• 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 wants to change Championship Game Requirements- also 9 games?

An interesting tidbit near the end from Swofford was that one of the upcoming discussion items was "possible scheduling alignments with other conferences..."

I know the Big 10 and PAC 12 tried to work a deal recently to guarantee a number of inter-conference games each year that they could jointly sell to TV for the both the Big 10 and PAC 12 networks, but they could not work it out. Swofford may be talking about such a joint TV deal with either the SEC or (more likely) Big 12.
 
Milhouse said:
gt will whine? no way!
Click to expand...

Johnson wants out of his contract anyway and actually "put in" for the Wake job and wanted to interview. Who knows whether it was for leverage or he actually wanted the job?
 
ACC commissioner John Swofford said Friday he is in favor of conferences having "the autonomy" to determine how teams qualify for their league championship games, and should the NCAA decide this spring to lighten its restrictions, the ACC would consider a different format.

Under the current structure, the NCAA requires that each conference have an equal number of teams in each division, and every team must play each opponent in its own division. Swofford said the NCAA is likely to re-evaluate those rules this spring.

"A piece of legislation may affect what we ultimately do," Swofford said. "... If some of those requirements were removed, we may schedule a little differently during the regular season than we do now, but that's to be determined."

Swofford said scheduling is always a popular topic at league meetings. And with the recent expansion to 14 teams, conference officials have been looking at how often conference teams play each other outside their divisions.

If the NCAA lifted its title-game requirements, Swofford said the ACC would consider having the top two teams in the league play for the ACC championship, in addition to maintaining divisions, but not requiring teams to play every opponent in their division.

"If those requirements were lifted, it gives you much more flexibility in how you schedule," Swofford said. "I'm a proponent of the conferences having the autonomy to determine how they do those things."

ACC officials will meet later this month and will also continue to discuss whether the league will play eight or nine conference games, along with possible scheduling alignments with other conferences, but Swofford said that nothing would change for the 2014 season.

"Any change to that, if it were to come, would be after the 2014 season," Swofford said.

The ACC championship game's partnership with the city of Charlotte, N.C., came to an end this season, but Swofford said the conference has been "very pleased" with the location, and the ACC is in "ongoing discussions" with Charlotte about the future.
 
Sounds like he favors some sort of pod system. Only makes sense with divisions getting bigger. I wonder if the SEC will make changes too.
 
I think it's already been said, but if you're not going to play all division teams every year and the CG won't be between the two division winners necessarily, why have divisions at all? They would serve absolutely no purpose. If that is the case I'd be in favor of eliminating the divisions and perhaps designating 3-4 "rivals" that you play every year. We all know who we'd want as our rivals.
 
How about this, have 5 permanent rivals - 14 teams, 9 games, that leaves 8 other teams that you get to play every other year. You could even have 5 permanent rivals set for 4 year time periods, then adjust the rivals every 4 years to include some sort of competitive balance adjustment or just rival rotation.

From 2015-2018, you play 5 teams 4 times, and the other teams you play twice to at least get a Home/Home.

Start out with something like this for the first 4 year cycle, then announce the next one in 2017:

Wake - Duke, UNC, NCSU, FSU, VT
Duke - UNC, NCSU, Wake, Clemson, GT
NC State - Wake, Duke, UNC, Clemson, BC
UNC - Wake, Duke, NCSU, FSU, UVA
Clemson - GT, NCSU, Duke, FSU, Syracuse
GT - Clemson, VT, Duke, UVA, Syracuse
FSU - Miami, Wake, UNC, Lousville, Clemson
Miami - FSU, VT, BC, Syracuse, Pitt
VT - UVA, Miami, Louisville, GT, Wake
Virginia - VT, Louisville, UNC, GT, Pitt
Louisville - FSU, VT, UVA, Pitt, BC
BC - Pitt, Syracuse, Miami, Louisville, NCSU
Syracuse - BC, Pitt, Miami, Clemson, GT
Pitt - Syracuse, BC, Miami, Louisville, UVA
 
http://espn.go.com/blog/acc/post/_/...acc?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Wake Forest University President Nathan Hatch, who is also the chairman of the NCAA's Division I board of directors, told ESPN.com on Wednesday that he thinks the ACC has a good shot at being granted the full autonomy over its championship game that it has formally requested -- but that the legislation hasn't actually gotten in front of the 18-member board yet.

Under the current NCAA rules, conferences must have two divisions in order to host a championship game, and every team within the division must play each other. The ACC has requested freedom to explore other options.

“That will be taken up, but it hasn’t really come to the board yet,” Hatch said. "I would expect that would go through, because the origin of that was from a time when conferences weren’t as large."
 
I wish Hatch and Wellman would take a break from running the NCAA to tend to the Wake basketball program.
 
I am for anything that keeps Wake in the ACC and allows us to play the other Big 4 schools every year. Don't care about the rest of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top