Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 40
  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by BUGGZY View Post
    possibly, but even the MAC still only invites the division champs to the CCG...
    True, but both divisions do not play a round robin division schedule (hence the loophole). (From Swofford's viewpoint) If the MAC does not have to follow the NCAA bylaws, then why should the ACC? What does that say about the bylaws when the NCAA does not even enforce its own rules?

  2. #12
    BUGGZY's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 15, 2002
    Location
    Annandale, VA
    Posts
    13,709
    Quote Originally Posted by VTHokie2000 View Post
    True, but both divisions do not play a round robin division schedule (hence the loophole). (From Swofford's viewpoint) If the MAC does not have to follow the NCAA bylaws, then why should the ACC? What does that say about the bylaws when the NCAA does not even enforce its own rules?
    Maybe that is his strategy: Aim high (to the point of being absurd) so when you do end up with 2 division champs (even with no round robin schedule) in the ACC CG still, it looks like a fair compromise...
    "This no more resembles that than something unlike something else resembles that." - Loosely quoting PHNC

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by BUGGZY View Post
    Maybe that is his strategy: Aim high (to the point of being absurd) so when you do end up with 2 division champs (even with no round robin schedule) in the ACC CG still, it looks like a fair compromise...
    Either that or he is playing a clever game of chicken with the NCAA. If the NCAA decides not to allow the ACC to get its way, then the NCAA will be forced to make the MAC comply which would mean that the MAC would either have to add a school (most likely a football-only member) or drop a school to get the membership back down to 12. Ultimately, I believe he banking on the NCAA caving into his demands or else risk the Power 5 walking. If conferences have more flexibility on who should participate in the CCG, then it could bring future conference musical chairs to a grinding halt. Also, it would mean that division requirements would be eliminated because the bylaw would contradict itself. If schools are no longer going to play a round robin division schedule, then there is no point for a conference to have 2 divisions. Instead it can simply take the 2 highest ranked schools and have them face off against each other.

    Another possibility is if the NCAA holds on to the notion that divisions must play a round robin schedule, then that could open up the door for the ACC to push to have the bylaws re-written so that a conference could have more than 2 divisions (essentially add an extra round to the CCG). If that happens, then you could see the ACC push to expand to 16 schools, so it could divide up into 4 divisions.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    January 01, 2005
    Location
    Blacksburg
    Posts
    4,404
    If divisions become meaningless and an ACC game is going to be played the first Saturday in December, let everybody in the conference play an ACC game the first saturday in December and the team with the best regular season record is crowned champion. That makes every ACC regular season game important, you'll never know when the conference championship is "on the line" in any given game.

    The hype of the conference championship game pitting the divisional champs no matter the overall regular season records is an idea I have disliked from the beginning (even when the Big12 or SEC started to play one). The 2nd time we play BC is more important than the first, a 6-3 record gets the trophy over a 7-2 record because of when a game is played, a 5-3 teams gets to play for the championship over a 6-2 team only because it's in the other division, the game played on the 1st Saturday is the most important ACC game of the season - only because the powers that be say it is.

    OK - carry on. I'm done.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    October 07, 1999
    Posts
    9,452
    Wonder if this change will be called The Duke Rule?
    Duke getting to go to the championship game made Swofford take action?
    Clemson ended up with a BCS bid anyway, so I don't see any harm done and FSU had already killed them in the regular season.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    October 02, 2005
    Posts
    193
    This idea is utterly stupid unless you just abolish the divisions like its done in basketball. Need an NCAA rule change to do it. We'll see if it happens. I just wonder if one could get around current rule by re-aligning divisions every year. I'd honestly rather see this: re-do divisions based on prior seasons ranking along the line of seeds moving teams necessary to create balanced divisions and putting 1 & 2 in separate divisions. continue to require all teams play everyone in division. Play 9 conference games fill rest of games based on best TV match ups and preservation of traditional rivalries. Having divisions when winning it means nothing and membership does not dictate schedule and help develop rivalries over time is pointless! Also, If this is such a great idea why doesn't the SEC want to do it the west has been dominate for them of late ALA,AUB,LSU,etc. ?

  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by vtox1 View Post
    This idea is utterly stupid unless you just abolish the divisions like its done in basketball. Need an NCAA rule change to do it. We'll see if it happens. I just wonder if one could get around current rule by re-aligning divisions every year. I'd honestly rather see this: re-do divisions based on prior seasons ranking along the line of seeds moving teams necessary to create balanced divisions and putting 1 & 2 in separate divisions. continue to require all teams play everyone in division. Play 9 conference games fill rest of games based on best TV match ups and preservation of traditional rivalries. Having divisions when winning it means nothing and membership does not dictate schedule and help develop rivalries over time is pointless! Also, If this is such a great idea why doesn't the SEC want to do it the west has been dominate for them of late ALA,AUB,LSU,etc. ?
    If you are going to realign the divisions, then it would probably have to be done every 2 years in order to ensures every team gets to play an opponent home and away before making any changes. Otherwise you end up running the risk of playing an opponent home or away multiple times over a period of time (depending on how the changes shake out). I am not sure many Hokie fans would enjoy seeing VT play at Miami 4 times in a row (within a 6 year period) because that is how the conference schedule shook out.

  8. #18
    Senior Member NCHokie83's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 02, 2012
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    1,857
    Quote Originally Posted by VTHokie2000 View Post
    If you are going to realign the divisions, then it would probably have to be done every 2 years in order to ensures every team gets to play an opponent home and away before making any changes. Otherwise you end up running the risk of playing an opponent home or away multiple times over a period of time (depending on how the changes shake out). I am not sure many Hokie fans would enjoy seeing VT play at Miami 4 times in a row (within a 6 year period) because that is how the conference schedule shook out.
    The radio guys in Raleigh have been beating the drum HARD year after year that the ACC needs to make sure the best programs play each other every single season. They want an annual round robin between FSU, Miami, Clemson, and VT, and they want the ACC to ensure it happens every year because of the HUGE games it will create throughout the seasons.

    There might actually be something to that. The SEC didn't get great because they were scheduling to make sure their best teams avoided competition. I mean think about it. You allow all 4 of those schools relatively easy including tough but winnable OOC games, early on, a relatively easy conference slate for them all leading up to the last month of the season where you see all 4 go head to head. Whoever comes out on top has an incredibly inflated ranking, and if you play it right, all will be ranked high going into that stretch, so nobody should fall THAT far with the losses.
    "I love it when you guys try to write off a Frank Beamer team -- no one is going to win this conference without Virginia Tech having some sort of say in it." - David Cutcliffe

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by NCHokie83 View Post
    The radio guys in Raleigh have been beating the drum HARD year after year that the ACC needs to make sure the best programs play each other every single season. They want an annual round robin between FSU, Miami, Clemson, and VT, and they want the ACC to ensure it happens every year because of the HUGE games it will create throughout the seasons.

    There might actually be something to that. The SEC didn't get great because they were scheduling to make sure their best teams avoided competition. I mean think about it. You allow all 4 of those schools relatively easy including tough but winnable OOC games, early on, a relatively easy conference slate for them all leading up to the last month of the season where you see all 4 go head to head. Whoever comes out on top has an incredibly inflated ranking, and if you play it right, all will be ranked high going into that stretch, so nobody should fall THAT far with the losses.
    I understand that fans and outsiders (of the athletic programs) want to see it. I don't disagree with it because it does make for exciting football. However, most people in that group don't always think about the logisitcal impact of it. For example, in order to ensure that VT and FSU maintain a balanced home-away rotation (since neither school would always want to play on the road), then VT would have to give up its home game against UVA. Do you believe that most Hokie fans would be willing to give up 4 home games against UVA in order so VT can play FSU at home 4 times (meaning VT ends up playing 8 games at UVA during that time period)? Or better yet, do you believe that most Hokie fans would be willing to go a few years without playing UVA so it could play FSU? What about if those 4 games ended up being 1 home game and 3 away games, then would it be worth it not to play UVA for 4 years? If it ended up being 0 home games and 4 away games, then would it still be worth it to Hokie fans?

  10. #20

    Join Date
    September 09, 2003
    Location
    Leesburg, VA
    Posts
    944
    Quote Originally Posted by VTHokie2000 View Post
    do you believe that most Hokie fans would be willing to go a few years without playing UVA so it could play FSU?
    I can't speak for any Hokie fan other than myself but I'd damned sure give up UVA if it got us F$U -- assuming an even split home/away, that is.
    "For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

    --Leonardo da Vinci

Posting Permissions

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