FC/OT: ACC looking to eliminate divisions…

[Midnighter]

This would be a good move for the B1G IMO…

ACC inching closer to eliminating divisions, introducing new schedule rotation

The ACC is discussing the possibility of eliminating divisions and introducing a new scheduling format as soon as the 2023 football season.

247sports.com

 

[BobPSU92]

#bringbackleadersandlegends

 

[WVilleLion]

This would be a good move for the B1G IMO…

ACC inching closer to eliminating divisions, introducing new schedule rotation

The ACC is discussing the possibility of eliminating divisions and introducing a new scheduling format as soon as the 2023 football season.

247sports.com

Agree. Most years would be two teams from the East.

 

[Got GSPs]

This would be a good move for the B1G IMO…

ACC inching closer to eliminating divisions, introducing new schedule rotation

The ACC is discussing the possibility of eliminating divisions and introducing a new scheduling format as soon as the 2023 football season.

247sports.com

Makes total sense for the big ten, it will be 13 teams seeing who will play tOSU for the conference championship. It gives Penn State, Michigan, and MSU a chance to play in that game.

 

[FrontierLion]

A Case Against all Divisional Play in Sports:
Exhibit 1: 2015 Major League Baseball - Pittsburgh Pirates finish with 98 wins, second-highest win total in all of MLB. The only problem? Division rival St Louis Cardinals finish with the highest win total in all of MLB. Pirates go on to play in the one-game wildcard and, you know the old song-and-dance, promptly lose to end their season.

If not for "Divisions," oh what could have been.

 

[JakkL]

If the playoffs expand then i think dropping divisions is a bad idea. With divisions itll be easier to get a 2nd team from the East into the playoffs. If the 2 best teams play in the league championship game then why would you expect the loser to be selected? Especially if the loss wasn't very close.

 

[Midnighter]

If the playoffs expand then i think dropping divisions is a bad idea. With divisions itll be easier to get a 2nd team from the East into the playoffs. If the 2 best teams play in the league championship game then why would you expect the loser to be selected? Especially if the loss wasn't very close.

I think it's less about choosing the loser of the championship game and more about having the opportunity to play for it. Right now, OSU will be in the championship game for the East for the foreseeable future.

 

[BobPSU92]

I think it's less about choosing the loser of the championship game and more about having the opportunity to play for it. Right now, OSU will be in the championship game for the East for the foreseeable future.

You always forget that Franklin’s got this.

 

[Midnighter]

You always forget that Franklin’s got this.

 

[Woodpecker]

Done deal

Primary opponents

Boston College: Miami, Pitt, Syracuse

Clemson: Florida State, Georgia Tech, NC State

Duke: North Carolina, NC State, Wake Forest

Florida State: Clemson, Miami, Syracuse

Georgia Tech: Clemson, Louisville, Wake Forest

Louisville: Georgia Tech, Miami, Virginia

Miami: Boston College, Florida State, Louisville

North Carolina: Duke, NC State, Virginia

NC State: Clemson, Duke, North Carolina

Pitt: Boston College, Syracuse, Virginia Tech

Syracuse: Boston College, Florida State, Pitt

Virginia: Louisville, North Carolina, Virginia Tech

Virginia Tech: Pitt, Virginia, Wake Forest

Wake Forest: Duke, Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech

 

[LionJim]

I guess if you need dedicated games (meaning, for instance, Michigan-Ohio State) then you either use divisions or try this new ACC model. I wouldn’t mind a change but in the end it’s just a choice.

Shame on me, I didn’t click the attachment. Are they getting rid of the championship game?

 

[doctornick]

I guess if you need dedicated games (meaning, for instance, Michigan-Ohio State) then you either use divisions or try this new ACC model. I wouldn’t mind a change but in the end it’s just a choice.

Shame on me, I didn’t click the attachment. Are they getting rid of the championship game?

If and when the Big Ten eliminates divisions - which I'd be surprised at this point if they don't - they'll do something similar to this with 2-4 set opponents for each team. I actually expect that the Big Ten will go with 3 per team just like the ACC did. That will enable each school to play every other team in conference home and away every 4 years. Even with only 8 conference games (though the Big Ten seems to want to keep 9 conference games).

I like it just so there will be a greater variety of schedules by cycling in different teams within the conference.

 

[marshall23]

You always forget that Franklin’s got this.

Winning would kill the fun here.
If PSU won the NC who would employ the BWICAC?

 

[Tom_PSU]

I love the potential realignment. No matter what they come up with there will be endless bitching and complaining from all the fan bases about how they were screwed. Finally something new to be pissed about.

 

[BobPSU92]

If and when the Big Ten eliminates divisions - which I'd be surprised at this point if they don't - they'll do something similar to this with 2-4 set opponents for each team. I actually expect that the Big Ten will go with 3 per team just like the ACC did. That will enable each school to play every other team in conference home and away every 4 years. Even with only 8 conference games (though the Big Ten seems to want to keep 9 conference games).

I like it just so there will be a greater variety of schedules by cycling in different teams within the conference.

Penn State’s “set opponents” would be maryland and rutgres. Yippee.

 

[psuno1]

I say the Big10 dose this sooner than later, go look for PSU's future schedule's they are not there anymore, except for out of conference opponents on some sites.

 

[psuno1]

Penn State’s “set opponents” would be maryland and rutgres. Yippee.

Just add The Ohio State and you got it.

 

[BobPSU92]

Just add The Ohio State and you got it.

We’re screwed.

 

[BobPSU92]

I say the Big10 dose this sooner than later, go look for PSU's future schedule's they are not there anymore.

PSU has no future?

 

[PSU12046]

Just add The Ohio State and you got it.

I thought they were just called "The" now?

 

[Woodpecker]

Just add The Ohio State and you got it.

But, but, but what about The Land Grant Trophy?

 

[doctornick]

Just add The Ohio State and you got it.

That's what I'm assuming. 3 games set opponents and we'll get tOSU, Rutgers and Maryland. I actually rather like it though others will beg to differ. I'd much rather play Rutgers and Maryland and have those games against teams that are actually near a huge amount of our fan base/alumni than any midwestern team.

We'd probably luck out with a relatively easy combination if that's it. tOSU would get Michigan and PSU (plus maybe someone like Illinois). Michigan would get Ohio St and Michigan St. Nebraska/Minnesota/Iowa/Wisconsin will likely all play the other three teams of that group.

 

[Midnighter]

Penn State’s “set opponents” would be maryland and rutgres. Yippee.

Don’t forget Michigan State.

 

[BobPSU92]

Don’t forget Michigan State.

True. Playing for the coveted LAND. GRANT. TROPHY. . Bring it on.

 

[Got GSPs]

Don’t forget Michigan State.

And tOSU

 

[LionJim]

And tOSU

If each team has three dedicated yearly games, then RU and Maryland would be two for us, pretty clearly. That would leave either MSU or OSU, and I’d say MSU would be a more likely choice.

 

[doctornick]

If each team has three dedicated yearly games, then RU and Maryland would be two for us, pretty clearly. That would leave either MSU or OSU, and I’d say MSU would be a more likely choice.

I think that the Big Ten would want to have tOSU/PSU as an every year matchup, especially considering that it has been consistently the second highest rated matchup on TV in conference (so the networks would probably push for it to be every year).

I don't think there is anyone who truly cares about PSU/MSU.

 

[Midnighter]

I think that the Big Ten would want to have tOSU/PSU as an every year matchup, especially considering that it has been consistently the second highest rated matchup on TV in conference (so the networks would probably push for it to be every year).

I don't think there is anyone who truly cares about PSU/MSU.

The conference does. They manufactured a rivalry with them like they did for Maryland and Rutgers. Not playing OSU or Michigan every year sucks for regular season interest but is our best chance at the B1G Championship and beyond.

 

[LionJim]

I think that the Big Ten would want to have tOSU/PSU as an every year matchup, especially considering that it has been consistently the second highest rated matchup on TV in conference (so the networks would probably push for it to be every year).

I don't think there is anyone who truly cares about PSU/MSU.

To be honest, I care about PSU/MSU only to the extent of MSU being an easier game than OSU.

 

[doctornick]

The conference does. They manufactured a rivalry with them like they did for Maryland and Rutgers. Not playing OSU or Michigan every year sucks for regular season interest but is our best chance at the B1G Championship and beyond.

When we were in Legends and Leaders divisions, we were not in the same division as MSU and didn't play them. I don't see any reason to think that the Big Ten cares about PSU playing MSU. And the "they" that "manufactured a rivalry", wasn't it the leadership at MSU at the time we joined the conference, no? I thought it was Perles who came up with playing for a trophy. I don't think the conference itself had anything to do with the trophy or PSU playing MSU to end the season (except that the schedule worked best that way).

 

[Midnighter]

When we were in Legends and Leaders divisions, we were not in the same division as MSU and didn't play them. I don't see any reason to think that the Big Ten cares about PSU playing MSU. And the "they" that "manufactured a rivalry", wasn't it the leadership at MSU at the time we joined the conference, no? I thought it was Perles who came up with playing for a trophy. I don't think the conference itself had anything to do with the trophy or PSU playing MSU to end the season (except that the schedule worked best that way).

You might be right, but it was supposed to be another end of year trophy game for the B1G.

 

[LionJim]

The conference does. They manufactured a rivalry with them like they did for Maryland and Rutgers. Not playing OSU or Michigan every year sucks for regular season interest but is our best chance at the B1G Championship and beyond.

Just read this, you beat me by two minutes.

 

[Moogy]

This would be a good move for the B1G IMO…

ACC inching closer to eliminating divisions, introducing new schedule rotation

The ACC is discussing the possibility of eliminating divisions and introducing a new scheduling format as soon as the 2023 football season.

247sports.com

The problem is, it still sucks big time. If you're in a conference together, you HAVE to at least play each other once during the regular season. That should be law. Otherwise, you just get into such nonsense about favorable scheduling having a huge impact on your fate each year.

Of course, the dunderheads in charge of conference affiliations decided to create huge conferences that make this impossible, at least for football ... so the next best option is to have divisions ... like little mini-conferences in each conference. So you could at least play everyone in your division once, and then have the champion of that square off against the other division. Very flawed, but at least a little better than the alternative.

So now other conferences have gone ahead and just done away with divisions, because everyone likes to make things worse ... and eventually crap falls apart, and they wonder "hey, what happened? totes didn't see that coming!"

Sort of like the amateur status of college sports, where it just kept getting more and more professional, and less about students as athletes ... and folks cheered every step of the way ... until finally they realized what they had created ... and now they're stunned and muttering that "college sports is dead." No crap.

 

[Midnighter]

The problem is, it still sucks big time. If you're in a conference together, you HAVE to at least play each other once during the regular season. That should be law. Otherwise, you just get into such nonsense about favorable scheduling having a huge impact on your fate each year.

Of course, the dunderheads in charge of conference affiliations decided to create huge conferences that make this impossible, at least for football ... so the next best option is to have divisions ... like little mini-conferences in each conference. So you could at least play everyone in your division once, and then have the champion of that square off against the other division. Very flawed, but at least a little better than the alternative.

So now other conferences have gone ahead and just done away with divisions, because everyone likes to make things worse ... and eventually crap falls apart, and they wonder "hey, what happened? totes didn't see that coming!"

Sort of like the amateur status of college sports, where it just kept getting more and more professional, and less about students as athletes ... and folks cheered every step of the way ... until finally they realized what they had created ... and now they're stunned and muttering that "college sports is dead." No crap.

Do you mean OSU? The issue with the divisions is they’re so unbalanced the Championship Game is almost always going to be OSU and someone else. I hated the lack of divisions before, but back then we didn’t have a Big Ten CCG. Now that we do, I’m in favor of leveling the playing field on any way possible. This helps, assuming we don’t play OSU every year.

 

[Moogy]

Do you mean OSU? The issue with the divisions is they’re so unbalanced the Championship Game is almost always going to be OSU and someone else. I hated the lack of divisions before, but back then we didn’t have a Big Ten CCG. Now that we do, I’m in favor of leveling the playing field on any way possible. This helps, assuming we don’t play OSU every year.

Do I mean OSU, with respect to what?

Yes, I know divisions aren't perfect. I don't like them, myself .. it's just that they're better than the alternative (no divisions) when you have unwieldy conference sizes.

At this point they'd be better off just expanding to 20 teams and having 2 10-team divisions, and we never play the teams in the other divisions (until a conference championship game, if that still have that stupidity). It's dumb, but not as dumb as the current or other possible setups.

 

[PSUSignore]

I think that the Big Ten would want to have tOSU/PSU as an every year matchup, especially considering that it has been consistently the second highest rated matchup on TV in conference (so the networks would probably push for it to be every year).

I don't think there is anyone who truly cares about PSU/MSU.

PSU's AD would probably want it even more. Imagine a home schedule that regularly doesn't have either UM or t(TM)OSU included. Ticket sales would be impacted. I'd put money on us getting one or the other and t(TM)OSU is more likely because UM already has two rivals that will absolutely be kept. Adding PSU to to UM's protected games would mean UM would have one of the toughest protected opponents in the conference and I don't see that happening. It would be nice to pick up a new team though instead of getting protected games against those from the east that we have played annually already. Someone like Iowa, Wisconsin or Nebraska would be cool. I'm torn because I'd like to see a tough schedule for viewing but for increasing our chances of getting to a Big 10 championship it's better to not play the big boys.