ACC designated rival

[gtchief]

Just have the first tiebreaker for division winner to be intra-division record.

Most wins within your division should determine division winner, since you know, you're supposed to be representing your division in the champ game.

Tiebreakers being head to head, then total league wins, etc

 

[LagrangeJacket]

Most wins within your division should determine division winner, since you know, you're supposed to be representing your division in the champ game.

Tiebreakers being head to head, then total league wins, etc

Yeah, that's what I meant, just worded it poorly. Have division winner be based on intra-division record.

 

[GT flunkout]

Wtf is all this whining about not being fair. Show the stats that show that ACC division champions have done so on the backs of their weak cross-division rival.

Oh that's right there is nothing that will show that. Oh and it was done to benefit Tobacco Road? That definitely explains all those division championships that UNC (1), NCST (0), Duke (1), and Wake (1) have won. Such a dynasty with the system they rigged for themselves


For all of you that think the Division champion should be decided on intra divisional games....

In 2014 UNC was 4-4 in the ACC... But 4-2 in the Coastal. Same as Tech. Since we lost to UNC that year in the tiebreaker I guess they deserved to go to the acccg more than us....

 

[micman]

When they set about creating the divisions, they couldn't create a north/south divide because the majority of traditional football schools would have all been in the south division. My preference would be to trade FSU for Miami. We have no natural rivalry/interest in playing Miami; whereas FSU had become a fun game for both fan bases, since we are their closest geographical ACC opponent. I am glad that we play VT--I think that that will continue to grow into a good rivalry--Nerd Bowl, etc. But I really miss playing FSU every year. Miami, Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville--there's just nothing there (although, I guess we have some history with Louisville from the Metro Conference days). My preference would be to play Clemson, FSU, and VT every year, and I don't really care who else we play from the conference after that.

 

[gtchief]

Wtf is all this whining about not being fair. Show the stats that show that ACC division champions have done so on the backs of their weak cross-division rival.

Oh that's right there is nothing that will show that. Oh and it was done to benefit Tobacco Road? That definitely explains all those division championships that UNC (1), NCST (0), Duke (1), and Wake (1) have won. Such a dynasty with the system they rigged for themselves


For all of you that think the Division champion should be decided on intra divisional games....

In 2014 UNC was 4-4 in the ACC... But 4-2 in the Coastal. Same as Tech. Since we lost to UNC that year in the tiebreaker I guess they deserved to go to the acccg more than us....

Sucks, but yes. We didn't take care of our own division. Correct me if I'm wrong, but we would have gone to OB anyways being the next highest ranked ACC team, which would have been further bolstered by not losing to FSU (even though the loss didn't knock us down much).

Out of curiosity, how would the other years look?

 

[GT flunkout]

Sucks, but yes. We didn't take care of our own division. Correct me if I'm wrong, but we would have gone to OB anyways being the next highest ranked ACC team, which would have been further bolstered by not losing to FSU (even though the loss didn't knock us down much).

How would the other years look, out of curiosity?

Well that's just like, your opinion. Every year the division team with the best overall ACC record is going to be the best team in the division. Point to a year that that has not been the case?

BTW, we rose 2 spots in the AP poll and 3 spots in the Coaches Poll after *losing* to FSU.

 

[gtzulu]

Of course there should be designated rivals. The pursuit of a "balanced schedule" would require continually shuffling the divisions regardless of history or tradition. There are schools that should play every year.

I'm in favor of keeping designated rivalries, but I think rough balancing of competition is good too. You can change the divisions with the constraints of traditional rivalries. Making tweaks on the divisions about every decade would be good, because the situations for programs change. Swapping Clemson and Miami is a great example of such a tweak. It preserves the FSU-Miami and has a lot of benefits.

I like playing Clemson because they're a great team lately, but I don't see Clemson-GT as a rivalry that needs preserving.

 

[gtzulu]

It does not give Miami or FSU an inside track because it guarantees at least one of them a division loss, since they have to play each other. The teams it benefits are the ones who get patsy cross division rivals.

Wrong. It gives Miami or FSU a *conference* loss which is weaker than a *division* loss. It ensures when either team loses to the other, they can still play in the ACC Championship Game. That doesn't happen if they're in the same division. So setting them up in separate conferences increased the odds you'd get either the then-marquee teams of Miami or FSU or both in the ACCCG.

Tobacco Road conspiracy theory is weak IMO. It just falls out that way after you split Miami and FSU.

 

[LagrangeJacket]

Well that's just like, your opinion. Every year the division team with the best overall ACC record is going to be the best team in the division. Point to a year that that has not been the case?

BTW, we rose 2 spots in the AP poll and 3 spots in the Coaches Poll after *losing* to FSU.

You could make an argument for Duke in 2013. Both GT and Duke had the same intra-division records, but we lost to Clemson while Duke beat NC State and Wake out of division, so they had the better conference record. Oh, and we beat Duke head-to-head 38-14.

Strangely, VT managed to lose to BC and Maryland that year, so they would've been the beneficiaries.

 

[gtzulu]

I agree with Flunkout. It would be easy to rebalance the divisions to give us and Miami our designated rivals as division opponents...but very difficult to do it while maintaining the designated rival for everyone in the conference. Yes it creates persistently unbalanced schedules and isn't fair, but that's the price we pay to maintain tradition.

Why would swapping Miami for Clemson mess up any other teams' rivalries? We don't have to do a wholesale reshuffling of the divisions.

 

[gtzulu]

Louisville brought in more money than Clemson in 2016. You should include them then split the big 4.

That's shocking to me if true. Where did all this interest in Louisville football come from?

 

[WracerX]

The little girl screwed the pooch when UL came into the league. The non-retarded solution was to put GT in Maryland's slot and UL in our spot.

Our crossover would have been UVa. UL would face CU every year. UL would have been in the same division as their two geographically closest rivals Pitt and VT. FSU would now play its two closest geographic rivals GT and CU.

In short, Swofford is a dumbass.

 

[gtchief]

Well that's just like, your opinion. Every year the division team with the best overall ACC record is going to be the best team in the division. Point to a year that that has not been the case?

BTW, we rose 2 spots in the AP poll and 3 spots in the Coaches Poll after *losing* to FSU.

Other than UNC in 2014 and VPI in 2013 I think the only other one I found was Miami flip-flopping with UNC in 2012. Both teams deferred to us to play for the Coastal due to NCAA troubles

Edit: nvm UNC was still winner

 

[andrew]

Why would swapping Miami for Clemson mess up any other teams' rivalries? We don't have to do a wholesale reshuffling of the divisions.

It wouldn't. But the proposal wasn't just that, it was about ending the designated rivalry spot too. That would mean no more UNC-NC State, or Duke-Wake. Presumably many of their fans would be upset about that, just like many of ours would be upset if we didn't get to play Clemson every year.

 

[gtzulu]

It wouldn't. But the proposal wasn't just that, it was about ending the designated rivalry spot too. That would mean no more UNC-NC State, or Duke-Wake. Presumably many of their fans would be upset about that, just like many of ours would be upset if we didn't get to play Clemson every year.

OK. I'm not in favor of ending rivalries. However I don't see why every ACC team should have to have a designated rival. (Do they?) I personally don't care about keeping Clemson-GT. It just doesn't feel like a big rivalry to me. VT-Tech has come to feel more like a rivalry. Rivalries need some hate. Let Duke play Wake every year if they want, but we don't need to play Clemson every year. I'm sure Clemson wouldn't mind playing a different cross-division team besides us too.

 

[andrew]

OK. I'm not in favor of ending rivalries. However I don't see why every ACC team should have to have a designated rival. (Do they?) I personally don't care about keeping Clemson-GT. It just doesn't feel like a big rivalry to me. VT-Tech has come to feel more like a rivalry. Rivalries need some hate. Let Duke play Wake every year if they want, but we don't need to play Clemson every year. I'm sure Clemson wouldn't mind playing a different cross-division team besides us too.

I actually enjoy playing Clemson every year precisely because it is a friendly rivalry with no real hate. Back when I lived in the south I looked forward to going up to Clemson every other year just as much as I looked forward to GT home games.

 

[GT flunkout]

OK. I'm not in favor of ending rivalries. However I don't see why every ACC team should have to have a designated rival. (Do they?) I personally don't care about keeping Clemson-GT. It just doesn't feel like a big rivalry to me. VT-Tech has come to feel more like a rivalry. Rivalries need some hate. Let Duke play Wake every year if they want, but we don't need to play Clemson every year. I'm sure Clemson wouldn't mind playing a different cross-division team besides us too.

That's nice. You also need to recognize you are in the extreme minority with this opinion. I realize that's not unfamiliar territory for you.

 

[gtzulu]

That's nice. You also need to recognize you are in the extreme minority with this opinion. I realize that's not unfamiliar territory for you.

Well if that's true, I'd concede we ought to keep the rivalry. I hadn't gotten the impression that most Tech fans think the Clemson rivalry is important.

 

[18in32]

You're an idiot.

It does not give Miami or FSU an inside track because it guarantees at least one of them a division loss, since they have to play each other. The teams it benefits are the ones who get patsy cross division rivals.

Go make a list of ACC patsies, then make a list of who gets to play them. Report back your findings, and cross reference those against teams in NC and VA.

I've got a pretty clear memory that Miami/FSU were put into opposite divisions because the ACC thought they'd be a ratings bonanza in the ACCCG. They thought that would give them a good chance of getting two blockbuster matchups in one year. (BTW, aside from 2009, has the ACCCG ever been a rematch?) One loss out-of-division don't matter since you'd have the tiebreaker with all the division teams you beat.

 

[18in32]

Well if that's true, I'd concede we ought to keep the rivalry. I hadn't gotten the impression that most Tech fans think the Clemson rivalry is important.

I think rivalries are more important than championships. I realize I'm probably in the minority on that one.