OT: ACC says "Let's make a Deal"

NickRU714

Heisman
Aug 18, 2009
13,604
12,367
0
i dont like pods simply because they will be geographic and not a fan of that, it would like what an old big east/acc might look like, thats not why i joined the big 10

Did you join to play Washington, USC and UCLA?
To not play UM, OSU and PSU?

Seems many people are relived we aren't playing "geographic" schools anymore.
This might be the first post wanting to play UM, OSU and PSU more often?
 
  • Like
Reactions: rubigtimenow

Pils86

All-Conference
Sep 21, 2008
1,766
1,315
0
You two just made my list…

I like pods, good for rivalries, almost a mini regional conference, easier travel for U and students. Your meme is bad, should delete.
 

RUaMoose_rivals

All-American
Oct 31, 2004
17,237
7,058
0
Does FSU have an option beside the Big Ten? Given that the SEC already has Florida, does adding FSU or Miami generate enough incremental TV revenue to make it a net positive? Same with Clemson and South Carolina being in the SEC. For some reason I have a hard time thinking the Big Ten would prioritize Clemson but that may not be the case.

The SEC would prioritize UNC and UVA because they would represent new contiguous markets. Both of those schools would be high on the Big Ten's list as well. If we are talking about the ACC losing 4 or less teams, there is enough left over and the possibility of a couple of adds that could keep them viable with the B-12. It is not out of the realm of possibility that some geographic sanity would allow a swap of Stanford and Cal to the Big-12 and WVU and someone else to the ACC. Academic profiles would not seem to be an issue anymore.
UVa isn’t high on anyone’s list. SEC adding FSU would add rivalries. FSU/Bama, FSU/GA, FSU/LSU, etc. Games ppl wanna watch regardless of what market they’re in. Your way of thinking is outdated. You think the Big 10 or SEC gives a **** about the central Va market? What compelling rivalries does UVa add? Oh everyone’s tuning in for the big MD/UVa game. Lol
 

e5fdny

Heisman
Nov 11, 2002
113,674
52,300
102
Did you join to play Washington, USC and UCLA?
To not play UM, OSU and PSU?

Seems many people are relived we aren't playing "geographic" schools anymore.
This might be the first post wanting to play UM, OSU and PSU more often?
Zipper gets you playing all schools sooner.

I wish is was just 12 but I know that ship has sailed. So whatever the number is I’d rather play more (and all) than less.

One protected (fine with that being Maryland for us) and the rest on the rotational sequence.
 

tom1944

All-American
Feb 22, 2008
6,596
6,971
0
Do you want to see every team have 1 or 2 rivalry games every year? I cannot imagine the B1G does away with Ohio State Michigan as a yearly game. I also wonder if the pressure to keep Michigan State Michigan as in state rivals could cause a 2-team yearly game(s).
 

NickRU714

Heisman
Aug 18, 2009
13,604
12,367
0
Zipper gets you playing all schools sooner.

I wish is was just 12 but I know that ship has sailed. So whatever the number is I’d rather play more (and all) than less.

One protected (fine with that being Maryland for us) and the rest on the rotational sequence.

Zipper meaning home/away in back to back years?

For example, USC home 2024 then USC away 2025?

If you want to truly rotate and play everyone than you can't do that. Just slows down the whole process.
 

e5fdny

Heisman
Nov 11, 2002
113,674
52,300
102
Zipper meaning home/away in back to back years?

For example, USC home 2024 then USC away 2025?

If you want to truly rotate and play everyone than you can't do that. Just slows down the whole process.
The zipper is a sliding 9 game B1G schedule that changes every year…

Someone(s) is added, someone(s) drops off.

Depending on what 9 teams you start with determines how it goes forward.

I would prefer a 10 game one (5H/5A) and 2 OOC. But that’s not my decision.

The more we add though the more difficult it becomes. Meaning it just takes a little longer to get through everyone.

I had it all broken down on here a while ago that laid the whole thing out.

It’s not necessarily back to back every season either.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: NickRU714

e5fdny

Heisman
Nov 11, 2002
113,674
52,300
102
Do you want to see every team have 1 or 2 rivalry games every year? I cannot imagine the B1G does away with Ohio State Michigan as a yearly game. I also wonder if the pressure to keep Michigan State Michigan as in state rivals could cause a 2-team yearly game(s).
I’d be fine with 1 protected game if it makes it easier to get thru the whole lineup.

But I don’t make that call.🤷‍♂️
 
Feb 5, 2003
10,900
9,218
113
Five team pods? I don't see it. Who gets screwed as the 5th team with the Pac 10 refugees and forced to travel west 2x every season? As I pointed out a couple weeks ago, Nebraska is closer to Rutgers than they are to any of the Pax schools.

FSU travel partner with UNC? Uhhh... Tallahassee is a 583 mile drive from Chapel Hill. That's not a travel partner. GT is far closer but that would surprise me.

Notre Dame would still clearly be the crown jewel of any expansion. Nobody would come close to drawing their ratings. Keep the SC rivalry going, plus Michigan, Purdue, Michigan State... America's favorite and most hated team in one.
 

krup

Heisman
Feb 5, 2003
70,133
10,066
0
Five team pods? I don't see it. Who gets screwed as the 5th team with the Pac 10 refugees and forced to travel west 2x every season? As I pointed out a couple weeks ago, Nebraska is closer to Rutgers than they are to any of the Pax schools.

FSU travel partner with UNC? Uhhh... Tallahassee is a 583 mile drive from Chapel Hill. That's not a travel partner. GT is far closer but that would surprise me.

Notre Dame would still clearly be the crown jewel of any expansion. Nobody would come close to drawing their ratings. Keep the SC rivalry going, plus Michigan, Purdue, Michigan State... America's favorite and most hated team in one.
The problem with Notre Dame is that they are only joining a conference if they don’t have a viable alternative, and the ACC hybrid arrangement is more than viable right now.

If the playoff has at least 3-4 at large spots and the ACC has enough teams left to be a conference (even if it is a weak one) they are aren’t leaving.

I don’t see them trying to accompany FSU or UNC to the SEC or B1G. They would only consider a conference if the ACC completely blows up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: satnom

megadrone

Senior
Jul 10, 2003
24,128
894
56
ridiculous the playoff committee continues to cater to ND.
not sure if they are.

ND is the only independent playing a schedule hard enough to get into the top 20. Under yesterday's plan, they will never get a first round bye (since they won't be a conference champion). they will usually be in the hunt for an at-large spot ESPECIALLY if they play more Big 10 teams (and pass on BC-Wake-Syracuse-Ga Tech as part of the ACC commitment).
 
  • Like
Reactions: NickRU714
Dec 17, 2008
45,215
16,775
0
not sure if they are.

ND is the only independent playing a schedule hard enough to get into the top 20. Under yesterday's plan, they will never get a first round bye (since they won't be a conference champion). they will usually be in the hunt for an at-large spot ESPECIALLY if they play more Big 10 teams (and pass on BC-Wake-Syracuse-Ga Tech as part of the ACC commitment).
Swarbrick was part of the group that came up with the 12 team plan a handful of years ago. So they're fine with the 12 team plan and never getting a bye.

12 teams is only set for the next 2 years. Beyond that, it's up in the air.

The potential problem for ND is the B10/SEC want more autobids. There's a real look at going beyond 12 to 14 or 16. I've seen CFB media mentioning 4 auto bids each as being discussed. So say it's a 16 team CFP. The B10 gets 4, the SEC gets 4. To placate and get some buy in from the ACC/B12 say they get 2 each. Then 1 more for the G5. That's 13 auto bids out of 16 and only 3 at-larges. This is just a hypothetical but you can see how that can be tight squeeze for ND as an independent.
 

cicero grimes

All-American
Nov 23, 2015
8,359
8,886
0
Pods are inevitable.
Big Ten/SEC can't have 20+ teams and not sort themselves into divisions.

It'll mimic the NFL.
You play your own division every year.
Then rotation of teams from other divisions.

Then have their own playoffs to determine conference champ.
Division winners in a 4 team playoff.
Add FSU and one more team and then go to two divisions. The original B10 and the new B10. This will make the fans of Purdue and NW happy who never wanted us in the conference as they can go back to getting beat up by their "traditional rivals" and rid themselves of the burden of having to play us newcomers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kupuna133

e5fdny

Heisman
Nov 11, 2002
113,674
52,300
102
Add FSU and one more team and then go to two divisions. The original B10 and the new B10. This will make the fans of Purdue and NW happy who never wanted us in the conference as they can go back to getting beat up by their "traditional rivals" and rid themselves of the burden of having to play us newcomers.
This, @NickRU714 I could get behind.

Beats that other four letter word.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NickRU714

kupuna133

All-American
Jul 13, 2015
6,035
6,667
113
Add FSU and one more team and then go to two divisions. The original B10 and the new B10. This will make the fans of Purdue and NW happy who never wanted us in the conference as they can go back to getting beat up by their "traditional rivals" and rid themselves of the burden of having to play us newcomers.
This could be the best idea I have heard regarding “divisions”. Love it. And it’s fairly balanced.
 

e5fdny

Heisman
Nov 11, 2002
113,674
52,300
102
This could be the best idea I have heard regarding “divisions”. Love it. And it’s fairly balanced.
It’s also pretty close to the inner vs. outer idea discussed by the B1G prior to the newest additions.