The Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC), a storied and proud collegiate athletic conference, has long been associated with excellence in basketball, but its football program has often lagged behind its peers in the Power Five. While schools like Clemson and Florida State have historically been competitive on the gridiron, the conference as a whole has struggled to consistently produce top-tier football teams capable of contending for national championships. Unfortunately, instead of focusing on long-term solutions to improve the quality of play, the ACC has often resorted to questionable ideas in an attempt to fix what is perceived as a football deficiency.
One of the most glaring examples of this is the ACC’s ongoing efforts to restructure its football scheduling and playoff format. In an attempt to gain more national relevance, the ACC has introduced various schemes to increase the perceived competitiveness of its teams, some of which seem more like reactionary solutions than thoughtful plans for improvement. For instance, the conference has periodically explored ways to increase its chances of securing a spot in the College Football Playoff (CFP). These efforts have ranged from adding more conference games to discussions around potential expansion, but many of these ideas fail to address the underlying issues: a lack of depth and consistency among the teams outside the top contenders.
Instead of focusing on enhancing the quality of football in the conference, the ACC often seems more concerned with artificially inflating the perception of its competitiveness. This can be seen in the frequent debates about whether the conference should restructure its divisions or create new formats that appear to be more “exciting” but do little to address the underlying lack of elite programs. For example, the divisional structure of the ACC has often been criticized for creating unbalanced matchups and a lack of competitive games in the middle of the season. While the intentions behind these proposals may be rooted in good faith, the reality is that these changes often fail to produce meaningful results and end up confusing fans, teams, and analysts alike.
Another “dumb idea” often put forward by the ACC is the push for increased television rights revenue as a solution to its football woes. While revenue from TV deals certainly plays a vital role in funding athletic programs, simply increasing revenue without addressing on-field product is misguided. The ACC has often been criticized for being too focused on financial aspects, such as negotiating lucrative television contracts, while overlooking the importance of investing in coaching, player development, and infrastructure needed to build a sustainable and competitive football program.
The ACC’s occasional flirtation with realignment, including rumors of expanding the conference with schools that might improve the football product, can also be seen as a short-term fix to a much deeper issue. Expanding the conference with more schools simply for the sake of adding programs does not guarantee increased competitiveness. In fact, it can dilute the overall talent pool and further divide resources, leaving the football product as inconsistent as ever. This approach is often perceived as a reactionary move rather than a well-thought-out strategy to build long-term strength.
The ACC, like any conference, should be dedicated to making long-term, strategic changes that will elevate its football programs. This might involve investing more in recruitment, coaching, and facilities to ensure that the conference can consistently compete with the best teams in the country. Instead of resorting to quick fixes that focus on perception rather than substance, the ACC should work toward improving its football product from the ground up, fostering an environment where schools have the necessary resources and coaching staff to contend on the national stage. Only then can the ACC hope to shed its reputation as a conference of basketball kings and become a legitimate powerhouse in college football as well.
