coastal divisions are good enough. There doesn't seem to be much push for teams to see greater VARIETY in opponents, just a few rivalries that were left on the cutting-room floor (UNC-Wake). If things were to be re-jiggered they likely would been done when adding Louisville. The most likely change before realignmageddon is the conference going to 9 games.
07-09-2019 11:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 2,133
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 89
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #106
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-09-2019 10:40 PM)esayem Wrote:  You could do that now with the current divisions, but some teams would only have two games to schedule OOC.

Pitt-SU, Louis
UVa- SU, BC
VaTech- Louis, Clemson
UNC- NCSU, Wake
Duke- Wake, NCSU
GaTech- Clemson, FSU
Miami- FSU, BC

BC- Miami, UVa
SU- Pitt, UVa
Louis- VaTech, Pitt
NCSU- UNC, Duke
Wake- Duke, UNC
Clem- GaTech, VaTech
FSU- Miami, GaTech

IDK, it creates arbitrary crossovers and locks teams in with a 10 game schedule. Bad probably outweighs good.

This doesn't quite accomplish your goal of having all 4 southernmost teams play each other every year. You're missing Clemson/Miami. One reason I favor the compromise alignment over the current alignment is because it places Miami in the same division as BC and Syracuse. This frees Miami up to play both Clemson and FSU as protected crossovers.

It's a good point about the resistance of the ACC schools (those with annual SEC rivals in particular) to expanding to 9 games. The conference also wants to retain 8 games to keep ND on the hook. However, Iowa, Iowa State, Stanford, and USC manage to get by on having 9 conference games plus an annual OOC power opponent, so it's not insurmountable. Maybe schedule just one buy game every other year instead of two.

Also, regarding arbitrary crossovers, there are already at least 2 of those (BC/VT, Lou/UVA), not mention all the arbitrary in-division matchups in any zipper alignment. I'd argue that the extra crossovers are mostly quite relevant in my compromise alignment at least.
(This post was last modified: 07-10-2019 07:37 AM by Nerdlinger.)
07-10-2019 07:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 2,133
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 89
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #107
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-09-2019 11:43 PM)Crayton Wrote:  
(07-09-2019 02:31 PM)esayem Wrote:  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
I'd keep UVA-UNC by doing something like this:
North: BC, Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville
South: GT, FSU, Miami, Clemson
Atlantic: VaTech, Wake, NC State
Coastal: UVA, Duke, UNC

The division names can be portmanteaus of these quad names (North Atlantic vs. South Coastal and North Coastal vs. South Atlantic), changing with the rotation. 10,000 times easier and more fan-friendly than the 6-pod system I was slogging through.

Va Tech-UVA, Wake-Duke, and NC State-UNC would be the permanent cross-division games, so all pairs not playing each other permanently would play each other two years on then two years off.

Yes, the South is loaded (look at the South-Atlantic!), but this arguably means more games with better TV ratings. We've already covered that any pod system removes recruiting issues, And, with divisions now featuring 7 teams, the winner of a weak division will still go at least 6-2 in conference play. The biggest switch in this alignment worth considering is giving Miami the option to take Louisville's spot and re-join their old Big East rivals.

IF there is a pod system, something like this is what should be done. I seem to recall more reputable sites than message boards mentioning this type of thing for the SEC when Missouri was joining the conference. But this may bring us back to the fact that the current Atlantic and Coastal divisions are good enough. There doesn't seem to be much push for teams to see greater VARIETY in opponents, just a few rivalries that were left on the cutting-room floor (UNC-Wake). If things were to be re-jiggered they likely would been done when adding Louisville. The most likely change before realignmageddon is the conference going to 9 games.

I approve of the North Atlantic / South Coastal and North Coastal / South Atlantic division naming system. I think, at least in part, that the ACC didn't seek to realign upon adding Louisville so as to not "rock the boat". Having lost Maryland, it might have seemed as though the league were in great upheaval if they realigned at the same time. That said, it's been a few years, and the ACC is quite stable right now, especially with their long-term GoR. I say now is as good a time as any to make changes that will improve the conference schedule, even if it's not a tremendous improvement like the near-geographic realignment would be.
(This post was last modified: 07-10-2019 08:37 PM by Nerdlinger.)
07-10-2019 07:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 2,133
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 89
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #108
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
So I've learned that a change in the alignment of the ACC's football divisions would only take a majority vote, not a 3/4 vote. This means only 8 schools need to approve rather than 11 -- much more surmountable. In this light, let's examine two of my favorite alternatives to the current alignment:

(1) Near-geographic alignment:

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

Where would the schools stand?

Boston College: Yea (gains Miami, avoids Clemson and FSU)
Clemson: Yea (fewer games vs. northeast teams)
Duke: Nay (UVA no longer annual, doesn't avoid Clemson and FSU)
Florida State: Yea (gains GT, fewer games vs. northeast teams)
Georgia Tech: Yea (gains FSU)
Louisville: Yea (gains potential rivals Pitt and VT)
Miami-FL: Yea (gains BC and Syracuse)
NC State: Yea (better recruiting by gaining GT)
North Carolina: Nay (doesn't avoid Clemson and FSU)
Pittsburgh: Yea (more games vs. northeast teams)
Syracuse: Yea (gains Miami, avoids Clemson and FSU)
Virginia: Nay (Duke and GT no longer annual, more games against ex-Big East teams)
Virginia Tech: Yea? (gains WF)
Wake Forest: Yea (gains UNC and VT)

So that's 10 "Yea", 1 "Yea?", and 3 "Nay". I'd say it passes.

(2) Compromise alignment:

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

Where would the schools stand?

Boston College: Yea (gains Miami, avoids Clemson and FSU)
Clemson: Yea (gains UNC and UVA, fewer games vs. northeast teams)
Duke: Nay (UVA no longer annual)
Florida State: Yea (fewer games vs. northeast teams)
Georgia Tech: Nay (UNC and UVA no longer annual, more games vs. northeast teams)
Louisville: Yea (gains potential rival Pitt)
Miami-FL: Yea (gains BC and Syracuse)
NC State: Yea (better recruiting by gaining Pitt and UVA)
North Carolina: Nay (GT no longer annual, doesn't avoid Clemson and FSU)
Pittsburgh: Nay (GT, Miami, and VT no longer annual)
Syracuse: Yea (gains Miami, avoids Clemson and FSU)
Virginia: Nay (Duke and GT no longer annual, doesn't avoid Clemson and FSU)
Virginia Tech: Yea? (gains WF)
Wake Forest: Yea (gains VT, avoids Clemson and FSU)

That's 8 "Yea", 1 "Yea?", and 5 "Nay". So it could fly, but it's a tougher sell than the near-geographic alignment.

If anyone has a better sense of how each of the schools would feel, please let me know!
(This post was last modified: 07-18-2019 08:59 PM by Nerdlinger.)
07-12-2019 06:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,905
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 411
I Root For: Common Sense
Location: Nunnayadamnbusiness
Post: #109
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
Let me set some of the goofy thinking straight regarding Pitt. I can’t speak to everyone else, but I can definitely speak to their thought process. They are not worried about avoiding Clemson and Florida State.

I have read that contention dozens of times on this board and it’s just ridiculous. That’s fundamentally the exact opposite of how Pitt fans and administrators would be thinking.

We are not located in some small college back water where we are the only game in town. In a best case scenario, Pittsburgh football is the fourth hottest sports ticket in the region behind the local professional teams. We need names to sell tickets and those two teams would do that very well for us.

The problem is we need to be able to recruit South Florida and we have an actual history with Virginia Tech. Therefore, our priorities are always going to be Miami and Virginia Tech. We don’t care about Louisville at all and we barely care about Boston College and Syracuse. However, Miami and Virginia Tech are important to us. Personally, I think Georgia Tech is also important because I’d I see them as our southern doppelgänger and I would like to be in Atlanta for recruiting reasons.

However, I can assure you nobody is afraid of playing Clemson or Florida State. That’s just absurd.
07-12-2019 07:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 2,133
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 89
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #110
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-12-2019 07:32 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  Let me set some of the goofy thinking straight regarding Pitt. I can’t speak to everyone else, but I can definitely speak to their thought process. They are not worried about avoiding Clemson and Florida State.

I have read that contention dozens of times on this board and it’s just ridiculous. That’s fundamentally the exact opposite of how Pitt fans and administrators would be thinking.

We are not located in some small college back water where we are the only game in town. In a best case scenario, Pittsburgh football is the fourth hottest sports ticket in the region behind the local professional teams. We need names to sell tickets and those two teams would do that very well for us.

The problem is we need to be able to recruit South Florida and we have an actual history with Virginia Tech. Therefore, our priorities are always going to be Miami and Virginia Tech. We don’t care about Louisville at all and we barely care about Boston College and Syracuse. However, Miami and Virginia Tech are important to us. Personally, I think Georgia Tech is also important because I’d I see them as our southern doppelgänger and I would like to be in Atlanta for recruiting reasons.

However, I can assure you nobody is afraid of playing Clemson or Florida State. That’s just absurd.

OK, thanks for your take. I changed Pitt from "Yea?" to "Yea" in (1) and changed the reason for their "Nay" in (2). Looks good?
07-12-2019 07:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crayton Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 126
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 17
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #111
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-09-2019 09:00 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(07-09-2019 01:11 PM)Crayton Wrote:  Finally figured it out!!! [something about teams having 3 permanent rivals and making divisions fit around those rivalries]
I like the thinking, but I tried to work out the nuts and bolts of this and ran into a problem.
[...]
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.
Ok, so I DID find a general solution to a 3/2/2 pod system. It is complicated to explain, so I brought a picture (attachment, I guess). Basically, the cross-pod rivalries need to be symetrical (specific opponents within a pod are not a contraint), with the 3-team pods either on the sides or above/below. Lots of flexibility still exists. I tried a number of configurations, but this kept the most desired rivalries.

The critique about it being "confusing to fans" could not be more right. The portmanteau division naming system with 4 pods makes things fan-accessible; "my team is always in the 'South' quad, so that means if an announcer uses the term 'South Coastal', I know they are talking about 'our' division".

The best I can come up with for the 3/2/2 system is to use a single, 14-team table, relegating mention of "Atlantic" and "Coastal" to a note ("a" or "c") next to each team. The CCG would still feature the 2 division winners, although different tie-breakers could be used to emphasise the single table. The top of the 2018 standings might look like this (GT/Mia switched with Syr/Lou):

#1 (8-0)a Clemson
#2 (6-2)c Pittsburgh
#3 (6-2)c Syracuse
#4 (5-3)a Georgia Tech
#5 (5-3)a NC State
Pittsburgh and Syracuse share a pod and are both in the Coastal, so Pitt advances to play Clemson in the title game on the basis of their head-to-head victory over Syracuse.

In case the attachment thingy doesn't work, here are the permanent rivalries for each team; the only ones from Nerdlinger's I replaced were ones that were not currently being played annually. I also unnecessarily switched UVA-WF and VT-Lou, figuring Wake is VT's closest opponent and UVA-Lou have already begun an annual series.

Atlantic: Florida St (Clemson), Miami (Virginia Tech), & Boston College (Syracuse)
Coastal: Pittsburgh (Georgia Tech), Louisville (Virginia), & Syracuse (Boston College)
Pod A: Clemson (NC State, Florida St) & Georgia Tech (Duke, Pittsburgh)
Pod B: Virginia (UNC, Louisville) & Virginia Tech (Miami, Wake Forest)
Pod C: NC State (Clemson, UNC) & Wake Forest (Virginia Tech, Duke)
Pod D: Duke (Georgia Tech, Wake Forest) & UNC (Virginia, NC State)


Attached File(s)
.jpg  acc.jpg (Size: 95.89 KB / Downloads: 11)
(This post was last modified: 07-12-2019 11:13 PM by Crayton.)
07-12-2019 11:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TuckerGnat Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 38
Joined: Jul 2018
Reputation: 14
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #112
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-12-2019 07:32 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  Let me set some of the goofy thinking straight regarding Pitt. I can’t speak to everyone else, but I can definitely speak to their thought process. They are not worried about avoiding Clemson and Florida State.

I have read that contention dozens of times on this board and it’s just ridiculous. That’s fundamentally the exact opposite of how Pitt fans and administrators would be thinking.

We are not located in some small college back water where we are the only game in town. In a best case scenario, Pittsburgh football is the fourth hottest sports ticket in the region behind the local professional teams. We need names to sell tickets and those two teams would do that very well for us.

The problem is we need to be able to recruit South Florida and we have an actual history with Virginia Tech. Therefore, our priorities are always going to be Miami and Virginia Tech. We don’t care about Louisville at all and we barely care about Boston College and Syracuse. However, Miami and Virginia Tech are important to us. Personally, I think Georgia Tech is also important because I’d I see them as our southern doppelgänger and I would like to be in Atlanta for recruiting reasons.

However, I can assure you nobody is afraid of playing Clemson or Florida State. That’s just absurd.

Agree 100% — it's a ludicrous contention.

"We want to avoid Clemson & FSU" said no Louisville fan ever. Though most individual Louisville fans will name a team in the Coastal they wish they could switch out Wake for (for me it's Miami, for most it's probably Virginia Tech), if there's one thing that unites the entire fan base, it's our desire to stay in the same division as Clemson & FSU.
07-13-2019 04:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 5,503
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 175
I Root For: The Heels
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #113
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-10-2019 07:29 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(07-09-2019 10:40 PM)esayem Wrote:  You could do that now with the current divisions, but some teams would only have two games to schedule OOC.

Pitt-SU, Louis
UVa- SU, BC
VaTech- Louis, Clemson
UNC- NCSU, Wake
Duke- Wake, NCSU
GaTech- Clemson, FSU
Miami- FSU, BC

BC- Miami, UVa
SU- Pitt, UVa
Louis- VaTech, Pitt
NCSU- UNC, Duke
Wake- Duke, UNC
Clem- GaTech, VaTech
FSU- Miami, GaTech

IDK, it creates arbitrary crossovers and locks teams in with a 10 game schedule. Bad probably outweighs good.

This doesn't quite accomplish your goal of having all 4 southernmost teams play each other every year. You're missing Clemson/Miami. One reason I favor the compromise alignment over the current alignment is because it places Miami in the same division as BC and Syracuse. This frees Miami up to play both Clemson and FSU as protected crossovers.

It's a good point about the resistance of the ACC schools (those with annual SEC rivals in particular) to expanding to 9 games. The conference also wants to retain 8 games to keep ND on the hook. However, Iowa, Iowa State, Stanford, and USC manage to get by on having 9 conference games plus an annual OOC power opponent, so it's not insurmountable. Maybe schedule just one buy game every other year instead of two.

Also, regarding arbitrary crossovers, there are already at least 2 of those (BC/VT, Lou/UVA), not mention all the arbitrary in-division matchups in any zipper alignment. I'd argue that the extra crossovers are mostly quite relevant in my compromise alignment at least.

Yeah, I think a 9 game schedule is a non-starter. It was voted down before and I don’t see how things have changed. I prefer my quad setup.

A simple solution, which we mention all the time, is having VaTech-Louisville and UVa-BC become crossover opponents. The Gobblers and the Birds have a history dating back to the Metro Conference, and Blacksburg is the closest town to Louisville in the football conference. Plus, that is an interesting TV game. The switch would reduce the league to one arbitrary match-up: UVa vs. BC, which could still be some sort of “Commonwealth” game.

These are fun exercises, but ultimately the superior option is to get rid of divisions and schedule like the old 12 team SEC did with Georgia Tech and Tulane. They didn’t have a regular rotation, but rather a schedule that comprised of each team’s most logical opponents based on geography and rivalries. The 10 team SEC approached this the same way until the 80’s, then they added and eighth conference game and you saw OOC rivalries diminish. UNC would have four permanent opponents, while other teams may only have one or two. Then you can do an even rotation with what is left.

As far as divisions go, I don’t think they need to have a perceived balance, the Big Ten surely hasn’t needed balanced divisions. Meanwhile they have heavyweight TV games including Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, and Michigan State every year. The ACC is missing opportunities, and having more control over the schedule will improve that.
07-13-2019 07:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardinalJim Offline
Welcome to The New Age
*

Posts: 8,169
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 731
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Planet Red
Post: #114
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-13-2019 04:28 AM)TuckerGnat Wrote:  
(07-12-2019 07:32 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  Let me set some of the goofy thinking straight regarding Pitt. I can’t speak to everyone else, but I can definitely speak to their thought process. They are not worried about avoiding Clemson and Florida State.

I have read that contention dozens of times on this board and it’s just ridiculous. That’s fundamentally the exact opposite of how Pitt fans and administrators would be thinking.

We are not located in some small college back water where we are the only game in town. In a best case scenario, Pittsburgh football is the fourth hottest sports ticket in the region behind the local professional teams. We need names to sell tickets and those two teams would do that very well for us.

The problem is we need to be able to recruit South Florida and we have an actual history with Virginia Tech. Therefore, our priorities are always going to be Miami and Virginia Tech. We don’t care about Louisville at all and we barely care about Boston College and Syracuse. However, Miami and Virginia Tech are important to us. Personally, I think Georgia Tech is also important because I’d I see them as our southern doppelgänger and I would like to be in Atlanta for recruiting reasons.

However, I can assure you nobody is afraid of playing Clemson or Florida State. That’s just absurd.

Agree 100% — it's a ludicrous contention.

"We want to avoid Clemson & FSU" said no Louisville fan ever. Though most individual Louisville fans will name a team in the Coastal they wish they could switch out Wake for (for me it's Miami, for most it's probably Virginia Tech), if there's one thing that unites the entire fan base, it's our desire to stay in the same division as Clemson & FSU.

Tucker nailed it.
Like Dr said, not much of a football connection with Pitt for Louisville fans either.
07-14-2019 08:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 46,670
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 1361
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #115
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-12-2019 06:48 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  (1) Near-geographic alignment:

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

Where would the schools stand?
Georgia Tech: Yea? (gains FSU, fewer games vs. northeast teams)

So that's 6 "Yea", 5 "Yea?", and 3 "Nay". If at least 2 of the questionable "Yea" votes are actually "Yea", this alignment could fly.




(2) Compromise alignment:

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

Where would the schools stand?
Georgia Tech: Nay (UNC and UVA no longer annual, more games vs. northeast teams)

That's 6 "Yea", 3 "Yea?", 1 "Nay?", and 4 "Nay". Needs 2 questionable votes to go "Yea" for it to fly.

If anyone has a better sense of how each of the schools would feel, please let me know!

GT would enthusiastically go for #1. It's not perfect but it is an improvement. GT would definitively not go with #2.
07-15-2019 06:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
solohawks Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,825
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 354
I Root For: UNCW
Location: Wilmington, NC
Post: #116
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
If you wanna see the ACC crumble, try to put the VA schools in a northern division
07-15-2019 06:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 2,133
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 89
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #117
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-15-2019 06:29 PM)solohawks Wrote:  If you wanna see the ACC crumble, try to put the VA schools in a northern division

Intriguing! Go on...
07-15-2019 06:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 2,133
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 89
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #118
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-15-2019 06:06 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(07-12-2019 06:48 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  (1) Near-geographic alignment:

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

Where would the schools stand?
Georgia Tech: Yea? (gains FSU, fewer games vs. northeast teams)

So that's 6 "Yea", 5 "Yea?", and 3 "Nay". If at least 2 of the questionable "Yea" votes are actually "Yea", this alignment could fly.




(2) Compromise alignment:

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

Where would the schools stand?
Georgia Tech: Nay (UNC and UVA no longer annual, more games vs. northeast teams)

That's 6 "Yea", 3 "Yea?", 1 "Nay?", and 4 "Nay". Needs 2 questionable votes to go "Yea" for it to fly.

If anyone has a better sense of how each of the schools would feel, please let me know!

GT would enthusiastically go for #1. It's not perfect but it is an improvement. GT would definitively not go with #2.

Thanks, good to know! Updated the votes.
07-15-2019 06:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 2,133
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 89
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #119
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
(07-12-2019 11:09 PM)Crayton Wrote:  
(07-09-2019 09:00 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(07-09-2019 01:11 PM)Crayton Wrote:  Finally figured it out!!! [something about teams having 3 permanent rivals and making divisions fit around those rivalries]
I like the thinking, but I tried to work out the nuts and bolts of this and ran into a problem.
[...]
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.
Ok, so I DID find a general solution to a 3/2/2 pod system. It is complicated to explain, so I brought a picture (attachment, I guess). Basically, the cross-pod rivalries need to be symetrical (specific opponents within a pod are not a contraint), with the 3-team pods either on the sides or above/below. Lots of flexibility still exists. I tried a number of configurations, but this kept the most desired rivalries.

The critique about it being "confusing to fans" could not be more right. The portmanteau division naming system with 4 pods makes things fan-accessible; "my team is always in the 'South' quad, so that means if an announcer uses the term 'South Coastal', I know they are talking about 'our' division".

The best I can come up with for the 3/2/2 system is to use a single, 14-team table, relegating mention of "Atlantic" and "Coastal" to a note ("a" or "c") next to each team. The CCG would still feature the 2 division winners, although different tie-breakers could be used to emphasise the single table. The top of the 2018 standings might look like this (GT/Mia switched with Syr/Lou):

#1 (8-0)a Clemson
#2 (6-2)c Pittsburgh
#3 (6-2)c Syracuse
#4 (5-3)a Georgia Tech
#5 (5-3)a NC State
Pittsburgh and Syracuse share a pod and are both in the Coastal, so Pitt advances to play Clemson in the title game on the basis of their head-to-head victory over Syracuse.

In case the attachment thingy doesn't work, here are the permanent rivalries for each team; the only ones from Nerdlinger's I replaced were ones that were not currently being played annually. I also unnecessarily switched UVA-WF and VT-Lou, figuring Wake is VT's closest opponent and UVA-Lou have already begun an annual series.

Atlantic: Florida St (Clemson), Miami (Virginia Tech), & Boston College (Syracuse)
Coastal: Pittsburgh (Georgia Tech), Louisville (Virginia), & Syracuse (Boston College)
Pod A: Clemson (NC State, Florida St) & Georgia Tech (Duke, Pittsburgh)
Pod B: Virginia (UNC, Louisville) & Virginia Tech (Miami, Wake Forest)
Pod C: NC State (Clemson, UNC) & Wake Forest (Virginia Tech, Duke)
Pod D: Duke (Georgia Tech, Wake Forest) & UNC (Virginia, NC State)

Very cool! I think you need to swap the NC schools around though. How's this?

[Image: qlbStVU.png]

While it's nice and symmetric-looking, I'm not sure how well this fares schedule-wise. I tried to work it out but things got kind of messy. Basically, I think it needs to be symmetric horizontally as well as vertically, and I don't know if that would preserve the necessary rivalries.
(This post was last modified: 07-16-2019 02:12 PM by Nerdlinger.)
07-15-2019 09:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 5,503
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 175
I Root For: The Heels
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #120
RE: A Realignment Proposal for the ACC
LOL, print that in a geometry book, not an ACC football program. Divisions are OK. Just get VaTech and Louisville as crossover opponents.
07-16-2019 06:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2019 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, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.