Through 5 years, the ACC is a solid number two in CFP bids. The B1G and SEC are grabbing the lion's share of at large bids to the NY6, but the ACC remains ahead of both the P12 and B12 to hold 3rd place in NY6 bids.

(12-03-2018 08:36 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

Code:

    CFP Bids    NY6 Bids
SEC         6                14
ACC         5                9
B1G         3                14
B12      3                8
P12      2                8
G5+Ind  1                7

ACC is doing great on CFP bids, but seriously trailing on the NY6 bids (although ahead still in 3rd place ahead of Pac-12 and Big XII). ACC needs enough quality depth to get an at-large bid more often (like this year - no NY6 at-large!) That should be the next goal for ACC football, IMHO.

(12-03-2018 08:36 AM)orangefan Wrote:  Through 5 years, the ACC is a solid number two in CFP bids. The B1G and SEC are grabbing the lion's share of at large bids to the NY6, but the ACC remains ahead of both the P12 and B12 to hold 2nd place in NY6 bids.

Code:

    CFP Bids    NY6 Bids
SEC      6          14
ACC      5          9
B1G      3          14
B12      3          8
P12      2          8
G5+Ind   1          7

Contract Bowl tie-ins skew the numbers slightly. Every time the Sugar Bowl has not been part of the CFP, the Sugar Bowl has had a team not ranked in the Top 12 by the CFP.

In 2015, that caused UNC to be left out of a NY6 Bowl (#16 Oklahoma State Cowboys). In 2016 it cost Colorado to be left out of a NY6 Bowl (#14 Auburn Tigers). And this year, that caused Penn State to be left out of a NY6 Bowl (#15 Texas Longhorns).


Adjusted Totals for NY6 Bowls in a fairer set-up:

B1G - 15
SEC - 13
ACC - 10
PAC - 9
B12 - 6
ND - 2
G5 - 5

Cheers,
Neil

The real problem is with the Citrus and Hall of Fame Bowl, coupled with the loss of the Peach Bowl as a non P-5


For 35 of 45 years an ACC school played in the Peach Bowl. That ended with the NY6 deal. The ACC lost not only the bowl as a regular bowl, but lost the venue - Atlanta.


Any bowl deal with the ACC includes the downside risk of a mediocre Wake Forest, Duke, BC, or GT - schools with relatively small alumni bases.

(12-03-2018 09:48 AM)Statefan Wrote:  The real problem is with the Citrus and Hall of Fame Bowl, coupled with the loss of the Peach Bowl as a non P-5


For 35 of 45 years an ACC school played in the Peach Bowl. That ended with the NY6 deal. The ACC lost not only the bowl as a regular bowl, but lost the venue - Atlanta.


Any bowl deal with the ACC includes the downside risk of a mediocre Wake Forest, Duke, BC, or GT - schools with relatively small alumni bases.

Interesting. I would think the ACC has enough small-time bowls to accommodate the 7-5 and 6-6 teams who may not travel well. What I believe is the issue to not getting a better bowl (like say the Gator) is the lack of enough underbelly support for Clemson and FSU. A situation that can be fixed mainly by Miami and VT getting closer to their former selves on a consistent basis.

Cheers,
Neil

(12-03-2018 11:01 AM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 09:48 AM)Statefan Wrote:  The real problem is with the Citrus and Hall of Fame Bowl, coupled with the loss of the Peach Bowl as a non P-5


For 35 of 45 years an ACC school played in the Peach Bowl. That ended with the NY6 deal. The ACC lost not only the bowl as a regular bowl, but lost the venue - Atlanta.


Any bowl deal with the ACC includes the downside risk of a mediocre Wake Forest, Duke, BC, or GT - schools with relatively small alumni bases.

Interesting. I would think the ACC has enough small-time bowls to accommodate the 7-5 and 6-6 teams who may not travel well. What I believe is the issue to not getting a better bowl (like say the Gator) is the lack of enough underbelly support for Clemson and FSU. A situation that can be fixed mainly by Miami and VT getting closer to their former selves on a consistent basis.

Cheers,
Neil

It's 2 sides of the same coin. The only way a team like Wake Forest gets to a NY6 bowl is if at least 3 of VT, Miami, Clemson and FSU are all down at the same time. As long as 2 (or better yet, 3 or 4) of those are winning 10+ games, they will go to the NY6 bowls most of the time.

(12-03-2018 12:51 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 11:01 AM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 09:48 AM)Statefan Wrote:  The real problem is with the Citrus and Hall of Fame Bowl, coupled with the loss of the Peach Bowl as a non P-5


For 35 of 45 years an ACC school played in the Peach Bowl. That ended with the NY6 deal. The ACC lost not only the bowl as a regular bowl, but lost the venue - Atlanta.


Any bowl deal with the ACC includes the downside risk of a mediocre Wake Forest, Duke, BC, or GT - schools with relatively small alumni bases.

Interesting. I would think the ACC has enough small-time bowls to accommodate the 7-5 and 6-6 teams who may not travel well. What I believe is the issue to not getting a better bowl (like say the Gator) is the lack of enough underbelly support for Clemson and FSU. A situation that can be fixed mainly by Miami and VT getting closer to their former selves on a consistent basis.

Cheers,
Neil

It's 2 sides of the same coin. The only way a team like Wake Forest gets to a NY6 bowl is if at least 3 of VT, Miami, Clemson and FSU are all down at the same time. As long as 2 (or better yet, 3 or 4) of those are winning 10+ games, they will go to the NY6 bowls most of the time.

Disagree, but that may have been my fault in presenting my case. The argument as I see it was that since the ACC lost the Peach Bowl as its best non-BCS bowl to the NY6 rotation the remaining bowls it got or kept was on the basis of knowing that after the top 2 are chosen, the ACC has teams that may not travel well or get good ratings as the third, fourth, and fifth options.

The solution, as I see it, remains that the ACC needs more consistency and higher level play from VT and Miami prior to the next go-round of musical bowls since the conference will look more attractive with having Clemson, FSU, Miami, VT, and a chance at ND then it does now with simply Clemson and FSU.

Is there a chance that teams like Duke, Wake, BC, and SU might get in the rotation during a down year for the upper echelon like Wake in 2006, Duke in 2013, or SU this year? Sure but the bowls will likely be more willing to gamble that will not happen often if they knew for sure the "desired" five are operating at a high level more often than not. So of the Citrus, Outback, and Gator, the most likely to switch to the ACC under the above provisions is probably the Gator.

And when the Top are operating at a high level more consistently the CW, Belk, Sun, Pinstripe, etc., will remain since they are already getting GT, UNC, NC State, UVA, Pitt, Lville, BC, SU, Duke, and Wake.

Hope that clarifies my point which was don't fret about the occasional hiccup of a Wake, Duke, BC, or SU doing extremely well in the season, focus on the real cure - Miami and VT getting back to their old selves.

Cheers,
Neil