Page 3 of 15 FirstFirst 12345678913 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 141
  1. #21

    Join Date
    March 18, 2004
    Posts
    248
    Quote Originally Posted by Edgeman View Post
    Not me! I'm not OK with VT joining "the new Big Least" division either. The only, and I mean only way I would be OK with that move is if ND joined in football and became part of that northern division...heck, give us UNC since they are UNC's "main" rival.


    Agree 100%. Put UVA and Duke in the North since half of their students come from there anyway.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    June 05, 2003
    Posts
    273
    Quote Originally Posted by Old Line Hokie View Post
    If Notre Dame would join as a full member, a North Division would be more attractive, but I am in the majority who would hate to see Tech back in the Big East (aka North) with BC, Pitt, Cuse, L'ville, UVa, and possibly Wake. I hope it's a simple switch with Louisville and GT or Tech gets in the same division with Clemson and few other "attractive" annual opponents. I'd like to play Clemson and Miami every year.
    The ACC needs to get to 16 and the 4 POD scheduling. Two divisions of 7 playing 8 games means long periods between games with the opposite division. The 4 POD scheduling allows for much more frequent rotation. As for Virginia, we need to play Virginia Tech and North Carolina every year. The rest can be changed to whatever configuration works best for the league.

  3. #23
    Edgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach
    Posts
    49,228
    Quote Originally Posted by HOO86 View Post
    The ACC needs to get to 16 and the 4 POD scheduling. Two divisions of 7 playing 8 games means long periods between games with the opposite division. The 4 POD scheduling allows for much more frequent rotation. As for Virginia, we need to play Virginia Tech and North Carolina every year. The rest can be changed to whatever configuration works best for the league.
    I'm OK with the pod approach as long as we're not stuck in a pod with all "old Big Least" teams. We joined the ACC to get away from that bunch...lol
    "You start a conversation you can't even finish it
    You're talkin' a lot, but you're not sayin' anything
    When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed
    Say something once, why say it again?"
    - David Byrne

  4. #24
    Hokie CPA's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 28, 1999
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA
    Posts
    61,763
    Quote Originally Posted by Edgeman View Post
    I'm OK with the pod approach as long as we're not stuck in a pod with all "old Big Least" teams. We joined the ACC to get away from that bunch...lol
    We already play UVa, Miami, Boston College and Pittsburg(h) every year. That's 1/3 of our schedule that looks an awful lot like our schedules from back in the Big East days. If we trade in Georgia Tech, North Carolina and Duke for Louisville, Syracuse and Wake Forest, then the only old Big East team we're adding is Syracuse. Loserville is an upgrade to our schedule and an instant rivalry ready to be renewed. PLUS, we STILL get to play Notre Dame every three years. So why is that so bad?
    *.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*. *.*.*.*.*.*

    I just wish we would STOP with the zone blocking read option crap and line up in the I, put a hat on a hat and run the tailback behind the fullback through a designated gosh-danged hole. There is NO REASON why this program shouldn't be able to find 5 fat guys who can move some people out of the way and clear a lane for a back to get through!

  5. #25
    Edgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach
    Posts
    49,228
    Quote Originally Posted by Hokie CPA View Post
    We already play UVa, Miami, Boston College and Pittsburg(h) every year. That's 1/3 of our schedule that looks an awful lot like our schedules from back in the Big East days. If we trade in Georgia Tech, North Carolina and Duke for Louisville, Syracuse and Wake Forest, then the only old Big East team we're adding is Syracuse. Loserville is an upgrade to our schedule and an instant rivalry ready to be renewed. PLUS, we STILL get to play Notre Dame every three years. So why is that so bad?
    I don't want to get rid of the rest of our "old ACC" foes & replace them with all Big Least teams. Don't mind taking our share with half, but I definitely don't want to reorganize in that manner. It's nice being able to drive to the majority of our Coastal opponents, but stick us with all Big Least? No freaking way!

    BTW, I'm also darn happy we don't have to travel to that darn Jiffy Pop Dome on our darn schedule every other darn year!!!!!
    "You start a conversation you can't even finish it
    You're talkin' a lot, but you're not sayin' anything
    When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed
    Say something once, why say it again?"
    - David Byrne

  6. #26
    Hokie CPA's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 28, 1999
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA
    Posts
    61,763
    Quote Originally Posted by Edgeman View Post
    I don't want to get rid of the rest of our "old ACC" foes & replace them with all Big Least teams. Don't mind taking our share with half, but I definitely don't want to reorganize in that manner. It's nice being able to drive to the majority of our Coastal opponents, but stick us with all Big Least? No freaking way!

    BTW, I'm also darn happy we don't have to travel to that darn Jiffy Pop Dome on our darn schedule every other darn year!!!!!
    I don't disagree with you. And I did preface that the solution making the most sense would not be popular around here. I'm just pointing out that the only Big East Team that would be rejoining our schedule is Syracuse. We've never been in a football league with Loserville (but we have a basketball history with them from back in the day) and we hardly ever play Wake Forest. So in actuality, there wouldn't be too much different from our annual schedule today vs. our annual schedule in the ACC North. We'd add an annual game against the Cuse. That's pretty much it.
    *.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*. *.*.*.*.*.*

    I just wish we would STOP with the zone blocking read option crap and line up in the I, put a hat on a hat and run the tailback behind the fullback through a designated gosh-danged hole. There is NO REASON why this program shouldn't be able to find 5 fat guys who can move some people out of the way and clear a lane for a back to get through!

  7. #27

    Join Date
    September 23, 2002
    Posts
    17,570
    Quote Originally Posted by HOO86 View Post
    The ACC needs to get to 16 and the 4 POD scheduling. Two divisions of 7 playing 8 games means long periods between games with the opposite division. The 4 POD scheduling allows for much more frequent rotation. As for Virginia, we need to play Virginia Tech and North Carolina every year. The rest can be changed to whatever configuration works best for the league.
    Yes, my goodness, this is exactly what it needs to be as soon as possible. Scheduling becomes trivially obvious with the 4 pods of 4 thing. We've got to get ND on board with this.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    November 18, 1999
    Posts
    6,383
    Quote Originally Posted by BUGGZY View Post
    if we ended up in the north but with a great crossover rival (Clemson or FSU), would that be better than what we have now?

    North / South:
    BC / Miami
    'Cuse / NCSU
    Pitt / GT
    L'ville / FSU
    uva / UNC
    VT / Clemson
    Wake / Dook

    for VT annually:

    Today / N-S split
    uva / uva
    Pitt / Pitt
    BC / BC
    UNC / L'ville
    Dook / Wake
    GT / 'Cuse
    Miami / Clemson

    worst case, we keep Miami as our crossover instead of Clemson, so we replace UNC, dook, and GT with L'ville, Wake and 'Cuse...no big deal IMHO. no better, no worse.
    Playing Syracuse, Pitt and BC each year would be an abomination that would hurt recruiting.

  9. #29
    BUGGZY's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 15, 2002
    Location
    Annandale, VA
    Posts
    13,709
    Quote Originally Posted by dallasvt View Post
    Playing Syracuse, Pitt and BC each year would be an abomination that would hurt recruiting.
    you do realize we already play 2 of those 3 every year, right? do you think recruits would really care if we replaced dook with Syracuse?
    "This no more resembles that than something unlike something else resembles that." - Loosely quoting PHNC

  10. #30

    Join Date
    November 18, 1999
    Posts
    6,383
    Quote Originally Posted by BUGGZY View Post
    you do realize we already play 2 of those 3 every year, right? do you think recruits would really care if we replaced dook with Syracuse?
    Oh really, I had no idea (sarcasm).

    That is bad enough. No need to make it worse. Playing Syracuse and BC does nothing for Tech. The ACC has saddled Tech with BC for too long. Tech does not need to go to the Carrier Dome every other year. No thanks.

    North/South divisions are not a good idea for Tech in my opinion. Tech needs to fight for itself as much as possible on this.

Posting Permissions

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