If the ACC's proposed scheduling model sounds a lot like the SEC's proposed scheduling model, it's because it is.
Jeremy Fowler of CBSSports.com reported on Monday that there is "significant support" among ACC athletic directors to stay at eight conference games. Faculty athletic representatives are expected to ratify the decision either Tuesday or Wednesday, though ESPN's Brett McMurphy tweeted that the vote has already been cast in favor of the status quo.
The apparent requirement, however, is that ACC teams must schedule at least one team from the so-called "power five" conferences each year.
(How that is enforceable for either the ACC or SEC will be interesting to follow.)
Similar to the SEC, this changes little for the ACC. Teams like Louisville, Clemson, Georgia Tech and Florida State already have longstanding rivalries with teams in power five conferences. And since Notre Dame will play five ACC opponents every year in football as part of a scheduling agreement, the Irish will "count" toward that requirement.
League officials have been asked to consider a model similar to the SEC's – an eight-game conference schedule, plus the guarantee of at least one game against another power conference. Many ACC schools already do this.
Notre Dame's commitment of five ACC games per year lessens the pressure to jump to a nine-game format, which the Pac-12 and Big 12 already use. The Big Ten will begin a nine-game schedule in 2016.
Fowler tweeted separately that, although the ACC would never admit it, support for eight conference games is bolstered by the SEC's model.
With several longstanding out-of-conference rivalries and the addition of Notre Dame fitting the description of an acceptable opponent, there's almost no incentive for the ACC to move to a nine-game conference schedule. The only way that would change is if an ACC team is, somehow, left out of the College Football Playoff because of an eight-game conference slate.
The ACC is the latest conference to wait and see just how the CFP selection committee weighs factors like strength of schedule. The overwhelming vibe seems to be that if conferences don't have to change their philosophy, then they won't.
Samuel Chi, B/R's resident playoff guru, writes that other major conferences shouldn't lend the SEC—and, perhaps now, the ACC—a helping hand with the nonconference scheduling requirement. "The SEC wants to have its cake and eat it, too," Chi wrote. "The other conferences shouldn't lend it a fork."
It's an interesting point of view. It could also show that college football needs a commissioner—and it needed one yesterday. Not NCAA president Mark Emmert, who doesn't have much in the way of individual power; his job is to speak and act on behalf of the membership. Rather, college football needs someone who can approve or deny things like realignment, make conference schedules equal across the board and approve playoff access criteria.
If the five most powerful conferences are granted autonomy within the NCAA, there would be no better time to add a commissioner for that group.
But that's wishful thinking. Conferences have the ability to act by themselves and in their own best interest. For the ACC, that means staying at eight conference games and forcing the selection committee to prove it needs to adapt.
It's hard to blame them, too.
Ben Kercheval is a lead writer for college football at Bleacher Report. All quotes cited unless obtained firsthand.