20-Game Conference Schedule Coming

[newclasspack]

Apparently we are moving to 20 ACC games in 2019. I hope that means we get our Home and home with you guys back.

[SCMatt33]

Apparently we are moving to 20 ACC games in 2019. I hope that means we get our Home and home with you guys back.

Excited about the 20 games, but I don't think the math works for adding any further "permanent rivals". I think the most likely scenario is a return to the three year rotation of Home, Away, and Home and Away. You'd have 2 permanent rivals (4 games), 4 teams away only (4 games), 4 teams home only (4 games), and 4 teams home and away (8 games). You'd have the three groups of 4 rotate every year just like in the old 12 team, 16 game model.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Apparently we are moving to 20 ACC games in 2019. I hope that means we get our Home and home with you guys back.

20 games? Wow. That means, what, 10 games for non-conference?

3 for a tournament
1 for a marquee game (Champions Classic)
1 for the B10/ACC Challenge
5 cupcakes

That's not a lot of cupcakes. Although having GT and BC count as cupcakes these days...

[pfrduke]

Per reports from ACC Media Session:

https://twitter.com/aadelsonESPN/sta...30328264208384

Bold prediction - starting in 2019, further hit pieces will be written about Duke's non-conference scheduling.

[SCMatt33]

20 games? Wow. That means, what, 10 games for non-conference?

3 for a tournament
1 for a marquee game (Champions Classic)
1 for the B10/ACC Challenge
5 cupcakes

That's not a lot of cupcakes. Although having GT and BC count as cupcakes these days...

Or 11 non-conference with four in a tournament as its been awhile since Duke played in a 3 game tourney (Maui in 07-08 I think, as it added the 4th game by 2011)

I'd also assume the NY game stays in, so your looking at a tournament (with one or two cupcakes built in), Champions game, challenge game, NY game, 4 other cupcakes.

[kAzE]

Holy cow, that's a ton of conference games. I think in the grand scheme, it probably helps our strength of schedule, since that's 10 true road games guaranteed, and there's a strong chance the ACC will be among the toughest, if not THE toughest conference for the foreseeable future.

Since the Champions Classic and ACC/B10 Challenge (usually match ups against marquee out-of-conference programs) seem to be popular events that will stick around, this basically just means less room for cupcakes. I guess that could be good or bad, depending on the amount of development our team needs. But a new 20-year TV deal certainly means more money for everyone (except, of course, the athletes).

[Pghdukie]

My concerns with 20 conference games would be starting league play at Christmas Holiday Break and too close after Finals. ACC would have to finish schedule and Conference Tournament before Madness.

[devildeac]

Apparently we are moving to 20 ACC games in 2019. I hope that means we get our Home and home with you guys back.

Nah, that makes too much sense. More than likely, the acc orifice will figure out some way for Duke to play UL, UVa, Syracuse, ND, the U and the cheaters twice each season and the lying, cheating bastards down the road will get BC and GT twice a season and maybe even get to play Clemson twice a season...in chappaheeya .

[mo.st.dukie]

My concerns with 20 conference games would be starting league play at Christmas Holiday Break and too close after Finals. ACC would have to finish schedule and Conference Tournament before Madness.

We usually have games against mid-majors squeezed in there anyways. Usually we'd play two or three mid-majors shortly after Christmas but before the new year and conference play. This year we have games against mid-majors on the 19th and 21st. So it's really not going to be any different except that they'll be playing better competition and may have to be on the road.

I like it, heck I wouldn't mind a 22 or 24 game conference schedule and eliminate all but one or two mid-majors from the schedule. I still don't understand why football has an 8 game conference schedule with a permanent cross division partner meaning you have to wait years to play other cross division teams. Just go to an 11 or 12 game conference schedule and play everybody more often.

[Bluedog]

Holy cow, that's a ton of conference games. I think in the grand scheme, it probably helps our strength of schedule, since that's 10 true road games guaranteed, and there's a strong chance the ACC will be among the toughest, if not THE toughest conference for the foreseeable future.

Since the Champions Classic and ACC/B10 Challenge (usually match ups against marquee out-of-conference programs) seem to be popular events that will stick around, this basically just means less room for cupcakes. I guess that could be good or bad, depending on the amount of development our team needs. But a new 20-year TV deal certainly means more money for everyone (except, of course, the athletes).

The thing is with RPI SOS, wouldn't having 20 conference games dilute it and hurt SOS? For example, let's say 15 conference teams have 13 out of conference games and the average team goes 9-4. If any of those 13 games are "replaced" by in conference, by definition the conference will go .500 in those (if it's 4 games between two teams, that'd be 2-2, whereas if those 2 games per team were out of conference, it'd likely be better than .500 overall as a conference). Thus, Duke's overall opponent's record will go DOWN because opponents are playing each other within the conference more. Basically, "dominating" other leagues doesn't have as heavy of an impact because the sample size is smaller. There's a feedback loop because it's based on your record (which might got down because harder opponents in conference) and then your opponent's record (which will go down because fewer out of conference opponents). And, in general, harder to say which conference is best simply because sample sizes are going down.

Not saying I'm against it necessarily, but from a math perspective, not sure it's going to help SOS. But I could be off base...It puts more pressure to completely dominate the few games at the beginning of the season since each game has a larger influence on the perceived strength/record of the conference.

[Wahoo2000]

Excited about the 20 games, but I don't think the math works for adding any further "permanent rivals". I think the most likely scenario is a return to the three year rotation of Home, Away, and Home and Away. You'd have 2 permanent rivals (4 games), 4 teams away only (4 games), 4 teams home only (4 games), and 4 teams home and away (8 games). You'd have the three groups of 4 rotate every year just like in the old 12 team, 16 game model.

Another option would be 6 "permanent" rivals and the other 8 rotate home and away each season. It'd make it a little easier to give more teams the permanent rival games they want. For instance (and with some exceptions), try grouping the southern football schools together, the "old" acc schools in VA and NC, and the ex-BE teams to the north and west.

Groupings like this, where each team plays the others in their group home and away yearly, then gets 1 "permanent" rival from each of the other 2 groups and the remaining 8 schools are played alternating home/away each year:
FSU/Miami/GT/Clemson/VT
Duke/UNC/NCSU/Wake/UVA
Louisville/ND/Pitt/Syr/BC

[kAzE]

The thing is with RPI SOS, wouldn't having 20 conference games dilute it and hurt SOS? For example, let's say 15 conference teams have 13 out of conference games and the average team goes 9-4. If any of those 13 games are "replaced" by in conference, by definition the conference will go .500 in those (if it's 2 games, that'd be 1-1, whereas if those 2 games per team were out of conference, it'd likely be better than .500 overall as a conference). Thus, Duke's overall opponent's record will go DOWN because opponents are playing each other within the conference more. Basically, "dominating" other leagues doesn't have as heavy of an impact because the sample size is smaller. There's a feedback loop because it's based on your record (which might got down because harder opponents in conference) and then your opponent's record (which will go down because fewer out of conference opponents). And, in general, harder to say which conference is best simply because sample sizes are going down.

Not saying I'm against it necessarily, but from a math perspective, not sure it's going to help SOS. But I could be off base...

Yeah, you might be right, since the actual numerical calculations for SOS and RPI are totally based upon win/loss, opponent's win/loss, and opponents of opponent's win/loss. But by eye test and advanced analytics (KenPom), it should be a relatively simple conclusion that more ACC games = harder schedule.

[Wahoo2000]

The thing is with RPI SOS, wouldn't having 20 conference games dilute it and hurt SOS? For example, let's say 15 conference teams have 13 out of conference games and the average team goes 9-4. If any of those 13 games are "replaced" by in conference, by definition the conference will go .500 in those (if it's 4 games between two teams, that'd be 2-2, whereas if those 2 games per team were out of conference, it'd likely be better than .500 overall as a conference). Thus, Duke's overall opponent's record will go DOWN because opponents are playing each other within the conference more. Basically, "dominating" other leagues doesn't have as heavy of an impact because the sample size is smaller. There's a feedback loop because it's based on your record (which might got down because harder opponents in conference) and then your opponent's record (which will go down because fewer out of conference opponents). And, in general, harder to say which conference is best simply because sample sizes are going down.

Not saying I'm against it necessarily, but from a math perspective, not sure it's going to help SOS. But I could be off base...It puts more pressure to completely dominate the few games at the beginning of the season since each game has a larger influence on the perceived strength/record of the conference.

I like it. Another nail in the coffin of RPI and another reason to move towards more sophisticated metrics like KenPom/Sagarin/etc. They're slow and beyond stubborn, but eventually the committee will see the light (Jerry Palm be damned).

[SCMatt33]

Another option would be 6 "permanent" rivals and the other 8 rotate home and away each season. It'd make it a little easier to give more teams the permanent rival games they want. For instance (and with some exceptions), try grouping the southern football schools together, the "old" acc schools in VA and NC, and the ex-BE teams to the north and west.

Groupings like this, where each team plays the others in their group home and away yearly, then gets 1 "permanent" rival from each of the other 2 groups and the remaining 8 schools are played alternating home/away each year:
FSU/Miami/GT/Clemson/VT
Duke/UNC/NCSU/Wake/UVA
Louisville/ND/Pitt/Syr/BC

The big downside to that is that you never get ANY home and home years with teams outside your permanent rivals, and I don't see most schools being ok with that. Additionally, having more permanent rival exacerbates the issue of unbalanced schedules when a 20 game schedule gives you a chance to somewhat alleviate it.

There is a middle ground where teams have 4 permanent rivals and the remaining ten go into five groups of two that rotate home, away, home, away, home and away, but I'd wager on the conference sticking with 2 permanent rivals.