Conference Re-alignment Bombshell | Page 3 | The Boneyard

Conference Re-alignment Bombshell

Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
125
Reaction Score
138
There is a lot of schedule "push back" right now in the ACC....

1....four teams have opposed a 9 game schedule because they are tied into a yearly SEC rivalry game and also play Notre Dame every three years....and thus, the measure has failed in voting.

2....there is unhappiness that you see teams, that are not the permanent crossover, from the opposing division so seldom..example...FSU plays GT (their closest and oldest rival) once every 12 years in Tallahassee. Clemson fans see Miami in Clemson once every 12 years and NC state hosts Duke once every 12 years.

3...going to round robin 9 team divisions is like having two separate conferences with little play between the two....that probably will not fly.

4...The reason that the ACC wanted clearance to have a CCG yet schedule the champion designation with flexibility...is that the conference was trying to attack the scheduling problems that currently exist (explore pods that allow more play between teams than the current structure).


ACC ADs vote to keep current schedule format

The solution is to expand to 16 schools to get to four divisions with four teams per division. Each year you would play the other three teams in your division as well as two of the four teams from every other division, for a total of nine conference games. That way, you play every team in your conference at least once every two years. If they can convince Norte Dame to join the conference in football (as one of the 16) that would free up more non-conference games.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
8,406
Reaction Score
7,935
They probably are...UConn's reported $72 million in revenue, for example includes $27 million in student fees and school funds....

(When you bring up link...click on UConn for breakout)

USA TODAY Sports

Private schools are not listed in the NCAA USA Today Athletic Department Finances Report
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
8,406
Reaction Score
7,935
The solution is to expand to 16 schools to get to four divisions with four teams per division. Each year you would play the other three teams in your division as well as two of the four teams from every other division, for a total of nine conference games. That way, you play every team in your conference at least once every two years. If they can convince Norte Dame to join the conference in football (as one of the 16) that would free up more non-conference games.

Of course...except that was denied by the NCAA...largely due to the Big Ten's objections.

The NCAA dictates that you must have two divisions or a round robin....the "pods" as you described, the ACC was very interested in.
 

dayooper

It's what I do. I drink and I know things.
Joined
Aug 16, 2013
Messages
1,641
Reaction Score
4,332
Of course...except that was denied by the NCAA...largely due to the Big Ten's objections.

The NCAA dictates that you must have two divisions or a round robin....the "pods" as you described, the ACC was very interested in.

Not sure where you are getting the ban on pods. I don't see it in the NCAA press release. Take a look for your self and if you see it, please let me know: Link.

The only thing I find is that if a conference has 12 or more teams, they must play a round-robin schedule within it's division. No where does it say that the divisions have to be static. Example using the ACC and adding UConn and Cincinati to make 16:

Pod A: FSU, Miami, GT, Clemson
Pod B: UNC, NCST, Duke, WF
Pod C: Louisville, Virginia, VT, Cincinnati
Pod D: Syracuse, BC, UConn, Pitt

Rotation 1 (2 years):

Pod A and Pod B are a division: FSU, Miami, GT and Clemson, UNC, NCST, Duke and WF

Pod C and Pod D are a division: Louisville, Virginia, VT, Cincinnati, Syracuse, BC, UConn and Pitt

Rotation 2 (2 years):

Pod A and Pod C are a division: FSU, Miami, GT, Clemson, Louisville, Virginia, VT and Cincinnati

Pod B and Pod D are a division: UNC, NCST, Duke, WF, Syracuse, BC, UConn and Pitt

Rotation 3 (2 years):

Pod A and Pod D are a division: FSU, Miami, GT, Clemson, Syracuse, BC, UConn and Pitt

Pod B and Pod C are a division: UNC, NCST, Duke, WF, Louisville, Virginia, VT and Cincinnati

Then you start back at rotation 1 and continue on forward. It falls within the guidelines that are set forth in the linked press release.

The idea of the amendment was so that one conference couldn't game the system. You don't want a conference to manipulate their CCG to give their best team the best chance to win the game and make it to the playoff.
 

shizzle787

King Shizzle DCCLXXXVII of the Cesspool
Joined
Oct 19, 2015
Messages
11,851
Reaction Score
18,153
Not sure where you are getting the ban on pods. I don't see it in the NCAA press release. Take a look for your self and if you see it, please let me know: Link.

The only thing I find is that if a conference has 12 or more teams, they must play a round-robin schedule within it's division. No where does it say that the divisions have to be static. Example using the ACC and adding UConn and Cincinati to make 16:

Pod A: FSU, Miami, GT, Clemson
Pod B: UNC, NCST, Duke, WF
Pod C: Louisville, Virginia, VT, Cincinnati
Pod D: Syracuse, BC, UConn, Pitt

Rotation 1 (2 years):

Pod A and Pod B are a division: FSU, Miami, GT and Clemson, UNC, NCST, Duke and WF

Pod C and Pod D are a division: Louisville, Virginia, VT, Cincinnati, Syracuse, BC, UConn and Pitt

Rotation 2 (2 years):

Pod A and Pod C are a division: FSU, Miami, GT, Clemson, Louisville, Virginia, VT and Cincinnati

Pod B and Pod D are a division: UNC, NCST, Duke, WF, Syracuse, BC, UConn and Pitt

Rotation 3 (2 years):

Pod A and Pod D are a division: FSU, Miami, GT, Clemson, Syracuse, BC, UConn and Pitt

Pod B and Pod C are a division: UNC, NCST, Duke, WF, Louisville, Virginia, VT and Cincinnati

Then you start back at rotation 1 and continue on forward. It falls within the guidelines that are set forth in the linked press release.

The idea of the amendment was so that one conference couldn't game the system. You don't want a conference to manipulate their CCG to give their best team the best chance to win the game and make it to the playoff.
This is actually a pretty cool idea.
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
1,290
Reaction Score
2,686
They probably are...UConn's reported $72 million in revenue, for example includes $27 million in student fees and school funds....

(When you bring up link...click on UConn for breakout)Some

USA TODAY Sports

Private schools are not listed in the NCAA USA Today Athletic Department Finances Report
They probably are...UConn's reported $72 million in revenue, for example includes $27 million in student fees and school funds....

(When you bring up link...click on UConn for breakout)

USA TODAY Sports

Private schools are not listed in the NCAA USA Today Athletic Department Finances Report

Not sure how Cincy's is only 42M then, the USA today has them 52.5. Regardless that "study" is horribly inaccurate.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
125
Reaction Score
138
I think the opposition to pods might go away if some of the other power conferences expand to 16 as well, starting with the PAC 12 gobbling up the Texahoma quartet.

Frankly, I was referring to static pods but the idea of dynamic ones is very creative and clever. Nice thinking, @dayooper !
 
Joined
Mar 14, 2012
Messages
38
Reaction Score
26
Other than Cincinnati who on earth would they take?

Yeah.

If only there was an American Conference school in a huge media/recruiting market that has proven it can compete against the ACC in football with recent bowl wins over Pitt and Florida State, and regular season wins over Louisville.
 

CL82

2023 NCAA Men’s Basketball National Champions
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
56,511
Reaction Score
206,259
They probably are...UConn's reported $72 million in revenue, for example includes $27 million in student fees and school funds....

(When you bring up link...click on UConn for breakout)

USA TODAY Sports

Private schools are not listed in the NCAA USA Today Athletic Department Finances Report
These figures are really tough to compare without a consistent reporting format. UConn includes fees and expenses that that are attributable to non-NCAA athetics in its budget. That accounts for at least a portion of the student fees. By way of example UConn shows 10M of which are student fees which is pretty close to FSU's 8 million. I'm also be interested in a clear understanding of what constitutes "other" income.
 
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
1,228
Reaction Score
368
UConn, Temple, and Cincinnati would be candidates assuming this rumor is true. I wouldn't be surprised if Temple gets more consideration than we think due to Norte Dame (probably) liking the idea of an ACC team in Philly and the ACC in general having a big geographical hole in the population-heavy region between VA and Boston.
Haven't heard this from UVA folks, but if true ESPN is pushing it. The best AAC candidates are:
1. Navy - 6th ND game.
2. UConn - 3.5 million in CT, NYC interest.
3. South Florida - 4 million metro area growing at 10%.
4. Temple - 4 million television market.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
8,406
Reaction Score
7,935
Not sure where you are getting the ban on pods. I don't see it in the NCAA press release. Take a look for your self and if you see it, please let me know: Link.

The only thing I find is that if a conference has 12 or more teams, they must play a round-robin schedule within it's division. No where does it say that the divisions have to be static. Example using the ACC and adding UConn and Cincinati to make 16:

Pod A: FSU, Miami, GT, Clemson
Pod B: UNC, NCST, Duke, WF
Pod C: Louisville, Virginia, VT, Cincinnati
Pod D: Syracuse, BC, UConn, Pitt

Rotation 1 (2 years):

Pod A and Pod B are a division: FSU, Miami, GT and Clemson, UNC, NCST, Duke and WF

Pod C and Pod D are a division: Louisville, Virginia, VT, Cincinnati, Syracuse, BC, UConn and Pitt

Rotation 2 (2 years):

Pod A and Pod C are a division: FSU, Miami, GT, Clemson, Louisville, Virginia, VT and Cincinnati

Pod B and Pod D are a division: UNC, NCST, Duke, WF, Syracuse, BC, UConn and Pitt

Rotation 3 (2 years):

Pod A and Pod D are a division: FSU, Miami, GT, Clemson, Syracuse, BC, UConn and Pitt

Pod B and Pod C are a division: UNC, NCST, Duke, WF, Louisville, Virginia, VT and Cincinnati

Then you start back at rotation 1 and continue on forward. It falls within the guidelines that are set forth in the linked press release.

The idea of the amendment was so that one conference couldn't game the system. You don't want a conference to manipulate their CCG to give their best team the best chance to win the game and make it to the playoff.
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
13
Reaction Score
6
Few points, and really as an outsider looking in with no horse in the race:

  • The ACC probably won't make a move until Notre Dame joins for football or their current contract ends
  • Temple, academically, would be a reasonable fit and sits in a larger market than UConn. They're not as strong as UConn, but pretty good (~115 or 125, I think, in USN&WR). Basketball would be a reasonable fit though UConn hoops would be a better fit. Football is currently stronger than UConn but that can be cyclical. Stadium issues (Rent at the Linc and dealing with the Eagles vs current holdup and legal hoops to get OCS built) would get resolved with higher conference payout.
  • ACC would have to agree on who to add. This isn't a slam dunk by any means. Tobacco road strength is diluted with all the expansion (would likely be pro UConn), FSU, Clemson, BC block may be able to block UConn, not sure if there's unanimous support for Cincinnati or if anyone even would consider Temple. Notre Dame partial football membership gives the ACC what they need in the metro Philly, NYC and Boston markets that they don't already get from BC and Syracuse. Not clear how the other old Big East schools would support a UConn expansion.
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
13
Reaction Score
6

Quoted post isn't showing up -- replying to the post about pods in an expanded ACC....
\

That's what the WAC was doing in the 90s. The pod rotation plan wasn't enough to prevent the breakup but the WAC had timezone and distance issues to deal with as well.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
8,406
Reaction Score
7,935
Dayooper....

Under current rules, FBS conferences must have at least 12 members, and championship games must be between the winners of two divisions within the conference. Each division must play a round-robin schedule during the regular season in order to hold a championship game.

Council members adopted a proposal that originated with the Division I Football Oversight Committee but also approved an amendment from the Big Ten Conference. The amendment, offered by the Big Ten late last week, allows conferences with fewer than 12 members to hold championship games in football, as long as they meet one of two additional conditions: Conferences that want to play championship games must either play their championship game between division winners after round-robin competition in each division or between the top two teams in the conference standings following full round-robin, regular-season competition between all members of the conference.


This is from the NCAA site...where do you find the NCAA availability of pods? The sticky point is the wording about the winner of two divisions...it doesn't say the winners of three divisions...

I think it is a big stretch to assume that they meant anything more than what has been current...two divisions...except they did amend that to allow a conference with less than 12 members to hold a CCG...if they played round robin and pitted the top two teams.



College football: FBS conferences with fewer than 12 members now able to hold championship game
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
1,228
Reaction Score
368
Few points, and really as an outsider looking in with no horse in the race:
  • ACC would have to agree on who to add. This isn't a slam dunk by any means. Tobacco road strength is diluted with all the expansion (would likely be pro UConn), FSU, Clemson, BC block may be able to block UConn, not sure if there's unanimous support for Cincinnati or if anyone even would consider Temple. Notre Dame partial football membership gives the ACC what they need in the metro Philly, NYC and Boston markets that they don't already get from BC and Syracuse. Not clear how the other old Big East schools would support a UConn expansion.
It will come down to what ESPN will pay for. The ACC could get to 16 leaving ND in its current 5 games for next 20 years they are signed up for as 17. That would work.

UConn would have support. Biggest objection from southern members now is travel. That's why put USF on list to balance. Florida is big enough to support 4 in P5.
 

dayooper

It's what I do. I drink and I know things.
Joined
Aug 16, 2013
Messages
1,641
Reaction Score
4,332
Of course...except that was denied by the NCAA...largely due to the Big Ten's objections.

The NCAA dictates that you must have two divisions or a round robin....the "pods" as you described, the ACC was very interested in.

How was that denied by the NCAA?
Dayooper....

Under current rules, FBS conferences must have at least 12 members, and championship games must be between the winners of two divisions within the conference. Each division must play a round-robin schedule during the regular season in order to hold a championship game.

Council members adopted a proposal that originated with the Division I Football Oversight Committee but also approved an amendment from the Big Ten Conference. The amendment, offered by the Big Ten late last week, allows conferences with fewer than 12 members to hold championship games in football, as long as they meet one of two additional conditions: Conferences that want to play championship games must either play their championship game between division winners after round-robin competition in each division or between the top two teams in the conference standings following full round-robin, regular-season competition between all members of the conference.


This is from the NCAA site...where do you find the NCAA availability of pods? The sticky point is the wording about the winner of two divisions...it doesn't say the winners of three divisions...

I think it is a big stretch to assume that they meant anything more than what has been current...two divisions...except they did amend that to allow a conference with less than 12 members to hold a CCG...if they played round robin and pitted the top two teams.



College football: FBS conferences with fewer than 12 members now able to hold championship game

It is two divisions, they just change every 2 years. The teams in each division still play a round robin, they just rotate through the league every six years.
 
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
1,228
Reaction Score
368
The threat that Delaney saw would be a method to let Notre Dame play in a pod and play for the CCG as a pod winner...while still playing their national schedule.
It was more than that. Delaney wants to prevent a conference playoff or tournament. If you remove the rule it enables that without intending to. The rotating pods into 2 divisions works within the rules.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
8,406
Reaction Score
7,935
As long as you keep just two divisions...you can rotate like top.....

I didn't follow for a moment....
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
19,228
Reaction Score
14,061
It will come down to what ESPN will pay for. The ACC could get to 16 leaving ND in its current 5 games for next 20 years they are signed up for as 17. That would work.

UConn would have support. Biggest objection from southern members now is travel. That's why put USF on list to balance. Florida is big enough to support 4 in P5.
Your southern members are pretty dumb. They forget there's more people up north?
 

dayooper

It's what I do. I drink and I know things.
Joined
Aug 16, 2013
Messages
1,641
Reaction Score
4,332
Haven't heard this from UVA folks, but if true ESPN is pushing it. The best AAC candidates are:
1. Navy - 6th ND game.
2. UConn - 3.5 million in CT, NYC interest.
3. South Florida - 4 million metro area growing at 10%.
4. Temple - 4 million television market.

  1. Navy - Not sure Navy wants to up to the P5, they just don't have the size to. I thought there was a rule that the Naval Academy recruits had to be under a certain size. I could be wrong or that has changed, but if that's still in place, than it's a deal breaker. I understand why ND may want them in there, but isn't there some sort of rule that they can't include BC as one of the five ACC games every year? Could be wrong on that?
  2. UConn - No Brainer.
  3. USF - Why? They already have a great hold on the state of Florida with FSU and, to a lesser extent, Miami. What does USF give the ACC that the other two don't.
  4. Temple - I can sorta see it, but with Pitt already in the fold and if you get UConn it would be a little redundant.
 

dayooper

It's what I do. I drink and I know things.
Joined
Aug 16, 2013
Messages
1,641
Reaction Score
4,332
As long as you keep just two divisions...you can rotate like top.....

I didn't follow for a moment....

Yup, and for the ACC, it leaves one conference game for rivalries in those years when rivals aren't in the same division.
 
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
4,916
Reaction Score
5,364
  1. Navy - Not sure Navy wants to up to the P5, they just don't have the size to. I thought there was a rule that the Naval Academy recruits had to be under a certain size. I could be wrong or that has changed, but if that's still in place, than it's a deal breaker. I understand why ND may want them in there, but isn't there some sort of rule that they can't include BC as one of the five ACC games every year? Could be wrong on that?
  2. UConn - No Brainer.
  3. USF - Why? They already have a great hold on the state of Florida with FSU and, to a lesser extent, Miami. What does USF give the ACC that the other two don't.
  4. Temple - I can sorta see it, but with Pitt already in the fold and if you get UConn it would be a little redundant.
Only one that makes sense is UCONN, reviving old rivalries in football and especially basketball with BC, Syracuse, and Pitt, would generate a lot of interest on several levels in all the major Northeast markets.
 
Joined
Dec 11, 2013
Messages
1,976
Reaction Score
7,769
Not sure where you are getting the ban on pods. I don't see it in the NCAA press release. Take a look for your self and if you see it, please let me know: Link.

The only thing I find is that if a conference has 12 or more teams, they must play a round-robin schedule within it's division. No where does it say that the divisions have to be static. Example using the ACC and adding UConn and Cincinati to make 16:

Pod A: FSU, Miami, GT, Clemson
Pod B: UNC, NCST, Duke, WF
Pod C: Louisville, Virginia, VT, Cincinnati
Pod D: Syracuse, BC, UConn, Pitt

Rotation 1 (2 years):

Pod A and Pod B are a division: FSU, Miami, GT and Clemson, UNC, NCST, Duke and WF

Pod C and Pod D are a division: Louisville, Virginia, VT, Cincinnati, Syracuse, BC, UConn and Pitt

Rotation 2 (2 years):

Pod A and Pod C are a division: FSU, Miami, GT, Clemson, Louisville, Virginia, VT and Cincinnati

Pod B and Pod D are a division: UNC, NCST, Duke, WF, Syracuse, BC, UConn and Pitt

Rotation 3 (2 years):

Pod A and Pod D are a division: FSU, Miami, GT, Clemson, Syracuse, BC, UConn and Pitt

Pod B and Pod C are a division: UNC, NCST, Duke, WF, Louisville, Virginia, VT and Cincinnati

Then you start back at rotation 1 and continue on forward. It falls within the guidelines that are set forth in the linked press release.

The idea of the amendment was so that one conference couldn't game the system. You don't want a conference to manipulate their CCG to give their best team the best chance to win the game and make it to the playoff.

Yes, yes, 1000 times yes! Someone please send this to the ACC offices!
 

dayooper

It's what I do. I drink and I know things.
Joined
Aug 16, 2013
Messages
1,641
Reaction Score
4,332
Only one that makes sense is UCONN, reviving old rivalries in football and especially basketball with BC, Syracuse, and Pitt, would generate a lot of interest on several levels in all the major Northeast markets.

Out of those four, yes. From an outsiders perspective, I would think Cincinnati or Houston would fit better than Navy, Temple and USF. Then again, I don't think anything happens with the P5 until Texas decides what it wants to do in 2024. We may see big changes as the Big10, Big12 and Pac12 media rights and GoRs expire.

Will they form a mega conference? No, but there may some sort of media alliance between the three (or the Big10, Pac12 and parts of the Big12). Bundle all three conferences (or two with Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and someone else joining the Pac).
 

dayooper

It's what I do. I drink and I know things.
Joined
Aug 16, 2013
Messages
1,641
Reaction Score
4,332
Yes, yes, 1000 times yes! Someone please send this to the ACC offices!

I like this one better:

Pod A: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska and ISU
Pod B: Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern and Illinois
Pod C: Purdue, Indiana, MSU, Michigan and OSU
Pod D: PSU, Maryland, Rutgers, UConn and WVU

Yes, I know WVU has as good of a shot of being in the Big10 as Liberty, but I couldn't think of a better school that quickly. Same with ISU.
 

Online statistics

Members online
375
Guests online
3,056
Total visitors
3,431

Forum statistics

Threads
155,758
Messages
4,030,524
Members
9,864
Latest member
leepaul


Top Bottom