forums

ACC reviewing 8 game schedule

Advertisement
Of course Syracuse doesn't care about maintaining rivalries, they aren't significant enough in football to have anyone care about them. **** this guy and **** his plan. Tell him to go back to Siberia.
 
ACC ever tries to scrap the FSU-Miami game, it could be the end of the conference. Miami and FSU wouldn't tolerate that one, and the little schools can scream all they way, Miami and FSU are the gems in the conference.
 
Syracuse trying to put an end to Miami FSU is like us trying to put an end to Duke Carolina in hoops. Lulzworthy.

If somehow it did happen, it would force realignment ala the big 10 and Michigan OSU.
 
Advertisement
The Syracuse AD's angle is that by playing "northern teams" it does nothing for his school's recruiting effort , presumably because they have a couple of players from FL and Ga ..and he thinks they should get to play in their home state. Simply put he wants to recruit in FL and he wants to schedule Miami.

The flip side is Miami has nothing to gain by playing in the Carrier Dome.. Likewise Louisville would like the same thing but again the same counter-argument:- "what does Miami have to gain by playing games in Kentucky ?" No disrespect intended. They are both fine schools ..but you play the hand that you are dealt. Swofford would be looking at a full-scale revolt if he ever tried to tamper with UM-FSU.
 
Re-align the divisions. North vs. South.

BC
Cuse
Pitt
Louisville
UVA
VT
Wake

UNC
Duke
NC State
Clemson
GT
FSU
UM
 
Last edited:
Dan E. Dangerously said:
Re-align the divisions. North vs. South.

BC
Cuse
Pitt
Louisville
UVA
VT
Wake

UNC
Duke
NC State
Clemson
GT
FSU
UM
Click to expand...

UM, FSU and Clem should not be in the same division. Need to try to keep some sort of competitive balance. VT, UM, FSU, CLEM need to be 2 and 2 in each division.

2nd off.....this Syracuse AD can suck it. Don't come in here and year 1 yelling out demands. Learn your place punk, we saved you from purgatory.
 
Advertisement
Big Sky Cane said:
Dan E. Dangerously said:
Re-align the divisions. North vs. South.

BC
Cuse
Pitt
Louisville
UVA
VT
Wake

UNC
Duke
NC State
Clemson
GT
FSU
UM
Click to expand...

UM, FSU and Clem should not be in the same division. Need to try to keep some sort of competitive balance. VT, UM, FSU, CLEM need to be 2 and 2 in each division.

2nd off.....this Syracuse AD can suck it. Don't come in here and year 1 yelling out demands. Learn your place punk, we saved you from purgatory.
Click to expand...
I think competitive balance stuff is cyclical. We're proof positive that not every good team stays good forever. The only difference as far as our schedule goes is that we'd be trading UVA & VT for NC State & Clemson. As bad as we've been against VT over the past 18 years, it would be hard to duplicate that against Clemson.

And yea, **** Syracuse's AD.
 
Miami and FSU need to be in different divisions. I want to meet them in the ACCCG every year. Two games a year vs. the Noles? Yes, Please.
 
We need to play FSU every year, the ACC needs us to play FSU every year, and FSU, with their attendance issues, pretty much needs us to play every year. So we can put this **** to bed right now.


However, 'Cuse raises a valid point, and the elephant in the room remains schedule inequality in these new bigger conferences. Basically, because of these cross divisional 'rivalries', you're gonna make the path to the championship game much more difficult for one school than another, all in the name of 'rivalries', some of which are forced.


Easy thing to do would be to go to a 9 game conference schedule with one set 'rival' and 2 rotating opponents, or make cross-divisional games not count unless in need if a tie breaker. In other words, if we go 6-0 in division but lose to Clemson and FSU, and Virginia Tech goes 5-1 in the division but beats B.C. and Wake Forest, we'd still win 'the division'.


Either that, or arrange the god**** divisions in a better way, and keep the teams you want to play 'together' (unfortunately, you probably couldn't do North/South, as cool as it would be). Maybe something like:

Miami, FSU, GA Tech, Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse, BC

Clemson, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, NC State, Wake, Duke, Virginia

For example, the only regional 'rivalry' you'd lose on a yearly basis here is Clemson-GT and your divisions would remain sort of balanced.
 
Last edited:
Get rid of FSU Miami rivalry **** no!!! The football powers did not want Syracuse and Pitt to join from the Big East and dilute our strength of schedule by playing a ****** Cuse team in lieu of FSU. They joined bc Tobacco Road powers wanted them for basketball. So let UNC/Duke play them home and home every yr in basketball but get the **** out about making concessions for football scheduling
 
Advertisement
SevenNSeven said:
We need to play FSU every year, the ACC needs us to play FSU every year, and FSU, with their attendance issues, pretty much needs us to play every year. So we can put this **** to bed right now.


However, 'Cuse raises a valid point, and the elephant in the room remains schedule inequality in these new bigger conferences. Basically, because of these cross divisional 'rivalries', you're gonna make the path to the championship game much more difficult for one school than another, all in the name of 'rivalries', some of which are forced.


Easy thing to do would be to go to a 9 game conference schedule with one set 'rival' and 2 rotating opponents, or make cross-divisional games not count unless in need if a tie breaker. In other words, if we go 6-0 in division but lose to Clemson and FSU, and Virginia Tech goes 5-1 in the division but beats B.C. and Wake Forest, we'd still win 'the division'.


Either that, or arrange the god**** divisions in a better way, and keep the teams you want to play 'together' (unfortunately, you probably couldn't do North/South, as cool as it would be). Maybe something like:

Miami, FSU, GA Tech, Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse, BC

Clemson, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, NC State, Wake, Duke, Virginia

For example, the only regional 'rivalry' you'd lose on a yearly basis here is Clemson-GT and your divisions would remain sort of balanced.
Click to expand...

LSU complains about this every year, because they have rivalry game with Florida plus the SEC west, while Alabama plays Tennessee every year
 
All this schit doesn't matter anymore for anything other than recruiting. Once the playoff is in full swing you will still be able to have a loss and make it to the big game.
 
How about only counting Division games for determining division championships? That way, we would have at least SOME chance to win the Coastal.

GT, VT have a one game lead on us before conference play even starts, since they never play FSU and we do.
 
Advertisement
I'm not worried about this. Common sense and big boy leverage will prevail. When the Pac 12 was forced to re-align, there was talk that USC would lose the annual Bay Area weekender, the alternating games at Stanford or Cal. It's the social highlight of the fall semester because the entire student body relocates for three days and gets drunk, trying not to fall off cable cars.

USC may not have pull with the NCAA but the Bay Area issue was easily muscled and retained. Same here.
 
"we saved you from purgatory?"

No offense, but Who is we? You know our history too. We jumped a sinking ship also except that we have been living in purgatory ever since.
 
Complete bull**** for Miami and FSU to play each year, while VT, Clemson, etc. play cupcakes.

It's also bull**** that we barely play teams like Syracuse, a team we have waaaaaay more history with than most ACC teams.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top