(04-19-2020 09:53 AM)esayem Wrote:  I’d make some changes to hoops partners to better incorporate Louisville:

Boston College- Notre Dame, Syracuse
Clemson- Virginia*, Georgia Tech
Duke- North Carolina, Wake Forest
Florida State- Georgia Tech*, Miami
Georgia Tech- Clemson, Florida State*
Louisville- Virginia Tech*, Notre Dame*
Miami- Florida State, Pittsburgh*
North Carolina- Duke, North Carolina State
North Carolina State- North Carolina, Wake Forest
Notre Dame- Boston College, Louisville*
Pittsburgh- Miami*, Syracuse
Syracuse- Boston College, Pittsburgh
Virginia- Clemson*, Virginia Tech
Virginia Tech- Louisville*, Virginia
Wake Forest- Duke, North Carolina State

I though about ND-Pitt instead of BC, and BC-Miami as well.

Ideally, UVA would have UNC or Duke instead of Clemson, but there is only so much that can be done with two permanent opponents.

I'm basing this on current state of men's basketball but

I would say pair up Duke-Virginia. Duke-Wake Forest is absolutely not necessary. That will leave Clemson-Wake Forest. No way Virginia should get stuck with Clemson in basketball. They're stuck with Virginia Tech but that's of course because they're in the same state. I'd also do Syracuse-Louisville and Boston College-Virginia Tech instead of Syracuse-Boston College and Louisville-Virginia Tech. Lville-VaT is a dud unless they bring back Seth Greenberg or Buzz Williams. If Boston College and Miami want, I'd be willing to pair them up, leaving Notre Dame and Pittsburgh. I'm not sure Pittsburgh-Miami is necessary to keep but I'm OK with BC-ND and Mia-Pitt as well.
Florida State probably deserves better teams than Miami and Georgia Tech but there isn't anyone suitable and they get the two closest geographical teams.

If Duke doesn't want to play North Carolina and Virginia twice every year, then Virginia can play Florida State. That leaves Duke, Wake Forest, Georgia Tech, and Clemson. Duke can't play Wake Forest since that would leave Georgia Tech and Clemson and they already have a matchup with each other. So Duke would take Georgia Tech (lesser of two evils) and Wake Forest and Clemson play each other again. Or Duke can take Florida State although that leaves Virginia with Georgia Tech (unless they actually prefer Clemson).

(04-19-2020 12:26 PM)schmolik Wrote:  Florida State probably deserves better teams than Miami and Georgia Tech but there isn't anyone suitable and they get the two closest geographical teams.

If Duke doesn't want to play North Carolina and Virginia twice every year, then Virginia can play Florida State. That leaves Duke, Wake Forest, Georgia Tech, and Clemson. Duke can't play Wake Forest since that would leave Georgia Tech and Clemson and they already have a matchup with each other. So Duke would take Georgia Tech (lesser of two evils) and Wake Forest and Clemson play each other again. Or Duke can take Florida State although that leaves Virginia with Georgia Tech (unless they actually prefer Clemson).

GT won't have a Bobinski induced hangover in basketball forever. The clock is ticking on Pastner. Clemson and FSU are the right ones for both sports.

(04-19-2020 12:57 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  GT won't have a Bobinski induced hangover in basketball forever. The clock is ticking on Pastner. Clemson and FSU are the right ones for both sports.

You realize you insulted your own school when you said Clemson was the right school for Georgia Tech in men's basketball right?

Those are not Cuse's rivals in hoops.

Keep one but give use either Louisville or Duke for the other.

ACC NCAA Tournament Performance:

2010-2019
Duke: 10 trips, 26 wins, 7 Sweet 16's, 2 Final Four's, 2 Championships so 10/26/7/2/2. All other teams will follow this pattern. First Four wins don't count as it's an unfair advantage to those teams to count an extra win. First four losses don't count as NCAA appearances.

Ranked in order by wins.
Duke: 10/26/7/2/2
North Carolina: 9/24/6/2/1
Syracuse: 8/17/5/2/0
Louisville: 8/16/4/2/1
Virginia: 7/13/3/1/1
Florida State: 6/9/3
Notre Dame: 7/8/2
NC State: 5/4/2
Miami: 4/4/2
Pittsburgh: 5/3/0
Virginia Tech: 3/2/1
Clemson: 3/2/1
Georgia Tech: 1/1
Wake Forest: 1/1
Boston College: 0

2000-2019:

North Carolina: 17/50/11/6/3
Duke: 20/49/15/4/3
Syracuse: 15/30/9/3/1
Louisville: 15/28/7/3/1
Pittsburgh: 13/16/5/0/0
Virginia: 9/14/3/1/1
Notre Dame: 12/13/3
NC State: 10/9/3
Florida State: 7/9/3
Georgia Tech: 5/7/1/1
Miami: 7/7/3
Wake Forest: 7/6/1
Boston College: 7/6/1
Virginia Tech: 4/3/1
Clemson: 5/2/1

Way to go Clemson! 2 NCAA Tournament wins in 20 years! There are 89 NCAA teams that have won 3 or more games in the NCAA Men's Division 1 Tournament in the last 20 years including all 14 other ACC teams, Mississippi AND Mississippi State, Washington State (Washington's won a lot of games), Ohio (not Ohio State, of course they have, Ohio University), Kent State, Western Kentucky, need I go on? When it comes to men's basketball, Clemson belongs in the SEC (and Kentucky and Florida belong in the ACC). Of course recently Wake Forest and Boston College have been worse but they were at least good in the previous decade.

Why do we put up with Clemson again and let them tell us we can't have a team that has won more tournament games in the last 20 years than every ACC member but North Carolina and Duke in our conference? It's not like they're in a relevant state or a relevant city. Oh yeah, that other sport.

(04-19-2020 09:50 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(04-19-2020 09:31 AM)esayem Wrote:  The ND deal helped the conference, so if that’s a shame, so be it. Plus, if they join a football conference in the next 17 years, it’ll be the ACC.

Yeah, I dont understand the trashing of ND. Im glad to be affiliated with them.

Let me explain it for you.

Today they play 5 ACC games that we decide. They play Navy - that is six dedicated games.

If we add their savior Navy, they want to drop to 4 ACC games and Navy. The ACC then gains NOTHING and ND gains another free game.

Now I don't know what that is called in upstate NY, but in Central NC we call that low class ****.

(04-19-2020 01:42 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(04-19-2020 12:57 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  GT won't have a Bobinski induced hangover in basketball forever. The clock is ticking on Pastner. Clemson and FSU are the right ones for both sports.

You realize you insulted your own school when you said Clemson was the right school for Georgia Tech in men's basketball right?

It's not like the Triangle is coming off the schedule. The most popular road game for GT MBB is Clemson because it is such an easy travel. If you don't know why they're going to play in all the sports you should look more into why Clemson fans have such an affinity for two dollar bills.

(04-19-2020 05:03 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(04-19-2020 01:42 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(04-19-2020 12:57 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  GT won't have a Bobinski induced hangover in basketball forever. The clock is ticking on Pastner. Clemson and FSU are the right ones for both sports.

You realize you insulted your own school when you said Clemson was the right school for Georgia Tech in men's basketball right?

It's not like the Triangle is coming off the schedule. The most popular road game for GT MBB is Clemson because it is such an easy travel. If you don't know why they're going to play in all the sports you should look more into why Clemson fans have such an affinity for two dollar bills.

He's a Yukon fan, I doubt he'll understand. They don't travel to their home football games so the concept of going to an away game would be like trying to explain an automobile to a caveman.

FSU would like Miami, Clemson and “The Revivalry” (UL)

If we're going to decide basketball permanent rivals, I'd say the fairest is to go from the top and let those teams decide their partners and go down the line. We can do the last 10 years, last 20 years, since 1985, or some other reasonable time period). Duke and North Carolina get first pick and of course they get each other. Interestingly if football ever can go to eliminating divisions, that sounds like a reasonable way to determine football permanent rivals as well.

(04-19-2020 02:26 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Those are not Cuse's rivals in hoops.

Keep one but give use either Louisville or Duke for the other.

Well, Georgetown and UConn won’t be walking through that door so you should probably accept your former BE foes. Duke will not be shedding a rivalry game to play Syracuse twice a season. ND-Louisville should have been done as soon as they entered the conference.

If the ACC dropped divisions and went to three permanent rivals per team, I came up with these:

Numbers are conference record rank in ACC since Louisville joined.

1. Clemson: Florida State, Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech
2. Florida State: Clemson, Miami, Georgia Tech
T3. Pittsburgh (Same 2019, better 2018 record): Syracuse, Louisville, Boston College
T3. Miami: Florida State, Boston College, Virginia Tech
5. Virginia Tech: Clemson, Miami, Virginia
6. Louisville: Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia
7. North Carolina: Duke, NC State, Virginia
8. Georgia Tech: Clemson, Florida State, Wake Forest
9. NC State: North Carolina, Wake Forest, Duke
10. Virginia: Virginia Tech, Louisville, North Carolina
11. Duke: North Carolina, NC State, Wake Forest
12. Boston College: Pittsburgh, Miami, Syracuse
13. Wake Forest: NC State, Georgia Tech, Duke
14. Syracuse: Pittsburgh, Louisville, Boston College

I think Georgia Tech would want Duke over Wake Forest but then I went further and Wake Forest wound up with only NC State so I switched it around.

If we were doing men's basketball permanent rivals, keep in mind that the ACC now plays 20 conference games a season so each team now plays 6 teams twice a year and can choose up to six permanent rivals if it wishes.

If we go by the 2010-19 rankings, we divide into three groups of five teams:

Group A: Duke, North Carolina, Syracuse, Louisville, Virginia
Group B: Florida State, Notre Dame, NC State, Miami, Pittsburgh
Group C: Virginia Tech, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Wake Forest, Boston College

If everyone played everyone in their group twice that is four permanent rivals. Each team could then choose two more.

Duke: NC State, Wake Forest (UNC's already in the group)
North Carolina: NC State, Wake Forest (Duke's already in the group)
Syracuse: Pittsburgh, Boston College
Louisville: Notre Dame, Florida State
Virginia: Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech

Florida State: Louisville, Georgia Tech
Notre Dame: Louisville, Boston College
NC State: North Carolina, Duke
Miami: Virginia Tech, Clemson
Pittsburgh: Syracuse, Clemson

Virginia Tech: Virginia, Miami
Clemson: Miami, Pittsburgh
Georgia Tech: Virginia, Florida State
Wake Forest: North Carolina, Duke
Boston College: Syracuse, Notre Dame

(04-19-2020 04:47 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(04-19-2020 09:50 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(04-19-2020 09:31 AM)esayem Wrote:  The ND deal helped the conference, so if that’s a shame, so be it. Plus, if they join a football conference in the next 17 years, it’ll be the ACC.

Yeah, I dont understand the trashing of ND. Im glad to be affiliated with them.

Let me explain it for you.

Today they play 5 ACC games that we decide. They play Navy - that is six dedicated games.

If we add their savior Navy, they want to drop to 4 ACC games and Navy. The ACC then gains NOTHING and ND gains another free game.

Now I don't know what that is called in upstate NY, but in Central NC we call that low class ****.

So you are going by what a fan on a message board says, about a hypothetical situation, that may likely, never, ever come about? In Upstate NY, and anyone with any sense, would say you need to get a grip.

(04-19-2020 04:47 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(04-19-2020 09:50 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(04-19-2020 09:31 AM)esayem Wrote:  The ND deal helped the conference, so if that’s a shame, so be it. Plus, if they join a football conference in the next 17 years, it’ll be the ACC.

Yeah, I dont understand the trashing of ND. Im glad to be affiliated with them.

Let me explain it for you.

Today they play 5 ACC games that we decide. They play Navy - that is six dedicated games.

If we add their savior Navy, they want to drop to 4 ACC games and Navy. The ACC then gains NOTHING and ND gains another free game.

Now I don't know what that is called in upstate NY, but in Central NC we call that low class ****.

It is called a five game per year commitment.

That is what it is called.

Five, not six.

There is no one at ND that wants to add another game to that.

The ACC tried that in 2012 with Pitt, with the Panthers to remain an annual opponent.

ND said no. Pitt is no longer an annual opponent after being so for a long time.

If the ACC tried to add Navy to add to ND's five game commitment, ND would likely not agree to that, sorry.

That is just business.

Navy in the five game rotation would open up another game to schedule as it pleases, which would be something ND would want.

If that is not something that the ACC desired, then don't add Navy. "Problem" solved.

This scenario would be the ACC trying to unilaterally change the deal in the first place. Talk about "low class".....

(04-19-2020 08:55 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(04-19-2020 04:47 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(04-19-2020 09:50 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(04-19-2020 09:31 AM)esayem Wrote:  The ND deal helped the conference, so if that’s a shame, so be it. Plus, if they join a football conference in the next 17 years, it’ll be the ACC.

Yeah, I dont understand the trashing of ND. Im glad to be affiliated with them.

Let me explain it for you.

Today they play 5 ACC games that we decide. They play Navy - that is six dedicated games.

If we add their savior Navy, they want to drop to 4 ACC games and Navy. The ACC then gains NOTHING and ND gains another free game.

Now I don't know what that is called in upstate NY, but in Central NC we call that low class ****.

So you are going by what a fan on a message board says, about a hypothetical situation, that may likely, never, ever come about? In Upstate NY, and anyone with any sense, would say you need to get a grip.

I thought this was a message and that I was responding to a fan. I had no idea I was in fact talking to Father Jenkins rather than Terry D. No wonder ND played the old Big East so well and helped screw you out of your own conference.

Wow, this is a message board.

I had no idea.

All this time I thought I was talking to the Bubba, Boo, and Debbie, et. al.

Thank you for lifting the magic veil Cuse.

(04-20-2020 08:36 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(04-19-2020 04:47 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(04-19-2020 09:50 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(04-19-2020 09:31 AM)esayem Wrote:  The ND deal helped the conference, so if that’s a shame, so be it. Plus, if they join a football conference in the next 17 years, it’ll be the ACC.

Yeah, I dont understand the trashing of ND. Im glad to be affiliated with them.

Let me explain it for you.

Today they play 5 ACC games that we decide. They play Navy - that is six dedicated games.

If we add their savior Navy, they want to drop to 4 ACC games and Navy. The ACC then gains NOTHING and ND gains another free game.

Now I don't know what that is called in upstate NY, but in Central NC we call that low class ****.

It is called a five game per year commitment.

That is what it is called.

Five, not six.

There is no one at ND that wants to add another game to that.

The ACC tried that in 2012 with Pitt, with the Panthers to remain an annual opponent.

ND said no. Pitt is no longer an annual opponent after being so for a long time.

If the ACC tried to add Navy to add to ND's five game commitment, ND would likely not agree to that, sorry.

That is just business.

Navy in the five game rotation would open up another game to schedule as it pleases, which would be something ND would want.

If that is not something that the ACC desired, then don't add Navy. "Problem" solved.

This scenario would be the ACC trying to unilaterally change the deal in the first place. Talk about "low class".....

Like I said, an attempt to drop the commitment to 4 games - low class. Thanks for the confirmation of that Father Jenkins.

Any move by the ACC like this would be so viewed by ND:




P.S. It would still be five ACC teams per year in this scenario, not four..........Navy would just be one of the rotating five schools per year or be an annual opponent as one of the five.

(04-20-2020 08:52 AM)Statefan Wrote:  

(04-19-2020 08:55 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(04-19-2020 04:47 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(04-19-2020 09:50 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(04-19-2020 09:31 AM)esayem Wrote:  The ND deal helped the conference, so if that’s a shame, so be it. Plus, if they join a football conference in the next 17 years, it’ll be the ACC.

Yeah, I dont understand the trashing of ND. Im glad to be affiliated with them.

Let me explain it for you.

Today they play 5 ACC games that we decide. They play Navy - that is six dedicated games.

If we add their savior Navy, they want to drop to 4 ACC games and Navy. The ACC then gains NOTHING and ND gains another free game.

Now I don't know what that is called in upstate NY, but in Central NC we call that low class ****.

So you are going by what a fan on a message board says, about a hypothetical situation, that may likely, never, ever come about? In Upstate NY, and anyone with any sense, would say you need to get a grip.

I thought this was a message and that I was responding to a fan. I had no idea I was in fact talking to Father Jenkins rather than Terry D. No wonder ND played the old Big East so well and helped screw you out of your own conference.

Wow, this is a message board.

I had no idea.

All this time I thought I was talking to the Bubba, Boo, and Debbie, et. al.

Thank you for lifting the magic veil Cuse.

You are welcome. Im just happy to be able to help you see the error of you ways.

Forget basketball...they pay a fraction of the bills. The ACC needs to maximize interest by having the "brands" play more often. Clemson vs VT or Miami. Same for FSU vs those teams.


This whole "we have been playing since 1922" is cute but it hurts the conference. The divisions need to be blown to bits and a 3-3-5 model put in place. That way everyone can play everyone more often and give us MORE games that are interesting to those outside of the ACC footprint. That is the only way to grow ACC football.

That's why I say we should add WVU. WVU has natural rivalries with Pitt, Cuse, VT and even Lville. The ACC needs some rivalries north of Charlottesville. VT vs BC isn't a rivalry. UVa vs Lville isn't a rivalry. Why is that being forced down our throats?

WVU would travel almost as good as Clemson. That is the kind of traveling, football first type program we need in this conference.

It makes so much sense it won't happen because the ACC brass is clueless when it comes to football.

(04-20-2020 04:04 PM)YouPeople Wrote:  WVU would travel almost as good as Clemson. That is the kind of traveling, football first type program we need in this conference.

It makes so much sense it won't happen because the ACC brass is clueless when it comes to football.

West Virginia's academics could be fairly described as Junior College-esk. This will turn off Presidents who want to be seen in lofty academic peer groups. It will also be an issue any time there is a superstar in FB or MBB that can't make the ACC minimums but can make the NCAA minimums. WVU will take them eagerly. You going to mandate the ACC minimums become the WVU minimums? You going to give them an exemption to minimums for players in state and from a neighboring state? If you don't that might cause a problem in non-revenue sports which typically get homegrown talent even at the P5 level. Some of the teams in the conference will never want to play them: UVA, GT, UNC, Duke. ALL of the teams in the conference will have an issue for what passes as acceptable fan behavior in Morgantown.