ACC mulls 3-5-5 college football scheduling model in an effort to scrap divisions

[NT80]

A 3-5-5 scheduling model is one in which league teams would play three permanent opponents, then rotate through the rest over a two-year period (five one year, five the next).

"Earlier this week, the NCAA Football Oversight Committee recommended conferences no longer be required to have divisions to hold a conference championship game. The Division I Council is set to vote on it later this month, when it is expected to pass."

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/33899589/acc-mulls-3-5-5-college-football-scheduling-model-effort-scrap-divisions

 

[NT80]

The AAC had 11 football members this past season, with no divisions.  When NT joins the AAC it will have 14 football members.  The AAC could opt for divisions then or something different like no divisions and this 3-5-5 scheduling.

If the 3-5-5 schedule, with three permanent opponents, I'm guessing NT would like Smut, Rice and UTSA.

However, Smut may want to stay with the other three regional small privates:  Tulsa, Rice, and Tulane.

[NT93]

53 minutes ago, NT80 said:

The AAC had 11 football members this past season, with no divisions.  When NT joins the AAC it will have 14 football members.  The AAC could opt for divisions then or something different like no divisions and this 3-5-5 scheduling.

If the 3-5-5 schedule, with three permanent opponents, I'm guessing NT would like Smut, Rice and UTSA.

However, Smut may want to stay with the other three regional small privates:  Tulsa, Rice, and Tulane.

ACC not AAC.

[NT80]

11 hours ago, NT93 said:

ACC not AAC.

??  Yes, the article is about the ACC, but the AAC will be in the same situation when the CUSA schools join....

[ttunt1970]

28 minutes ago, NT80 said:

??  Yes, the article is about the ACC, but the AAC will be in the same situation when the CUSA schools join....

80 can't be the same as AAC will have 14 football playing schools not 11

[Hunter Green]

12 hours ago, NT93 said:

ACC not AAC.

Nitpicker...

[C Rod]

12 minutes ago, ttunt1970 said:

80 can't be the same as AAC will have 14 football playing schools not 11

Mike Aresco is a vocal opponent of divisions because they often don't pair the two best teams to play in the division championship game. To ensure the two best teams have a shot at the college football playoff, don't be surprised to see a 3-5-5 scenario in the AAC as well as the ACC. 

[C Rod]

Found it!

https://247sports.com/college/florida-atlantic/LongFormArticle/FAU-Football-Exclusive-Interview-with-AAC-commissioner-Mike-Aresco-Florida-Atlantic-American-Willie-Taggart-conference-realignment-174413889/#174413889_5

Quote

DIVISIONS IN THE AAC

Q: A big question with the fans of the newest programs is how divisions will work. What are some of the things that you look for when you’re breaking these teams up into the two divisions?

A: “First of all, we’re not sure that we’re going to have divisions as we go forward. We had divisions when he had 12 teams and then when UConn left and we were left with 11 teams, we decided to do away with divisions. We just had our top two teams play for the championship. Because I think the college football playoffs will expand and conferences like ours will have a shot, the top six conferences will have an automatic, I think that will be the final plan. And if that’s the case, it’s really important that you match your two best teams in the championship game. You can divisions where one division winner has three losses or four losses, that’s happened in our case once. And what if that team defeats an undefeated team on the other end, in the other division, or a one-loss team? Then, unfortunately, your champion is a three or four-loss team, which is unlikely to make the playoff. 
You really want to match your top teams.  Let’s say you have a one-loss team and an undefeated team or a two-loss team or two one-loss teams. Again, that’s what you want. So, I suspect we will look hard at this. We may decide we’ll do divisions, in which case, we would have to determine if it’s on an east-west basis, which is the case currently except for Navy, which likes to play in Texas, Tennessee and likes to play in the west division. …
I’m not saying this is going to happen, I don’t want to go on record as saying that. But I suspect that we will look really hard at whether we really want to have divisions at all … 

 

[Hunter Green]

13 hours ago, NT80 said:

The AAC had 11 football members this past season, with no divisions.  When NT joins the AAC it will have 14 football members.  The AAC could opt for divisions then or something different like no divisions and this 3-5-5 scheduling.

If the 3-5-5 schedule, with three permanent opponents, I'm guessing NT would like Smut, Rice and UTSA.

However, Smut may want to stay with the other three regional small privates:  Tulsa, Rice, and Tulane.

I'd like that pairing as well. Excellent travel destinations and decreased travel costs, in addition to increased potential for attendance. I suppose the conference will have final say as to the allignment.

[NT80]

22 minutes ago, ttunt1970 said:

80 can't be the same as AAC will have 14 football playing schools not 11

You guys.  AAC has 11 now, but will have 14 when NT joins.   

ACC has 14 now, in two divisions of 7.  But they are losing the divisions next year and going to this 3-5-5 format, which is still 8 conference games a season = 3 opponents stay the same each year (your rivals), then the other 5 opponents alternate every other year.

1 + 3 + 5 + 5 = 14 total football programs

[NT93]

1 hour ago, NT80 said:

??  Yes, the article is about the ACC, but the AAC will be in the same situation when the CUSA schools join....

I wasn’t meaning to be a jerk.  I was just clarifying that the OP’s post was about the ACC, not the AAC.  

[NT80]

4 minutes ago, NT93 said:

I wasn’t meaning to be a jerk.  I was just clarifying that the OP’s post was about the ACC, not the AAC.  

You're fine.   The main issue is the doing away with conference divisions and the pros and cons of it and/or the need even for a conference championship game.

It used to be conferences needed at least 12 or 14 or 16 members to split into even divisions and be able to host a conference championship game.   Now the division requirement is being dropped, and that could also affect conference membership goals.  

This also brings up the point = does a conference championship game help or hurt a conference?   Two undefeated teams playing could greatly benefit the winner.  But two 1-loss teams playing could just sink the loser out of a great Bowl down to a mediocre Bowl. 

[C Rod]

6 minutes ago, NT80 said:

But two 1-loss teams playing could just sink the loser out of a great Bowl down to a mediocre Bowl. 

But on the flip side, the 1-loss winner will have a stronger resume to make a NY6 bowl.

[VideoEagle]

Look at the Big XII as they've both had a championship game and not had one. The CFP committee told them they needed the "data point" of a championship game. Of course, part of that was the Big XII trying to get greedy in a year when both Baylor and TCU were close and instead of the Conference officially backing one tried to push both which caused neither to get in. Obviously, most years an AAC team won't be in the running for one of the four CFP slots but they will be in the running for a NY6 Bowl game. The "extra data point" will out weigh the hurt of the runner up.