While I'm not really a fan of abandoning divisions, doing so would allow for a schedule in which even a school in a conference of 14 could play all the other schools in the conference at least twice in 4 years (and with only an 8-game conference schedule). I was inspired by this article. Basically, for a 14-team conference, each team gets 3 protected annual matchups and alternates between half of the other 10 opponents every 2 years. The author proposes a different scheme for the ACC, adding ND as a full member and having 4 protected matchups. Here I'm working with the ACC as is and giving them 3 protected matchups like the Big Ten and SEC. I also changed some of the matchups around in each conference. I tried to retain traditional/desired rivalries while still remaining somewhat competitively balanced.

The last 2 columns for the ACC, Big Ten, and SEC are the matchups I'd add if the conferences wanted to expand to 4 or 5 protected matchups. Having 5 protected matchups works well with a 9-game conference schedule, permitting each team to play all other teams at least twice in 4 years.

ACC

Big Ten

SEC

I also have one for the Pac-12. The protected matchups were obvious. I suppose they could go with an 8-game schedule, but if they stick with 9 games, every team can play 3 California schools per season. This gives the Northwest and Mountain schools equal access to the coveted SoCal recruiting grounds.

Pac-12

Here's my setup for the ACC with 15 schools (ND goes all in). Each school has 4 protected matchups.

ACC

What do you think of the whole scheme? Any matchups I should change?