ACC 2-7-7 conference scheduling idea (except for two schools)
Since the SEC is adopting a nine-game model, probably using a 3-6-6 format, the ACC will probably switch to a nine-game model as well. So let’s take a look at 9 game models.
As we all know, there are two constraints:
1) The ACC has 17 football schools.
2) UNC needs to maintain three primary rivals.
Here’s one solution I can think of: let every school have two primary rivals and play a 2-7-7 schedule, except for UNC and NC State, which will have three primary rivals and play 10 conference games every other year.
For example, in odd years, UNC plays 10 conference games, and in even years, NC State plays 10 conference games.
Does this make sense? Please let me know if the math doesn’t work. I’m a Pamplin graduate.
Assuming the math works, here is my pairing for primary rivals:
UNC: NC State, Duke, UVa
NC State: UNC, WF, GT
Duke: UNC, WF
WF: Duke, NC State
UVa: VT, UNC
VT: UVa, Miami
Miami: VT, FSU
FSU: Miami, Clemson
Clemson: FSU, GT
GT: Clemson, NC State
Stan: Cal, SMU
Cal: Stan, SMU
SMU: Stan, Cal
Cuse: BC, Pitt
Pitt: Cuse, Louisville
BC: Cuse, Louisville
Louisville: Pitt, BC
What do you think?
Everyone has at least two primary rivals and plays everyone else every other year.
8 Replies
M
MVIII
11mo
Unless UNC and NC State want to do this which I highly doubt they do.
(In response to this post by RandomAsianGuy)
11mo
Dropping a school would be even more difficult.
(In response to this post by MVIII)
11mo
would take money to leave the conference? I mean, many schools are going through the process of whether or not they want to compete by playing players, and whether they will get left behind anyway.
What if, for example, Wake forest decided to jettison football, and join the Big East? Duke? BC?
I'm not saying it could realistically happen, but next year it will cost $149M to exit the conference. What if the conference paid said school $75M++ to leave the conference, and move down to FCS in football?
** Edited by Big12 guy at 8/22/2025, 2:26:07 PM
(In response to this post by MVIII)
S
Stech
11mo
no I don't think they will take it at 75M. Plus probably everyone in the ACC but Duke and UNC make way more money off of football than basketball, even if they stink. That said, I like the way you are thinking out of the box!!
PS I do think that the reason the ESPN basketball talking heads are talking about an ACC Big East merger is that is entirely possible, with the ACC being the conference name because of the ESPN 50% owned Channel. ACC will eventually stand for Academic Conference of Champions or something like that. If they start paying the Sweet 16 in basketball like the eventual playoff 16, basketball can make a lot of money. Many people have recency bias, but basketball makes a ton of money in the NCAA tournament, but it doesn't get paid out like football. Once they expand the tournament, it will.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
E
EDGEMAN
11mo
...conference, shedding the deadwood. Would be great if they can get a conference network channel. That might actually raise the per-member payout above what either conference is receiving now, or better yet, what they're projected to receive down the road.
Football first schools...go with large public universities first, then fill in as needed with smaller public and then private schools to get an even number.
(In response to this post by Stech)
11mo
Separate football, and form a football only conference.
We will see if basketball is negotiated separately in the B12, but the Big East gives a base.
I think football a football only conference is the only way to get back to regional conferences.
Separate the football, and see where the media money falls.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
11mo
(In response to this post by Stech)
11mo
Get rid of the weak link or two.
But I just took my daughter on a tour of Wake Forest. Half of that tour was them emphasizing their Power 4 athletic affiliation. Seems like a bit part of their culture and identity.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)