ACC to consider adding 9th conference game

Great, another round of unwatchable conference games instead of a round of unwatchable OOC games.

The ACC-pouring salt on the wounds of college football for the last 40 years.

They are doing it, if they do it, for one reason and only one reason.  To save money.  Not for any other reason.  And it will affect their W-L record if they trade in Coastal Carolina or S.C. State for another ACC opponent.  If they trade Notre Dame or USC or Georgia they may not.

Also it is blatantly unfair to Florida State, Georgia Tech and Clemson.  They already have a must game with in state, OOC BCS opponents.  Now they have very limited scheduling flexibility as opposed to the Tobacco Road or Virginia teams. 

This has pros and cons, but just because the PAC 10 does it does not mean it is without flaws.  Other than USC and ND, I know of know traditional rivals from outside that conference that teams must play. 

We will see how it plays out.  But this does not guarantee a worse overall record unless they give up the marquis OOC game and keep the Div II or weak OOC opponent. 

I know of know no traditional rivals

I would love to see the ACC approve their schedule.  Please tell me if you would miss any of these games:

BC vs. UMass (FCS)

Clemson vs. Furman (FCS)

Florida State vs. UAB

Maryland vs. Villanova (FCS)

North Carolina State vs. Wofford (FCS)

Wake Forest vs. Army

Duke vs. Northwestern

Georgia Tech vs. Samford (FCS)

Miami vs. FIU

UNC vs. James Madison (FCS)

UVA vs. Middle Tennessee State

VaTech vs. William & Mary (FCS)

In the interest of better football I hope the ACC approves the 9th game.  Hopefully all BCS conferences will eventually follow suit.

UW Dawg, I hope you are right but I have my doubts.

Not sure why Wake and Army or Duke and Northwestern are a  problem.  On the others I agree....however, I think it is a stretch to believe that these are the games that will disappear.  The purpose is to save money, not necessarily come up with a more attractive schedule.

Most  believe that major schools must have an absolute  minimum of 6 home games to cut it and many believe that number is 7.  It will be tough just maintaining the 6 games if these schools go to 9 conference games.  On alternating years they must have 2 of those OOC games at home just to get to 6.  If your OOC opponents are BCS level, they are going want home and home games.  As I mentioned above, Clemson, Florida State and Georgia Tech already are locked into such a series. 

The other thing 9 games inside the conference does, is increase the liklihood of a rematch in the Conference Championship game, which is a bane to many who don't like these conference championship games.  Unlike the PAC 10, 9 games does not give you a complete round robin and does not allow the league to drop that championship game.

Schools are not going to save money by playing Notre Dame, UCLA, Colorado etc.  They will save money by bringing in Middle Tennessee and James Madison etc.  Again, I hope you are right, but I have real doubts about getting a more attractive schedule out of this.

I'm not an ACC fan, so I could care less about them saving money (good for them if they do).  I just want to see better football games.

Weather it is more conference games, or just placing more of the quality BCS opponents on everyone's schedule, I think that eliminating the unbalanced FCS matchups is better for college football and the fans.