2025 ACC thread

[Tom]

ACC needs to rethink their tiebreakers if Duke has the possibility of getting in the ACC championship over the two teams that beat them while having the same record (If UVA loses). What’s funny is that they’re getting in over them because both GT and UVA have good ACC records.

 

[Root4GT]

ACC needs to rethink their tiebreakers if Duke has the possibility of getting in the ACC championship after losing to two teams that beat them while having the same record (If UVA loses). What’s funny is that they’re getting in over them because both GT and UVA have good ACC records.

Too many teams too few games and too many teams with the same Conference record. If Duke gets in the ACC CG, all ACC teams should be embarrassed.

 

[Darthdad]

ACC needs to rethink their tiebreakers if Duke has the possibility of getting in the ACC championship over the two teams that beat them while having the same record (If UVA loses). What’s funny is that they’re getting in over them because both GT and UVA have good ACC records.

Agreed.

OTOH, the playoff committee will cream their pants over this methodology because it places at least as much emphasis on your losses than head-to-head.

Honestly, a freaking coin toss would be preferable to Duke.

 

[Spalding Jacket]

It’s 3 hours before the end of the regular season and we have no idea who is in the ACCCG. 5 possible teams, perfect ACC wheel of destiny, who says this conference is not entertaining must watch TV.

 

[Thwg777]

It’s 3 hours before the end of the regular season and we have no idea who is in the ACCCG. 5 possible teams, perfect ACC wheel of destiny, who says this conference is not entertaining must watch TV.

Down to 4. dook, uva, smu and miami. GT and pitt were mathematically eliminated so far today.

 

[Golden Tornadoes]

Screw the tie breakers and all that nonsense. We had our destiny in our own hands and played like a deer in the headlights for a whole quarter. We should have won it at home, on senior night, and taken what we earned instead of hoping and praying all this junk went our way.

ETA: Miami has made our ACC losses look even more embarrassing by absolutely destroying Pitt and NCST.

 

[BleedGoldNWhite21]

When you consider how easily we could have lost to Wake, Duke and even BC, the tiebreakers with all of these teams bunched up don’t really bother me. We were lucky during the bye week to be handed control of our destiny again and we laid a huge goose egg. Only ones to blame are ourselves.

 

[Buzzed_11]

So dumb that we beat Duke and they have a tiebreaker over us. These acc rules are dumb

 

[RonJohn]

ACC needs to rethink their tiebreakers if Duke has the possibility of getting in the ACC championship over the two teams that beat them while having the same record (If UVA loses). What’s funny is that they’re getting in over them because both GT and UVA have good ACC records.

There is nothing wrong with the tie-breakers. If using head-to-head the way you want with SMU-Miami-Pitt-GT-Duke all having two losses: Miami would be eliminated, Pitt, would be eliminated, GT would be eliminated, and Duke would be eliminated. IF SMU had lost to Duke, the SMU would be eliminated also. You can't take the head to head of two teams in a multi-team tie and start promoting or elininating teams based on it, unless they are all common opponents. You could argue about using something else as the next tie-breaker, but the strength of your schedule is a good one.

The big issue is that there is not a definitive way of breaking the multi-team ties. You have to pick something, and stick with that no matter how it affects your speficic team that year.

A larger issue for the conference is that with the OOC wins/losses and strength having no impact on ACCCG tie-breakers, it sets up a case where a team that hasn't won any OOC FBS games could go to the championship game and cause the conference to have zero teams in the playoffs. They should look at having rules about being at least .500 in OOC games to make it to the ACCCG. Maybe only allowed 1 OOC loss to make the game. I wouldn't really like that, especially with GT having 3 P4 OOC games next year, but something needs to be done to keep the ACC Champion from being a five loss team.

 

[BleedGoldNWhite21]

So dumb that we beat Duke and they have a tiebreaker over us. These acc rules are dumb

Pitt would be saying the same thing about us had Duke lost. That’s the problem when a bunch of teams have the same record and beat each other.

 

[Root4GT]

There is nothing wrong with the tie-breakers. If using head-to-head the way you want with SMU-Miami-Pitt-GT-Duke all having two losses: Miami would be eliminated, Pitt, would be eliminated, GT would be eliminated, and Duke would be eliminated. IF SMU had lost to Duke, the SMU would be eliminated also. You can't take the head to head of two teams in a multi-team tie and start promoting or elininating teams based on it, unless they are all common opponents. You could argue about using something else as the next tie-breaker, but the strength of your schedule is a good one.

The big issue is that there is not a definitive way of breaking the multi-team ties. You have to pick something, and stick with that no matter how it affects your speficic team that year.

A larger issue for the conference is that with the OOC wins/losses and strength having no impact on ACCCG tie-breakers, it sets up a case where a team that hasn't won any OOC FBS games could go to the championship game and cause the conference to have zero teams in the playoffs. They should look at having rules about being at least .500 in OOC games to make it to the ACCCG. Maybe only allowed 1 OOC loss to make the game. I wouldn't really like that, especially with GT having 3 P4 OOC games next year, but something needs to be done to keep the ACC Champion from being a five loss team.

With ND, Tenn and UGA as our 3 OOC games in 2027 I don’t want the need to have a winning record in OOC games as a factor!

 

[Darthdad]

There is nothing wrong with the tie-breakers. If using head-to-head the way you want with SMU-Miami-Pitt-GT-Duke all having two losses: Miami would be eliminated, Pitt, would be eliminated, GT would be eliminated, and Duke would be eliminated. IF SMU had lost to Duke, the SMU would be eliminated also. You can't take the head to head of two teams in a multi-team tie and start promoting or elininating teams based on it, unless they are all common opponents. You could argue about using something else as the next tie-breaker, but the strength of your schedule is a good one.

The big issue is that there is not a definitive way of breaking the multi-team ties. You have to pick something, and stick with that no matter how it affects your speficic team that year.

A larger issue for the conference is that with the OOC wins/losses and strength having no impact on ACCCG tie-breakers, it sets up a case where a team that hasn't won any OOC FBS games could go to the championship game and cause the conference to have zero teams in the playoffs. They should look at having rules about being at least .500 in OOC games to make it to the ACCCG. Maybe only allowed 1 OOC loss to make the game. I wouldn't really like that, especially with GT having 3 P4 OOC games next year, but something needs to be done to keep the ACC Champion from being a five loss team.

Go with head-to-head sweep. If one team has lost to all others tied, eliminated that team and restart with the others. If one team has beaten all others tied, that team advances and restart with the others. If head-to-head sweep is otherwise inconclusive, for a multi-team tie, go with most Power 4 wins.

 

[RonJohn]

Go with head-to-head sweep. If one team has lost to all others tied, eliminated that team and restart with the others. If one team has beaten all others tied, that team advances and restart with the others. If head-to-head sweep is otherwise inconclusive, for a multi-team tie, go with most Power 4 wins.

They do have that as part of the head to head. If one team beat all others, they advance. If one team lost to all others, they are eliminated. That is written into the rule.

 

[Sugar3ThousandPounds]

There was some discussion in the postgame thread yesterday whether Haynes King would go down as a Tech legend or “just” a great QB who led us out of the darkness of the clown and laid the groundwork for a better future for Tech football.

Diego Pavia showed what a legendary career looks like. Belt to *** in your rival’s backyard to snap a 6-game rivalry losing streak and clinch the first 10-win season in program history. On top of the win over #1 Bama last year and likely going to New York with an outside chance to win the Heisman.

Will always love and appreciate HK, but don’t think I can call him a legend will such a comparable player and situation in Pavia & Vandy doing more with arguably less and against tougher competition. Failing to close out 8OT and the Pitt choke unfortunately make the difference

 

[Darthdad]

They do have that as part of the head to head. If one team beat all others, they advance. If one team lost to all others, they are eliminated. That is written into the rule.

thx

Now they need most P4 wins for next tie-breaker.

 

[TechPhi97]

Gotta love how Duke winning somehow eliminates us notwithstanding our win over them. yet that logic doesn't work with us having lost to Pitt. We're still out anyway. Is it because Duke beat NCSU and we didn't?

Duke has the highest conference opponent winning percentage by far, which wins the tiebreaker in a lot of scenarios.

 

[Darthdad]

Duke has the highest conference opponent winning percentage by far, which wins the tiebreaker in a lot of scenarios.

Hopefully the ACC changes it for next year.

 

[Benny]

May as well just add the Sunbelt teams in ACC states at reduced payout. Could keep the conference around after most leave soon .

 

[jeffgt14]

Starting to look like we might've made it if Wake didn't **** themselves with constant turnovers.

 

[jeffgt14]

Duke is going to get to the ACCCG.