Tag Archives: Pac-12

ACC Football Scheduling: How Can the ACC Better Position Itself for a Playoff Spot?

Posted on by
6
Examining Strength of Schedule and What ACC Teams Need to Do to Make the Playoff

Examining Strength of Schedule and What ACC Teams Need to Do to Make the Playoff

As you might’ve noticed earlier today, we linked to a piece from SB Nation’s Team Speed Kills entitled “How Much Will Schedule Strength Affect Playoff Selection?” — which effectively dissects the merits (or lack thereof) of scheduling tougher in order to get a playoff spot. The impetus for such an article, of course, is the flurry of recent news regarding the number of conference games. When announcing its divisional realignment the other day, the Big Ten upped its conference slate to nine games, while the Pac-12 is actually discussing moving down to eight (from the current nine). Even the SEC, which has been with the ACC in the “remain at eight” boat briefly mentioned a nine-game schedule during its SEC Network press conference today. So with two alternatives seemingly on the table again, what scheduling setup makes the most sense for the ACC if it hopes to place its top team(s) in the four-team College Football Playoff?

To start, the ACC obviously has two disadvantages when it comes to pursuing a nine-game conference schedule. One of these — out-of-conference rivalries — is a shared issue with the SEC. The other, unique to the ACC, is the Notre Dame scheduling agreement. As of 2014, at least four ACC schools will have annual in-state matchups with SEC schools on the books, effectively locking them (Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville) into a ninth game on top of the eight-game conference schedule. The Notre Dame arrangement, which has the Irish playing five ACC games per year, brings that total to 10 for those teams in select years. Those same teams will likely also be at five home games and five road games by that point, making for a less-than-ideal scheduling demand of two guaranteed home dates and little calendar flexibility. If the ACC were to add a ninth game, those teams would be locked into 11 games against major-conference competition, and might also need to take a hit on home games (hosting six total, instead of seven). For schools like FSU and Clemson, it’s a tough financial hit to take, especially without an ACC Network off the ground yet.

Continue reading →

About these ads

Atlantic Coast Convos Far-Too-Early 2013 Top 25 (May 1)

Posted on by
7
Could Stanford Challenge Alabama for the National Championship This Season? Stranger Things Have Happened

Could Stanford Challenge Alabama for the National Championship This Season?

College football has always been based in part upon random guessing about who’s better, so you’ll likely find little issue with this early top 25 poll based on nothing but speculation and a fear of Nick Saban. Who finishes below the terrifying Tide however, is largely up for debate, which is why we filled out the second through 24th spots to the best of our abilities. If nothing else, use this as a reminder that we’re getting closer to kickoff. Disagree with any (or all) of the below? Protest away in the comments.

Atlantic Coast Convos 2013 Top 25 (May 1)

1. Alabama Crimson Tide (Last: 1)

2. Stanford Cardinal (Last: 2)

3. Texas A&M Aggies (Last: 3)

4. Ohio State Buckeyes (Last: 8)

5. Oregon Ducks (Last: 4)

6. Georgia Bulldogs (Last: 5)

7. South Carolina Gamecocks (Last: 6)

8. Clemson Tigers (Last: 7)

9. Louisville Cardinals (Last: 10)

10. Texas Longhorns (Last: 9)

Continue reading →

ACC Football Divisional Realignment: What are the Most Important Factors for a Better Divisional Setup?

Posted on by
34
If the ACC Considers Realigning its Divisions, the Florida State-Miami Rivalry is at the Focal Point

If the ACC Considers Realigning its Divisions, Talk Will  Revolve Around the Florida State-Miami Rivalry

Now that the ACC‘s no longer in imminent peril, everyone can shift away from realignment theories and focus on other things… like divisional realignment theories. While the ACC does effectively have a wall built around its borders, that doesn’t change the issue it’s been having with the on-field football product of late. Due to expansion (both the first and second round), rivalries have taken a backseat to a hackneyed divisional alignment solely meant to match up Florida State and Miami for the ACC championship. Eight years after the formation of the “Atlantic” and “Coastal” divisions, that title game has yet to occur and now, with 14 teams, this nonsensical setup has never appeared more pointless. For the sake of more compelling matchups, as well as improving the quality of all the league’s teams (theoretically, at least), the best solution seems to be realigning the divisions. But what makes the most sense?

First, you have to outline the most important factors for divisional realignment; what are the top priorities if we’re going to blow up the current model and start over? From my point of view, those priorities are as follows:

1. Geography: Rivalries are inherently built out of geographic proximity — something the current alignment largely misses out on. With a league that spans from Boston to Miami, travel costs should also be a consideration to re-work things along geographic lines.

2. Eliminate Crossover Opponents: Under the current setup, each school is locked into six games in their respective division, plus one permanent crossover and then a rotating crossover opponent. With just one flexible slot each year, many schools in opposite divisions end up playing each other just once every six years. While some small exceptions can be made, the rule that every team needs a crossover opponent (since many of these are forced “rivalries”) must go. By freeing up another spot in the schedule, teams face each other more frequently, which is something virtually every fan base wants.

3. Get Teams Exposure in Florida: This is where things get a bit tricky. Getting in front of Florida recruits is a big deal for every school, and a pure geographic realignment largely cuts off the northeast schools from that recruiting hot bed. But if Miami (tons of northeast alums, anyway) was put in a hypothetical “North” division, this largely solves that issue. Every “North” team would have Miami on the annual schedule, while every “South” team would have an annual tilt with Florida State.

“But, but, but WHAT ABOUT THE FLORIDA STATE-MIAMI RIVALRY?!” We’re getting to it…

Continue reading →

Could a Scheduling Alliance Between the ACC, Big 12 and Notre Dame Truly Work?

Posted on by
Reply
Under Further Discussion: Is an Alliance Between Notre Dame, the ACC and Big 12 Viable?

Under Further Discussion: Is an Alliance Between Notre Dame, the ACC and Big 12 Viable?

Last week, our own Hokie Mark put together an article on his site, ACCFootballRx, taking a look at how a scheduling agreement between the ACC, Big 12 and Notre Dame could conceivably work out. While he does a great job of laying out the specifics, he and I also carried the conversation over to email afterward, to discuss the issue a bit more. In particular, we dove into Notre Dame’s willingness to participate, notes on television deals and West Virginia‘s desires in this proposed situation.

John: First and foremost, would Notre Dame want to partner with the Big 12 as a whole? I get the feeling they’d prefer to keep their primary opponents, five ACC teams and then have the flexibility to schedule the Big 12′s elite teams like Texas and Oklahoma.

Mark: I agree.  That’s why I said I think this would have to fall somewhere between “rotating through all of the teams” and “just play the made-for-TV matchups.” I could see Notre Dame giving the Big 12 a list of teams they’d agree to play, which might look like this: Texas, Baylor, TCU, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State. (They’d leave out Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and West Virginia, in my opinion).

That may not go over so well with the four left out, but consider this: (1) WVU is more interested in the ACC scheduling part anyway, so skipping Notre Dame is probably fine with them; (2) Kansas, K-State and Iowa State are just happy to be in a BCS/power conference; (3) at any rate, that creates a 6-4 vote in favor of the deal.

John: Doesn’t the Big 12 need a two-thirds majority for critical decisions? (I thought that was the case, anyway) I mostly agree with your assessments of teams, though I’m not sure Baylor gets lumped in with the other five. Also agree that KU, KSU and ISU are all off the table; plus there’s no way Notre Dame’s scheduling (former head coach) Charlie Weis any time soon.

What kind of impact could we potentially see in terms of television contracts? How much would Notre Dame’s go up by? And each conference’s deals? Would this also put FOX into the bidding (along with ESPN and NBC) for Notre Dame’s contract that expires after 2014?

Continue reading →

Atlantic Coast Convos Far-Too-Early 2013 Top 25

Posted on by
2
Can Duke Johnson and the 'Canes Find Themselves in the Top 25 This Fall?

Can Duke Johnson and the ‘Canes Find Themselves in the Top 25 This Fall?

With spring practices well under way, and recruiting classes all settled, we’ve got our first informed look at what college football’s top 25 may look like for 2013. While it’s nothing more than a slightly educated guess, perhaps it’ll at least make us forget about just how long it is until the new season kicks off this coming August. Disagree with any (or all) of the below? Protest away in the comments.

Atlantic Coast Convos 2013 Top 25 (April 3)

1. Alabama Crimson Tide (Last: 1)

2. Stanford Cardinal (Last: 2)

3.Texas A&M Aggies (Last: 3)

4.Oregon Ducks (Last: 4)

5. Georgia Bulldogs (Last: 5)

6. South Carolina Gamecocks (Last: 7)

7. Clemson Tigers (Last: 8)

8. Ohio State Buckeyes (Last: 6)

9. Texas Longhorns (Last: 13)

10. Louisville Cardinals (Last: 9)

Continue reading →

ACC Football Recruiting 2013: Border Wars, and Leaving Your Footprint to Find Talent

Posted on by
1
Does UGA Control Georgia Recruiting So Much That Tech Must Look Elsewhere?

Does UGA Control Georgia Recruiting So Much That Tech Must Look Elsewhere?

ACC teams pulled in an impressive haul on National Signing Day last month, but with so many conference schools located in states/general regions that overlap with (current and future) Big Ten and SEC schools’ territories, it can be a real uphill slog to lock down local recruits. For some schools like Georgia Tech (14th ranked class out of 15 in the ACC), the overriding opinion is that their own home state, Georgia, may be lost for good to the likes of rival Georgia, and perhaps Georgia State in the future, so why not “go national?“

As a key football brand, there’s not doubt the ‘Wreck will ultimately find success leaving the state of Georgia. But for other schools, they can’t afford a bad recruiting class to tell them now is the time to alter course. This year in particular, several schools actually went on the offensive, grabbing some of their best players from bordering states (and in turn, rival institutions from other conferences).

To help frame the conversation, I’ve enlisted our own Hokie Mark (who runs his own ACCFootballRx site along with the work he helps with here) to parse through his immense collection of recruiting data, and give us a starting point. From Mark’s companion piece on ACC schools losing in-state recruits, here’s how we’ll be classifying states:

ACC-Exclusive States: Massachusetts, North Carolina, New York, Virginia

Battleground States: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, South Carolina

Border States: Alabama, Connecticut, Washington D.C., Indiana, Maryland, New Jersey, Ohio, Tennessee

In “Border States,” there were a total of 68 players who received a four- or five-star rating from Rivals.com (we’ll be using this for consistency, and because that’s where Mark’s data is from). Of those 68, here’s how the recruits were broken down (by conference):

ACC: 9

B1G: 26

Big 12: 2

Notre Dame: 2

Pac-12: 3

SEC: 24

Continue reading →

Is My School an Expansion Target? A Handy Guide to Conference Realignment

Posted on by
3
Is Your Team a Prime Expansion Candidate? Choose Your Own Adventure Below...

Is Your Team a Prime Expansion Candidate? Calculate Your “Realignment Score” Below

The Big Ten expansion carousel got rolling once again today, this time claiming that invites have been officially issued to both Virginia and North Carolina of the ACC. Until proven true, it’s just another round of ACC death hoaxes, so until I see some confirmation from Frank the Tank and/or Brett McMurphy, you can count me a skeptic here.

But nonetheless, it’s obvious that expansion fever is still very much in the air and everyone – especially ACC fans – needs to be conscious of the warning signs for this catastrophic disease. With that, we’ve created this helpful guide to assist you in navigating the twists and turns of your school’s conference realignment rumors. All metrics are completely subjective, though are all based on college football expansion moves since 2004.

1. Would my school be upgrading with a move?

From 2004 through all confirmed changes for the upcoming years, 55 of 60 FBS schools that switched conferences have made a significant upgrade in membership compared to their former leagues. So if your favorite school/alma mater would find itself in better company by way of leaving its current situation (and that is that case for all schools not in the Big Ten, SEC or Pac-12), please give them two points for this round. If your school is in those leagues, subtract two.

2. Is my school a founding member of its conference?

Again going back to 2004, 13 founding members of leagues have left or are planning to leave the conferences which they founded at one point or another. Among the most notable include founding Big East member Syracuse leaving for the ACC, and founding ACC member Maryland heading to the Big Ten. But overall, being one of the founding members of a conference usually means that school also possesses an unequal amount of power (we’ll get to the larger conversation around this in a second). The scoring here is a bit more complicated, but by conference affiliation:

  • Big Ten, SEC, Pac-12, MAC= 0 points
  • Big 12= 1 point
  • ACC, MWC= 2 points
  • Big East, C-USA, Sun Belt= 5 points

Continue reading →