Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 82
  1. #21
    Femoyer Hokie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 20, 2003
    Location
    Glen Allen, VA
    Posts
    1,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Colonel Jessup View Post
    Of the four OOC games per year, we need either 3 or 2 of them to be home games. If we schedule a FCS team, that would be a home game with no need to play at their stadium. Using a road game on a scrub instead of a big time school (as a part of a home and away two game series) leads to poor schedules. That is, unless, you think playing ECU and Marshall is better than playing a Ohio State and a Richmond.
    I don't think we should play anyone not in the 5 major conferences. No ECU, no Marshall, no Richmond. They don't belong on an ACC schedule. Just like the Big 10 just announced. Is the goal here to have 7 home games every year or to improve the quality of our home schedule (and for the conference to improve its image)? I think the latter.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckd4vt View Post
    But, we really got to get at least two or three NCs in that time to be considered top tier...

    Not really, we just need to get the top 4 (VT, FSU, Clemson, Louisville) to do well (read: win) in bowls and high-profile OOC games, and win the ACC games that they should win. And the next level (NCSU, UNC, Pitt, GT, Miami, Virginia) to do the same against similar competition. Whether we get an NC or not, we will greatly improve the quality-level of the conference, because we haven't been doing that.

    Remember, nobody other than the SEC has won a NC in the last seven years. That doesn't make the B1G and the Pac-12 non-first-tier.
    No trees were harmed in the making of this post. However, billions of electrons were horribly inconvenienced.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    September 19, 2002
    Posts
    16,734
    The BIG announcement was a sham. OK, they won't play a FBS team, but they'll still play the Arkansas States of the world. It would eb impossible to schedule 3 or 4 BCS teams every year. The SEC, Big12 and PAC12 ill still play FBS along with lower level 1a schools and the BIG will still play their share of MAC opponents. The only way we would eb able to schedule 3 or 4 power 5 schools is if every conference decided to do that. Then let the lawsuits begin to fly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Femoyer Hokie View Post
    I don't think we should play anyone not in the 5 major conferences. No ECU, no Marshall, no Richmond. They don't belong on an ACC schedule. Just like the Big 10 just announced. Is the goal here to have 7 home games every year or to improve the quality of our home schedule (and for the conference to improve its image)? I think the latter.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Colonel Jessup View Post
    Of the four OOC games per year, we need either 3 or 2 of them to be home games...
    Why is that? With the explosive growth of revenue in college football, why are we still shackled to the same number of home games that we needed when revenue was smaller?

    I notice that several schools in the SEC say that they "need" seven home games each year. Why is that still the case?

    /baffled
    No trees were harmed in the making of this post. However, billions of electrons were horribly inconvenienced.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    December 28, 1999
    Posts
    7,959
    Many B1G schools with enormous stadiums can afford to pay Akron big $ to come to their stadium and not return to Akron. We cannot do that and decades worth of evidence back that up. Heck, we even have to go to ODU in a 2 for 1. I'd rather play a big school 1 for 1 and a FCS team 1 and 0.

    Quote Originally Posted by Femoyer Hokie View Post
    I don't think we should play anyone not in the 5 major conferences. No ECU, no Marshall, no Richmond. They don't belong on an ACC schedule. Just like the Big 10 just announced. Is the goal here to have 7 home games every year or to improve the quality of our home schedule (and for the conference to improve its image)? I think the latter.

  6. #26
    It's my understanding that the B10 announced no FCS teams on their schedules. They did not preclude playing MAC schools who are FBS schools, albeit 2nd level FBS schools.

    If you are endorsing the B10 approach, then both ECU and Marshall can be on our schedule, but Richmond can't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Femoyer Hokie View Post
    I don't think we should play anyone not in the 5 major conferences. No ECU, no Marshall, no Richmond. They don't belong on an ACC schedule. Just like the Big 10 just announced. Is the goal here to have 7 home games every year or to improve the quality of our home schedule (and for the conference to improve its image)? I think the latter.

  7. #27
    Are we going to ODU because we have to, or because we want to "show the flag" in 757?

    Quote Originally Posted by Colonel Jessup View Post
    Many B1G schools with enormous stadiums can afford to pay Akron big $ to come to their stadium and not return to Akron. We cannot do that and decades worth of evidence back that up. Heck, we even have to go to ODU in a 2 for 1. I'd rather play a big school 1 for 1 and a FCS team 1 and 0.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    December 28, 1999
    Posts
    7,959
    You are right but a school who does that is essentially starting with a budget several million dollars less than a conference rival which does benefit from the millions earned from an extra home game. That is why FSU was so worried with their geographic peers earning much more money in tv revenue.

    Quote Originally Posted by Freddyburg Hokie View Post
    Why is that? With the explosive growth of revenue in college football, why are we still shackled to the same number of home games that we needed when revenue was smaller?

    I notice that several schools in the SEC say that they "need" seven home games each year. Why is that still the case?

    /baffled

  9. #29

    Join Date
    February 16, 2001
    Posts
    14,845
    You proved mine by never mentioning the Bowl Record and thinking academics is secondary. I never mentioned Olympic sports, but you attacked the ACC for being good at it...wow! The difference is that your definition completely ignores two of the biggest things to a conference, but keep you definition if it makes you feel better. However, many more think Bowl Records and Academics count in a conference...I am far from alone with this position.

    Quote Originally Posted by 133193Hokie View Post
    well - I guess you proved my point. Second tier conferences argue that they have better academics and higher standards just like second tier football programs (UVA for example) ;-)

    Seriously - I do think that the ACC has some positives with academics and Olympic sports being two of them. But to say that the ACC today (or for the last 5 years) is better or equal to the B1G and/or PAC is stretching it in my opinion. Can the ACC get there someday - maybe. But it will be hard with all of the small private schools we have in the conference.

  10. #30
    Femoyer Hokie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 20, 2003
    Location
    Glen Allen, VA
    Posts
    1,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Atlee Hokie View Post
    It's my understanding that the B10 announced no FCS teams on their schedules. They did not preclude playing MAC schools who are FBS schools, albeit 2nd level FBS schools.

    If you are endorsing the B10 approach, then both ECU and Marshall can be on our schedule, but Richmond can't.
    Sorry Atlee, you are probably correct but I stand by the Big five conferences only approach. And that is what I think the ACC needs to do. As a conference. Until we do we will never improve as a conference and we will never achieve the kind of TV revenue that the other conferences enjoy. Maybe someday the moons will align just right and FSU, Clemson, Miami and maybe VT will all be good at the same time but most every year the ACC has way more than its share of less attractive match ups. We don't need more just so everyone can have seven home games every year. TV already has a hard enough time finding attractive ACC games each week as it is. And our home schedule will be pretty weak more often than not. I would even rather play the Vanderbilts, Kentuckys, Northwesterns, Maryland and Rutgers of the world than ECU or Marshall. We can do better as a conference. Status quo won't cut it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •