I understand ECU treats ACC games like their SB, but if we're scared to play a team like ECU at home then our program isn't as solid as I give it credit for.

People talking about beating Clemson or contending in the Atlantic but are scared to play ECU at home? Get out of here.

10/3/2018 9:24:34 AM

I just don't think we get much from scheduling ECU. If we lose, it's a bad loss; if we win, so what? Not to mention their atrocious fans and the fact that it is their SB means that they're going to be game planning ours out all season, whereas we're focusing on bigger fish. I get both points, but it just doesn't seem like a smart series to start. Also, I hate ECU and it just elevates their program.

Also wouldn't be scheduling App State for the same reason, minus all of the animosity, but in all honesty they have a better shot at being a decent win than ECU does moving forward I think.

[Edited on October 3, 2018 at 9:44 AM. Reason : .]

10/3/2018 9:43:44 AM

^ but if we play CF gets all that sweet sweet money they would otherwise have had to pay back

10/3/2018 9:58:34 AM

It's not that I'm worried we'll lose this game, but even if we don't beat Clemson, there's a non-zero chance we could be 10-1 in December which would still probably mean a top 10-15 ranking and a bid for a MAJOR bowl appearance. If that happens this game is nothing but a liability for our SOS, our national ranking AND for our players who could use the rest before meeting up with a major team like Texas, Michigan, Auburn, West Virginia or Wisconsin in a bowl game.

10/3/2018 10:20:33 AM

Quote :

"I understand ECU treats ACC games like their SB, but if we're scared to play a team like ECU at home then our program isn't as solid as I give it credit for. People talking about beating Clemson or contending in the Atlantic but are scared to play ECU at home? Get out of here."

100% agree

Quote :

"I just don't think we get much from scheduling ECU. If we lose, it's a bad loss; if we win, so what?"

Then what’s the point in playing Marshall or James Madison or USF or Troy or any other team like that that’s on our schedule this year or in the coming years? Those are all high risk/no reward opponents. But you gotta play somebody.

If we’re the program we’re striving to be then we should have no problem taking care of a mediocre (probably worse than mediocre) ECU team at home regardless of their annoying fans and regardless of them treating it like a super bowl. You think Marshall getting a P5 opponent at home wasn’t cause for them to get insanely pumped up for a chance at a big win? We have better players, better depth, better coaches. We should win. If we lose, don’t blame the fact that we played them at all...blame the coaches or players for not preparing and executing. We have a looooong ways to go as a program if we’re scared of losing to this ECU team.

10/3/2018 10:26:31 AM

I'd rather play 12 games than 11.

I'm all for it.

10/3/2018 10:40:48 AM

that's a false dilemma, ECU is not the only game we could schedule

10/3/2018 11:11:56 AM

^^^it's a minor thing but I would argue out of state non conf is better than in state, even at mid major level. We already have two in state opponents every year.

Also it helps ecu get instate exposure and fuck ecu

10/3/2018 11:32:23 AM

^^there very few available opponents not looking to replace a home game. Which was key. Nobody that had a home game cancelled was gonna give up a home game to play on the road. FCS was option too. But there weren’t many feasible opponents aside from ecu.

10/3/2018 11:45:10 AM

There are not a lot of options for getting the games and the finances do matter of getting that game in, so it is understandable to try and figure out something.

Also everyone is assuming we'll be like 11-0 or 10-1... what if we are 5-6 and need that win to get us into a bowl game? or 7-4... 8-4 with a bowl win getting to 9-4 looks a lot better to me. Honestly if you can't beat ECU at home on December 1st then our season should end at that point anyway. The only scenario this is really bad is if we are 10-1, don't make the ACCCG, and then lose this one. Anything else who cares, it is another chance to have a home game and be entertained. And again if that happens we don't deserve a major bowl invite anyway.

10/3/2018 11:48:31 AM

I meant scheduling ECU in the future for so many games is the liability.

I think we'll take care of business against them this year, and it's an opportune year to play them with them being shitty and especially with the hurricane situation legitimizing it even further.

10/3/2018 11:54:15 AM

I get that. But other than their fans being shit heads it’s no different than playing half the ooc teams we play....we win and that’s the expectation. We lose and it’s embarrassing.

10/3/2018 12:03:34 PM

for future seasons i'd rather just schedule Duke than ECU since the ACC doesn't want us to ever play the conference team that is the closest geographically as a conference game

10/3/2018 12:45:25 PM

Veto ECU, Re-vote for Duke.

10/3/2018 12:59:22 PM

Getting Kelly Bryant to transfer to NCSU for 2019 season. Good idea? Or Great idea???

10/3/2018 1:41:13 PM

Ehh. I mean yeah...let’s steal Clemson’s play book for sure. But I don’t think he’s coming here. And I don’t know how much interest we have.

10/3/2018 2:28:40 PM

I think it's silly to say we wouldn't have interest. Kelly Bryant is really good.

I think he ends up in the SEC though, or maybe even WVU. Regardless, he'll be the starter at a major conference program next year.

10/3/2018 2:35:33 PM

I thought you had to give up a year of eligibility to transfer within the ACC

10/3/2018 2:47:55 PM

I say that because we’ll have McKay in his 3rd year in the system. Leary will be in his second year. I’m not sure we’re in the market for him. But I could certainly be wrong. Haven’t seen anything to indicate we’re interested.

Bryant is good but he’s a flawed QB. He’s not great. Yes, clemson went to the CFP with him last year. But i think it’s fair to question how great he is when not surrounded by elite level talent at every position.

10/3/2018 2:54:14 PM

Hey, we're elite too, dammit

10/3/2018 3:07:24 PM

Quote :

"I thought you had to give up a year of eligibility to transfer within the ACC"

This is incorrect with regards to graduate transfers.

Also you're insane if you think either McKay or Leary are currently better than Kelly Bryant. If they were, we would have been in the same position as Alabama/Clemson this year in regards to qb controversies.

10/3/2018 3:13:15 PM

Does the grad transfer thing apply to the 1st game of the season similar Angeline?

10/3/2018 3:50:26 PM

^^it's not about currently its about next season

10/3/2018 4:28:42 PM

Does Clemson have to grant his release / approve the school for grad transfers? Could they release him with a caveat that he can't attend X schools or even ACC schools in general, or is that just for regular transfers?

10/3/2018 4:37:47 PM

Quote :

"Also you're insane if you think either McKay or Leary are currently better than Kelly Bryant. If they were, we would have been in the same position as Alabama/Clemson this year in regards to qb controversies."

Lol I didn’t say they were better. I’m talking about their familiarity with the team and system. And not to mention, if you take Bryant for one year you almost surely lose at least one of those guys to transfer. And that’s gonna hurt come 2020. all around I don’t think it’s a great fit. Bryant likely wants to go somewhere with little to no competition (he’s got one year left, he’s gonna wanna be the man from day 1). I don’t think that’s what he’d be getting into at State. I also think we’re not gonna risk losing the QB depth going forward by taking a year of bryant. Again, Bryant is good. I also think it’s totally fair to question how he translates when he’s not playing on a team surrounded by elite players at every position and a juggernaut defense.

[Edited on October 3, 2018 at 5:47 PM. Reason : H]

10/3/2018 5:47:00 PM

Let's get him now so we can get the playbook too!!!

10/3/2018 6:01:59 PM

To clear up a few of the posts about Bryant...

As a grad transfer, he is free to transfer wherever he wants and play immediately. The fact that he's transferring at this point in the season doesn't work like the Angeline deal since he was a traditional transfer and he's taking this season as a redshirt with the new 4 game rule. He's already filed his paperwork with Clemson to transfer so he's clear to go to any school he chooses.

In regards to NC State. Not going to happen. Various insiders are saying that once we landed Hockman, we are out of the grad transfer sweepstakes. Initially we were going to be interested in Hurts, and Bryant would make even more sense, but now that we have 3 QBs on roster, I think the preference will be that we sign a HS kid for scholarship spacing.

We'll have RS-SO McKay(3*), RS-SO Hockman(4*), and RS-FR Leary(3*) all competing for the starting job. I think we'll end up bringing in more of a project QB in the 2019 class and focus on landing a big-time prospect in the 2020 class.

I like Bryant over Hurts, without question, but I don't think Bryant fits what we're trying to do. I love what he brings as a runner and leader, but he leaves a lot of questions as a passer. The strength of our offense is QB, OL, and WR this year. Next year the strength of the offense appears to be OL, WR, and TE. Feels like we need more of a competent passer/leader than a run threat at QB.

Now back to ECU...

- Reports are WVU had 0% interest in coming here 12/1 to play, so that was out.
- Then we're left with FBS games because we're not scheduling a FCS team(doesn't help for bowl eligibility or bowl placement).
- Then you have to find teams that need to make up 1 game this year.
- The options include ECU, VT, UCF, USC, UNC, App State, and Marshall.
- Ok, so let's remove UNC and Marshall because we're not playing them twice in one season.
- App State is very likely to play in their conference championship game(also on 12/1), so probably not a good choice given we wouldn't be able to schedule a fall-back.
- Same goes for UCF, they're likely playing in their conference championship game on 12/1.
- So realistically you're left with ECU, VT, and USC.
- USC is looking to add a home game and not go on the road, so take that one off.
- So realistically you're looking at ECU or VT. We could have picked VT, but if you can only schedule 1 game for 12/1 with conference championship stipulations, don't you think ECU is the safer pick? If you pick a team and they make the conference title, you're stuck playing 11 games.

Also, why is everyone clamoring for Duke? They didn't even miss a game, why are they trying to schedule a 13th game, let alone a road game?

10/3/2018 8:32:05 PM

everyone is 2 people and, for at least one:

Quote :

"for future seasons i'd rather just schedule Duke "

10/3/2018 10:50:48 PM

yeah let's schedule Duke and/or VT instead of ECU/WVU. I'm sure the ACC will be cool with us playing more conference games than every other school. That won't cause any issues with final standings, etc.

10/3/2018 11:30:40 PM

^ exactly

10/4/2018 12:09:27 AM

Isn't UNC playing Wake in the next couple years for an OOC game? So I doubt the ACC would mind us playing Duke.

10/4/2018 6:03:40 AM

^^^,^^ its fun when people try to be condescending while having absolutely no idea what they are talking about

10/4/2018 7:07:35 AM

Yeah, we could play duke OOC no problem. The problem this season is that we already play wake and duke didnt have a game cancelled

10/4/2018 7:34:16 AM

Thanks for the nice analysis on Bryant.

10/4/2018 8:35:48 AM

Quote :

"yeah let's schedule Duke and/or VT instead of ECU/WVU. I'm sure the ACC will be cool with us playing more conference games than every other school. That won't cause any issues with final standings, etc."

Quote :

"^ exactly"

conference teams are allowed to schedule each other as non-conference games, wake and UNC have a non-conference series already scheduled. Yow just doesn't have any interest in scheduling Duke, she's been asked but just says she would rather get rid of the divisions (which is fine to want but doesn't solve the problem)

ACC teams Wake Forest and North Carolina schedule non-conference matchups
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2015/01/26/acc-wake-forest-north-carolina-non-conference-game/22347863/

Quote :

"North Carolina and Wake Forest jointly announced Monday that they have agreed to play a non-conference football series in 2019 and 2021 with the first game in Winston-Salem. Wait a second, you're probably thinking. Aren't North Carolina and Wake Forest in the same conference? Indeed, they are both still members of the Atlantic Coast Conference and will presumably remain so when these games are played in 2019 and 2021. You haven't missed any major realignment news. But with the ACC swelling to 14 members and deciding to continue with an eight-game league schedule, some traditional rivals will play each other far less frequently than they would like. That prompted discussion amongst athletics directors at last spring's conference meetings about the possibility of ACC teams scheduling each other for non-conference games. North Carolina, for instance, is scheduled to play Wake Forest as a conference game in 2015 but not again until 2022. The ACC schedule rotation is currently set through 2024. "This is a unique opportunity to play a regional rival in years that fall outside the normal conference rotation," UNC athletics director Bubba Cunningham said in a release. "We have a long history with Wake Forest that has historical value and will generate interest within our fans." In other words, instead of UNC and Wake Forest spending upwards of $1 million to fill a non-conference date with someone like Louisiana-Monroe or North Texas, they will play a more cost-effective game against a real rival, which will generate more fan interest and ticket sales. Even though it's a bit awkward and will create some confusion, it's pretty much a win-win for those two schools. It's also something other schools in the ACC could look to duplicate."

no reason NCSU couldn't schedule Duke instead of whatever slot they are considering ECU for in future seasons



[Edited on October 4, 2018 at 8:39 AM. Reason : link added for unc-wake]

10/4/2018 8:38:26 AM

^I'm fairly certain there is a rotating schedule with ECU and the Triangle schools that we have to play them so often, so we really can't just stop scheduling ECU and replace them with Duke.

We could stop scheduling teams like Marshall/WVU/SC and try to fill them with Duke, but I'm not sure I understand the upside. I get that it's good for fans and it's a natural rivalry given the location, but part of the appeal of home-and-home games with teams like WVU is that you get more national publicity with big name programs and you get exposure to new recruiting areas.

Personally I'd rather have a cupcake OOC schedule and pad wins, at least until we're an annual top 25 program, and then at that point you can start scheduling more exciting games. I don't see the point of playing a top 25 team in OOC unless you're angling for the CFP, because SOS doesn't really mean anything outside of that.

10/4/2018 9:24:16 AM

we don't have to play ECU



[Edited on October 4, 2018 at 10:17 AM. Reason : other than our already scheduled games i guess, but we aren't required to schedule them]

10/4/2018 9:54:33 AM

No, we actually did.

"The legislature has used its political muscle in the sports arean before.

East Carolina experienced a significant drought in playing UNC and N.C. State in football following an incident in 1987 in which some ECU fans damaged N.C. State's Carter-Finley Stadium after a 32-14 win.

A group of senators from eastern N.C. counties hinted they would push for legislation that cut funding for building projects on the two ACC campuses.

Buoyed in part by the attention and pressure that created, ECU and N.C. State have had eight on-campus games since 1997.

After facing each other in 1981, ECU and North Carolina didn't meet again until 2001, That, however, was the first of nine on-campus games over a span of 14 seasons."

We and UNC have basically been forced politically to include ECU in our scheduling. There is nothing that forces us to, but there was political leverage that led to us scheduling them as often as we have.

That being said, after we fulfill our current scheduling obligations, I think you could see a significant drought in scheduling them again unless strong-armed politically...again.

10/4/2018 10:55:12 AM

So if we somehow were able to play Duke or VT instead of ECU, that game wouldn't count in the conference standings?

10/4/2018 11:11:12 AM

^^go search the nc general statutes for "football," we don't have to play ECU

the AD's got together on their own due to political pressure and worked out a schedule to start playing again in '96 or '97

[Edited on October 4, 2018 at 11:13 AM. Reason : .]

10/4/2018 11:12:50 AM

^^Correct, it would be considered out on conference. It's happened before, recently.

[Edited on October 4, 2018 at 11:13 AM. Reason : f]

10/4/2018 11:13:04 AM

^^But that's exactly what I said, we don't "HAVE" to play ECU, but because of political pressure we caved and agreed to. So essentially, we weren't forced to but it was strongly suggested we do or there would be potential negative repercussions.

I doubt we continue scheduling ECU regularly once our current deal runs up. I know it's a "rivalry", but we didn't schedule them for a decade or so for a reason.

10/4/2018 1:50:51 PM

Is the stupid barrel trophy still a thing? If so, it's been at ECU since 2010.

10/4/2018 2:53:32 PM

^^you do realize we just added two more future games against them this week, right?

[Edited on October 4, 2018 at 2:56 PM. Reason : There's a trophy???]

10/4/2018 2:55:14 PM

Yeah saw we added them for 2025 and 2028 to get them to agree to the game this year. So we're now officially playing them every 2-3 years. I'm fine with that.

10/4/2018 8:37:13 PM

Wow, it’s been 10 years since the last time we beat them

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Carolina–NC_State_rivalry

10/4/2018 10:46:31 PM

It makes zero sense that we play ECU more than Duke

10/5/2018 7:42:51 AM

gotta get dat sweet Victory Barrel back

10/5/2018 10:21:44 AM

All these teams lost this week:

#5 LSU
#7 Oklahoma
#8 Auburn
#13 Kentucky
#14 Stanford
#20 Michigan State
#24 VT
#25 OK State

Enough for NC State to move into the top-20? Or will the close score against a hurting BC team knock us down?

10/7/2018 2:30:48 AM

we won't drop in the polls after a win, don't be ridiculous

10/7/2018 2:37:23 AM