The ACC will become the fourth and final power conference to play a nine-game conference football schedule, according to an announcement from ACC Commissioner Jim Phillips. The ACC revealed the news Monday afternoon via its social media platforms, along with a quote from Commissioner Phillips.
Athletic Directors at the ACC football-playing institutions voted “overwhelmingly” in favor of the nine-game format. And like the SEC, the ACC will also have a requirement that each member plays a total of 10 power non-conference opponents.
“We have been incredibly intentional throughout our discussions on ACC Football, including the future of our conference schedule,” Phillips said. “Today, the Athletic Directors of the 17 football-playing institutions overwhelmingly supported a regular season schedule that includes nine conference games and a minimum of 10 games each year against Power 4 opponents. This positions the ACC as one of only two leagues committed to having every team annually play a minimum of 10 games against Power 4 teams. There will be additional discussions and more details to be determined, but today’s decision showcases the commitment and leadership of our ADs in balancing what is best for strengthening the conference and their respective programs. As specified in the Conference constitution, the model will be presented to the Faculty Athletics Representatives for formal adoption.”
Due to the ACC having an uneven number of schools (17), 16 league teams will play a nine-game schedule with at least one power non-conference opponent. Then one team each season will play only eight conference games, but will have to schedule two power opponents in non-league play.
That problem could already be solved by the Clemson Tigers. Beginning in 2027, the Clemson is scheduled to play both Notre Dame and South Carolina annually out of conference.
A specific date for the ACC’s move to a nine-game scheduling format was not mentioned, but it’s widely expected to be the 2027 season. Shifting to nine games in 2026 would necessitate the cancellation of at least 13 existing game contracts which would then subject those ACC members to large financial penalties.
Last month, the SEC announced that its league members will begin playing a nine-game conference football schedule in 2026. That brought the number of leagues playing nine conference games up to three, joining the Big Ten and Big 12.
Football Schedules
Games against Notre Dame should count in the standings….that way the problem could be managed
Notre Dame plays five each year anyway
The ACC should stick with an 8-game conference schedule for all teams, with 4 protected opponents for each team and 4 rotating on a 6-year schedule, with the following protected opponents:
Boston College: Miami, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia
California: Clemson, Louisville, SMU, Stanford
Clemson: California, Florida State, Georgia Tech, NC State
Duke: NC State, North Carolina, Syracuse, Wake Forest
Florida State: Clemson, Georgia Tech, Miami, Virginia
Georgia Tech: Clemson, Florida State, Stanford, Virginia Tech
Louisville: California, SMU, Stanford, Virginia Tech
Miami: Boston College, Florida State, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
NC State: Clemson, Duke, North Carolina, Wake Forest
North Carolina: Duke, NC State, Virginia, Wake Forest
Pittsburgh: Boston College, Miami, SMU, Syracuse
SMU: California, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Stanford
Stanford: California, Georgia Tech, Louisville, SMU
Syracuse: Boston College, Duke, Miami, Pittsburgh
Virginia: Boston College, Florida State, North Carolina, Virginia Tech
Virginia Tech: Georgia Tech, Louisville, Virginia, Wake Forest
Wake Forest: Duke, NC State, North Carolina, Virginia Tech
Having 16 play 9 and 1 play 8 causes problems in regards to ACC title game qualification.
Three teams could finish with the same amount of wins or losses, but the standings would be distorted by having one of those three play one fewer conference game than the other two.
This is why I’ve also suggested the Big Sky add CSU Pueblo to go to 14 football members, so that all 14 can play 9 conference games – 5 protected, 4 rotating on a 4-year schedule.
I like your layout Z……..but I really dislike the 8 games conference schedule because it punishes the smaller D-1 conferences and FCS schools……they has everything to do with money and not competing on a even playing field. You see how terrible the portal is with the bigger schools poaching all the talent from the smaller schools who can’t complete on the NIL. The scores reflect the growing distance between the four main conferences and the rest of FBS,I have never seen a worse non-competitive OOC slate of games then here in 2025. We are all just seeing college football as we know it being slowly destroyed.
Agree. ACC should stick to 8 conference games.
I think the better solution would have been for five teams to play that eight game conference schedule with Notre Dame counting as their ninth conference game.
Either that or invite an 18th team (UConn, Tulane, or Memphis).
I would not invite any of those teams. Let’s wait it out and see where the dust settles
I was surprised the ACC did not implement exactly as you stated. Perhaps though after examining each school’s interconference rivals/potential scheduling opportunities the ACC deemed they would meet the 10 game commitment anyway and the 10 game commitment was/is an attempt to market themselves as such ahead of their P4 peers and curry favour with the public and fans
With the exception of certain P4 schools (SEC excluded for now), most everyone plays a 10 game P4 schedule anyway.
UConn’s only shot at an immediate conference affiliation for football is the MAC. They’d be football only.
As it stands now, Notre Dame is the only school in FBS that can really make independence work. Just last year they made the CFP title game, without the benefit of playing in a conference title game (so did OSU for that matter, being denied a shot at the B1G title by Michigan, a team they haven’t been able to beat since COVID-19 was declared a pandemic in March 2020).
I always thought Navy made sense from a football only standpoint. Natural rival with ND, and to a lesser extent Duke, UVA, BC, SU, Pitt who they have played many times over the years. It would reclaim the DC/Baltimore market that was opened with Maryland’s exit, and their other sports could stay in the Patriot League.
@Gerry, the service academies barely belong in FBS and certainly are not P4 worthy. Height and weight restrictions limit them so much, they can’t hup but run the veer or some form of option offense to compete, they would be better off to move to FCS.
I foresee Clemson and FSU taking turns playing only 8 ACC games (when they play ND OOC along with their in-state rival). I suspect both those schools won’t give up 7 home games a year. Or FSU may play ND neutral site in FL some years.
How would the ACC make this work for qualifying for the CCG, though? Though granted, the CCG may go away by then anyway.
I raised that point in my comment too. It would have been better to stay at 8 conference games for all teams.
This is a great change that I´m very excited about, but what does he mean when he says ¨one of only two leagues?¨ Wouldn´t it be three because SEC and Big 12 teams also will be playing ten power 4 teams each?
I believe that the Big 12 has a mandate as well and forces their teams to do it, maybe they just haven’t released an official statement on it?
The Big Ten needs to step up now and mandate all of their teams playing a 9+1 model with one non-conference power opponent required every year. I know that most of the teams in the league already comply, but this would make it official and push some of the teams that are not doing it to do so.
The only question I would have on this mandate would be Washington State and Oregon State. They met the power opponent requirement back when they were scheduled by most teams. Would they continue to meet this requirement for a certain amount of years? This would also be good to know for the sake of Oregon and Washington, since both are scheduling them as an annual non-conference rivalry game.
I don’t think the Big 12 requires one P4 non conference game every year. Since most Big 12 teams do schedule one, they should formalize it to puts pressure the Big 10 who has backed away from such a commitment. That teams like Penn State and Indiana are playing no P4 teams out of conference this year is shameful.
The Big 12 does require it now.
Expand the regular season! 13 or 14 games.
With the proposed CFP auto bids and play-ins you’ll effectively be implementing just that for almost half of each conferences members.
If Navy were added someday as ACC football only, that would almost make Notre Dame be able to join fully. It would give them regular matchups against Navy, Pitt, Boston College, Stanford, Syracuse, Georgia Tech, Miami, FSU, Clemson… schools they have long history with. Then they could have their annual OOC with USC.
.
There would still be two more spaces on the schedule and they could pick up a Michigan or a Purdue or Michigan State…
.
It really turns out the anchor on their schedule has always literally been Navy.
ND doesn’t want to join a conference, though. Heck, FSU and Clemson are trying to get out of the ACC.
Making moves for a school that doesn’t want to join makes zero sense.
Navy is not coming to the ACC. We have to stop with the Notre Dame stuff. They are never joining a football conference unless they are cornered and forced by all the FBS schools.
They don’t need to join a conference, so why should they? They can make the CFP and as a partner of the ACC, they can play in those bowl games (hoping that bowls go away someday and CFP expands).
We have to stop here with Notre Dame.
Connecticut would only join the MAC if the MAC lets them in—-they want all sports and we know Connecticut basketball is never joining the MAC. I think that if UConn hoops agreed to play three MAC schools per year in basketball (and yes, travel to them), that they MAC would let them play football, but I am hearing none of this thus far.
Pitt Syracuse is protected. FSU GT protected over FSU Miami? You have odd ideas
Deleted a bunch of comments. As for banning individuals, there is no login on this site so that cannot be done.
As I’ve mentioned before, personal attacks will not be tolerated. And comments that are essentially “likes” of a post will also be deleted.
2-7-7 format: 2 protected, 7 teams in even years, 7 teams in odd years
Here are my picks for protected “rivalries”:
Stanford: Cal, WF
Cal: Stanford, SMU
SMU: Louisville, Cal
Louisville: Pitt, SMU
GTech: Clemson, VT
Clemson: GT, FSU
FSU: Miami, Clemson
Miami: FSU, BC
WF: Duke, Stanford
Duke: UNC, WF
UNC: NC St, Duke
NC St: UNC, UVA
UVA: VT, NC St
VTech: UVA, GT
Pitt: Louisville, ‘Cuse
Syracuse: BC, Pitt
BC: ‘Cuse, Miami
Although I really hope that the ACC blows up in the early 2030s because as a Stanford fan, it’s ridiculous that we and Cal have to play east coast schools all the time.
Cal and Stanford should re-join the Pac 12.
I see Cal and Stanford going back to the Pac -12 much sooner then later. Makes zero sense for them to be in the ACC.
I would imagine Clemson, Georgia Tech and Florida St. fought for 8-game conference but keep the 10-game Power 4 policy in order to keep in-state rivals and have flexibility with other non-conference games against P4s.
Just thinking out loud here. I have a feeling that the one team with an 8 game schedule will rotate between Clemson and FSU. Since both schools have annual SEC rivals and Clemson plays ND annually for several years in a row coming up. I think most schools want 9 every year while a few want 8. Obviously this is the case or it wouldn’t have been voted on successfully. I think this is because some schools realized that it will be tough for them to find two non-conference power opponents every year with all of the other leagues moving to 9 games. However, the schools that already have an annual non-conference power opponent, it’s much different for them. Biggest issue with this will be how they determine tie-breakers between teams with 8 conference games as opposed to teams with 9 conference games. Example, 8-1 vs. 7-1, or 7-1 vs. 7-2, etc. That’s the sole reason why I am skeptical about this model.
I think the ACC should do a 2-7-7 model. This way all teams will rotate amongst each other every other year and a home/home every 4 years. The exception to this would be the team playing 8 conference games, doing a 2-6 model instead during the years where they play 8 conference games. The ACC doesn’t have as many rivalry games as the SEC and Big Ten so I think 2 annual opponents would be enough, plus if somebody isn’t your annual opponent, you will still play them every other year anyways.
Now I am not the greatest at ACC history or rivalries so please forgive me if I miss one below. This is just what I was thinking based on my knowledge.
BC: PITT, SYR
CAL: STAN, SMU
CLEM: FSU, GT
DUKE: UNC, WAKE
FSU: MIA, CLEM
GT: CLEM, LOU
LOU: VIR, GT
MIA: FSU, VT
NCST: WAKE, UNC
UNC: DUKE, NCST
PITT: BC, SYR
SMU: STAN, CAL
STAN: CAL, SMU
SYR: BC, PITT
VIR: VT, LOU
VT: VIR, MIA
WAKE: NCST, DUKE
Oklahoma State-Oklahoma was excellent when they were part of Big 8 & later Big 12.
Missouri-Kansas was excellent when they were part of Big 8 & later Big 12 too.
Penn State-Pittsburgh was excellent when they were part of then Big East Football.
Maryland-Virginia was excellent when they were part of ACC.
Ever since realignment I have loss considerable interest in these rivalries however spirit of conference play continues to be very high interest.
Pardon for using word fan because I remain a fan of Conference games whether it be highly rated Georgia-Florida or under rated Oklahoma State-Baylor & traditional Michigan-Ohio State or newcomer Illinois-USC.
I like to wish very best to CFB for success of these highly important conference games.
Penn St and Pitt, never in the same conference you goof. You talk about all this like you know it all and you really don’t know your ass from a hole in the ground. You single handed, is making this page a once great place next to impossible to like reading the comments.
They have been conference rivals in non basketball sports before, as recently as the late 70s/early 80s.
R.I.P. SMU vs TCU rivalry (for good)
1915-2025
Notre Dame is never joining the ACC—or any conference until they are forced to by all 129 FBS programs.
The MAC won’t take Connecticut as football only–they kicked UMass out and only brought them back when the Minutemen gave in and brought all sports in.
Exception: If UConn hoops agreed to play three MAC schools per year in hoops with one of those being a visit to the MAC school, then maybe a deal could be struck.
I want to see a Northeast-style conference in the near future with some of the old Big East teams that have FBS football.
Perhaps it could include:
Louisville
Cincinnati
West Virginia
Pitt
Penn State (if they decide to leave the Big Ten)
Maryland (if they decide to leave the Big Ten)
Rutgers (if they decide to leave the Big Ten)
Syracuse
UConn
Boston College
Temple (only if none of the 3 Big Ten schools want to join)
Maybe Virginia and Virginia Tech too?
No school would ever leave the Big Ten–$$$$$$–Penn State would turn down the SEC to stay in the B1G. It makes the most $$$$$
The only way someone would leave the Big Ten is if a power struggle ensues. With 18 schools now, it will become increasingly likely that someone is going to be upset or agitated. Like you said, I don’t see it happening, but I wouldn’t be shocked if it does.
If I’m at home flipping channels, I’m much more likely to stop and watch Memphis vs. Louisville or ECU vs. NC State than I ever would for Syracuse vs. Cal or Wake vs. SMU.
The NCAA dropped the ball years ago. The conferences should be 12 teams and you should play EVERYBODY in your conference. That eliminates who had an easy schedule and who had a hard one. Plus, there’s the built in head-to-head for tiebreakers (simplifying the process). It would put everybody on an even playing field. And the playoff needs to be 16 teams with ALL neutral sites. An unfair advantage for the 5-8 seeds to get a home game. In the current format it’s very unlikely that a 9-12 will advance. The 11 and 12 seeds are handicapped by this.
ACC isn’t the best as current constructed. Stanford & California should be in Big Ten. SMU & WVU should swap spots in fairly equal conferences. UCONN should get some consideration for ACC. The football is a good time slot for the original Big East football.