Momentum Building For 9 Game ACC Schedule

[champs99and04]

I wonder if a compromise could be adding a 15th team (hopefully UConn) which would also add some inventory for ESPN (though not as much as adding a 9th conference game). The conference would then go to three divisions with five teams each. You would play the other four in your division annually as well as rotating two opponents from each of the other divisions per year.

Here's where it gets interesting: you could potentially make lots of new money by having a mini tournament for the conference championship- the three division winners and a wild card team would play semis and then a final to determine the conference champ. That would mean lots of new money (due to the two new conference tournament semifinal games). What do you guys think of this idea?

I've had this thought before, regarding a potential three division ACC, and it's an interesting one to consider. I never made the connection that it could open the door to a conference mini-tournament, but it makes sense. I imagine that would pump in an a-ton of revenue, and logistically, three five team pods - with a hypothetical eastern corridor of UConn, BC, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, and maybe Virginia - makes a lot of sense and could help balance the schedule. You would play all four of your division opponents every year and four or five of the ten others, depending on whether they stay at 8 conference games, and rotate home/away.

It would be interesting with hoops as well. Theoretically you could play round robin with your divisional foes then a one-off with the other 10 (Notre Dame could mess this up, as they do everything).

The only way this would be possible would be to add a 15th team in football. Perhaps the Presidents/ADs balk at the idea of another game, but if we're using history as a guide those concerns tend to dissipate in the face of money.

 

[Marty Jackson]

I've had this thought before, regarding a potential three division ACC, and it's an interesting one to consider. I never made the connection that it could open the door to a conference mini-tournament, but it makes sense. I imagine that would pump in an a-ton of revenue, and logistically, three five team pods - with a hypothetical eastern corridor of UConn, BC, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, and maybe Virginia - makes a lot of sense and could help balance the schedule. You would play all four of your division opponents every year and four or five of the ten others, depending on whether they stay at 8 conference games, and rotate home/away.

It would be interesting with hoops as well. Theoretically you could play round robin with your divisional foes then a one-off with the other 10 (Notre Dame could mess this up, as they do everything).

The only way this would be possible would be to add a 15th team in football. Perhaps the Presidents/ADs balk at the idea of another game, but if we're using history as a guide those concerns tend to dissipate in the face of money.

Isn't there 16 schools in bb?

 

[MattMang23]

Isn't there 16 schools in bb?

No. 15 currently. 14 competitive ones and Boston College.

 

[Jae-VT]

There's an added conference tournament semifinal game. In a 15-team league, the three division winners and a wild card play for the conference tourney title.

Reg season-12
Conf semi-13
Conf final-14
Natl semi-15
Natl final-16

I'm afraid there is a fatal flaw in your theory. Current NCAA rules basically make a three division system impossible for any conference that would like to host a conference championship game.

Here is the presser from the NCAA when they changed the rule:

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.

 

[bobbyinaz]

I'm afraid there is a fatal flaw in your theory. Current NCAA rules basically make a three division system impossible for any conference that would like to host a conference championship game.

Here is the presser from the NCAA when they changed the rule:

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.

And any decision to change this would be made by a P5 autonomy vote which means it will never happen. No way the SEC, B1G & PAC vote to let this happen

 

[shizzle787]

The idea of 4 16-team superconferences is bunk for many reasons:
1) An undefeated Notre Dame will never be left out of current CFP set-up so there is no reason for them to join a conference.
2) Non-conference games would have no meaning if 4 conferences winners are semifinalists.
3) Anti-trust lawsuits by everyone not in P4 would cause major problems for everyone involved.
4) The Pac-12 does not have good expansion options if Texas/Oklahoma/Kansas are poached by ACC/SEC/Big 10 first.