Good news for expansion haters. Sort of

[Chard]

I can't find any mention of this article (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/hokies-journal/2010/10/acc_athletic_directors_conside.html) on the board.

Last week, all 12 athletic directors from the ACC convened in Blacksburg for their annual fall meeting and one of the big topics of discussion was an expanded conference schedule for football and men's basketball.

Talk centered specifically around increasing the amount of conference games each ACC team plays -- from eight to nine games in football and from 16 to 18 games in basketball.

Later in the article:

"There’s a lot more discussion that will have to occur before a vote is taken, in my opinion," Weaver said Monday. "We have not come to a resolution and I think it's a little premature for us in the ACC."

So, it sounds like something that is being seriously discussed but no one is rushing for it.

I wonder what the basketball coaches think of this. Wasn't Coach K against the return to a round robin?

[JasonEvans]

18 games in basketball does not get you back to the round robin. You would have to go to 22 games for a round-robin in basketball. Still, 18 games means more home-and-home matchups and decreases the likelihood of a skewed schedule giving a team a big advantage over others (I'm looking at you, 2007 Virginia).

In football, I really doubt they do anything because a 9th league game means an imbalanced home-road schedule, which is pretty unfair, and it means one less optional game for teams. The optional games are often home contests against undermanned non-BCS opponents and (for many ACC schools) those are big revenue drivers.

It all comes down to money and I don't really see the money in extra league games for football.

--Jason "I like it in hoops, not in football" Evans

[Acymetric]

18 games in basketball does not get you back to the round robin. You would have to go to 22 games for a round-robin in basketball. Still, 18 games means more home-and-home matchups and decreases the likelihood of a skewed schedule giving a team a big advantage over others (I'm looking at you, 2007 Virginia).

In football, I really doubt they do anything because a 9th league game means an imbalanced home-road schedule, which is pretty unfair, and it means one less optional game for teams. The optional games are often home contests against undermanned non-BCS opponents and (for many ACC schools) those are big revenue drivers.

It all comes down to money and I don't really see the money in extra league games for football.

--Jason "I like it in hoops, not in football" Evans

I dunno, there would be more big time in-conference matchups most likely...that could boost ticket sales or more importantly come in handy negotiating for a tv contract...take Directional U off of Clemson's schedule and replace it with NC State or Virginia Tech...something along those lines. Definitely a bigger tv draw, right?

[RoyalBlue08]

I'm ok with 22 league games. Let's start Dec. 1 and get rid of all those silly non conference games. Preseason tournament, ACC-Big Ten challenge, and then conference play! (I know, I know, it's not going to happen because 1.), 2.), .....)

[Bob Green]

I'm ok with 22 league games. Let's start Dec. 1 and get rid of all those silly non conference games. Preseason tournament, ACC-Big Ten challenge, and then conference play! (I know, I know, it's not going to happen because 1.), 2.), .....)

Unfortunately, 22 league games would most likely be the demise of the ACC-Big Ten challenge. That's the exact reason the Big East coaches voted down extending the ACC-Big East challenge. All those silly non conference games serve a purpose in preparing the team by allowing the coaching staff to mix and match line-ups and exposing freshmen to the college game without dumping them straight into the briar patch of ACC competition, plus those games often times simulate an NCAA Tournament first round game.

Bottom line: I do not favor 22 league games.

[ACCBBallFan]

No comment on football.

In basketball the way they would probably adminsiter it is having 3 logical or physical divisions with 4 teams each.

6 - Always play your home division opponents home and home

8 - alternate which of the other division teams play twice or one

4 - alternate as above
---
18

Could have a Carolinas division with Duke, UNC, Wake and NC St

A state rivals division with VUVA, VA Tech, FSU and Miami-FL with both pairs not necessarily in same division

Others - Clemson, GA Tech, BC and Maryland

So perhaps a Southern Clemson, GA Tech, FSU and Miami and

an Eastern diviison: BC, MD, UVA and VA Tech.

or split into second division of charter ACC schools Clemson, Maryland, UVA and GA Tech

final division of most recent additions FSU, BC - VA Tech, Miami

I think Gary would lobby against it as he would prefer to play Duke and UNC twice since he fares better against them than depending on someone else to upset them.

[sagegrouse]

I fully support the expansion of the conference football and basketball schedules for and only one reason -- to make State a rivalry game for Duke in both sports. That means a football game every year and home-and-home in basketball.

As the Grey Fox, Everett Case, once said, "Just bury me somewhere along Route 70, going to a game at Duke."

sagegrouse

[snowdenscold]

I agree that 22 would probably be too many to squeeze into a season, but I definitely support going to 18 (I don't care either way about football).

The chance to pick up 2 more home and away series is quite appealing, especially if you lost the first game =)