Why we should root for Wake Forest

[Devilhawks]

Because I am an optimist, I believe that we still have a chance at the regular-season ACC title. Unfortunately, we don't quite control our own destiny on that front.

If we and Carolina both take care of business before March 8th, and we were to beat them, we would be tied at 12-4 atop the standings. Since we would have split the season series, it would come down to who had the better record against the third place team. For us to win the Title, we need that third place team to be Wake.

Out of all the possible third-place teams in this scenario (Clemson, FSU, BC), Wake is the only one against which we will have a better record than UNC. Thus, we should be rooting for Wake from here on out.

Caveat: We can also win the Title if FSU finishes 3rd and Wake finishes 4th. This is because we and UNC will have the same record against FSU (for tiebreaking purposes, 1-0 = 2-0).

[CDu]

In our favor, Wake has the easiest remaining schedule of those three.

The best-case scenario would be Wake finishing third, FSU finishing fourth and BC finishing fifth, with us winning out. Then, we'd get the 8/9 game, then (if we win) the winner of the FSU/BC game. UNC would get the 7/10 game, then (if they win) the winner of the Wake/(probably)Clemson game.

We'd get a banner (Co-Champs) either way though. And I actually don't care that much whether we finish 1 or 2 in the regular season. I just want to see Wake and Clemson in UNC's half of the bracket.

[Bluedog]

Because I am an optimist, I believe that we still have a chance at the regular-season ACC title. Unfortunately, we don't quite control our own destiny on that front.

If we and Carolina both take care of business before March 8th, and we were to beat them, we would be tied at 12-4 atop the standings. Since we would have split the season series, it would come down to who had the better record against the third place team. For us to win the Title, we need that third place team to be Wake.

Out of all the possible third-place teams in this scenario (Clemson, FSU, BC), Wake is the only one against which we will have a better record than UNC. Thus, we should be rooting for Wake from here on out.

Caveat: We can also win the Title if FSU finishes 3rd and Wake finishes 4th. This is because we and UNC will have the same record against FSU (for tiebreaking purposes, 1-0 = 2-0).

Not really. Your reasoning determines who gets the #1 seed. However, if two teams finish 12-4 atop the rankings, they are BOTH regular season ACC Champs even though one of them gets the #2 seed in the tournament. So, i don't think it matters much to me...as long as we're in a different half than Carolina.

Edit: What CDu said above...

[Devilhawks]

Not really. Your reasoning determines who gets the #1 seed. However, if two teams finish 12-4 atop the rankings, they are BOTH regular season ACC Champs even though one of them gets the #2 seed in the tournament. So, i don't think it matters much to me...as long as we're in a different half than Carolina.

Edit: What CDu said above...

Fair enough... I guess we would hang a banner either way

[ice-9]

I think Duke defeating UNC @ Chapel Hill is the bigger variable than whether or not Wake will come 3rd! But it's certainly possible.

(Ironic how less than 2 weeks ago people were talking about Duke being a middling ACC team. Now, we're discussing how Duke can get the #1 seed in the ACC tourney!)

[eddiehaskell]

Regular season title? To be any kind of champion you've gotta win the ACC tournament...

[BD80]

(Ironic how less than 2 weeks ago people were talking about Duke being a middling ACC team. Now, we're discussing how Duke can get the #1 seed in the ACC tourney!)

Hell, we're still looking at a number one seed in the NCAA tourney!

[DukeFencer]

Out of all the possible third-place teams in this scenario (Clemson, FSU, BC), Wake is the only one against which we will have a better record than UNC. Thus, we should be rooting for Wake from here on out.

It doesn't matter where BC falls in the standings --if the tie-breaker came down far enough to them, it would just keep going to the next place team, because both Duke and UNC are 0-1 against them.

Clemson is the only team that can break the tie-breaker in favor of UNC (as of right now.) Wake and Maryland are the only teams that can break the tie-breaker in favor of us (as of right now.) Which means that for the 1 seed it would come down to which of those 3 teams finished the highest out of each other. Neither has to finish in 3rd place, just as long as one finishes above Clemson (wherever that ends up.)

HOWEVER - are the standings finalized from the top down or bottom up? Because Clemson and Wake are currently tied, but Wake owns that series right now 1-0 (with last game of the season a rematch.)

The ACC tie-breaker rules state that:
"If there is more than one tie in the standings, and when utilizing the tie-breaking procedures you come to a pair of teams tied, a team's record against the combined tied teams is used, rather than performance against the individual tied teams."

Duke has a 1-2 record against those teams. UNC has 1-1. Jeez I hate expansion

So it'd be back to my original theory that Wake OR Maryland has to finish above Clemson. And of course there's that little fact of beating Florida State, VaTech, and of course, oh yeah, UNC, before we get to any of this.

[CDu]

Regular season title? To be any kind of champion you've gotta win the ACC tournament...

Not according to the banners hanging in Cameron. The official champion (for NCAA tournament purposes) is determined by the ACC tournament. However, there is a regular season championship, and Duke most certainly celebrates such an honor.

[eddiehaskell]

Not according to the banners hanging in Cameron. The official champion (for NCAA tournament purposes) is determined by the ACC tournament. However, there is a regular season championship, and Duke most certainly celebrates such an honor.

Duke (and others) may celebrate it, but does that make it real or official? It's like UNC hanging a 5th banner and the fans claiming they have 5 national championships...is that really the case?

Anyway, here is what the ACC has to say:

OFFICIAL CHAMPION

Contrary to popular belief, the ACC basketball champion has not always been "officially" declared in the Tournament. The ACC merely copied the old Southern Conference bylaws, and the term pertaining to basketball just read: "Beginning December 1 and ending with the conference basketball tournament." With 17 teams it didn't pay to be too detailed. In the early years of the Tournament, unofficially, and by custom, everyone regarded the Tournament champion as the ACC champion. But it wasn't until July, 1, 1961, that the words "and the winner shall be the conference champion" were added to the ACC bylaws.

http://www.theacc.com/sports/m-baskb...022499aac.html

So there is one champion of the ACC and to be that champion you've got to win the ACC tournament. Teams finishing the ACC regular season in first place and declaring a championship is equivalent to UCONN finishing with the best division 1 record and billing themselves as NCAA regular season champions.

[NSDukeFan]

I know it's fun to project, but I would really like to get a win today in Blacksburg first.

[DU82]

So there is one champion of the ACC and to be that champion you've got to win the ACC tournament. Teams finishing the ACC regular season in first place and declaring a championship is equivalent to UCONN finishing with the best division 1 record and billing themselves as NCAA regular season champions.

Isn't that what we (and others) do with the "Final number 1 ranking" banners since the AP doesn't do a ranking after the tournament?

[eddiehaskell]

Isn't that what we (and others) do with the "Final number 1 ranking" banners since the AP doesn't do a ranking after the tournament?

Yeah - sounds about right. Us humans love ranking things and declaring champions. Next thing you know, we're going to have pre-conference play ACC champions.

BTW - I'm not saying having the best conference record is meaningless. It's an honor and quite the feat. I can see why every school would want to recognize the achievement.

[Olympic Fan]

Sigh ... does this confusion over ACC championships have to come up every year? The facts are simple:

(1) The ACC Tournament champion is THE official ACC champion. As noted above, that was voted in 1961.

There's a story behind that. You see, the old Southern Conference was so big (17 teams at the time the ACC broke off) that the only way to determine a champion was in the tournament. When the ACC was formed as an eight-team league, it continued to crown its champion in a tournament. There was no formal vote, because that's the way it had always been done.

But by the end of the 1950s, UNC coach Frank McGuire, who hated the tournament, started to agitate to declare the regular season winner as the champion (as almost every other league at that time did). He pointed out that the ACC was playing a balanced schedule and that the regular season was a fairer test than the tournament. McGuire got especially incensed about the 1960 tournament, when fourth seeded Duke upset regular season co-champs UNC and Wake Forest on back-to-back nights to win the title.

At the offseason meetings a year later, UNC (McGuire) sponsored a formal proposal to make the regular season leader the official champion. When UNC got no support for its proposal (the tourney was too popular and too financially important to monkey with), the school withdrew its motion. But just to prevent any future confusion, the league took a formal vote to confirm the former policy -- the tournament champion was THE champion.

(2) For 29 years after that vote, there was no such thing as a regular season champion. The league officials -- to avoid conflict with the real championship decided in the tourney -- specifically labeled the regular season winner as "the first-place finisher" and NOT the regular season champion.

That changed in 1990 when the ACC voted to allow the first-place finisher to declare itself regular season champion and to hang a banner. They made one firm rule -- the banner MUST carry the title "Regular season Champion".

Note: It's believed this change was prompted by Clemson's first-place finish in 1990. Up to then, Clemson had never won anything in ACC basketball and this was seen as a way to reward the league's worst basketball school. Clemson actually got a small trophy from the league for its regular season championship ... nobody since has gotten a trophy.

One other note: Although the ACC made no specific determination about changing the designation of first-place finishers before 1990, it has been assumed that it's okay for schools to honor their pre-1990 first-place finishers as regular season champions. Everybody, including Duke, does it.

So it's very simple. If you hear the term "ACC champion" that's ONLY the tournament champion. If you want to honor a team for a first-place finish, then that's okay as long as you make it clear you are talking about the "ACC regular season champion."

Now, to get back to the topic that started this thread -- rooting for Wake Forest to help Duke get a share of the regular season championship.

While I agree that a regular season title is worth having, Wake's success from here on out has NOTHING to do with whether Duke wins or shares that title.

It's been mentioned before, but bears repeating -- in the ACC, tiebreakers are used ONLY in tournament seeding, not in determing regular season titles. Go back to 2001 when Duke and UNC tied at 13-3 in the league. Even though UNC earned the No. 1 seed via tiebreaker (meaning Duke had to play No. 3 Maryland in the semifinals!), Duke was the co-regular season championship that year. Duke's last ACC football title was a co-championship with Virginia in 1989. Even though the Cavs routed the Devils head-to-head ... its still a co-championship because Duke beat Clemson and finished 6-1, while Virginia lost to Clemson and also finished 6-1.

So is there a reason to care what Wake does or where they finish?

I would say yes -- because I believe that UNC, Duke, Wake and Clemson are all battling for the two spots in Greensboro the first weekend of the NCAA Tournament. Under the pod system, the two top seeded ACC teams should be sent to Greensboro -- the other two will travel (Philadelphia is the next closest).

As of this moment (before Saturday's game), I think Duke has a very narrow edge for the second spot (with UNC No. 1 at the moment). But its close. ACC record doesn't matter nearly as much in this determination as overall record and power ratings.

Anyway, I think it helps Duke's chances to play in Greensboro if Wake -- and Clemson -- lose another game or two. That's why I think we should be pulling against Wake Forest. I don't real care if Duke is the 1-2-or-3 seed in the ACC Tournament, but I do want to play in Greensboro the first week of the NCAA Tournament.

[eddiehaskell]

^^ Good post. Thanks for the info.

[yancem]

Sigh ... does this confusion over ACC championships have to come up every year? The facts are simple:

Now, to get back to the topic that started this thread -- rooting for Wake Forest to help Duke get a share of the regular season championship.

While I agree that a regular season title is worth having, Wake's success from here on out has NOTHING to do with whether Duke wins or shares that title.

So is there a reason to care what Wake does or where they finish?

I would say yes -- because I believe that UNC, Duke, Wake and Clemson are all battling for the two spots in Greensboro the first weekend of the NCAA Tournament. Under the pod system, the two top seeded ACC teams should be sent to Greensboro -- the other two will travel (Philadelphia is the next closest).

As of this moment (before Saturday's game), I think Duke has a very narrow edge for the second spot (with UNC No. 1 at the moment). But its close. ACC record doesn't matter nearly as much in this determination as overall record and power ratings.

Anyway, I think it helps Duke's chances to play in Greensboro if Wake -- and Clemson -- lose another game or two. That's why I think we should be pulling against Wake Forest. I don't real care if Duke is the 1-2-or-3 seed in the ACC Tournament, but I do want to play in Greensboro the first week of the NCAA Tournament.

Thinking about more immediate concerns, the ACC tournament, where Wake finishes makes a difference in the tournament match-ups. In the semis, 1 will paly 4 and 2 will play 3 (assuming the seeds hold up). I would prefer to have UNC play Wake on Saturday than us (I know that we got drummed by Clemson but I don't think we would play that poorly against them again). I think that Wake matches up against UNC better thanany of the other top teams and I would rather not have to play them again. Unfortunately the top 4 seeds are far from set in stone. UNC could be 1 or 2, Duke could be 1, 2 or 3, Wake could be 2, 3 or 4, and Clemson and Florida St could be 3, 4, 5 or 6.