http://www.espn.com/blog/acc/post/_/id/93618/could-virginia-tech-pitt-be...
Playing old Big East foes means nothing to me. If it was that important to VT, then Tech would have stayed in the Big East. Playing NC State and Wake more often is a giant meh to me, though I imagine more games in NC is overall a good thing. That being said if VT can use its power to get divisional realignment and/or stop playing BC every year that would be great.
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
I am 100% for the 9+1 format.
What is the point of having a season but to watch your team play in as many exciting, "meaningful" games as possible.
Don't get me wrong, I will love watching VT smash liberty just to have Hokie football back, but I can't say that I will necessarily wake up that morning super pumped for the matchup itself, or even necessarily scheduling my day around it.
I would love to see FSU, Clemson, NC State, and Louisville more, because those are games I can get up for all week long. If that means our schedules year to year are tougher, so what?
I know we've hashed this out, but both 9+1 and 8+2 should produce more meaningful games, it just comes down to who your AD is willing to schedule. With a 9+1, we play Wake and Syracuse more often and that doesn't really help our strength of schedule. With 8+2, we could conceivably play anOSU and Alabama more often. It just so happens that we have a crappy permanent game against BC that will always water down our ACC schedule so we want more games to reduce the effect.
with 9+1, we also play FSU and Clemson more often.
I'm OK either way. Maybe an 8+2, but lose the permanent BC connection?
I agree, the more interesting games the better for me (I'm a proponent for 10+2).
But looking at VT's future schedules, 9+1 is mostly going to diminish the interesting games somewhat, not improve them.
16: ND/UT 17:WVU/(clemson) 18: ND/(FSU) 19:ND/______20: PSU/Mich 21: Mich/WVU/ND (!!!) 22: WVU/_____ 23: Purdue/Rutgers/(FSU) 24: Wisky/Rutgers/(clemson) 25: PSU/Wisky
Whit has alluded to a "Preseason Bowl Game" for the future to fill one of those blanks.
To go to 9+1, you would lose the second game in all of that and fill it with Clem/FSU or someone not good/interesting. I guess if you model it without the crossover game, it's closer.
But if anything, I would propose a 9+2 with one cupcake warm up game.
9+1 doesn't limit teams to only 1 P5 OOC. Personally I like the 9+1 concept because it increases the chances we'll drop the Libertys, W&M's, etc from our schedules and cut back on ODU/ECU to make room for the extra conference game while keeping WVU, and the various B10 matchups for SoS and profile.
Dude, look at our future schedules. We don't have any FCS after 2021, and most of the years immediately after that are full.
Although, I agree there is no reason to play ODU and ECU in the same year.
Although, I agree
there is no reason toVT should NEVER play ODU and ECU in the same year.FIFY
8+2 for me. I like inter-conference P matchups.
if they go 9+1, then the teams that play ND and a P OOC rival in the same year are screwed, and that group includes most of our "football schools". Our best football schools want 8+2 and I think they'll get it. If UNC wants to play Wake as an OOC, fine. They are doing that now and I have no problem with it.
I personally love OOC games. Looking at the first weekend this year, I would hate to see FSU v UVA replace FSU v Ole Miss
It just depends which OOC games are cut. I prefer FSU/UVA to FSU/Citadel.
I wish the ACC would take over OOC scheduling from the schools. Take Duke's 4 cupcakes away.
Not necessarily in response to your comment, but there should be more P5 schools in bowl games. If P5 only plays P5, then bowls will by half P5 and half G5. The P5 should have two games to beat up on the G5.
The level of bowl games that 6-6 teams get into is so low that I don't personally care if those teams are P5 or G5. Just my two cents.
Whatever allows us to be able to play Clemson, FSU on a more regular basis. Those teams need to be in Lane more than once a millennium.
FCS games should go away anyway. So really the argument here is what is to be done with those OOC games? Imo everyone should only play P5 opponents but even if you are required to do 9+1 you still have room to play a big marquee game OOC.
1 SEC/In State Rival
1 P5 team
1 G5 team
Yeah ND complicates some of that schedule but it also makes it a little easier as their games still won't count as one of the 9. Any year you play them you can choose to have an awesome full schedule with all P5 opponents or you can skip on a marquee OOC game for a G5 team. The schedule complaints are just non existent if you're prepared to play a full schedule of FBS teams, the only reason not to is to inflate your win total so you can make a bowl which there are already too many of (not that we won't watch them, but still).
The whole playing meaningful conference games is big, plus seeing every conference opponent in a 5 year cycle. I want 9 conference games if only to force people to stop paying for games no one really wants to watch more than a half of (or its brutally embarassing when you squeak by or lose FUCKING JMU). I get there is a financial trickle down here, but the more games between similarly talented teams the better for everyone. When you have less wiggle room there you have to add quality imo.
Everyone only playing P5 games will never happen unless the P5 conferences separate themselves from the rest. It is just too difficult to schedule those games, especially with different conferences having different numbers of conference games.
I think that's the long term goal of the P5 schools. They're tired of sharing money with the dirty commoners.
I don't think they're tired of sharing money so much as they're tired of having empty seats and no hype for
FCS gamesgames against non-P5 opponents. And more P5 v. P5 match ups are desired, both from a media content perspective and a butts in seats perspective.College football be gettin' expensive yo.
G5 IS not FCS
no, it's DIII /s
I'd agree it isn't happening anytime soon. But once you move to 9 playing 12 P5 opponents esp with the ND deal gets a lot easier for ACC teams even if you have an instate rival from another conference. This whole idea of we'd give up home games for marquee OOC games is silly, do home and home and don't set your away in a year where you have the 5 away conference games. The schedule from the league office/the ADs can be manipulated to work around some of that. And if you don't want to do that you'd still have a floating game to do whatever you want with.
The value of a home game in terms of income would be offset by the extra TV money from guaranteed conference games or getting paid to do a neutral site. I just don't believe the 9 game schedule would make it impossible to get 6 home games a season plus more guaranteed TV spots.
Especially since our in state rival is in our division we really wouldn't be affected in the same way as some of our other conference buddies. We will always have a chance to have 2 OOC home games if we want them.
The issue isn't getting to 6 home games. The hurdle is that most schools want 7 home games a year. Easier to do when you can just rent an FCS team for a week, or make lopsided deals with Group of 5 schools.
Both years that we played Alabama, we only had 6 home games. This year, we have 6 home games. I'm sure that had we not played those games, we would have had a 7th game in Lane (granted, against much inferior opposition). Now in 2010, with the Boise game at FedEx, we still had 7 home games, but our OOC schedule was an FCS and three current Group of 5 teams.
To be honest, 8+2 (no permanent cross division) is my favorite option. Notre Dame will take one of those spots when you play them. For the SEC rivals, that is there other spot. That gives everybody freedom for those last two spots.
What I would like to see implements is a maximum of no more than one FCS team. Not two in one year. That would prevents the FSU, NC's, Duke's, NC State's from loading up with a very WEAK OOC schedule.
There is the built in penalty of the second FCS game not counting toward bowl eligibility.
To be fair, the reason FSU played two FCS teams in 2012 was because West Virginia cancelled at the last minute, and FSU got caught on the wrong end of musical chairs. At fbschedules.com, 2008 and 2012 are the only two seasons I can find where FSU played 2 FCS games, so it's not like it's a regular occurrence.
Still, there are plenty of bad FBS teams to fill a schedule with.
I don't think anyone is talking about division realignment. I wouldn't mind seeing the permanent crossover games dropped if VT decides to vote 8+2 but I am sure that would be a separate discussion. Either way I am just glad the number of good games will go up in the ACC, even if the Hokies are pretty much already following the 8+2 guidelines.
I think FSU/Miami, UNC/NC State, Clemson/GT, and Pitt/Syracuse are examples of why the permanent crossover won't be dropped without some sort of realignment.
How often would you play each school in a 9 game format with no cross-over?
Also, do Clemson/GT and Pitt/Syracuse really matter? I feel like the ACC protects the crossover game so much just to keep the FSU/Miami game.
Clemson/GT is a thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clemson%E2%80%93Georgia_Tech_football_rivalry
Apparently, so it Pitt/Syracuse: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pittsburgh%E2%80%93Syracuse_football_rivalry
As for how often...9 games minus 6 divisional opponents is 3 spots to rotate 7 teams through. So, 5 years to rotate through all of the home-and-homes.
Don't forget UVA/UNC
That's not cross-divisional.
Thinking if they go to rearrange divisions sorry, my typing couldn't keep up with the idea in my head.
I care about none of those games so dropping the permanent cross division games wouldn't bother me. There are teams on both sides of the debate. I don't think realignment would be packaged with dropping them if it ever came to a vote.
Likewise, there are people in Florida who don't care if we play UVA every year. There are people in NC that don't care if we play Miami and Georgia Tech every year.
Okay, so let's give them a little consideration.
You must have missed the part where the NC schools are complaining about not playing each other enough and scheduling each other as non-conference games.
These current divisions were drawn up specifically with the permanent crossover in mind. Without that, they would look very different.
Now, the ACC could very well vote to abolish the permanent crossover without realigning, but don't believe that it will happen without a very long debate among the voting members.
Yeah and now you are going to tell me how, without permanent crossovers, they would have made it the North Carolina school division and the Old Big East division which would never fly.
No, but the "I don't care so no other side matters" argument isn't a good discussion tactic.
You know who does care about FSU/Miami TV producers. You know who cares about UVA/UNC the ACC commissioners. Those games are not going away.
Major Key, I happen to be neither of those, hence my not caring.
Odds are, any change to the conference schedule won't happen until 2019, coinciding with the ACC Network broadcast launch, and to cause the fewest disruptions to existing contracts. We play Clemson and FSU in 2017 and 2018.
So, the extra conference game won't be one of those two for a while. Well, maybe FSU to create a home-and-home with 2018, except that 2019 is the year that the Atlantic teams go to the SEC, which means they will most likely get the extra home conference game, thus meaning the Coastal teams get the extra away game in odd years.
In 2019, we're most likely adding NC State or Syracuse at their place. (Already have WF scheduled, and Louisville is an away game in 2020.) The easiest game to replace is the game at ECU.
In 2020, we get a home matchup, which could cost us either Penn State or ECU. So, whoever we don't play of NC State/Wake in 2019, or maybe FSU.
Of course, there is the possibility that the ACC will completely scrap current rotating Atlantic vs. Coastal games scheduled, to allow them to start fresh with the rotating home-and-home. Year 1, you play at Clemson and vs. FSU. Year 2, you play at FSU and vs. Wake. Year 3, you play at Wake and vs. NC State. Year 4, you play at NC State and vs. Syracuse, etc. Thing is, it's too late at night for me to figure out if it's possible to do that and still maintain the 4-5 schedule.
I'm still a firm believer that just as we force another P5 game to conform to ACC rules, ECU will join a P5 conference.
FTFY
Sure. They can join when Notre Dame becomes a permanent member.
ECU adds no value to the ACC. If they are going P5 then it will be to the Big
12(whatever number we are at now)I'm starting to think you guys missed the joke
I was trying to add to it...
If we really end up being the swing vote then I'd expect us to go to a 9 game schedule and drop the annual series with a certain out of conference 'rival'.
#Sauces
I am all for anything that allows us to never play ECU again. Anything else we gain is just gravy.
So wait, there might be a way to rid ourselves of the annual ECU match and the annual BC match?
this sounds oddly familiar
I vote 9+1.
And I may be in the minority, but I don't mind the cross-divisional rival setup we have in the conference. Several of those games are bigger than we give them credit for, and not ensuring that they get played every year would be a pretty big blow to most of the fanbases. (Probably the most meaningless cross-divisional "rivalry" game is Louisville-LOLUVA.)
Of course, division realignment could assure that these games continue to happen, but that's not what's at stake here.
ETA: As a secondary UGA fan, I'm imagining the backlash of the Auburn game suddenly not becoming annual.
What really sucks about playing BC is that they're on the same home/away schedule as Miami so VT has two long flights every other year.
And both of them were changed in the rotation at the same time.
Man, that schedule adjustment between 2012 and 2013 probably screwed us up more than whatever they decide going forward. Hopefully, they'll use this new decision as an excuse to get us back to alternating GT and Miami, or at least get them out of the same year as the UVA game. Our non conference schedules have to carry our home ticket package in odd years, and man, is 2019 a stinker. (Furman, ODU, Duke, UNC, Pitt, and WF.)
Anybody ready for a 10 conference game schedule with no permanent cross over game ?
Hope I've TKP'd hard enough and am not repeating anything.
Just so we've covered all the bases, they could also just go rogue and make all the games ACC. The rotation can be the teams you DON'T play in a given year.
I think it's better, though, to get at least SOME outside games.
I'm going to vote for the 8-2 format, with no permanent crossover, but some allowance for those who want to schedule their cross-conference rival every year (the allowance is that if it's not a scheduled ACC game, it wouldn't count towards or against the ACC conference total -- it would be considered an OOC game for all practical purposes).