A close (albeit long) look at ACC tiebreak scenarios

[gtphd]

If we win out, I don't care if we go to the ACCC or not.

The only reason I follow this is because it gives me rooting interest in games I wouldn't otherwise watch.

Also, I'd rather win out and go to the ACCCG than win out and not go.

 

[gtphd]

== 11/10 games ==
1. GT over Miami
2. VT over Pitt

== 11/17 games ==
3. GT over UVA
4. Clemson over Duke
5. Miami over VT
6a Wake over Pitt *

== 11/23-24 games ==
6b. VT over UVA*
7. Miami over Pitt

Isn't there a scenario where VT beats Miami, then loses to UVA, leaving GT, VT, and UVA tied with GT holding the tiebreaker against both? So then Miami over VT isn't necessarily required.

 

[AE 87]

== 11/10 games ==
1. GT over Miami
2. VT over Pitt

== 11/17 games ==
3. GT over UVA
4. Clemson over Duke
5. Miami over VT
6a Wake over Pitt *

== 11/23-24 games ==
6b. VT over UVA*
7. Miami over Pitt

Isn't there a scenario where VT beats Miami, then loses to UVA, leaving GT, VT, and UVA tied with GT holding the tiebreaker against both? So then Miami over VT isn't necessarily required.

Iiuc, if pitt loses to vpi and d'oh u, then uva over vpi also gives us the title in either a 3 way or 4 way tie depending on whether wf beats pitt.

 

[GTNUKE]

Iiuc, if pitt loses to vpi and d'oh u, then uva over vpi also gives us the title in either a 3 way or 4 way tie depending on whether wf beats pitt.

Nope, if it is a 3 way tie with Pitt (Pitt beats Wake), then we need it to be with VT (we win) and not UVA (Pitt wins).

There is a 4 way tie scenario, but the UVA loss to Pitt likely hurts us. It could result in eliminating UVA and going back to the 3 way tie between Pitt-GT-VT, but not sure until we have more results.

 

[GTNUKE]

== 11/10 games ==
1. GT over Miami
2. VT over Pitt

== 11/17 games ==
3. GT over UVA
4. Clemson over Duke
5. Miami over VT
6a Wake over Pitt *

== 11/23-24 games ==
6b. VT over UVA*
7. Miami over Pitt

Isn't there a scenario where VT beats Miami, then loses to UVA, leaving GT, VT, and UVA tied with GT holding the tiebreaker against both? So then Miami over VT isn't necessarily required.

Your 7 games above are the most likely outcome putting GT in the ACCCG (see post #17 in this thread).

I also provided current ESPN FPI odds of each game. The good news is each one taken indivually is a greater than 50% probability.

4 of the 7 are fairly likely, but 3 are essentially coin flips (including us over Miami).

 

[AE 87]

Nope, if it is a 3 way tie with Pitt (Pitt beats Wake), then we need it to be with VT (we win) and not UVA (Pitt wins).

There is a 4 way tie scenario, but the UVA loss to Pitt likely hurts us. It could result in eliminating UVA and going back to the 3 way tie between Pitt-GT-VT, but not sure until we have more results.

My post referred to a 3 way tie of GT UVA and vpi or a 4 way tie of those 3 and Pitt.

 

[18in32]

== 11/10 games ==
1. GT over Miami
2. VT over Pitt

== 11/17 games ==
3. GT over UVA
4. Clemson over Duke
5. Miami over VT
6a Wake over Pitt *

== 11/23-24 games ==
6b. VT over UVA*
7. Miami over Pitt

Isn't there a scenario where VT beats Miami, then loses to UVA, leaving GT, VT, and UVA tied with GT holding the tiebreaker against both? So then Miami over VT isn't necessarily required.

Yeah, not all the things you list are actually necessary – Clemson doesn't have to beat Duke, for example. (In fact, if Duke wins out, and Pitt loses out, then we lose a head-to-head against Duke unless VT loses exactly one more game. Then the Duke/VT/GT tie can't be broken head-to-head, so you have to go to Coastal-only records. That would disqualify Duke, and then we beat VT on the head-to-head.)

It is definitely possible that a UVA/VT/GT tie happens – that happens if (1) Pitt loses to VT, Wake & Miami, (2) VT beats Pitt & Miami but not UVA, and (3) UVA beats VT but not GT. In that scenario we win due to the head-to-head tiebreaker. (This possibility was captured in my OP when I noted that if Pitt loses all its games, and VT loses one more game, we win, regardless of anything else.)

The very unlikely 4-way tie is also still possible but not good for us. It is possible if (1) Pitt loses to VT & Wake *or* Miami, (2) VT beats Pitt & Miami but not UVA, and (3) UVA beats VT but not GT. The first tiebreaker is to look at the teams' records against one another. Pitt would be 2-1; VT would be 1-2; UVA would be 1-2; and GT would be 2-1. That would eliminate UVA & VT – and then give Pitt the head-to-head tiebreak over us.

PS. @AE 87 – this might also be of interest to you. I think you asked about this scenario.

 

[77GTFan]

I enjoy the rivalry with Clemson, but making them our annual cross division opponent makes life tough for us. Next year I believe we will have NCSU and Clemson. If I were made king I would require each team to play nine ACC games, with a Notre Dame game counting as one. This increases the inventory of conference matchups for TV. But, the three cross division games would not count in the division race. These would be games that surely count for making the playoffs, national rankings and bowl invitations. But, the path to Charlotte would be based on the six games within the division.

 

[gtphd]

I enjoy the rivalry with Clemson, but making them our annual cross division opponent makes life tough for us.

How has this not been discussed before?

Cross-division rivalries are a mess. In addition to the imbalance of playing Clemson every year vs. playing Wake Forest every year, it also results in a scenario where rarely play other ACC teams. There's only 1 slot for non-rival Atlantic teams, so you play them once every 6 years. That means you visit them once every 12 years. So if you're a Tech Alumni who just moved to Louisville, and really want to go to a GT game in Louisville, the next game will be in 2030. There's a better chance that the ACC will disband, realign, reschedule, or add teams before that game takes place.

 

[18in32]

How has this not been discussed before?

Cross-division rivalries are a mess. In addition to the imbalance of playing Clemson every year vs. playing Wake Forest every year, it also results in a scenario where rarely play other ACC teams. There's only 1 slot for non-rival Atlantic teams, so you play them once every 6 years. That means you visit them once every 12 years. So if you're a Tech Alumni who just moved to Louisville, and really want to go to a GT game in Louisville, the next game will be in 2030. There's a better chance that the ACC will disband, realign, reschedule, or add teams before that game takes place.

Screw scheduling imbalance. Never stop playing Clemson. Or UGA. Or Auburn.

 

[georgiatech22]

Screw scheduling imbalance. Never stop playing Clemson. Or UGA. Or Auburn.

Simple. We rejoin the SEC, Missouri takes our spot in the ACC. We play Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, South Carolina, Kentucky, Vandy every year. Play Clemson as a non conference opponent, and play Auburn every few years as a crossover game.

 

[AmpuTECHture]

Simple. We rejoin the SEC, Missouri takes our spot in the ACC. We play Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, South Carolina, Kentucky, Vandy every year. Play Clemson as a non conference opponent, and play Auburn every few years as a crossover game.

I like it!

Remaining in the ACC, I like cross division games to only count in the depths of tie-breaker scenarios (3rd or later tiebreaker). In some reality, I would like to see pairs of 9 team divisions that play a round robin and face off against the other division champion for a conference champion to have a automatic bid to the playoff.

 

[AmpuTECHture]

And while the Clemson game hurts us, if we take care of business in the division, we aren't concerned about our loss to Clemson. I would rather play Clemson than not. Just don't lose to ööööing Pitt and duke

 

[18in32]

Remaining in the ACC, I like cross division games to only count in the depths of tie-breaker scenarios (3rd or later tiebreaker).

How about Coastal should be determined only by Coastal games (excluding Atlantic opponents) and then tie-breaks should have something to do with margin of victory (capping the benefit/cost on any one game to 21 pts, or the like)?

 

[CoachTech]

Do we forget this is college football where anything could happen?

Yeah anything can happen. Like Bama and Clemson playing in the playoff for the 4th straight year. There is not parity in the NCAA as long as Bama and Clemson are ripping and tearing like they have the last few years.

 

[18in32]

Yeah anything can happen. Like Bama and Clemson playing in the playoff for the 4th straight year. There is not parity in the NCAA as long as Bama and Clemson are ripping and tearing like they have the last few years.

That's one of the fun things about football, though. I'm positive we couldn't beat Clemson in a best of seven series. But in one game? GT has pulled off lots of unlikely victories (and losses) over the years.

 

[BigDanT]

Yeah anything can happen. Like Bama and Clemson playing in the playoff for the 4th straight year. There is not parity in the NCAA as long as Bama and Clemson are ripping and tearing like they have the last few years.

Clemson usually drops one to an undeserving team. That could be us

 

[TampaBayJacket]

For all you tough guys who think we're all pussies for not wanting to face Clemson again, it's more strategic than your simple epeen bravado. The two forces at play are definition of a successful season and ACC benefits from a CFP berth. Like it or not, we will get less money if we knock Clemson out of the CFP and our cash-strapped AA needs every penny. We lose by winning in a twisted sort of way. The more likely scenario is we play them at 8-4/7-5 and lose to them and got to our bowl at a much less appealing 8-5 or 7-6 record. A much better scenario is to win out and feel good about 8-4 without jeopardizing the feeling.

Edit: Honestly I dont really care about the distribution. I just threw that in as an extra reason but really I just remember the feeling of losing to UGA, losing in the ACCCG, and then losing the bowl game. Dont like closing the year out on three straight losses so I figured its better to not play the extra game.

 

[ThisIsAtlanta]

For all you tough guys who think we're all pussies for not wanting to face Clemson again, it's more strategic than your simple epeen bravado. The two forces at play are definition of a successful season and ACC benefits from a CFP berth. Like it or not, we will get less money if we knock Clemson out of the CFP and our cash-strapped AA needs every penny. We lose by winning in a twisted sort of way. The more likely scenario is we play them at 8-4/7-5 and lose to them and got to our bowl at a much less appealing 8-5 or 7-6 record. A much better scenario is to win out and feel good about 8-4 without jeopardizing the feeling.

Quick, how much money did we make in 1990?

 

[ElCidBUZZingFAN]

For all you tough guys who think we're all pussies for not wanting to face Clemson again, it's more strategic than your simple epeen bravado. The two forces at play are definition of a successful season and ACC benefits from a CFP berth. Like it or not, we will get less money if we knock Clemson out of the CFP and our cash-strapped AA needs every penny. We lose by winning in a twisted sort of way. The more likely scenario is we play them at 8-4/7-5 and lose to them and got to our bowl at a much less appealing 8-5 or 7-6 record. A much better scenario is to win out and feel good about 8-4 without jeopardizing the feeling.

Full retard.