ACC looking to drastically change how 2 teams get invited to Charlotte

[NCHokie83]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoot...acc-title-game

Kind of hard to get my mind wrapped around this one, but I'll try.

• Divisions will remain in place
• No requirement to play all division opponents in a given year
• 2 teams with best records in ACC play get invited to Charlotte
• Winning Division would essentially be a meaningless accomplishment

Had this been in place since Expansion, the ACC Championship Game would have been amended as follows:

2005 - Virginia Tech vs Miami -- Florida State excluded
2006 - Wake Forest vs Georgia Tech
2007 - Virginia Tech vs Boston College -- BC gets tiebreaker over UVa based on overall record
2008 - Virginia Tech vs GT/FSU/BC -- Unsure how 3 way tiebreaker would have worked.
2009 - Virginia Tech vs Georgia Tech -- VT gets tiebreaker over Clemson based on overall record
2010 - Virginia Tech vs Florida State
2011 - Virginia Tech vs Clemson
2012 - Florida State vs Clemson -- Georgia Tech excluded
2013 - Florida State vs Clemson -- Duke excluded

[BUGGZY]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoot...acc-title-game

Kind of hard to get my mind wrapped around this one, but I'll try.

• Divisions will remain in place
• No requirement to play all division opponents in a given year
• 2 teams with best records in ACC play get invited to Charlotte
• Winning Division would essentially be a meaningless accomplishment

Had this been in place since Expansion, the ACC Championship Game would have been amended as follows:

2005 - Virginia Tech vs Miami -- Florida State excluded
2006 - Wake Forest vs Georgia Tech
2007 - Virginia Tech vs Boston College -- BC gets tiebreaker over UVa based on overall record
2008 - Virginia Tech vs GT/FSU/BC -- Unsure how 3 way tiebreaker would have worked.
2009 - Virginia Tech vs Georgia Tech -- VT gets tiebreaker over Clemson based on overall record
2010 - Virginia Tech vs Florida State
2011 - Virginia Tech vs Clemson
2012 - Florida State vs Clemson -- Georgia Tech excluded
2013 - Florida State vs Clemson -- Duke excluded

i know they are toying with change, which is fine, but why in the world would you keep the facade of divisions if they have NOTHING to do with scheduling or making it to the ACCCG? keeping them would be more confusing than dumping them unless there is another element we're missing...

[HokieJamie]

If you're not going to determine the 2 teams based on division then just scrap the division concept completely and re-do the schedules so that we rotate through the other schools more then once every 9 years or whatever crazy number it is.

[JoesterVT]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoot...acc-title-game

Kind of hard to get my mind wrapped around this one, but I'll try.

• Divisions will remain in place
• No requirement to play all division opponents in a given year
• 2 teams with best records in ACC play get invited to Charlotte
• Winning Division would essentially be a meaningless accomplishment

Had this been in place since Expansion, the ACC Championship Game would have been amended as follows:

2005 - Virginia Tech vs Miami -- Florida State excluded
2006 - Wake Forest vs Georgia Tech
2007 - Virginia Tech vs Boston College -- BC gets tiebreaker over UVa based on overall record
2008 - Virginia Tech vs GT/FSU/BC -- Unsure how 3 way tiebreaker would have worked.
2009 - Virginia Tech vs Georgia Tech -- VT gets tiebreaker over Clemson based on overall record
2010 - Virginia Tech vs Florida State
2011 - Virginia Tech vs Clemson
2012 - Florida State vs Clemson -- Georgia Tech excluded
2013 - Florida State vs Clemson -- Duke excluded

The idea is so fraught with problems, I don't see how it could ever be implemented as stated.

[hoosnowahokie]

If you're not going to determine the 2 teams based on division then just scrap the division concept completely and re-do the schedules so that we rotate through the other schools more then once every 9 years or whatever crazy number it is.

Don't you have to have two divisions to hold a conference title game? I believe it's an NCAA rule that goes with having to have 12 teams to have a conference title game. That's why they would keep the divisions, but not care who plays who.

I can't find anything searching around for this though.

[HokieJamie]

Yes you do but I thought I had read somewhere that Swofford (and other conferences) want them to get rid of that rule.

[BUGGZY]

Don't you have to have two divisions to hold a conference title game? I believe it's an NCAA rule that goes with having to have 12 teams to have a conference title game. That's why they would keep the divisions, but not care who plays who.

I can't find anything searching around for this though.

yes, but that rule also states that you must play a full round robin within your division and that only division winners can play in the CCG. The ACC is going to petition for more autonomy and essentially an elimination of all of those rules, so the question remains, why have divisions if they won't mean ANYTHING?

[VTHokie2000]

yes, but that rule also states that you must play a full round robin within your division and that only division winners can play in the CCG. The ACC is going to petition for more autonomy and essentially an elimination of all of those rules, so the question remains, why have divisions if they won't mean ANYTHING?

Maybe the ACC is trying to use the "MAC" loophole to bring about this desired change. If that is the case, then the NCAA has kinda painted itself in a corner.

[48zip]

Yes you do but I thought I had read somewhere that Swofford (and other conferences) want them to get rid of that rule.

haha. That "somewhere" is the link in the OP.

[BUGGZY]

Maybe the ACC is trying to use the "MAC" loophole to bring about this desired change. If that is the case, then the NCAA has kinda painted itself in a corner.

possibly, but even the MAC still only invites the division champs to the CCG...