ACC Realignment: Georgia Tech Fans Approve Of A Eagles-Jackets Swap

by Brian Favat on May 13, 2011 11:57 AM EDT in Boston College Football

As a follow up to yesterday's ACC realignment hypothetical, Winfield from the SB Nation Georgia Tech blog From The Rumble Seat tackled the same issue of whether Boston College and Georgia Tech should swap divisions. Seems like he is in favor of said proposal:

"Clemson stays on our schedule as an intra-division game and Virginia Tech becomes the inter-division rival. This is awesome because they don't fall off the schedule, and maybe, just maybe, we can get Clemson and Virginia Tech to play at Bobby Dodd during different years unlike now. Second awesome point is that Florida State would be a permanent fixture on the schedule. And to that I say BRING IT. My biggest lament about conference expansion was dropping the Seminoles off the schedule. I'd love to see them back on it. Finally, a selfish awesome: Duke would fall off the schedule for a little while. While a win is appreciated, I am really really really really tired of playing them."

So, to recap, Georgia Tech fans think this idea is awesome, because it improves the Jackets yearly football schedule by adding Florida State and balancing the home-road sched a bit more. BC fans generally think it's awesome because we'd get to play Virginia Tech, Miami and Clemson annually. Seems like a win-win.

Of course, because this is a win-win for both programs, this idea will never get off the ground.

Tweet Comment 12 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Brian knows my thoughts on this

But to reiterate, I don’t know if this is such a good move as it puts all the new teams in the same division, hurting some eventual rivalries to come. Brian was kind enough though to point out about travel through the flight, can’t believe I missed that. As a Clemson fan, I like how the divisions are now, as we get all of our traditional rivals already, but I do see that the BC-Miami series not being played each year hurts the conference. Maybe just maybe, the ACC will reevaluate this and move BC over. Maybe. But as you said:

Of course, because this is a win-win for both programs, this idea will never get off the ground.

Having been an ACC fan my entire life, this is pretty par for the course.

Oh, and to add some good fire, I think ACC needs to grab WVU and maybe ECU to control the Potomac region, and bring in more viewers. I think the conference screwed thinking that because a school is in a region people will watch, (before I get flamed, I am not calling out BC, because I wanted BC in the conference to play Miami, and for a potential future road trip venture for me), instead of thinking about getting people to watch. WVU and ECU have huge underground fan bases, and they are freaking everywhere. I see WVU & ECU stuff all over where I live, adding them would guarantee ACC control through the Virginia’s and Carolinas for years to come. my thoughts though.

Don't give up, don't ever give up ~ Jim Valvano

by AParker on May 13, 2011 1:05 PM EDT reply actions

I don’t doubt ECU’s presence in the Carolinas, but adding the Pirates would not enhance the ACC’s national image. ECU is an unknown outside of the region and while it would increase their profile to join the ACC, it certainly would not help increase the ACC’s profile. Of course, if conferences start moving to 14 or 16 teams each and the ACC loses a few teams or cannot lure larger market teams into joining the conference, then ECU does become a realistic alternative.

by BCPhilly13 on May 13, 2011 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions

ECU and WVU are not options due to academics. At all. The ACC is very clear on this.

Also, I don’t think BC, VT, and Miami are in position to develop new rivalries. How many does a school need? 3 or 4?

'11: Minimum Goal: Win 10 games again
'10: 7th in offense, 41st in defense. Division Champions. 10-4. (6-3)
'09: 3rd in offense, 107th in defense. 7-6 (4-4)

Tomahawk Nation: Nole-Holds-Barred Analysis of FSU Sports!
Follow Tomahawk Nation's Twitter feed!

by Bud Elliott on May 13, 2011 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions