Matt Norlander - ACC Definitely Returning To 18-Game Schedule In 2025-26
It’s not the answer to what ails the ACC. That’s largely been addressed already.
Over on X, Matt Norlander has posted that the ACC is definitely moving back to an 18-game conference schedule in 2025-26, and is doing so because only four conference teams got bids to the NCAA tournament this year.
The idea is that it gives conference teams more chances to schedule solid non-conference opponents to boost their chances.
Two problems with this:
- A lot of ACC teams historically build sucky schedules and that won't change overnight.
- Scheduling was part of the problem, but not the main problems.
What were the main problems?
Money and talent.
The first problem is self-explanatory: in the NIL/free agent era, you have to pay to play. Schools that can pay will get good players.
That’s actually half the talent equation. The other half is coaching and that’s improved a lot since the tournament ended.
The ACC was at an historical low coaching-wise. Tony Bennett flamed out before the season and Jim Larranaga did right before Christmas. Jon Scheyer has been terrrific at Duke and Brad Brownell has been really good at Clemson, but otherwise?
Not so much.
The other Big Four schools have had sub-par coaching. Hubert Davis, to be kind, is erratic. Kevin Keatts was too. Steve Forbes has been an improvement, but he hasn’t made the NCAA tournament yet (the money part kicks in painfully at Wake Forest).
Adrian Autry hasn’t shown much at Syracuse, Earl Grant’s teams play hard but are always at a disadvantage talent-wise, Jeff Capel has had a harder time at Pitt than expected and Mike Young has fallen off at Virginia Tech, probably because the Hokies lack competitive money and facilities.
Look however at the coaching changes this year and at some other schools in the past couple.
- Louisville - We were big boosters of Pat Kelsey, but he amazed even us. Brilliant job. That program was flat on its back.
- Miami - Jai Lucas may be ideally suited for this era.
- Virginia - Ryan Odom is building very quickly.
- NC State - Will Wade is building a very different sort of team than Keatts had.
- Notre Dame - tough year, but Micah Shewsberry is still a solid coach.
- Florida State - everyone enjoyed Leonard Hamilton, but he was getting on. Luke Loucks is much younger and seems to have a smart approach to FSU’s particular realities.
- Georgia Tech - Damon Stoudamire dealt with a lot this season and still competed.
- SMU - Andy Enfield had a really good first year. He’s going to do very well in Dallas.
- Stanford - Kyle Smith shows a lot of promise. He’ll need players but if he gets them, look out.
The ACC is about to become much more competitive and that, as much as anything, will help increase the number of teams that get NCAA bids.
Final point: the ACC needs UNC to be consistently competitive. Just consider this: what would the Tar Heels be like if Todd Golden, Matt Painter, Pat Kelsey, Chris Beard or Grant McCaslin coaching there? We’re not advocating for any of those guys, certainly not Beard or Golden given their apparent issues, but do you think UNC would be better on the court? Of course they would.
The insistence on keeping the job in the family can’t go on much longer. It worked with Ol’ Roy Williams because he was a great coach. It flamed out with Bill Guthridge and Matt Doherty and the truth is, there’s just not anyone obvious to turn to if Davis, for whatever reason, leaves.
If Davis can’t escape the up-and-down cycle he’s in, Carolina will be looking for a new coach soon. And that will also have huge ramifications for the conference. Duke fans don’t like UNC and vice-versa, but the conference is better when UNC is relevant. There’s no getting around that. And if Wade does turn State around, as seems likely, and Duke continues to excel, there’s no way in hell that the UNC fan base will accept that.