OOC games vs. ACC team

[WoadBlue]

We are going to play Wake in 2019 and 2021 OOC.

The only reason that makes sense is if we are doing to provoke teams that might not want to end divisional play when we can per the NCAA. Playing teams in the conference but the games don;t count in league standings is going to make waves, perhaps big ones.

Wake was our 1st footbal game, and we have played the Deacs more than 100 times. But UNC football needs to play OOC games to maximize our national name.

 

[rdcb]

Why are they doing this? Just wondering

 

[6666Heel]

Don't know who came up with it, but I like it. It IS a major departure from normal non-conf scheduling in the modern era, but as you pointed it, it IS a way to preserve the long-standing rivalry for the Heels and Deacs. I could envision Cuse and PItt doing the same as they were long time rivals even before there was a Big East! Effectively, So long as it doesn't impact the conference standings, what's diff does it make? Not a whole lot different than Clemson, FSU and GaTech playing the same non-conference in-state P5 rival every year due to historical tradition. And as far as "national recognition" is concerned, IMHO this will be much more meaningful than playing a non-conference, non-regional, non-P5 school such as Tulsa or SDSU, since this opponent IS a P5 conference member.

How much prestige did Bama gain from their late season matchup with powerful WCU??? This year I think the SEC LOST some prestige when it became obvious that their non-conference scheduling generally was a joke, other that the aforementioned contests involving UF, USC and UGA.

This post was edited on 1/26 12:04 PM by 6666Heel

 

[Raising Heel]

My initial reaction was "meh" but I'm trying to think of this in terms of pros and cons. Maybe it's not so bad.

Pros
The game helps UNC satisfy the recently-implemented rule that ACC teams play an out-of-conference game against a Power 5 team each season.The historic significance of the rivalry arguably makes the matchup more attractive to UNC fans than, say, Middle Tennessee State or Idaho.It's a winnable game, but a loss wouldn't hurt UNC in the conference standings.The proximity of the schools makes travel easy for the team and fans.Keeps the money within the conference

Cons
Opportunity cost, i.e. who else could UNC have played that would have been more exciting for fans?Wake will be more competitive than an FCS team, so presents a greater chance for a loss.A win won't do anything to improve the perception of UNC football.No one to talk smack to if we win (quick, let's all go over to the Wake boards!.........).

Feel free to add to the list.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Originally posted by Raising Heel:
My initial reaction was "meh" but I'm trying to think of this in terms of pros and cons. Maybe it's not so bad.

Pros
The game helps UNC satisfy the recently-implemented rule that ACC teams play an out-of-conference game against a Power 5 team each season.The historic significance of the rivalry arguably makes the matchup more attractive to UNC fans than, say, Middle Tennessee State or Idaho.It's a winnable game, but a loss wouldn't hurt UNC in the conference standings.The proximity of the schools makes travel easy for the team and fans.Keeps the money within the conference

Cons
Opportunity cost, i.e. who else could UNC have played that would have been more exciting for fans?Wake will be more competitive than an FCS team, so presents a greater chance for a loss.A win won't do anything to improve the perception of UNC football.No one to talk smack to if we win (quick, let's all go over to the Wake boards!.........).

Feel free to add to the list.

First of all, I think this is an exceptionally stupid idea.

Your list of pros and cons is pretty thorough. But I feel that not all pros and cons are weighted the same. And IMO, the cons listed outweigh the pros - substantially.

No UNC fans give a damn about WFU. No UNC fans consider them a rival. Why are they? Just because they're an hour down the road? In fact, as a UNC football fan that travels to UNC basically once a year for a game, I would pick just about any other game on the schedule to attend before I picked a game against WFU. At least with SDSU, I'm going to see a team I've never seen before. And for those of you that go to away games, wouldn't you rather go somewhere you've never been or have seldomly been rather than Winston-Salem? I know that if I traveled to away games frequently, I'd be much more excited about a trip to Morgantown WV, State College, PA or Knoxville, TN. Just something new, you know?

Then there's this: "A win won't do anything to improve the perception of UNC football." - Boom. That's it. Our scheduling should be based pretty much on whether or not a game against a potential opponent does anything to strengthen our brand. I'd rather get our heads kicked in by Bama than win over WFU. What network wants to televise that game? The Ocho?

 

[Raising Heel]

Originally posted by Raising Heel:

Updated list:

Pros
gunslingerdick hates it

 

[Raising Heel]

WAKE AND UNC SMASH SPACE AND TIME

 

[SeaHawk98]

In related news, NC State is trying to schedule UAB for future dates.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Originally posted by Raising Heel:

Originally posted by Raising Heel:

Updated list:

Pros
gunslingerdick hates it

 

[Tigertown_a_Rick]

Originally posted by SeaHawk98:

In related news, NC State is trying to schedule UAB for future dates.

Wonder if that's a home and away series...lol!

I understand folks not rushing to the ticket office to buy tickets for a non-conf matchup with the Deacs, but what if that non-conf game were with FSU or Clemson....How would you guys feel then?

 

[UNC71-00]

Originally posted by Raising Heel:

Originally posted by Raising Heel:

Updated list:

Pros
gunslingerdick hates it

 

[WoadBlue]

Originally posted by Tigertown@Rick:

Originally posted by SeaHawk98:

In related news, NC State is trying to schedule UAB for future dates.

Wonder if that's a home and away series...lol!

I understand folks not rushing to the ticket office to buy tickets for a non-conf matchup with the Deacs, but what if that non-conf game were with FSU or Clemson....How would you guys feel then?

If we were to play Clemson OOC and win, and Clemson wins the Atlantic while we finish 2nd in the Coastal, I will be pissed.

 

[Raising Heel]

Seems like opinions are pretty sharply divided on this move. Nationally, most people hate it because WAKE AND UNC DON'T FOOTBALL GOOD. Most locals seem to be embracing the idea though.

As somebody pointed out, this would be hailed as genius if it were Alabama and Georgia. Here's an Auburn blogger who seems to like the idea.

 

[Tigertown_a_Rick]

Originally posted by WoadBlue:

Originally posted by Tigertown@Rick:

Originally posted by SeaHawk98:

In related news, NC State is trying to schedule UAB for future dates.

Wonder if that's a home and away series...lol!

I understand folks not rushing to the ticket office to buy tickets for a non-conf matchup with the Deacs, but what if that non-conf game were with FSU or Clemson....How would you guys feel then?

If we were to play Clemson OOC and win, and Clemson wins the Atlantic while we finish 2nd in the Coastal, I will be pissed.

Yeah, I would be too.....The fact that we very seldom play Clemson and FSU anymore, how would you feel if we played them in a non-conference game similar to what has just been set up with Wake?

It's really going to be interesting to see how this whole new concept of playing conference foes in a non-conference game, is going to work?....With game attendance declining the last several years, it appears that schools are now having to think outside the box, so to speak, in an effort to try and lure fans back to the stadiums?

I personally would like to see Carolina play either South Carolina, Tennessee or Georgia every year....Not all 3 in the same season, but would like to see the Tar Heels play one of those 3 teams every year in the future....It might negatively impact the record from time to time, but you don't get any better playing inferior competition....Not to Mention, these 3 SEC schools are contantly coming into Carolina's backyard and plucking-away some of the state's best players year-in and year-out, and that needs to stop if the Tarheels are ever going to achieve the kind of success that us fans want....

 

[Raising Heel]

Originally posted by Tigertown@Rick:

I personally would like to see Carolina play either South Carolina, Tennessee or Georgia every year....

Not even every year, but maybe more often than never.

We at least play South Carolina from time to time. But we haven't played Georgia in my lifetime (I'm 43) and have played UTjr only once since 1961 (the 2010 Music City Bowl). How do you go a half century without playing flagship Power 5 teams from states with whom you share a border?

Of course we tried to play a home-and-home with UTjr but they pussed out....


This post was edited on 1/27 8:05 AM by Raising Heel

 

[Tigertown_a_Rick]

Originally posted by Raising Heel:

Originally posted by Tigertown@Rick:

I personally would like to see Carolina play either South Carolina, Tennessee or Georgia every year....

Not even every year, but maybe more often than never.

We at least play South Carolina from time to time. But we haven't played Georgia in my lifetime (I'm 43) and have played UTjr only once since 1961 (the 2010 Music City Bowl). How do you go a half century without playing flagship Power 5 teams from states with whom you share a border?

Of course we tried to play a home-and-home with UTjr but they pussed out....



This post was edited on 1/27 8:05 AM by Raising Heel

Spot on!

 

[TarHeelNation11]

^^ a home-and-home with UGA absolutely needs to happen. That's an oldddd, long-forgotten rivalry from the early 20th century. Plus, most UGA fans know nothing about UNC, especially UNC football, so they won't be nearly as hostile to visiting fans as they typically are.

As for this "OOC" Wake game, I hate the whole concept of it. Hate it. I'm too lazy to rehash my entire post from Blue Heaven on this topic, but basically........it sucks. Like GSD said, no Carolina fans consider Wake a direct rival; they only consider them a rival within the context of the Big 4. Yawn. It's like scheduling ECU.......lose-lose for Carolina football.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Originally posted by Raising Heel:

Originally posted by Tigertown@Rick:

I personally would like to see Carolina play either South Carolina, Tennessee or Georgia every year....

Not even every year, but maybe more often than never.

We at least play South Carolina from time to time. But we haven't played Georgia in my lifetime (I'm 43) and have played UTjr only once since 1961 (the 2010 Music City Bowl). How do you go a half century without playing flagship Power 5 teams from states with whom you share a border?

Of course we tried to play a home-and-home with UTjr but they pussed out....


This post was edited on 1/27 8:05 AM by Raising Heel

I'll see your suggestions of UT, So Car and UGa and raise you a WVa (last played in bowl game of '08) and PSU (don't know the last time we've played). I think both of those schools would make for great OOC series.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

^^ Not only would both of those schools make for good home-and-home series........either one would make an excellent addition to the ACC. You'd take one and not the other, but either one would be nice. Penn State would be a grand slam addition.

Damn you Joe Paterno and your insistence that PSU join the Big Ten and not the ACC

 

[SeaHawk98]

I would love for UNC to play UGA.

and especially TENN since they keep on taking good North Carolina players. Of course we set up a series with them, but those cowards backed out.

 

[topdecktiger]

Originally posted by Raising Heel:
My initial reaction was "meh" but I'm trying to think of this in terms of pros and cons. Maybe it's not so bad.

Pros


The game helps UNC satisfy the recently-implemented rule that ACC teams play an out-of-conference game against a Power 5 team each season.
The historic significance of the rivalry arguably makes the matchup more attractive to UNC fans than, say, Middle Tennessee State or Idaho.
It's a winnable game, but a loss wouldn't hurt UNC in the conference standings.
The proximity of the schools makes travel easy for the team and fans.
Keeps the money within the conference

Cons


Opportunity cost, i.e. who else could UNC have played that would have been more exciting for fans?
Wake will be more competitive than an FCS team, so presents a greater chance for a loss.
A win won't do anything to improve the perception of UNC football.
No one to talk smack to if we win (quick, let's all go over to the Wake boards!.........).

Feel free to add to the list.


I don't think there really is a con. The opportunity cost really isn't a factor. Most teams only play one or two FBS teams OOC anyway. That still leaves you two spots open. What's the opportunity cost in playing Wake Forest as opposed to San Diego St or Middle Tennessee? The one benefit is that you would get more credit for scheduling an additional FBS team then a midmajor team. Let's say that next year, you had South Carolina, Illinois, and Wake Forest all on the schedule. North Carolina would get a fair amount of credit for having 3 of 4 FBS teams on the OOC schedule. Not a bad idea in the playoff era.

The one thing I get is maybe nobody likes the idea of playing Wake Forest, but you can also schedule other opponents. Clemson, Louisville, Florida St, Boston College would all be good games for this. I don't think it would be a bad idea to get to see those teams more often.

 

[topdecktiger]

Originally posted by WoadBlue:

If we were to play Clemson OOC and win, and Clemson wins the Atlantic while we finish 2nd in the Coastal, I will be pissed.




Why? That could already happen anyway.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Originally posted by topdecktiger:

Originally posted by WoadBlue:

If we were to play Clemson OOC and win, and Clemson wins the Atlantic while we finish 2nd in the Coastal, I will be pissed.




Why? That could already happen anyway.

Woad is saying that we might lose out on the Coastal championship because the win against Clemson wouldn't count in the standings. And I agree, that would suck. What would suck even more with this stupid idea is that say we play and beat Clemson in an OOC game. Then say Clemson goes on to win the Atlantic because the loss against us didn't count in the standings. And then say we go on to win the Coastal. Then we play Clemson, a team we already beat, for the conference championship. And we lose. That would be a mighty hard pill to swallow. I know we're getting a head of ourselves with all the what ifs, but it really makes no sense to me. Again, why don't we just schedule a team from another P5 conference. I know that sounds crazy and all, but I'm pretty sure other schools do it.

 

[chattreb]

I think it is a good idea, as do some of the best SEC writers I know. They see it as the first of many arrangements like this.

 

[WoadBlue]

Originally posted by chattreb:
I think it is a good idea, as do some of the best SEC writers I know. They see it as the first of many arrangements like this.

Then many of the 'best' SEC writers you know of don't know SEC history and/or donpt care yo know the inevitable bad consequences.

In the past, perhaps through the 1960s, SEC teams had only 5 mandated league games. Every year, there would be at least 1 game between 2 SEC teams that did not count as a league game. And it led to weord reults, such as a team that offically was 4-1 but actaully beat 5 SEC teams, or a team that won the SEC with an official league mark of 4-1 but actuallly lost to 2 SEC teams.

It is trouble waiting to happen.

 

[topdecktiger]

Originally posted by gunslingerdick:

Woad is saying that we might lose out on the Coastal championship because the win against Clemson wouldn't count in the standings. And I agree, that would suck. What would suck even more with this stupid idea is that say we play and beat Clemson in an OOC game. Then say Clemson goes on to win the Atlantic because the loss against us didn't count in the standings. And then say we go on to win the Coastal. Then we play Clemson, a team we already beat, for the conference championship. And we lose. That would be a mighty hard pill to swallow. I know we're getting a head of ourselves with all the what ifs, but it really makes no sense to me. Again, why don't we just schedule a team from another P5 conference. I know that sounds crazy and all, but I'm pretty sure other schools do it.


Well, see, that's the problem. Under this scenario, you wouldn't "lose out" on the Coastal championship because of the Clemson game. The reason is, you already knew ahead of time the 8 games on your conference schedule. The Clemson game, again in this scenario, is only added after the fact. You already know from the very beginning that the game doesn't count in the standings.

The other point you are off on is when you say, "Why don't we just schedule a team from another P5 conference?" What you are missing is that Wake Forest isn't scheduled in place of another P5 team. It's not an either/or scenario. The only reason Wake Forest is being schedule is so the teams can play each other more frequently. I can understand if you personally don't think it's important to play Wake Forest regularly, and I wouldn't disagree with that. The point is, some people at North Carolina do want to play Wake Forest more regularly (being that they are an instate rival), so that's why this is happening. No other reason. If it was just about making the schedule better, then yeah, you would just go add on South Carolina, Penn St, Auburn, Texas Tech, or whoever. However, it has nothing to do with improving the schedule. It's simply to play a rival team more frequently. It's actually a pretty good solution to the problem for the conference as a whole.

 

[WoadBlue]

Originally posted by topdecktiger:

Originally posted by gunslingerdick:

Woad is saying that we might lose out on the Coastal championship because the win against Clemson wouldn't count in the standings. And I agree, that would suck. What would suck even more with this stupid idea is that say we play and beat Clemson in an OOC game. Then say Clemson goes on to win the Atlantic because the loss against us didn't count in the standings. And then say we go on to win the Coastal. Then we play Clemson, a team we already beat, for the conference championship. And we lose. That would be a mighty hard pill to swallow. I know we're getting a head of ourselves with all the what ifs, but it really makes no sense to me. Again, why don't we just schedule a team from another P5 conference. I know that sounds crazy and all, but I'm pretty sure other schools do it.


Well, see, that's the problem. Under this scenario, you wouldn't "lose out" on the Coastal championship because of the Clemson game. The reason is, you already knew ahead of time the 8 games on your conference schedule. The Clemson game, again in this scenario, is only added after the fact. You already know from the very beginning that the game doesn't count in the standings.

The other point you are off on is when you say, "Why don't we just schedule a team from another P5 conference?" What you are missing is that Wake Forest isn't scheduled in place of another P5 team. It's not an either/or scenario. The only reason Wake Forest is being schedule is so the teams can play each other more frequently. I can understand if you personally don't think it's important to play Wake Forest regularly, and I wouldn't disagree with that. The point is, some people at North Carolina do want to play Wake Forest more regularly (being that they are an instate rival), so that's why this is happening. No other reason. If it was just about making the schedule better, then yeah, you would just go add on South Carolina, Penn St, Auburn, Texas Tech, or whoever. However, it has nothing to do with improving the schedule. It's simply to play a rival team more frequently. It's actually a pretty good solution to the problem for the conference as a whole.

No it is not. The fact is that any time 2 teams in the same league play but it is not a 'league', you can have results that cause a can of nasty worms to be opened for all. 2 teams in the league playing but it doesn't 'count' in league standings?

For example - UNC wins the Coastal with a 7-1 league record. Our loss is rto Miami, which was 6-2. But we also lose the 'OOC' game to Wake, meaning we havwe 2 Ls to ACC members, just like Miami, which beat us head to head.

In that scenario, every ABCer in the world wil be on a rampage, certain that Swofford arranged the OOC games vs league menbers to help UNC cheat everybody else.

 

[HeelFan58]

I would prefer to play Wake more often as a conference game and not as an OOC. In the 50's and 60's we played Tennessee , UGa , Texas , Florida , Michigan , Michigan State , Ohio State and the like as OOC games because if you wanted to go to one of the few bowl games you had to have impressive wins. These games also brought in a lot of money before the big TV contracts. The trend now is to load up on cupcake to guarantee a trip to the plethora of meaningless bowl games and to play as many home games as possible against said cupcake. Just take a look at Moo's pathetic schedule for next year. I cannot believe that recruits want to come and play in these pathetic games.

 

[Tigertown_a_Rick]

Originally posted by HeelFan58:
I would prefer to play Wake more often as a conference game and not as an OOC. In the 50's and 60's we played Tennessee , UGa , Texas , Florida , Michigan , Michigan State , Ohio State and the like as OOC games because if you wanted to go to one of the few bowl games you had to have impressive wins. These games also brought in a lot of money before the big TV contracts. The trend now is to load up on cupcake to guarantee a trip to the plethora of meaningless bowl games and to play as many home games as possible against said cupcake. Just take a look at Moo's pathetic schedule for next year. I cannot believe that recruits want to come and play in these pathetic games.

I think a lot of us would like to play Wake as a conference opponent rather than as a non-conference foe, but the fact that the league is not willing to go to 9 conference games, is the reason that schools like North Carolina are now considering this option because of those historical ties with the Demon Deacons....

If the ACC ever decides on the 4-team conference Pod concept that would allow teams to face every conference opponent every other year, I think that would solve the problem, and there would not be a need to look to keep historical rivalrys going because Carolina would likely be in a 4-team POD with the Deacs, State and Dook?

I've read a bunch of good things about this possible future conference setup, and have yet to find something that I dislike about it?

Of course, it would work a whole lot better "IF" Notre Dame and either West Virginia or Penn State would join the ACC to make an even 16 team conference....

Imagine a 16-team conference with the POD setup:

UNC
Duke
State
Wake

Miami
FSU
Clemson
Ga. Tech

UVA
Va Tech
Louisville
Notre Dame

Pittsburgh
West Va. or Penn State
Syracuse
BC

Play the 3 teams in your POD every year, and play 2 teams from the other PODs every season, rotating so that you play every conference member every 2 years....Of course, that doesn't solve everything, but it would remove the argument that seems to have been the reason why Carolina and Wake have decided to schedule a non-conference game?

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

Originally posted by WoadBlue:

For example - UNC wins the Coastal with a 7-1 league record. Our loss is rto Miami, which was 6-2. But we also lose the 'OOC' game to Wake, meaning we havwe 2 Ls to ACC members, just like Miami, which beat us head to head.

In that scenario, every ABCer in the world wil be on a rampage, certain that Swofford arranged the OOC games vs league menbers to help UNC cheat everybody else.

I'm 50-50 on the idea, don't really see what it adds, and don't really see what it takes away. If it were with a better team than Wake, I could see the various points mattering more (chance to strengthen the schedule, but greater chance at an L). Best case scenario is some "can of worms" does happen, and they get rid of the crap scheduling/division set up they have right now.

But in you scenario above, even if you were to count that Wake game in the standings, UNC would still be 7-2 against ACC teams, which is a half game ahead of Miami at 6-2 anyways, so they should have no claim to the title even though they beat us head to head... they're still a half game back.

As for your last comment, not sure how anyone could say that Swofford had it in the bag for UNC when they lost the game in question, but then again ABCers never really make much sense, so I could see that scenario playing out.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

I'm 100% on board with the 4 team pod idea that Tigertown mentioned above. I think that would be best for getting fresh opponents in every couple years. My one question on that though would be, how does the championship game work at that point? You'd have 4 pod winners. Do you do a final four playoff similar to the one for the national championship? At that point, the two in the ACCCG would have played 11 conference games by the end of the year (9 reg season, 2 playoff), which may be a bit much.

Or do you just have the top 2 of the 4 pod winners play in the ACCCG? Although, I'm not sure what the tiebreakers would be if all 4 pod winners had the same record and didnt play each other.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Did I miss something? Who in the hell gives a damn about WFU? This is just a bizarre discussion to me. Put it this way, if I was asked to rank every ACC opponent on how much I would like to watch a match up of the Heels and every other team, watching the Heels against WFU would be my bottom 3 of desirable ACC games with Syracuse and BC. And I don't know one single UNC fan that would say that a game against WFU is intriguing.

It's just weird, confusing and makes little sense.

 

[topdecktiger]

Originally posted by WoadBlue:

No it is not. The fact is that any time 2 teams in the same league play but it is not a 'league', you can have results that cause a can of nasty worms to be opened for all. 2 teams in the league playing but it doesn't 'count' in league standings?

For example - UNC wins the Coastal with a 7-1 league record. Our loss is rto Miami, which was 6-2. But we also lose the 'OOC' game to Wake, meaning we havwe 2 Ls to ACC members, just like Miami, which beat us head to head.

In that scenario, every ABCer in the world wil be on a rampage, certain that Swofford arranged the OOC games vs league menbers to help UNC cheat everybody else.




It simply would not be a controversy. You had 8 league games, just like Miami. You went 7-1, they went 6-2. Nobody would care about the Wake Forest game, because going into the beginning of the year, everybody knew that game wasn't going to count in the first place. That's what you keep overlooking. Everybody knows that the game wasn't going to count. You aren't gaining any advantage with this. There is no advantage gained by North Carolina with this game, because it's only added in after the fact.

 

[topdecktiger]

Originally posted by Hark_The_Sound_2010:

I'm 50-50 on the idea, don't really see what it adds, and don't really see what it takes away. If it were with a better team than Wake, I could see the various points mattering more (chance to strengthen the schedule, but greater chance at an L). Best case scenario is some "can of worms" does happen, and they get rid of the crap scheduling/division set up they have right now.

But in you scenario above, even if you were to count that Wake game in the standings, UNC would still be 7-2 against ACC teams, which is a half game ahead of Miami at 6-2 anyways, so they should have no claim to the title even though they beat us head to head... they're still a half game back.

As for your last comment, not sure how anyone could say that Swofford had it in the bag for UNC when they lost the game in question, but then again ABCers never really make much sense, so I could see that scenario playing out.



That's the one thing people are getting hung up on. There isn't an attempt to "add" anything. UNC and WF clearly stated that this game is being played for only one reason: so two rivals can play each other more frequently. That's literally the only reason for this, and the only reason any other teams would consider it. The easiest solution is go to 9 conference games. That would put the rotations back on schedule, like they were before Pitt and Syracuse joined. The ACC decided against 9 games, since several teams already have OOC rivals, and the Notre Dame agreement makes it more complicated for those other schools to schedule OOC games. That's the only reason this has come up.

I also wanted to respond to your other post, so I'm going to do it here to save space. The other poster had the right idea with the pod format, but didn't execute it exactly right. They way the pod system works is that you still have two divisions, just like normal. The difference is that pods rotate between the two divisions. You still play 8 games, you still have divisions, and you still have a CCG. You just have different teams in your division every year. You play all the teams in your pod ever year, and you can play on team outside your pod every year, as a cross-division opponent when you aren't in the same division. I assumed Notre Dame and Cincinnati for the two extra teams. This is how it would look.

 

[Tigertown_a_Rick]

Originally posted by topdecktiger:

Originally posted by Hark_The_Sound_2010:


I'm 50-50 on the idea, don't really see what it adds, and don't really see what it takes away. If it were with a better team than Wake, I could see the various points mattering more (chance to strengthen the schedule, but greater chance at an L). Best case scenario is some "can of worms" does happen, and they get rid of the crap scheduling/division set up they have right now.

But in you scenario above, even if you were to count that Wake game in the standings, UNC would still be 7-2 against ACC teams, which is a half game ahead of Miami at 6-2 anyways, so they should have no claim to the title even though they beat us head to head... they're still a half game back.

As for your last comment, not sure how anyone could say that Swofford had it in the bag for UNC when they lost the game in question, but then again ABCers never really make much sense, so I could see that scenario playing out.





That's the one thing people are getting hung up on. There isn't an attempt to "add" anything. UNC and WF clearly stated that this game is being played for only one reason: so two rivals can play each other more frequently. That's literally the only reason for this, and the only reason any other teams would consider it. The easiest solution is go to 9 conference games. That would put the rotations back on schedule, like they were before Pitt and Syracuse joined. The ACC decided against 9 games, since several teams already have OOC rivals, and the Notre Dame agreement makes it more complicated for those other schools to schedule OOC games. That's the only reason this has come up.

I also wanted to respond to your other post, so I'm going to do it here to save space. The other poster had the right idea with the pod format, but didn't execute it exactly right. They way the pod system works is that you still have two divisions, just like normal. The difference is that pods rotate between the two divisions. You still play 8 games, you still have divisions, and you still have a CCG. You just have different teams in your division every year. You play all the teams in your pod ever year, and you can play on team outside your pod every year, as a cross-division opponent when you aren't in the same division. I assumed Notre Dame and Cincinnati for the two extra teams. This is how it would look.

Thanks for the clarification....Really like that idea for the future....

Of course, the argument is, and has been: "Notre Dame ain't joining the ACC"!....And that has always been a good argument, but that argument will be changing IMO, and the reason is simple: The Power 5 now have their own automony, and have the right to make the decisions that are best for the Power 5 like scheduling only Power 5 opponents in the future, which the B1G is already adopting, I think?....There seems to be a shift among the Power 5 to conduct their own championship game in the future, which means of course that Notre Dame's INPENDENT status would likely be voted down by the Power-5 offcials, and it would be either your part of the Power-5 or you're not?.....The P-5 Conferences have already been given the authority to choose their champions in any way they seem fit, and the idea above seems to be one of the best ways to do so?

The move by the Power-5 to fund all scholarships for 4-years have futher separated themelves from the smaller schools, and they have the money and the power now to do that....Smaller schools don't have the resources of the P-5, and that gap is about to increase even more with the Playoffs, and it's payoffs to the P-5 members.....If Notre Dame makes the playoffs in 2015(Yeah, I know a long shot, right now?), I think that we will see an excellerated pace toward an 8-team playoff because 2 or more Power-5 Champions will be left at home in that scenario.....It's really just a matter of time before an 8-team playoff that includes the P-5 champions, is adopted by the NCAA, or maybe even the Power-5 schools, themselves?....If adopted by the P-5 schools, Notre Dame will be forced to join the ACC or one of the other P-5 conferences, or the Irish will be left behind IMO....Hard to imagine I know, but the landscape of College Football has now changed with the inclusion of a yearly playoff, which also depicts a different era where games will be decided on the field, and not by the Media or Computers.....Notre Dame's history and tradition was built in the previous era of Mythical National Champions who were crowned by the opinions of people who in some cases had never even played the game of football, and had a regional bias too boot, when voting a champ?....The Irish have NO tradition in the new era of College Football as only 4 teams at the moment can make that claim, and they are FSU, ALA,ORE and OSU...In 2015, 4 more P-5 teams could also become a part of this new tradition, or some of the same teams, could further add to their new tradition of making the NCAA D-1 playoffs?......The one thing that can't be argued is the fact that we are entering a whole new and exciting era in college football with new changes and challenges ahead!

 

[Xlance]

I beg to differ with the opinion that it's a bad idea and that no Carolina fan cares about playing Wake Forest.

I am a Tar Heel fan and I love playing Wake Forest. I would much rather play Wake than State. Maybe it's just an age thing.
I never miss an opportunity to go to a game at Groves/BB&T as it's one of the best venues I have ever been in to see a football game and the people are always nice


This post was edited on 1/28 6:59 PM by Xlance

This post was edited on 1/28 7:00 PM by Xlance

 

[HeelFan58]

The B1G is going to schedule only power5's? I think that is great and it will slim PSU down when they have to give up their 4 cupcakes a year!

 

[Tigertown_a_Rick]

Originally posted by HeelFan58:

The B1G is going to schedule only power5's? I think that is great and it will slim PSU down when they have to give up their 4 cupcakes a year!

I could be mistaken about the B1G playing only P-5 teams?....But I did read where they are going to play a 9 game conference schedule as will the PAC-12, and will be scheduling only D-1 teams in the future for their out of conference games?....I'm not sure that will be ONLY P-5 teams, but it is a move in the right direction IMO?

The Big 12 as you know already plays 9 conference games in their 10 team conference....

Both the SEC and the ACC only play 8 conference games, but have an agreement for their conference members to play a member from a P-5 conference for a non-conf game....Of course, that requirement is not for every team since Clemson,Ga Tech, Louisville and FSU already fill that requirement, and play SEC rivals at the end of every regular season....

I personally wish the ACC would adopt the new Pod rotation system that was mentioned above as it would allow all ACC conference foes to play each other more frequently than they do now....

I would also like to see Notre Dame and 2 SEC teams in the final 4 playoffs for 2016, and the reason is simple: That would leave out 3 of the 5 P-5 champions this coming season, and the uproar would be of such magnitude that an 8-team playoff that includes all P-5 conference champs would be adopted by the NCAA, or the P-5 teams might leave the NCAA behind, and start their own playoffs among P-5 teams ONLY, which I hope happens sooner rather than later...

Again, the "New Year's 6" as it was called this year, is already setup to accomodate an 8-team playoff that will include the champions from all 5 Power conferences along with 3 Wildcards....

 

[Raising Heel]

Originally posted by Xlance:
I beg to differ with the opinion that it's a bad idea and that no Carolina fan cares about playing Wake Forest.

I am a Tar Heel fan and I love playing Wake Forest. I would much rather play Wake than State. Maybe it's just an age thing.

I never miss an opportunity to go to a game at Groves/BB&T as it's one of the best venues I have ever been in to see a football game and the people are always nice.

+1, except the thing about State. That's a much bigger game to me.

 

[topdecktiger]

The Big Ten was initially going to require school to schedule only FBS teams for OOC games. That proposal eventually got dropped. It's not that much of an issue, because the Big Ten doesn't play too many FCS teams in the first place. That's because they have plenty of nearby MAC teams that they can play.

The whole 8-team playoff thing, that's coming. It's just a matter of time. Once the networks figure out exactly how much money they are going to make off of it, it will come.