think the ACC would want to give the model a few years to see how things play out when implemented. On paper it looks like it is a good idea. However, once it is put into practice then schools and their fans could start to raise objections to it or want to make tweaks to it. Specifically I thinking about the schools with 0 or 1 protected rivals because those schools could be burdened with playing the "less desirable" members more frequently than the schools with 2 or 3 protected rivals. For example VT could end up being stuck with playing BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Wake, and L'ville more frequently than Clemson, FSU, Miami, and UNC because they have 3 protected rivals and VT isn't one of them. Also, it could mean schools like UVA, Duke, NC State, and GT aren't burdened with playing the less desirable members as frequently as VT because they have 2 or 3 protected rivals which happen to not include any school on the "less desirable member list." Plus, the schools VT ends up playing more frequently would become a de facto protected rival for the most part because that group of schools would be included in the pool of schools to fill out VT's conference schedule due to quirks created in the future conference schedule rotation. The quirks are created because not everyone has the same number of protected conference games.