The Confidential

The ACC Sports Blog

Poll: ACC Future Football Scheduling

What do YOU think about the future football scheduling for the ACC?  Give us your opinion.


Click through for explanations of the poll options.

For background, see these articles:

  • SEC-ACC scheduling alliance?  The SEC and ACC going beyond the four rivalry games to add 10 more games between the other 10 ACC and 10 SEC schools.  We can call this the 8 + 1 proposal.
  • Then, there is simply going to 9 conference games.
  • There is also the Five Conference scheduling alliance proposed by the Confidential.  All five conferences agreeing to fair and balanced OOC matchups between schools with regional commonality.

Also, BenDNole over at TNIIAM had this comment/proposal:

My solution is this:
Pod 1: FSU, GT
Pod 2: Miami, Clemson
Group A: UNC, UVa, Duke, UofL, BC
Group B: NCSt, VT, Wake, Pitt, Cuse

Pods 1 and 2 always play each other as cross-divisional rivals.
Then, you rotate divisions:
Year 1/2: Divisions are 1A and 2B
Year 3/4: Divisions are 1B and 2A

Each team in Group A and B would have 1 permanent crossover game (aligned vertically in my example. UNC/NCst, UVa/VT, Duke/Wake, UofL/Pitt, BC/Cuse). The other crossover game for teams in Group A and B would rotate between the remaining 4 teams.

Teams would average only 4 years (maximum) between meetings. Every school would play a Florida team every year. And every team would be play the Atlanta team every other year, on average.

And then, of course, there is the status quo.

Single Post Navigation

12 thoughts on “Poll: ACC Future Football Scheduling

  1. Although I voted for the ACC/SEC games I would also support the 5 Alliance Schedule, but I think the ACC could benefit with either, more exposure in our footprint or more on the left coast.

  2. If I had to pick one, I’d go ACC/SEC. I like the Confidential’s idea better IF the ACC could stay at 8 league games and still work it out to play 2 OOC P5 games somehow (while accounting for Notre Dame as one of those every 3 years). It would take lots of juggling, but worth it IMO.

    • Noah Tojans on said:

      I would simply expand the conference with Cincinnati and UCONN. Divide into four. four team regions (local). Play each regional opponent annually, a rotating region annually, and then two opponents from a third region. This ensures you play each conference member every other year. Assumign the NCAA removes the divisional requirement for a CCG, then you pick the two top teams to advance to the CCG. If they don’t then simply match two divisions together each season for a division and then rotate the next season. Basketball scheduling is even simpler.

      • The problems with this:

        #1. Cincy and UConn add little demographically and monetarily. From a football standpoint, both are “good.” But not needle-movers.

        #2. With ND, that means 17 basketball teams. Plus, ACC keeping that ND spot open for a reason. If ND ever wants to join, UConn or Cincy will get the spot.

        #3. At 16, probably easier to use fours… but then schedule your own pod, plus 2 from each other pod = 9 games.


        • Go all out for ND to go all in with Texas coming along. That would solve alot of problems.

        • BenDNole on said:

          Yeah, I’d just wait until 2025, when that Big12 GOR runs out. Invite UT, OU, OSU, TT, Baylor. Tell ND they can get in at #20, or we’ll find someone else (because if we get the Texoma five, we don’t need ND anymore). Conference of 20 with 4 pods of 5
          1) FSU, Miami, Clemson, GT, Wake
          2) VT, UNC, NCSt, UVa, Duke
          3) ND, Pitt, BC, Cuse, UofL
          4) UT, OU, OSU, TT, Baylor

          9 conference games, rotating pods together to form divisions

        • One can always dream.

          4 division games. Play one other division every year. Rotate in 3-year cycles.

  3. For me, it all starts with a division-less set-up. Then, it doesn’t really matter if we’re doing 8 or 9 games. I would personally love to play an SEC team every year, but it would be great to see Clemson, Wake and FSU more too. As for ND and Texas all in, that would be perfect (or even WVU which probably makes more sense geographically). At that point, even 10 games might be good if there was a consensus between the power conferences. If not, 8 or 9 would still work.

  4. BenDNole on said:

    Surely, between here and the sbnation community, we have someone who can ask the ACC office if they’re considering anything “unique” (other than what’s listed). I feel like we have to have somebody who can present some good ideas to the HQ. Anyone know of how to get these ideas in front of the decision-makers?

  5. Ren.hoek on said:

    After the NCAA relaxes the division rules, we should keep divisions and play 4 games in each divisions for 8 total games. 2 permanent & 2 rotating in your division, 1 permanent & 3 rotating in the other division. You play everyone in 2 years, keep 8 games, and preserve essential rivalries.

  6. I’m going to be the boring guy who votes for the status quo. I hate the idea of ditching divisions (if you win all your conference games, there should be no way you are not conference champion). 9 conference games are not practical for the schools with locked non-conference rivalry games, especially given the ND games. 8+1 with the SEC really isn’t all that interesting to the teams without an SEC rivalry — I don’t think we want any part of Alabama in the Dome any time soon. And rotating divisions are just silly.

    I’d like divisional realignment along strict north/south lines, but that’s not happening either. Which leaves things the way they are. Sorry.

%d bloggers like this: