Why the ACC is resistant to changing alignment and scheduling

[GoldCard]

Having read the proposed no-division scheduling scenario last year and the subsequent petition to the NCAA to approve changes to conferences deciding their champion, I thought the ACC was sure to scrap the divisions. However, now that the NCAA rule change is imminent, Swofford has been quoted as saying that he plans no change to the divisional format?

That left me saying, "HUH?!"

It just makes sense to scrap the divisions. Everybody plays everybody more often. Everybody wins...

Unless...

Swofford expects changes to conference membership sooner rather than later... such as additional members added to the fold. Wink-wink. Nudge-Nudge. Say no more, say no more.

Could it be he expects the Playoffs will force a certain independent school into joining if it wants to compete for national titles?

I ask you knowingly.

 

[ShortCreek]

I can't stand West Virginia but I still think the Mountaineers should be considered as an "add" to the ACC if expansion is ever truly considered. I think they would further stabilize and strengthen the conference, which in turn helps U of L. They fit geographically and have good football. I actually think their basketball will elevate with their next hire as well. Huggins can take that program only so far and that has already been accomplished.

 

[beantowncard]

WVU has a better financial deal with the little big 10 than they would have in the ACC. Besides, the blue bloods of the ACC had to hold their noses to allow UL in - they wouldn't offer West Virginny and further contaminate the conference.

 

[dldinatl]

I would like to know what WV cleared after all the bills. Their travel expenses had to 3-4 fold. I find it hard to believe with the little difference in conference money how they could be better off in the Big 12-2. Although I hope to never be in a conference with them again.

 

[topdecktiger]

You are overthinking this.

There never was a scheduling proposal. That never happened. It was a bunch of bloggers and posters who assumed that's what the ACC was doing, because of the legislation. However, that was incorrect. The ACC simply doesn't have plans to scrap the divisions.

 

[FloridaCard]

I hope that, if the ACC expands, it will include Cincinnati. They are our oldest rival. No other team comes close.

 

[GoldCard]

TopDeck, if you're right, then why bother petitioning the NCAA for a rule change? The Big X(ii) is the only league that benefits unless other leagues scrap the division format.

 

[zipp]

Some of our (U of L) fans are confusing the issues... The proposal was to use something other than divisional champions to determine who plays in the conference championship game. Such as the two best teams in the conference--as determined by an objective ranking system--regardless of division. That doesn't mean you have to or should change the divisions themselves.

I like our current football schedule a lot, at least enough to want to play it a few more years!

 

[topdecktiger]

TopDeck, if you're right, then why bother petitioning the NCAA for a rule change? The Big X(ii) is the only league that benefits unless other leagues scrap the division format.

Just to have leeway if any better option comes along. The only problem the ACC has with the current setup is that some teams don't play frequently enough. Otherwise, there isn't an issue.

That said, there won't be any changes. Swofford gave an interview last week, and specifically addressed this issue. He said:

In our most recent conversations about divisions, the majority of our schools continue to prefer having divisions and having the divisions as they currently exist.

About as straightforward as you can get. The schools simply don't want to change the divisions.
https://floridastate.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1758831&PT=4&PR=2

 

[topdecktiger]

Some of our (U of L) fans are confusing the issues... The proposal was to use something other than divisional champions to determine who plays in the conference championship game. Such as the two best teams in the conference--as determined by an objective ranking system--regardless of division. That doesn't mean you have to or should change the divisions themselves.

I like our current football schedule a lot, at least enough to want to play it a few more years!

Actually no. The proposal was to eliminate any restrictions from the NCAA as to how a conference can determine a championship. There are three components to the current rule: there must be at least 12 teams, there must be 2 divisions, the schools within each division must play a round robin. The proposal was simply to do away with any sort of NCAA requirements, and leave it completely up to the conference.

 

[CardinalJim]

I believe the ACC will keep the divisions but change how teams are selected. The ACC only supported changing how teams are selected for a championship game, not the elimination of championship games or the requirement of a minimum 12 teams in a conference. Those are all separate issues.
CJ

 

[Guardman]

I think that CardinalJim has it about right. It appears that the ACC is going to keep the divisions the same for now, but they are going to select the Championship Game participants differently. I also believe that conference teams will receive added scheduling flexibility. I think there will be more made-for-tv matchups, in which SOS is protected, with Notre Dame, FSU, Clemson, GT, Miami, VT and Louisville playing more frequently against one another.

 

[topdecktiger]

I believe the ACC will keep the divisions but change how teams are selected. The ACC only supported changing how teams are selected for a championship game, not the elimination of championship games or the requirement of a minimum 12 teams in a conference. Those are all separate issues.
CJ

No, that's incorrect. The deregulation includes the 12 team minimum. The 12 team minimum is not a separate issue, because it's part of the requirements of the existing rule. The ACC/Big 12 proposal is simply to eliminate any NCAA requirements for staging a championship game. That includes number of teams and divisions.

 

[zipp]

Staying at home, I'd like to see U of L schedule another Coastal Division team each year out of conference, if we can find one that wants to do the same. That's the only thing I don't like about ACC football scheduling--we don't play teams from the opposite division often enough.

Formally, we need to stay with an eight-game conference schedule in the hope that someday Notre Dame decides to join the ACC. And they won't do it with a nine-game schedule...

 

[dopeordogfood]

I would like to know what WV cleared after all the bills. Their travel expenses had to 3-4 fold. I find it hard to believe with the little difference in conference money how they could be better off in the Big 12-2. Although I hope to never be in a conference with them again.

According to this, they aren't clearing much despite only fielding 16 sports.

http://www.chicagofootball.com/2015...rtments-rank-in-spending-profit-more/afyao2c/

 

[beantowncard]

The Mounties can stay in the Big 12-2 for all I care. They made the choice they had to make at the time. Syracuse and Pitt (which sucks) conspired to blow up the big east and WVU did what they had to do. But now I could not care less about them.

 

[meanbird]

I hope that, if the ACC expands, it will include Cincinnati. They are our oldest rival. No other team comes close.

Same here. WVU can kick rocks all the way to Texas for all I care.

 

[GoldCard]

If and when Notre Dame goes all in, the ACC will be in a position to potentially lure a program from the SEC. If nobody there is interested, then I still don't see them going for WVU. Cincinnati would bring new recruiting ground and a more civilized fan base.