Tuesday, August 16, 2016

More on the scheduling debate in the ACC

We can assume that ESPN is well sourced on their ACC scheduling talks since ESPN is waiting for an answer. Tuesday Andrea Adelson broke down the even split between the 9-1 crowd and the 8-2 crowd. BC is firmly in the 9-1 camp. Ultimately it comes down to the flexibility needed for those schools that have non ACC rivals (GT, FSU, Clemson and Louisville) and those who have real trouble scheduling games among the Power 5. Something or someone will have to give since the ESPN/ACC Netwok is owed ten Power 5 games per team.

My guess is that the 8-2 crowd will win out. They have the most powerful football brands right now and the 8-2 model can still meet the needs of the 9-1 crowd. How? By allowing ACC schools to play each other as non-conference games. That puts BC at a slight disadvantage because our permanent crossover game against VT counts in the standings but a non-conference game say against Miami might not. But in my opinion, that is a minor problem. 

I prefer 8-2 and would like to see BC take on any and all Power 5 teams, even if it hurts our bowl eligibility on occasion. 

A compromise will be reached soon and I am sure it will be called unanimous regardless of how the actual votes play out. 


Hoib said...

I'm for 9-1. W/ in that mix whomever is playing ND that game should count in the 9, and in the ACC standings. This allows the So. Schools the flexibility to play their SEC rival on the the years they play ND, to not have to play 11 p5 games. BC has shown under this regime they can't be trusted to schedule quality non league games. I want it out of their hands as much as possible.

Geezer eagle said...

Agreed. Eliminate the creampuffs.

Geezer eagle said...
This comment has been removed by the author.