Roy Williams on Dan Patrick

[Lord Ash]

Just because the ACC decided the winner of the tournament was the champion doesn't make it so.

Actually, I believe it DOES make it so.

EDIT: Whoops sorry, I missed page 3 when I was reading this the first time, and a few folks already made this point. Sorry!

[cspan37421]

dadgummit!

Sorry, I just had to say it to humor myself.

I think we're all savvy enough to understand the various points being made. I have a little sympathy for the view that the regular season should count more. Baseball playoff expansion wasn't my favorite thing - generally, I do not care for the watering down of regular season accomplishments. The endless NBA playoff setup is the poster child for meaningless regular season. I recall the NHL was particularly bad too, before the expansion into warm climates (did >50% of teams make it?)

Balance is needed. I would not want to live in a sports world that didn't have NCSU in 1983 or the Boston Red Sox of 2004.

My gut tells me that if you can't make the regular season mean everything, to allow for these "Cinderella" stories, it still has to have some substantial significance.

[Jarhead]

Ty Lawson said, "The way the media portrayed us was that we were a giant and we wouldn't lose a game. That's tough to stand up to. We did our best, and we still won the ACC championship."

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/ncaato...ark&id=3985959

Ignoring the fact that the Holes were embracing the chance to go undefeated, someone needs to tap Lawson on the shoulder and inform him that Duke is the ACC Champion of 2009!

Seriously, though, who can fault Lawson, now that even theACC.com is printing two official T-shirts, the Conference Champion T-shirt for the Holes and the Tournament Champion T-shirt for Duke. I miss the good ole days when a conference champion had to win a tournament.

Couldn't it be said that they won the regular season title because of a performance enhancing drug?

[MarkD83]

There are 4 championships that mean something every year. The regular season, the tournament (which is recognized by the conference as the champion), an NCAA regional and the NCAA championship. Duke hangs banners for all of these. However, they have different significance, NCAA champion > NCAA regional champion > ACC Tournament > ACC Regular season.

In addition, the regular season has infinite importance for those who do not make the NCAAs. Take VT for instance...if they had won a few more games in December or finished 9-7 in conference they would be in the NCAAs. So, the regular season does mean something.

[killerleft]

I never meant that they didn't have the AUTHORITY to declare the winner to be the winner of the ACC tournament. They can declare the team who scores the most total points over the course of the season to be the champion, it won't wash logically. Teams, coaches and fans vacillated because they knew that if one team was 15-1 and had a bad shooting day in one game, resulting in all that previous work being washed away, it was unfair.

I meant it in the sense that when 8 teams agree to play a balanced schedule the team that has won the most games over the course of that season is the only team that can be logically declared the champion. Beating 3 of the 8 teams competing while competing over 3 days fails the logic test.

And no the NCAA tournament isn't invalid because it is single elimination. It would be impossible to have 64 teams play a balanced schedule, so the next best way declare a champion is a tournament. A tournament is a way to declare a champion, but it is less accurate than a balanced schedule.

The most fair, balanced and accurate way to declare a champion when multiple teams are competing is to have each team play each other team, the team who wins the most is the natural champion. The ACC declared a more inaccurate way in order to grab more money for the member schools.

I am done. I know I will never convince people of this and that is ok. I just needed to do some mental gymnastics today.

I think most everybody would agree that money is the driver behind the ACC tournament. Logic and fairness are fine. But no amount of logic or fairness can change the unalterable fact that Duke University's Blue Devils are the real and genuine ACC Men's Basketball Champions of 2008-2009.

If Ty Lawson or anybody else wants to try and dream themselves up a championship (and who would deny that the Heels are the historical and true champions of self -awarded championships?), then let 'em.

[tele]

"...come on now." I can see why ol' Roy would be concerned about Seth Davis filling out his boxes if Seth was a graduate of ESPNU, especially those final four boxes:

http://sports-ak.espn.go.com/ncb/tournament/bracket

[dball]

Remember the NCAA pulled the rule and allowed more teams in EXACTLY because of the 1974 Final. They saw the result as a bad one. One team was harmed because of a result of a single game in a one weekend tournament. Yes, it was exciting for the fans, it was hardly an reasonable or equitable for the teams involved.

State lost one early season game to UCLA but that was the only blemish on their record. As the undefeated 'regular season champs', they received the first round bye in the tournament. If Maryland had won, then this statement might make more sense.

Rather than the tournament being the issue, the game highlighted the inequity of having a sole league representative--no matter how the conference champion was determined. State and MD were mostly ranked in the Top 5 all year. State was ranked number one at the end of the regular season.

[4decadedukie]

I meant it in the sense that when 8 teams agree to play a balanced schedule the team that has won the most games over the course of that season is the only team that can be logically declared the champion.

I have no problem with the "old ACC;" however, with twelve teams there is a major issue.

The obvious concern is regular season ACC schedules are NOT "balanced." They were, some years ago, when all teams played every other school twice (the home-and-away round-robin). Now, however, with "rivalry schools" playing twice and schedules that change annually, the seasonal ACC schedule is clearly more difficult for some team than for others.

Let me prove this by citing the just-concluded 2009 ACC schedule. The top four conference team (those that received bys in Atlanta last week) were UNC, Wake, Duke and FSU. Duke was required to play the other three top teams twice (a total of six games), whereas Wake, UNC and FSU played the other top clubs only five times (not six). In a season where an additional win or loss to a ranked team is especially critical, it is easy to see how this disparity makes the regular ACC schedule an "uneven playing field."

For this reason, the ACC Tournament is the only "level playing field" to determine the annual championship.

[Spret42]

I have no problem with the "old ACC;" however, with twelve teams there is a major issue.

The obvious concern is regular season ACC schedules are NOT "balanced." They were, some years ago, when all teams played every other school twice (the home-and-away round-robin). Now, however, with "rivalry schools" playing twice and schedules that change annually, the seasonal ACC schedule is clearly more difficult for some team than for others.

Let me prove this by citing the just-concluded 2009 ACC schedule. The top four conference team (those that received bys in Atlanta last week) were UNC, Wake, Duke and FSU. Duke was required to play the other three top teams twice (a total of six games), whereas Wake, UNC and FSU played the other top clubs only five times (not six). In a season where an additional win or loss to a ranked team is especially critical, it is easy to see how this disparity makes the regular ACC schedule an "uneven playing field."

For this reason, the ACC Tournament is the only "level playing field" to determine the annual championship.

I agree. In my first post on this thread I said that Duke was the ACC champion this year. There is no regular season champion in a league with an unbalanced schedule. If UNC wants to be ACC champs, take the damned tournament seriously and win it.

What got everyone in an uproar was when I said the ACC tournament as it was originally constituted was a meaningless money grab. I think it was. I should have qualified my use of the word meaningless or better instead said unnecessary.

[4decadedukie]

What got everyone in an uproar was when I said the ACC tournament as it was originally constituted was a meaningless money grab.

You may be right; the ACC Tournament was -- and, perhaps, may still be -- principally a financial boom for the Conference, the universities and their booster clubs, the host city, and so forth. However, having gone three time recently, it is FUN, most attendees really know ACC hoops, and they fervently support their school.

[Devilsfan]

Seth not being very intelligent because he went to Duke is very humorous. Maybe Mr. Williams should invite Seth to the next meeting of the unc Mensa organization. He is a member, right?

[BD80]

...the unc Mensa organization...?

The meeting is at the back of the restaurant, the table of four ... with three empty seats.

I think the guy with white hair and ugly light blue tie sitting at the table is lost.

We have had multiple requests for the Mexican comedian namd Carlos ...