ACC tie breaker

Advertisement
Is it really as retarded as I’m being told? Opponents winning %???

So we need to root for Florida and Ball state to win? Even if it works out for us, no one can control opponents winning %.
no it's conference opponents win% within conference, so even less in our control

according to gramilch / macclain - luckily for us as of last week's games - our conference opponents win % within conference was better than Clemson's and SMU's

Louisville, VT, Cal all won so we should still be the best in that scenario

need those 3 to win as much as possible just like Syracuse, GT, duke, and Wake
 
Last edited:
A. Two-Team Tie
1. Head-to-head competition between the two tied teams.​
2. Win-percentage versus all common opponents.​
3. Win-percentage versus common opponents based upon their order of finish (overall conference​
win-percentage, with ties broken) and proceeding through other common opponents based upon​
their order of finish.​
4. Combined win-percentage of conference opponents.​
5. The tied team with the higher ranking by the Team Rating Score metric provided by SportSource​
Analytics following the conclusion of regular season games.​
6. The representative shall be chosen by a draw as administered by the Commissioner or​
Commissioner’s designee.​
B. Three (or More) Team Tie
Three team (or more) tiebreaker procedure will first be used to identify one Championship Game
representative. Once that team is determined, the tiebreaker procedures restart for the remaining tied
teams.
1. Combined head-to-head win-percentage among the tied teams if all tied teams are common​
opponents.​
2. If all the tied teams are not common opponents, the tied team that defeated each of the other tied​
teams.​
i. If all the tied teams are not common opponents, no tied team defeated each of the other​
tied teams, but a tied team lost to each of the other tied teams, such team shall be​
eliminated and removed from the tie.​
3. Win-percentage versus all common opponents.​
4. Win-percentage versus common opponents based upon their order of finish (overall conference​
win-percentage, with ties broken) and proceeding through other common opponents based upon​
their order of finish.​
5. Combined win-percentage of conference opponents.​
6. The tied team with the highest ranking by the Team Rating Score metric provided by SportSource​
Analytics following the conclusion of regular season games.​
7. The representative shall be chosen by a draw as administered by the Commissioner or​
Commissioner’s designee.​
 
Here is how it stands as of today 10/27/24 if it comes down to Conf record. It would be Miami and Clemson with the two best-winning percentages and SMU left out.

1730047238558.png
 
Last edited:
Is it really as retarded as I’m being told? Opponents winning %???

So we need to root for Florida and Ball state to win? Even if it works out for us, no one can control opponents winning %.
Ball State just beat NIU, who beat ND. That SHOULD put a stake through the heart of ND's playoff chances, while actually helping ours.

I hate it when it comes down to BS like opponent win percentage, because it doesn't tell the whole story.

As for Florida, they have actually become a decent team. I'm going to laugh my rear end off if they beat Georgia, after we took UF to the woodshed. I'd love to see the spin on that one.
 
Advertisement
no it's conference opponents win% within conference, so even less in our control

according to gramilch / macclain - luckily for us as of last week's games - our conference opponents win % within conference was better than Clemson's and SMU's

Louisville, Duke, VT, Cal all won so we should still be the best in that scenario

need those 4 to win as much as possible just like Syracuse, GT, and Wake
Yes but if Duke had not pulled a Manny, then SMU would no longer be undefeated in conference. How the F do you lose with 6 turnovers? SMU was trying to give them that game and Duke would not take it.
 
Yes but if Duke had not pulled a Manny, then SMU would no longer be undefeated in conference. How the F do you lose with 6 turnovers? SMU was trying to give them that game and Duke would not take it.
yeah I had a brain fart and included duke on there.

fwiw, I dont think clemson beats Pitt, VT, and Louisville - they are dropping one of those
 
yeah I had a brain fart and included duke on there.

fwiw, I dont think clemson beats Pitt, VT, and Louisville - they are dropping one of those
Actually, my point was more bottom line than that.

If Duke had won, it would have eliminated the possibility of three undefeated teams tying for the conference lead. Pitt is the only other but they play both Clemson and SMU so that will get settled on the field. As it stands now, the possibility of a 3-way tie is still alive (although I think unlikely)
 
Ball State just beat NIU, who beat ND. That SHOULD put a stake through the heart of ND's playoff chances, while actually helping ours.

I hate it when it comes down to BS like opponent win percentage, because it doesn't tell the whole story.

As for Florida, they have actually become a decent team. I'm going to laugh my rear end off if they beat Georgia, after we took UF to the woodshed. I'd love to see the spin on that one.

If there is one thing you can bank on with the 12 team playoff it is that a one loss Notre Dame is absolutely getting in.
 
Advertisement
Best case scenario -

Louisville beats Clemson
Pitt beats SMU
Clemson beats Pitt

They all have one loss and they can fight over second place 😂

Edit:
If VT beats Clemson instead and they win out it’s a 4 way tie for 2nd
 
Last edited:
yeah I had a brain fart and included duke on there.

fwiw, I dont think clemson beats Pitt, VT, and Louisville - they are dropping one of those
Best case for us would be Clemson losing to VT or UL since we beat both. Even if we drop one and tie them in record we would have a tie breaker.
 
Is it really as retarded as I’m being told? Opponents winning %???

So we need to root for Florida and Ball state to win? Even if it works out for us, no one can control opponents winning %.
Fla. Ball st. Mean **** all in this.
 
Back
Top