• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

ACC Considering Eliminating Divisions In Football

Pilchard said:
OK, I understand the theory. Clemson carries the banner for the ACC in football. They draw the numbers; so, they will want a bigger piece of the pie.

If they don't get it, they go the SEC?

Yes, that would suck (and that would likely lead for the ACC to crater), but that also might suck for Clemson, despite their cut of the "billions". OTOH, they could go to the Big 10. So, Clemson is going to play Minnesota and Purdue every year? Not denying the increasing chatter that the ACC is eventually going to get swallowed up, and WF will likely be among the schools kicked to the curb, but be careful what you wish for. Clemson (and FSU when they were good) has a pretty sweet deal right now as they will never be in a situation with a more frequent path to the elite level of college football.
Click to expand...

the argument is that if you believe Hale's numbers, Clemson will have a revenue deficit of almost $50 million per year to the SEC and B1G schools.

Over the past 20 years or so the Michigan States, Penn States, Auburns, Tennessees, etc., have underachieved, but it is hard to perennially underachieve when you start each year with a $50 million advantage. So eventually, with that continual revenue deficit, Clemson will no longer have an easy path to the elite level.
 
Pilchard said:
OK, I understand the theory. Clemson carries the banner for the ACC in football. They draw the numbers; so, they will want a bigger piece of the pie.

If they don't get it, they go the SEC?

Yes, that would suck (and that would likely lead for the ACC to crater), but that also might suck for Clemson, despite their cut of the "billions". OTOH, they could go to the Big 10. So, Clemson is going to play Minnesota and Purdue every year? Not denying the increasing chatter that the ACC is eventually going to get swallowed up, and WF will likely be among the schools kicked to the curb, but be careful what you wish for. Clemson (and FSU when they were good) has a pretty sweet deal right now as they will never be in a situation with a more frequent path to the elite level of college football.
Click to expand...

That may be true but it also seems that you argue that the ACC is stronger than it’s given credit for. Or maybe I’m mistaken
 
Yes, I get the money drives everything theory.

The counterpoint is that if Clemson's (or FSU's or Miami's) move is to leave the ACC for the SEC or Big 10 they also lose their easy path to the elite level.

There's no arguing that the SEC is the dominant football conference. OTOH, think there is a valid argument that despite their revenues the Big 10 is not the #2 football conference, and the ACC has outperformed the Big 10 at the CFP level.
 
Last edited:
Pilchard said:
Yes, I get the money drives everything theory.

The counterpoint is that if Clemson's (or FSU's or Miami's) move is to leave the ACC for the SEC or Big 10 they also lose their easy path to the elite level.

There's no arguing that the SEC is the dominant football conference. OTOH, think there is a valid argument that despite their revenues the Big 10 is not the #2 football conference, and the ACC has outperformed the Big 10 at the CFP level.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but I guess part of Hale's argument is the ACC has outformed the Big Ten because of Clemson and it will be harder for Clemson to do that.

I don't really buy that Clemson is the only program who can compete with the Big Ten, but the ACC and Big XII have been ahead of the Pac-12 because they've had consistent Top 10 programs. I'm also question the extent to which money = wins in conferences where every program has money and wins are generally normally distributed.
 
Pilchard said:
Yes, I get the money drives everything theory.

The counterpoint is that if Clemson's (or FSU's or Miami's) move is to leave the ACC for the SEC or Big 10 they also lose their easy path to the elite level.

There's no arguing that the SEC is the dominant football conference. OTOH, think there is a valid argument that despite their revenues the Big 10 is not the #2 football conference, and the ACC has outperformed the Big 10 at the CFP level.
Click to expand...

When you say the ACC has outperformed the B1G at the CFP level all you're saying is that Clemson has performed well in the playoff. Clemson winning games and championships in the playoff doesn't make the ACC a good football conference.

tOSU (2-3) and Clemson (6-4) are the only teams from either conference to win a single game (Mich St, Mich, FSU, and ND(2021) are all 0-1). And clearly Clemson has had an easier path to the CFP than any B1G team over the past eight seasons.

Eventually the playoff is going to change and more teams will have access.
 
BiffTannen said:
When you say the ACC has outperformed the B1G at the CFP level all you're saying is that Clemson has performed well in the playoff. Clemson winning games and championships in the playoff doesn't make the ACC a good football conference.

tOSU (2-3) and Clemson (6-4) are the only teams from either conference to win a single game (Mich St, Mich, FSU, and ND(2021) are all 0-1). And clearly Clemson has had an easier path to the CFP than any B1G team over the past eight seasons.

Eventually the playoff is going to change and more teams will have access.
Click to expand...

Serious question: what is your data that Clemson has an either path to the CFP than a Big 10 team? Rankings? Because, if so, that’s just the same narrative BS that the SEC lives off of.
 
You mean the same SEC that has had three different teams win the CFP in the past three years ?

But sure, I would give the CFP Rankings credence. No other ACC teams have even been in the conversation come selection day, save ND last year and FSU seven years ago.
 
PhDeac said:
The Athletic proposes their rivalry set up.

https://theathletic.com/3309051/2022/05/13/acc-football-schedule-college-football/

Each beat writer goes into detail about their logic. All three said the hardest game to leave on the cutting room floor was Wake-UNC.

Andy Bitter — Virginia Tech beat writer - Wake Forest: Duke, NC State, Louisville

Manny Navarro — Miami beat writer - Wake Forest: NC State, Duke, Clemson

Grace Raynor — Clemson beat writer - Wake Forest: NC State, Duke, Georgia Tech


If we can't get UNC (which I doubt we will), I'd prefer to have Virginia, Georgia Tech, or Virginia Tech as the 3rd rival.
Click to expand...

I'd go for that. And still schedule UNC out of conference then.
 
Deacon92 said:
I'd go for that. And still schedule UNC out of conference then.
Click to expand...

We'd still play UNC every other year or two years on and two years off, so I don't know if we'd still schedule them out of conference. We'll still have ND reguarly and other P5 games like Ole Miss coming up.
 
Got the feeling that the ACC wasn't jazzed about WF and UNC playing on OOC games. Not sure why as ESPN picked up the game at WF for Friday night prime time, and the ABC televised the game at UNC in the money 3:30 time slot Both games were entertaining and created buzz.
 
The ACC looked bad because everyone else was confused as to why Wake-UNC wasn't an ACC game and didn't count as an ACC loss for Wake in the standings which actually impacted the CFP because Wake remained undefeated in conference. The ACC isn't used to anybody except Clemson having a national profile. The ACC looked like a joke who wasn't doing right by member schools. The ACC didn't have to split up the NC schools when they did divisions. They could have kept all of UNC's traditional rivalries in one division. But they didn't. Back when divisions were announced, we said that they could have just put the Big Four, Virginia, Clemson, and Tech or Maryland in one division and the rest in the other.

The Athletic writers seem to think two high profile exciting competitive games between UNC and Wake prompted this change. But they also don't think Wake and UNC will be every year rivals.
 
Last edited:
BiffTannen said:
You mean the same SEC that has had three different teams win the CFP in the past three years ?

But sure, I would give the CFP Rankings credence. No other ACC teams have even been in the conversation come selection day, save ND last year and FSU seven years ago.
Click to expand...


Yep and the same SEC that has won 14 of the last 24 national titles going back to Tennessee’s 1998 title. And I believe that is by 6 different teams—UT, LSU, Florida, Auburn, Alabama & UGa. ACC has 4 in that same time frame, two each by FSU & Clemson. A $50 million difference in income differential is not going to help even Clemson keep up over time.
 
TheReff said:
Yep and the same SEC that has won 14 of the last 24 national titles going back to Tennessee’s 1998 title. And I believe that is by 6 different teams—UT, LSU, Florida, Auburn, Alabama & UGa. ACC has 4 in that same time frame, two each by FSU & Clemson. A $50 million difference in income differential is not going to help even Clemson keep up over time.
Click to expand...
There isn't a $50 Million income differential.
 
macktheknife said:
There isn't a $50 Million income differential.
Click to expand...

Per the new article there is going to be by mid-2020’s. Would recommend reading it. When SEC adds both Texas & OK, their 3:30 game of the week, revenue alone, will be just about what ESPN pays the ACC for all of our sports combined on their family of networks. (Contract with SEC starting in 2024 is worth a whopping $3 billion)
 
TheReff said:
Per the new article there is going to be by mid-2020’s. Would recommend reading it. When SEC adds both Texas & OK, their 3:30 game of the week, revenue alone, will be just about what ESPN pays the ACC for all of our sports combined on their family of networks. (Contract with SEC starting in 2024 is worth a whopping $3 billion)
Click to expand...

Well they can’t spend it on the athletes so how many water slides is enough.
 
So the ACC is eliminating divisions because in part bc UNC and Wake were scheduling each other as non-conference games - these were good close games that filled seats and got on TV. But they are not going to make UNC-Wake a rivalry? WTF :noidea::dumb::confused: The Wake and UNC AD's should threaten to continue non-conference games with each other for the years we do not naturally play.

I think the two schools have already demonstrated that they are rivals. Let UNC-UVa play every second or third year. See if they are clamoring for the game bad enough to schedule each other non-conference.
 
awaken said:
So the ACC is eliminating divisions because in part bc UNC and Wake were scheduling each other as non-conference games - these were good close games that filled seats and got on TV. But they are not going to make UNC-Wake a rivalry? WTF :noidea::dumb::confused: The Wake and UNC AD's should threaten to continue non-conference games with each other for the years we do not naturally play.

I think the two schools have already demonstrated that they are rivals. Let UNC-UVa play every second or third year. See if they are clamoring for the game bad enough to schedule each other non-conference.
Click to expand...

Good point-the analysis in the Athletic article is a bit comical. My guess is that the big programs get to pick their partners first. I think State and Duke are likely matches for us. If we don’t get UNC as a third, I can probably talk myself into any of our current division rivals (save Syracuse).
 
The Mountain West is getting rid of their divisions next year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top