Recent Comments

It has absolutely taken the excitement out of watching players develop over the years for me

Absolutely. In the past ~24 hours, we have gotten an Offensive transfer from Auburn (a "meh" Offense) and a Defensive transfer from UNC (a bad defense). Normally, this would be exciting news, but at this point its really just questions---Does this make us better? Worse? Will these guys even play? Do I really even care??

Next year, it's wash, rinse, and repeat again with a bunch of new faces, also on their 3rd collegiate team.

I get that the "Beamer Way," is gone from CFB and its not coming back, but this current "System" (if you can call this a system) is watering down the product. But we're fans....don't worry about us....we're just here to buy $14 Beers and donate to the "Collective"

That's exactly why I started making the roster tracker spreadsheets. Without them I wouldn't know ~40% of the roster at the start of the season.

Played in every game...but <100 Snaps total.

Was a backup and at one point, apparently fill-in TE.

Presumably is a depth piece, which we certainly need on OL.

Slightly OT, but there are so many new names on the Roster (with various levels of eligibility), it's near impossible to keep any track of at this point or have any realistic projections going forward beyond just this year.

Maybe that's intriguing for some but, for me, it makes me much less engaged and invested in following.

But do the NBC ratings count

Nonconference away games do not count towards shared revenue. I don't know if those ratings factor into the ACC revenue distributing algorithm. I can't imagine they would.

Can't imagine goACC doing something dumb or unfair? Really? LOL - just teasing

You mean Alum emotionally overreacted without all the facts?

Honestly, we're probably where we should be but the problem i have is with bama. They've lost 20 games... more than 1/3 of their schedule, and they're one spot behind us. FUCK the $ec with the biggest cactus ever known to man

Yes the scheduling as a whole is definitely broken but its a lot less of a struggle if you're a brand name and don't commit to long standing home and homes with mid to low tier programs

We could go schedule a home + home against a strong opponent and reap the same benefits - but we can't because our brand isn't valued and we suck

Man, I think it's less to do with teams being unwilling to play us and more about Scheduling in college football being broken for decades; things need to be scheduled 7+ years in advance, etc

Personally, I'm an advocate that we should be scheduling as difficult as possible. I'd rather get blown out by some blueblood and lose to WVU by seven, then beat Marshall and liberty every year (not that we can even do that... but digress)

You mean I got all angry for nothing?

The most generous interpretation of this news is that the ACC is trying anything possible to create big name matchups to build TV ratings, get more dollars, and improve the conference's brand/image.

The least generous interpretation of this news is that this is a blatant power grab; something the blue(ish) blooded schools in the conference are doing to the detriment of other members.

That's a pretty freaking important piece of clarity, as it affects how many games the ACC is rotating among everyone else. I was a bit surprised that they'd be allowed to do that.

That arrangement makes a lot more sense than the original announcement.

But do the NBC ratings count? They aren't part of the television deal as it stands right now.

Also in years they are at Clemson that dont count towards ACC games do they count towards revenue share split?