Did you join to play Washington, USC and UCLA?
To not play UM, OSU and PSU?
Seems many people are relived we aren't playing "geographic" schools anymore.
This might be the first post wanting to play UM, OSU and PSU more often?
OT: ACC says "Let's make a Deal"
- Thread starter jaydogsmooth1
- Start date
Did you join to play Washington, USC and UCLA?
To not play UM, OSU and PSU?
Seems many people are relived we aren't playing "geographic" schools anymore.
This might be the first post wanting to play UM, OSU and PSU more often?
I like pods, good for rivalries, almost a mini regional conference, easier travel for U and students. Your meme is bad, should delete.You two just made my list…
UVa isn’t high on anyone’s list. SEC adding FSU would add rivalries. FSU/Bama, FSU/GA, FSU/LSU, etc. Games ppl wanna watch regardless of what market they’re in. Your way of thinking is outdated. You think the Big 10 or SEC gives a shit about the central Va market? What compelling rivalries does UVa add? Oh everyone’s tuning in for the big MD/UVa game. Lol
Zipper gets you playing all schools sooner.
I wish is was just 12 but I know that ship has sailed. So whatever the number is I’d rather play more (and all) than less.
One protected (fine with that being Maryland for us) and the rest on the rotational sequence.
Do you want to see every team have 1 or 2 rivalry games every year? I cannot imagine the B1G does away with Ohio State Michigan as a yearly game. I also wonder if the pressure to keep Michigan State Michigan as in state rivals could cause a 2-team yearly game(s).
Zipper meaning home/away in back to back years?
For example, USC home 2024 then USC away 2025?
If you want to truly rotate and play everyone than you can't do that. Just slows down the whole process.
I would have agreed with you before the west coast teams were added. The geography fit was thrown out the window. All about who brings the most $$$ now no matter where they are.
The zipper is a sliding 9 game B1G schedule that changes every year…
Someone(s) is added, someone(s) drops off.
Depending on what 9 teams you start with determines how it goes forward.
I would prefer a 10 game one (5H/5A) and 2 OOC. But that’s not my decision.
The more we add though the more difficult it becomes. Meaning it just takes a little longer to get through everyone.
I had it all broken down on here a while ago that laid the whole thing out.
It’s not necessarily back to back every season either.
Last edited:
I’d be fine with 1 protected game if it makes it easier to get thru the whole lineup.
But I don’t make that call.🤷♂️
Five team pods? I don't see it. Who gets screwed as the 5th team with the Pac 10 refugees and forced to travel west 2x every season? As I pointed out a couple weeks ago, Nebraska is closer to Rutgers than they are to any of the Pax schools.
FSU travel partner with UNC? Uhhh... Tallahassee is a 583 mile drive from Chapel Hill. That's not a travel partner. GT is far closer but that would surprise me.
Notre Dame would still clearly be the crown jewel of any expansion. Nobody would come close to drawing their ratings. Keep the SC rivalry going, plus Michigan, Purdue, Michigan State... America's favorite and most hated team in one.
FSU travel partner with UNC? Uhhh... Tallahassee is a 583 mile drive from Chapel Hill. That's not a travel partner. GT is far closer but that would surprise me.
Notre Dame would still clearly be the crown jewel of any expansion. Nobody would come close to drawing their ratings. Keep the SC rivalry going, plus Michigan, Purdue, Michigan State... America's favorite and most hated team in one.
The problem with Notre Dame is that they are only joining a conference if they don’t have a viable alternative, and the ACC hybrid arrangement is more than viable right now.
If the playoff has at least 3-4 at large spots and the ACC has enough teams left to be a conference (even if it is a weak one) they are aren’t leaving.
I don’t see them trying to accompany FSU or UNC to the SEC or B1G. They would only consider a conference if the ACC completely blows up.
not sure if they are.
ND is the only independent playing a schedule hard enough to get into the top 20. Under yesterday's plan, they will never get a first round bye (since they won't be a conference champion). they will usually be in the hunt for an at-large spot ESPECIALLY if they play more Big 10 teams (and pass on BC-Wake-Syracuse-Ga Tech as part of the ACC commitment).
Swarbrick was part of the group that came up with the 12 team plan a handful of years ago. So they're fine with the 12 team plan and never getting a bye.
12 teams is only set for the next 2 years. Beyond that, it's up in the air.
The potential problem for ND is the B10/SEC want more autobids. There's a real look at going beyond 12 to 14 or 16. I've seen CFB media mentioning 4 auto bids each as being discussed. So say it's a 16 team CFP. The B10 gets 4, the SEC gets 4. To placate and get some buy in from the ACC/B12 say they get 2 each. Then 1 more for the G5. That's 13 auto bids out of 16 and only 3 at-larges. This is just a hypothetical but you can see how that can be tight squeeze for ND as an independent.
Add FSU and one more team and then go to two divisions. The original B10 and the new B10. This will make the fans of Purdue and NW happy who never wanted us in the conference as they can go back to getting beat up by their "traditional rivals" and rid themselves of the burden of having to play us newcomers.
This could be the best idea I have heard regarding “divisions”. Love it. And it’s fairly balanced.
It’s also pretty close to the inner vs. outer idea discussed by the B1G prior to the newest additions.
