ACC Considering 10 Power 4 Games With New Format

It’s that time of year again. The leaves are changing, the air is getting crisp, and college football is heating up. But the real drama isn’t just happening on the field. Behind closed doors, the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) is staring down a decision that could reshape its identity and alter the landscape of college football for years to come.

The question is simple, but the answer is anything but: Should the ACC move to a nine-game conference schedule, or stick with eight and require two tough non-conference matchups? It’s a debate that pits tradition against ambition, regional rivalries against national relevance. The league’s athletic directors are gathering to hash it out, and you can almost feel the tension in the room. This isn’t just about adding another game; it’s about survival and respect in the cutthroat world of the Power Four.

The ACC’s Identity Crisis

For years, the ACC has fought a perception problem. Fair or not, it’s often seen as a step below the behemoth SEC and the powerful Big Ten. While the conference has produced national champions and Heisman winners, its overall strength of schedule is constantly under the microscope. In the new era of the College Football Playoff (CFP), where every game matters, a weak schedule can be a death sentence.

That’s why this scheduling debate is so critical. The SEC recently fired a shot across the bow by moving to a nine-game conference schedule, effectively daring everyone else to keep up. Now, the ACC is forced to respond. Commissioner Jim Phillips seems to be pushing for a nine-game slate, a move that would align the ACC with its powerhouse peers and force every team to face a tougher gauntlet. As Duke coach Manny Diaz put it, “I think it’d be awfully strange to be the only conference not at nine conference games.” He’s right. In this game of thrones, you don’t want to be the one left standing when the music stops.

The Great Debate: 9-Game vs. 8+2 Model

On the surface, a nine-game conference schedule seems like the logical choice. It guarantees more meaningful matchups, strengthens schedules from top to bottom, and eliminates the cupcake games that fans and critics love to mock. It creates a more balanced, equitable system where every team is tested. Nine out of the 13 athletic directors polled seem to agree, seeing it as a necessary step to stay competitive.

But it’s not that simple. Schools like Clemson and Florida State are pumping the brakes, and for good reason. They’ve built their brands on marquee non-conference games that draw massive TV ratings and define seasons. Think about Clemson’s recent clash with LSU or Florida State’s showdown with Alabama. These are the games that capture the nation’s attention and, more importantly, bring in serious revenue. Under the ACC’s new revenue-sharing model, which rewards teams for high viewership, removing those games would be financially devastating.

This is where the “8+2” model comes in. It offers a compromise, allowing schools to preserve their iconic non-conference rivalries—like Florida State vs. Florida or Clemson vs. South Carolina—while still scheduling another quality Power Four opponent. Imagine Clemson playing its annual game against South Carolina and still having the freedom to schedule a home-and-home with Ohio State. The possibilities are tantalizing and would give the CFP committee clear, head-to-head data to evaluate the ACC’s strength.

Navigating Rivalries and Revenue

The heart of this conflict lies with the four schools that have annual SEC rivalries: Florida State, Clemson, Georgia Tech, and Louisville. For them, a nine-game conference schedule plus a rivalry game already fills 10 of their 12 slots with Power Four opponents. There’s no room left for those blockbuster neutral-site games that have become a staple of opening weekend.

Clemson AD Graham Neff voiced this concern perfectly, arguing that limiting flexibility could diminish the overall product. On the other hand, Louisville AD Josh Heird has a different take: “Play good teams.” He insists Louisville would continue scheduling giants like Georgia and Texas A&M, even if it means an 11-game Power Four schedule. It’s a bold, almost defiant stance that shows just how high the stakes are.

But there’s a risk. What if the SEC and Big Ten decide to schedule primarily amongst themselves, leaving the ACC out in the cold? One AD rightly pointed out, “Who’s to say the other Power 4 leagues want to schedule ACC schools?” It’s an interesting thought that highlights the conference’s precarious position.

The Final Decision Looms

As the athletic directors prepare to meet, the future of ACC football hangs in the balance. This is more than a scheduling tweak; it’s a philosophical choice about what kind of conference the ACC wants to be. Does it want to be a league defined by its internal battles, or one that consistently tests its mettle against the best in the nation?

Whichever path they choose, the message is clear: the ACC is done being an afterthought. The pressure is on to create a schedule that is not only compelling for fans and TV partners but also tough enough to earn respect from the CFP committee. The final vote may still be weeks away, but one thing is certain—the ACC is ready to make a move. And when it does, the echoes will be felt across all of college football.