May 8, 2008
ACC moving to nine-game conference schedule?
During the annual meetings, the ADs of the Atlantic Coast Conference will be discussing the prospect of moving the conference to a nine-game football schedule, according to The News & Observer blog.
Under the proposal, each team would play five divisional games and for cross-divisional games per year, transitioning teams back to the three at-large dates per season. The change could bring more competitive games to the schedules of the conference's teams, however, the format could mean that several teams per year would play five ACC games on the road and just four at home.
"It's something that I think we should talk about and explore," Wake Forest athletic director Ron Wellman said Thursday. "There are some obvious pros and cons, and it's certainly not beyond the exploratory stage for now. But with the 12-game regular-season policy, there is some additional room for flexible in-conference scheduling."
No vote is expected on the proposal during the spring meetings, rather just an open discussion between the athletic directors. Any change to the conference schedules would take several years to implement.
Comments:
Lennie Collins
posted on May 8, 2008 6:36 PM — 69.149.118.227 — link — abuse?
said:
That would be great...if teams like Oklahoma gone be punks and play teams like Tennessee-Chattanooga! Image how the schedule would have looked if Nebraska, Missouri, or Colorado would have been on the schedule. Still weak but better! CRIMSON & CREAM TRUE! Take note that I said Oklahoma non-conference schedule is WEAK! I gone keeps it real!
posted on May 8, 2008 6:45 PM — 72.145.94.138 — link — abuse?War Eagle Atlanta
said:
Their current 8-game schedule is enough to play everyone in your division and get a healthy smathering of those from the opposite one. If they want to add another conference game, they just risk continuing to 'eat their own'.
Hey ACC: You became a man with the conference title game. Don't over-do it here... The only reason you play nine conference games is if you're a 10-team conference and want everyone to get a crack at everyone else. (and as an extra bonus only for the Pac-10, choose to ignore head to head competition when crowning a champ...)
Tomcat said:
posted on May 8, 2008 6:54 PM — 69.150.213.9 — link — abuse?
#2 Lennie I'm surprized, really man other than Tenn-Chat, the Sooners have
Wash Huskies
Cinn Bearcats
TCU Horned Frogs
Any one of these three might give the Sooners a pretty good game especially Cinn & TCU
Sooners are lucky they have the Frogs at home, still a decent OCC schedule
IMHO
Adios TomcatLennie Collins
posted on May 8, 2008 7:04 PM — 69.149.118.227 — link — abuse? said:
War Eagle Atlanta, Comment #3 say it again cause Pacific Ten should rename their conference the WHACIFICENT TEN. USC beats Arizona State head to head and ASU still gets a share of the conference title? Tomcat, Comment #4,...don't try to con me! Washington will be the only non-conference team to not be blown out by 15+ points. Oklahoma only has Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, and Kansas to thank for not having a laughable schedule. They did not have to make phone calls to do it either!
Tomcat said:
posted on May 8, 2008 7:29 PM — 69.150.213.9 — link — abuse?
Lennie I know that the Frogs lost alot on Defense and yall got them at home,but history has shown that the Frogs do real well against OU.
#6 If you will recall Stanford beat USC , that same Stanford team that lost to TCU.
Go Frogs
OU travels to Floyd Casy Stadium in Waco this year-Looks like an upset special
The Beatdown on the Brazos
Go BU BearsRegan said:
posted on May 8, 2008 10:27 PM — 75.182.53.208 — link — abuse?
Agree with WEA.
The ACC doesn't need this, as their SOS only matters when it comes to the top teams, and they would end up playing each other in the ACC Championship Game.
The only reason I can see for them to do this is to increase the frequency of cross-division matchups.
Unlike the Big 12, the SEC and ACC have an 'annual rival' for each team in both divisions. (ie: of 3 cross-division games/season, each team plays two rotating teams and one 'fixed' team).
By opening up a 9-game slate, it would allow for, say, Clemson to 'improve' it's SOS by getting either a Miami or VT instead of missing both like they do in 2008.
Won't do any good, since if Clemson's SOS actually does end up mattering, it will include one of them in the ACC CG. (or whoever wins the Coastal).
posted on May 9, 2008 1:21 AM — 67.166.241.225 — link — abuse? said:
Since 2006, the Pac-10 moved to a nine game conference schedule, but seemingly, they disregard head-to head competition when crowning a conference champion because for the last two years, they've had split champions. Anyone know the rationale behind this? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
Come on. Enough is enough. If Mike Slive told the SEC to move to a 9-game schedule, I'm sure they'd all say WTF, Mike. Whatcha been smoking in that Birmingham office?(the one that should be in Atlanta)
Tomcat said:
posted on May 9, 2008 1:36 AM — 70.243.165.175 — link — abuse?
#10 WEA ya your right,co-champs ? doesnt really make much sense and either CCG should be eliminated or all conferences should have them.
In the XII the UT vs OU is always bigger than some earlier season rematch.
Like UT vs CU or OU vs Missu
Two teams should not face each other twice in the same season. Only benefits the loser in the first game.
If the B-10/11 had CCG we wouldnt have heard all the bull about a tOSU vs Mich rematch in 06, they probably would have played each other twice anyway.
Adios Tomcat
The ACC should probably schedule more P-10, B-10,B-12 and BE games instead of more ACC against itself games.
posted on May 9, 2008 1:51 AM — 67.166.241.225 — link — abuse? said:
TC: Amen, brother . Would someone please explain to me what sense it makes to have every fricking team in the conference play the others if you're going to ignore the head-to-head games when determining the champ??
http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/pac10/southern_california/yearly_results.php?year=2005
(notice that USC is a co-champ every year from 06-07)
ABSOLUTELY agree, Tomcat: Any rematch with conference foes favors the initial loser, but unfortunately, I'm still for them--welcome to real conferences with championship games...
Zac said:
posted on May 9, 2008 3:07 AM — 209.36.193.14 — link — abuse?
"...don't try to con me! Washington will be the only non-conference team to not be blown out by 15+ points."
Sorry, Lennie, but I'm with Tomcat big-time on this one. In fact of the 3 teams he listed in Post #4, WA is the weakest. Cinci is far and away the strongest. Although I still think they loose in Norman, it won't be until after they've forced your Sooners to change their jerseys a time or two.
As for the ACC and going to a 9 game schedule. I'm with WarEagle. Why bother???
Lennie Collins
posted on May 9, 2008 8:17 AM — 69.149.118.227 — link — abuse? said:
Zac, Comment #13, this will be the same Tomcat that will be saying after every Oklahoma victory how bad these teams were! I know! I have nothing against the man but check past post. Last year this "Cat" was saying how Miami's defense was gone slow down Oklahoma. After the game, WHAM!...Miami defense was overrated? Washington is Oklahoma only ROAD non-conference game and all I have to say is USC! I am also 100% if Oklahoma beats Cincinnati by 20+ points you will also say that the Bearcats were not that good after all. Crimson & Cream True! Take Care, Doggone It!
Tampa Hurricane
posted on May 9, 2008 9:12 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse? said:
This is a terrible idea. The ACC should keep a 8 game conference schedule and have the schools schedule better OOC opponents. All conferences should agree to a rule that the teams need to play three of the four (PAC-10 two of three) OOC games against BCS division opponents.
A quick view of the future OOC opponents for Miami shows that the Canes are already doing this.
2009: Oklahoma, USF, UCF
2010: Ohio State, UCF, Pittsburgh, USF
2011: Marshall, Ohio State, Kansas State, USF
2012: Kansas State, Marshall, Cincinnati, USF
2013: Florida, USFCompare that to the weak OOC contracted by UF:
2009: Troy, FIU, FSU
2010: Miami (OH), USF, Appalachian State, FSU
2011: FAU, Furman, FSU
2012: no games under contract
2013: Toledo, MiamiIt's time for conferences to step up and have their programs play other BCS conferences!
Regan said:
posted on May 9, 2008 4:30 PM — 75.182.53.208 — link — abuse?
Tomcat (#11):
>>>
The ACC should probably schedule more P-10, B-10,B-12 and BE games instead of more ACC against itself games.
>>>Straight up. FSU got to be king in the '90's with the anyone, anywhere mindset. The ACC needs to do this (like the Big East is trying to) if they want to catch up with the other established conferences anytime soon.
Regan said:
posted on May 9, 2008 4:57 PM — 75.182.53.208 — link — abuse?
I got bored a few months ago and analyzed the ACC's OOC 2008 schedule, and half of it reads like a coloring book:
VS. Big East (4x): NCSU/USF, UNC/CONN, UNC/RUTG, UVA/CONN
VS. Big Ten (1x): DUKE/NW
VS. Big 12 (4x): FSU/COL, WFU/BAY, MIA/TXAM, VT/NEB
VS. Pac-10 (2x): MARY/CAL, UVA/SCAL
VS. SEC (10x): CLEM/BAMA, CLEM/SCAR, FSU/FLA, NCSU/SCAR, WFU/MISS, WFU/VAN, DUKE/VAND, GT/MSST, GT/UGA, MIA/FLA
VS. DI-Ind (5x): BC/ND, WF/NAVY, DUKE/NAVY, UNC/ND, VT/WKU
VS. C-USA (3x): NCSU/ECU, UVA/ECU, VT/ECU
VS. MAC (2x): BC/KENT, MARY/EMCH
VS. Sun Belt (3x): BC/UCF, MARY/MTSU, MIA/UCF
VS. Div II (14x): BC/URI, CLEM/CIT, CLEM/SCST, FSU/WCAR, FSU/TNCH, MARY/DEL, NCSU/WMMA, DUKE/JMAD, GT/JAXST, GT/GARWB, MIA/CSU, UNC/MCNST, UVA/RICH, VT/FUR
*Notes: Only 23 of the 48 OOC games are against BCS Conference foes (including Notre Dame).The only ACC team to avoid a Division II opponent is Wake Forest (@BAY, MISS, NAVY, VAND)
Also, ten games vs. the SEC isn't as impressive as you might think. 3 of them are rivalry games that Armageddon wouldn't stop. (CLEM/SCAR, FSU/FLA, GT/UGA)
While some teams (UVA, UNC, and MIA) did have a cupcake or two, they balanced them out with really tough OOC games. The other ACC teams should learn from their examples...
RazzMaTazz said:
posted on May 10, 2008 1:58 AM — 70.137.164.88 — link — abuse?
I know this is a fantasy but, rather than the ACC moving to a 9-ACC-game format.... I wish that the ACC (better yet, the NCAA) would issue a decree that every BCS team has to play at least two (better yet, three) BCS teams from other conferences. I don't mind if D-1 schools schedule a cupcake opener to tune-up. But I have absolutely ZERO interest in watching BCS schools demolish cupcakes. I never miss watching Clemson play a D-1 opponent. But I'd rather mow the lawn than watch Clemson play SC-State or Citadel this year. It's a disgrace.
It would be so fun to watch more interconference D-1 games. And I think it would make the whole BCS system fairer because then you'd get to see how teams really stacked up from conference to conference.
I kinda like that Duke vs. Northwestern game. Last year Duke beat NWU. Our bottom is higher than your bottom.Zac said:
posted on May 11, 2008 2:31 AM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse?
Lennie (Post 14), tell ya what, and remember, you heard it here 1st. If OK beats Cinci, period, they'll have beaten a good team. Two years ago Cinci won a couple of decent games + their bowl. Last year they won 10 games including their bowl. This year they return (I know; I've said this before.) 16 starters (Count em, SIXTEEN!!!); that's 8 on both sides of the ball. In addition to them, they're getting back their original starting QB, Dustin Grutza, who got injured early in their 2nd game. They have a solid defense, a rising QB, one of the best coaches in CF, and they've got the personnel coming back and coming in to arguably make another splash in non-conference, not to mention the Big East. If your Sooners take the Bear-Cats lightly, Cinci will embarrass OK and its fans as badly as WVU did in the Fiesta Bowl. Personally, I think history and tradition, not to mention preparation, are on OK's side. The Sooners always seem to be ready for that 1st big game. Mark me; this is a big one; it'll certainly be big for Cinci. If OK beats them, they'll have beaten a good team. If OK beats them by 20 +, they'll have beaten a good team by 20 +. That's where I stand now, that's where I'll stand this fall...IF OK beats them...IF!!!
Regan said:
posted on May 11, 2008 5:15 PM — 75.182.53.208 — link — abuse?
I got bored a few months ago and analyzed the ACC's OOC 2008 schedule, and half of it reads like a coloring book:
VS. Big East (4x): NCSU/USF, UNC/CONN, UNC/RUTG, UVA/CONN
VS. Big Ten (1x): DUKE/NW
VS. Big 12 (4x): FSU/COL, WFU/BAY, MIA/TXAM, VT/NEB
VS. Pac-10 (2x): MARY/CAL, UVA/SCAL
VS. SEC (10x): CLEM/BAMA, CLEM/SCAR, FSU/FLA, NCSU/SCAR, WFU/MISS, WFU/VAN, DUKE/VAND, GT/MSST, GT/UGA, MIA/FLA
VS. DI-Ind (5x): BC/ND, WF/NAVY, DUKE/NAVY, UNC/ND, VT/WKU
VS. C-USA (5x): BC/UCF, MIA/UCF, NCSU/ECU, UVA/ECU, VT/ECU
VS. MAC (2x): BC/KENT, MARY/EMCH
VS. Sun Belt (1x): MARY/MTSU,
VS. Div II (14x): BC/URI, CLEM/CIT, CLEM/SCST, FSU/WCAR, FSU/TNCH, MARY/DEL, NCSU/WMMA, DUKE/JMAD, GT/JAXST, GT/GARWB, MIA/CSU, UNC/MCNST, UVA/RICH, VT/FUR
*Notes: Only 23 of the 48 OOC games are against BCS Conference foes (including Notre Dame).
The only ACC team to avoid a Division II opponent is Wake Forest (@BAY, MISS, NAVY, VAND)
Also, ten games vs. the SEC isn't as impressive as you might think. 3 of them are rivalry games that Armageddon wouldn't stop. (CLEM/SCAR, FSU/FLA, GT/UGA)
While some teams (UVA, UNC, and MIA) did have a cupcake or two, they balanced them out with really tough OOC games. The other ACC teams should learn from their examples...
(Sorry about previously mislabeling UCF; I hate making mistakes when I start up with facts, figures, etc...hope yall can forgive me.) :)Regan said:
posted on May 11, 2008 5:29 PM — 75.182.53.208 — link — abuse?
RazzMaTazz (#19):
I actually agree with you; although the NCAA has very little control over what teams can do schedule-wise.
In Stu Mandel's latest book 'Bowls, Polls, and Tattered Souls', he gets into the details of why things are the way they are, he puts special emphasis that absolutely no one is in control of stuff like this apart from the schools themselves.
The book is amazing, insightful, and funny; I highly recommend it for any CFB fan. (wasn't paid to say that, I promise)
A move like this would probably have to be instituted by the individual conferences.
In theory, the BCS was supposed to (in part) promote scheduling tough(er) teams rather than cupcakes due to the inclusion of the SOS component. Tweaking, I think has probably taken its toll there (not to mention the other flaws the BCS 'might' have, lol...)
As far as Clemson goes, I'm kinda glad we don't play UGA every year anymore (right now), although I am looking forward to our home-and-home with them.
Generally, though, I'd be okay with:
1x Division II game per year (it's good to play some fellow SC teams for tradition's sake), 1x (decent) non-BCS conference game, 1x BCS-Conference school, and finish off the year with the traditional victory over the Gamecocks.
The good news is that it looks like we'll get our wish from 2010-2016.
We actually get 3x helpings of SEC East in 2013! (Since Vandy counts!)
Regan said:
posted on May 11, 2008 5:43 PM — 75.182.53.208 — link — abuse?
Zac (#20):
Even though I'm mainly an ACC guy (Clemson, Miami), I like the Big East and hope they keep surprising the doubters.
I miss the Miami/VT Big East days when it was the gathering of the Old Eastern Independents (PSU should have joined the BE to begin with...), but it is interesting that as soon as it looks like there's a top dog in the conference, there seems to be other top dogs to challenge them.
However, I really don't know what to make of the Big East. The entire conference seems to be a greater incarnation of Tommy Bowden. When you expect them to flounder, they dominate the game and shock the world. But when expectations are high, they somehow can't stay dominant (at least in popular mindset).
Either way, I for one would fear the BEasts if I was filling out the OOC schedule. The ACC and SEC have 4x and 2x games respectively, and of the 6x, I really am not comfortable picking any of them.
Regan said:
posted on May 11, 2008 6:33 PM — 75.182.53.208 — link — abuse?
Hey RazzMaTazz, a while back, I'd compiled a list of the DI teams that Clemson has never played before, and it's actually pretty big. The BCS-conference teams alone are:
Big Ten: Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Purdue, Wisconsin
Big 12: Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas
Big East: Cincinnati, Connecticut, Louisville, Rutgers, South Florida
Pac-10: Arizona, Arizona State, Oregon, Oregon State, UCLA, Washington, Washington State
SEC: Arkansas
...yeah, you're right...Clemson needs to spice it up some. :)
RazzMaTazz said:
posted on May 13, 2008 1:42 AM — 70.137.152.187 — link — abuse?
Regan: Interesting list. I'd like to see Clemson play any of those teams more than Citadel.
I'm a bit surprised that upper tier teams couldn't make as much money from a series with another upper tier OOC school as from playing cupcakes at home. I understand that there's lots of money to be made from home games. But it seems like that would (or could) be offset by:
1) Better TV deals (for games that audiences would actually want to watch).
2) Better attendance (for the fewer home games).
3) Higher ticket prices. (I assume people would be willing to pay more to see a good game.)
4) The elimination of a cupcake-beat-down fee.
5) National exposure. (Intangibles like a 5-star safety, Loston, out of Texas contacting-- and then committing to-- Clemson's coaches after watching Clemson play FSU on national TV on Labor Day. Or more logo gear sales.)
Does anybody know of any CFB websites that let you check the results of one conference against another conference over a given timeframe? (For example, the record of the ACC vs the Big Ten from 2003 to 2007.)
gatorhippy
said:
posted on May 8, 2008 5:57 PM — 70.121.155.98 — link — abuse?I like it...
I think it's a good idea...
Depending on the opponent, it would certainly raise most of the ACC teams SOS in the BCS formula...