»
Topic: Heck No to 9 games conference schedule!
Replies: 21   Last Post: Feb 7, 2014 2:06 PM by: Kaplony
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 21  

Heck No to 9 games conference schedule!

[3]
Posted: Feb 7, 2014 6:44 AM
 

It would only mean more meaningless games, more noon games, more Thursday night games, and horror of horror--Friday night games. It would also mean Clemson's SOS would take a hit which would put us at a disadvantage when it came time to pick teams for the playoffs. #### NO ACC!


Message was edited by: AThomas®


2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Re: Heck No to 9 games conference schedule!


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 6:54 AM
 

Agreed.


Re: Heck No to 9 games conference schedule!


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 7:56 AM
 

yeah it was a stupid idea when they planned it. they realized it and stopped it. why is this even coming up again?

If the ACC network needs an inventory of games let them show some decent OOC games. Or have an SEC ACC football challenge. With the part time add of ND the ACC should be way past this stupid 9 game subject.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Amen! Preach it brutha***


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 8:03 AM
 



2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Aspiring member of the TigerNet Sewer Dwellers


Re: Heck No to 9 games conference schedule!


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 8:05 AM
 

Totally agree!


Agreed....however I'm afraid thi$ i$ more about E$ecPN and


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 8:15 AM
 

their golden goo$e the $EC. E$ecPN will promi$e $woffy more ba$ketball attention and he'll $tep right in line.

Hope I'm wrong.

2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


Re: Heck No to 9 games conference schedule!


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 8:27 AM
 

I don’t want the nine game schedule either but if I am not mistaken it is one of the things that has to happen for an ACC network to materialize as ESPN wants more inventory. I’ll be honest I don’t remember where I read that but I’ll see if I can’t find a link.

If my memory isn’t betraying me then this is likely to happen as the league will not want to pass up on the extra money of the network.


I for one would love a friday night game


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 8:33 AM
 

plan ahead take the day off, head to clemson for a friday night game and sit back and watch college football all day saturday.

Thursday on the other hand is difficult even for those that live in the upstate

2019 student level member


I'm not a fan of Thursday night games, but Friday nights

[1]
Posted: Feb 7, 2014 8:35 AM
 

are for high schools and mid-majors, not for elite college football programs (yes I said ELITE :D )

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Aspiring member of the TigerNet Sewer Dwellers


Would a nine game schedule be SO bad?


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 8:52 AM
 

On the assumption that we are still divisional (a requirement under current NCAA rules), we always play:

NCSU
FSU
BC
Wake
Louisville
Syracuse
GT

And one rotating Coastal team. With nine games, we add one additional Coastal team. That team could be:

Duke (yes, traditionally weak although of course not last season...I think under Cutcliffe)
UVA (yes, traditionally weaker but they are recruiting pretty well)
VT (Traditionally strong)
Miami (Traditionally strong)
Pitt (generally okay)
UNC (generally okay)

Adding one of these is no different than adding a big name OOC game.

2012 - Auburn. Yea! We won...booo, they finished 3-9 with a ranking on par with the bottom of the Coastal.

2013 - Georgia. Yea! We won...booo, they finished 8-5 behind Duke and Miami.

It happens all the time.

Plus, an extra Coastal game means it is more of a "conference". Playing GT and ONE other Coastal opponent every year is pretty weak.

null


Re: Would a nine game schedule be SO bad?


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 9:00 AM
 

> On the assumption that we are still divisional (a
> requirement under current NCAA rules), we always
> play:

Wookie - Swoffie is trying to dump the NCAA rule of divisional play and put 2 best teams in ACCCG.

I don't think it will be allowed....every other major conference has built their conference membership based on the NCAA rule of 2 divisions, so I would think the SEC, PAC and BIG are a long way from just tossing all that work and money out the window.


Actually


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 12:20 PM
 

I believe the other Power 5 would support us on this because it helps alleviate some scheduling concerns they have.

The SEC has the same problems we have in that with divisions and a permanent cross-division rival they don't cycle through the other teams as quickly. A change like we are proposing would allow them to do the same thing the ACC wants to do...give each team 3 or 4 permanent games and cycle through the others faster.

In the Pac12 everybody wants to play in the rich SoCal recruiting grounds as much as possible. Doing away with divisions would allow the teams to do that, plus like the ACC since going to divisions the Pac12 has had years where the two best teams are in the same division resulting in a weak championship game.

If the B1G were to go to what we are proposing it would allow the other teams to get the highly desirable Ohio State/Michigan/Nebraska/Penn State games more often.

The BigXII doesn't currently have a dog in the fight, but should remember when they had divisions that often the two best teams were in the same division. Also if they expand in the future it allows teams to get the highly coveted Texas and OU games more often.


Except Clemson got a boost from playing UGA and Auburn in


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 9:02 AM
 

terms of perception. Beating Number 5 UGA was big. Beating an Auburn team in 2011 coming off the NC was big too. It gave Clemson a boost.

Sorry, but a big-time OOC of game will help Clemson unlike another ACC game.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Exactly and it helps insolate the SEC from OOC comparisons


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 9:05 AM
 

ESPiN knows what they're doing...

2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

There isn't one Coastal Division team


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 12:03 PM
 

that I would rather see a game against than a UGA or Auburn.


You've got to realize the ACC is not in a bubble


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 8:56 AM
 

Sure it would be great to schedule a big OOC game but the other conferences that are establishing networks are in the same boat when it comes to producing inventory for their networks.

Even if the ACC stayed at 8 games, other schools may be unable to schedule Clemson due to commitments within their own conference. Where will the OOC games come from going forward if OOC opponents have expanded their conference schedule?


It makes football bland too. A Texas-Ohio State matchup, a

[1]
Posted: Feb 7, 2014 9:05 AM
 

Oregon-Auburn clash, and a Clemson-UGA class provides conference cross over and variety to a annual group of opponents played year in and year out.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Re: It makes football bland too. A Texas-Ohio State matchup, a


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 11:11 AM
 

Is the Clemson-UGA class a lab?


A conference game is better than SC State


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 10:14 AM
 

If other conferences go to a 9 game schedule (the SEC is talking about it) then the ACC will. There is no reason to be the only conference doing it.

Back when conferences expanded from 7 to 8 games, fans were up in arms about losing big games. It cost us the Clemson/UGA game. But eventually teams will adjust their scheduling philosophy and open up the big OOC games.

Teams with out of conference rivals are the ones that have a problem with losing an extra non-conference games.


The problem is


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 2:06 PM
 

it isn't going to replace the SC State's of the world, it's going to replace the H&H series with schools like UGA.

Our athletic budget is currently built around 7 home games every year. With a 9 game ACC schedule and the yearly H&H with USUC we aren't going to be able to play a H&H with a UGA/Auburn etc. Power 5 level teams aren't going to play here in a one and done. It will be the Georgia States, Troys, MTSUs of the world and the in-state FCS schools that do that. Besides, we are but required to play the in-state FCS school by the General Assembly. As long as the NCAA counts one game a year against them for bowl eligibility we are going to play them.

Also we have a required game every three years with the parasites from South Bend, so every 6 years that means we will only have 6 home games because of having to go up there to play them.


agreed***


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 10:28 AM
 



2019 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

If a 9-game schedule meant that we could play better


Posted: Feb 7, 2014 11:18 AM
 

competition more often and not lose a 7th home game every other year, which the current proposal would force, I'd be okay with it. Unfortunately, the only way to accomplish that is a major divisional re-alignment putting the top programs together in one division and the rest in the other. Make the 9th game a home game, ALWAYS, for the top division teams. Better SOS for the schools that need it, better league inventory by a long shot, bigger home schedules for programs with venues to support them. Voila. Problem solved.

The ACC is unique among the other 4 power conferences in that we have four programs (you can name them) that draw under 40,000 fans per game, while the other conferences have three teams combined that share that distinction (Vandy, Wash St., Northwestern). Robbing from the rich to feed the poor is the wrong way to go.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Replies: 21  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Fiesta Bowl
FOR SALE: 2 tickets for sale, section 103 row 25. Asking $200 per ticket. Will accept Venmo or PayPal and wil...

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
1739 people have read this post