MBB: ACC-BCS Challenge

[sagegrouse]

The ACC has a collective 4-7 record against teams in BCS conferences. It's not too pretty.

Wins over:

Az State (Duke)
Ohio St. (UNC)
So. Car. (Mia.)
Auburn (State)

Losses to:

Syracuse (UNC)
Texas A&M (Clem.)
U. of So. Fla. (UVa)
Stanford (UVa)
Wisc. (UMd)
Cinc. (UMd)
Fla. (FSU)

Looks like the Big Ten has a chance for a breakthrough next week against the ACC.

sagegrouse

[rthomas]

Not sure about against BCS but overall Big East is 62-6. ACC 42-10.

[DukieBoy]

If there would ever be a year Big Ten could beat the ACC in the challenge, it'd be this year. They are an incredibly deep conference this year with 5 to 6 quality teams and could have up to 7 or 8 in the tourney at the end of the year.

[uh_no]

If there would ever be a year Big Ten could beat the ACC in the challenge, it'd be this year. They are an incredibly deep conference this year with 5 to 6 quality teams and could have up to 7 or 8 in the tourney at the end of the year.

but they won't

they're the big 10....consistently overrated in the preason

[DukieBoy]

but they won't

they're the big 10....consistently overrated in the preason

Well Ohio State, which is the 4th best team in the Big Ten according to the AP polls, gave UNC, who is 2nd in the ACC, all it could handle.

6 Big Ten teams in the top 25
3 ACC teams

So you tell me, are they really overrated right now?

[loran16]

Well Ohio State, which is the 4th best team in the Big Ten according to the AP polls, gave UNC, who is 2nd in the ACC, all it could handle.

6 Big Ten teams in the top 25
3 ACC teams

So you tell me, are they really overrated right now?

Errr, DID YOU WATCH THE SAME GAME EVERYONE ELSE DID? UNC manhandled OSU for 39 minutes, before they got extremely sloppy as hell. If LD2 doesn't goof off with FTs, that game is never within 2 possessions.

OSU is very possibly overrated.

Now the point is clear that the Big 10 is really good this year and could take the challenge. But well, the OSU-UNC game is a terrible example.

[DukieBoy]

Errr, DID YOU WATCH THE SAME GAME EVERYONE ELSE DID? UNC manhandled OSU for 39 minutes, before they got extremely sloppy as hell. If LD2 doesn't goof off with FTs, that game is never within 2 possessions.

OSU is very possibly overrated.

Now the point is clear that the Big 10 is really good this year and could take the challenge. But well, the OSU-UNC game is a terrible example.

To be honest, I didn't watch the whole game. However, if they were in the game at all, then it shows they are good. We'll find out this week who is truly over and under rated

[YourLandlord]

Errr, DID YOU WATCH THE SAME GAME EVERYONE ELSE DID? UNC manhandled OSU for 39 minutes, before they got extremely sloppy as hell. If LD2 doesn't goof off with FTs, that game is never within 2 possessions.

OSU is very possibly overrated.

Now the point is clear that the Big 10 is really good this year and could take the challenge. But well, the OSU-UNC game is a terrible example.

I'm not sure being up by a steady 10 points for most of the 2nd half is "manhandling" someone.

[cwaugh]

Errr, DID YOU WATCH THE SAME GAME EVERYONE ELSE DID? UNC manhandled OSU for 39 minutes, before they got extremely sloppy as hell. If LD2 doesn't goof off with FTs, that game is never within 2 possessions.

OSU is very possibly overrated.

Now the point is clear that the Big 10 is really good this year and could take the challenge. But well, the OSU-UNC game is a terrible example.

I wouldn't say UNC "manhandled" OSU. I watched the entire game and would have to say that both teams played poorly. It was an ugly game to watch.

[theAlaskanBear]

I would wait until conference play starts to start casting judgements about the strength of conferences. There are alot of important games coming up now that the cupcakes are mostly out of the way.

The Big 10 is in a good position to win the Challenge this year.

Purdue, Michigan St, Minnesota, and Michigan should all win their games.
Duke, NC State, and VTech should all win their games.

Clemson looked like I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this. last night. Maryland has been very unimpressive so far too.

We some good games, and a lit tle bit of luck to take out the Big 10 this year.

[Olympic Fan]

So BCS record actually means something this year? As opposed to last season when the ACC had the best BCS record -- but all the talking heads annointed the Big East as the best conference?

Look, the ACC has not looked great so far, but let's keep it in context. We're talking about 11 games. Let's revisit this topic at the end of next week, after the ACC-Big Ten challenge (that will in itself double the ACC's total of BCS games), plus games like Duke-UConn , Duke St. John's, UNC-Kentucky, NC State-Marquette, Southern Cal-Georgia Tech.

FWIW (and at this early date, not much) -- the RPI currently rates the ACC as the No. 3 conference (behind the No. 1 Big East and No. 2 Big 12 ... the SEC is fourth, the Pac 10 10th and the Big Ten is 11th). Sagarin rates the ACC No. 2, behind only thre Big East (3. Big 12, 4. Big 10, 5. SEC ... 9th Pac 10).

And Pomeroy rates the ACC No. 1 ahead of the No. 2 Big 12, No. 3 Big East, No. 4 Big 10, No. 5 SEC and No. 9 Pac 10.

The ACC has had a bad week -- no question. If things don't change, we're going to be a middle-of-the-pack BCS conference. But the ACC has been the top rated BCS conference, generally with the best OOC record and the best BCS record, for most of the last decade and it hasn't helped our bubble teams all that much at NCAA selection time.

As for the ACC-Big Ten Challenge, this is about the fifth straight year when going in, everybody has said, 'This is the year the Big Ten finally wins.' Well, one of these years everybody will be right.

Is this the year?

I don't know ... let's wait until Monday morning to make our official picks (we should have a thread for that). But in general, I like the matchups from an ACC point of view.

[uh_no]

So BCS record actually means something this year? As opposed to last season when the ACC had the best BCS record -- but all the talking heads annointed the Big East as the best conference?

Look, the ACC has not looked great so far, but let's keep it in context. We're talking about 11 games. Let's revisit this topic at the end of next week, after the ACC-Big Ten challenge (that will in itself double the ACC's total of BCS games), plus games like Duke-UConn , Duke St. John's, UNC-Kentucky, NC State-Marquette, Southern Cal-Georgia Tech.

FWIW (and at this early date, not much) -- the RPI currently rates the ACC as the No. 3 conference (behind the No. 1 Big East and No. 2 Big 12 ... the SEC is fourth, the Pac 10 10th and the Big Ten is 11th). Sagarin rates the ACC No. 2, behind only thre Big East (3. Big 12, 4. Big 10, 5. SEC ... 9th Pac 10).

And Pomeroy rates the ACC No. 1 ahead of the No. 2 Big 12, No. 3 Big East, No. 4 Big 10, No. 5 SEC and No. 9 Pac 10.

The ACC has had a bad week -- no question. If things don't change, we're going to be a middle-of-the-pack BCS conference. But the ACC has been the top rated BCS conference, generally with the best OOC record and the best BCS record, for most of the last decade and it hasn't helped our bubble teams all that much at NCAA selection time.

As for the ACC-Big Ten Challenge, this is about the fifth straight year when going in, everybody has said, 'This is the year the Big Ten finally wins.' Well, one of these years everybody will be right.

Is this the year?

I don't know ... let's wait until Monday morning to make our official picks (we should have a thread for that). But in general, I like the matchups from an ACC point of view.

after last year's tournament, there is absolutely no argument that could possibly put the ACC as the best converence 5 teams in the elite 8? 3 #1 seeds? vs 1 and 1 from the acc?

[houstondukie]

Errr, DID YOU WATCH THE SAME GAME EVERYONE ELSE DID? UNC manhandled OSU for 39 minutes, before they got extremely sloppy as hell. If LD2 doesn't goof off with FTs, that game is never within 2 possessions.

OSU is very possibly overrated.

Now the point is clear that the Big 10 is really good this year and could take the challenge. But well, the OSU-UNC game is a terrible example.

The game I saw was one of the ugliest college basketball games we'll see this year. "Manhandled"? Really?

[Olympic Fan]

after last year's tournament, there is absolutely no argument that could possibly put the ACC as the best converence 5 teams in the elite 8? 3 #1 seeds? vs 1 and 1 from the acc?

I'm just trying to figure out how you want to measure conferences. The origin of this thread was bemoaning the ACC's poor BCS record so far.

I merely pointed out that if BCS record is the measure of a conference, the ACC should have been judged the best last season -- when it had a 28-18 record against BCS opponents (including a 10-6 record head-to-head with the Big East, which was itself a mere 22-22 vs. other BCS leagues).

The same the year before, when the pollsters and talking heads thought the Pac 10 was the best conference, even though the ACC again had the best BCS record (30-19) compared to the Pac 10's 15-14 record. (An unlike the Big East in 2009, the Pac 10 did not exactly shine in the 2008 tournament).

And while I agree the Big East did make a strong argument for its superiority in the 2009 NCAA Tournament, I'm not sure there's not an argument to be made against them. After all, what is the measure of a conference?

Well, the ACC had the best team -- does that make the ACC No. 1?

The Big East was better 2-5 -- does that make them the best?

Or does the ACC's overall superiority of depth (reflected by last year's OOC, BCS and head-to-head superiority) make it No. 1?

In other words, what are you looking for -- the conference that's best at the very top (which last year was the ACC)? The conference with the most quality teams (last year, clearly, the Big East)? Or the conference that's the best top to bottom (which, last year, was the ACC)?

It's all pretty arbitrary, depending on what criteria you're looking for.

I just want to know what measure you are going to use, so that we can see how upset we should be over the ACC's poor showing in its first 11 BCS games.

[JasonEvans]

after last year's tournament, there is absolutely no argument that could possibly put the ACC as the best converence 5 teams in the elite 8? 3 #1 seeds? vs 1 and 1 from the acc?

Part of the problem with the "best conference" argument is that everyone has different criteria.

Yes, the Big East had a lot of very good teams last year, but the bottom of the conference was a joke compared to the bottom of the ACC. The reason so many of the unbiased rankings (like Pomeroy, Sagarin, and RPI) rated the ACC higher was because the middle and especially the bottom of the ACC were waaay better than the same level of the Big East.

So, which is a tougher conference:


Conference A- 10 teams- 2 teams in the top 5 in the nation, 1 team in the top 25, 1 team in the top 50, 6 teams ranked outside the top 100.

Conference B- 10 teams- 1 team in the top 10, 4 in the top 25, 4 in the top 50, 1 team in the top 100.

Conference C- 10 teams- 1 in the top 5, 1 in the top 10, 2 in the top 25, 2 in the top 50, 3 in the top 100, 1 outside the top 100.

A is really top heavy, but the top is impressive. The bottom sucks a lot though.
B has no one who will really challenge for the national title, but every game is a war. No off days there!
C is pretty evenly balanced between great teams, good teams, and a couple bad teams.

I dunno the answer as to which is best. I just put it out there to demonstrate that there are a lot of ways to look at the "who is the best" argument.

--Jason "note-- the above examples were not meant to simulate any actual conferences" Evans

[JasonEvans]

As usual, Oly Fan beat me to the punch with the exact same argument... and his is a more clear explanation than mine too.

--Jason "nothing new to see here... please move on" Evans

[ice-9]

I'm just trying to figure out how you want to measure conferences. The origin of this thread was bemoaning the ACC's poor BCS record so far.

I merely pointed out that if BCS record is the measure of a conference, the ACC should have been judged the best last season -- when it had a 28-18 record against BCS opponents (including a 10-6 record head-to-head with the Big East, which was itself a mere 22-22 vs. other BCS leagues).

The same the year before, when the pollsters and talking heads thought the Pac 10 was the best conference, even though the ACC again had the best BCS record (30-19) compared to the Pac 10's 15-14 record. (An unlike the Big East in 2009, the Pac 10 did not exactly shine in the 2008 tournament).

And while I agree the Big East did make a strong argument for its superiority in the 2009 NCAA Tournament, I'm not sure there's not an argument to be made against them. After all, what is the measure of a conference?

Well, the ACC had the best team -- does that make the ACC No. 1?

The Big East was better 2-5 -- does that make them the best?

Or does the ACC's overall superiority of depth (reflected by last year's OOC, BCS and head-to-head superiority) make it No. 1?

In other words, what are you looking for -- the conference that's best at the very top (which last year was the ACC)? The conference with the most quality teams (last year, clearly, the Big East)? Or the conference that's the best top to bottom (which, last year, was the ACC)?

It's all pretty arbitrary, depending on what criteria you're looking for.

I just want to know what measure you are going to use, so that we can see how upset we should be over the ACC's poor showing in its first 11 BCS games.


Fair points, but here's the thing:

Last year (pre-tournament), you could make a strong argument that the ACC is the better conference. By certain criteria, it was. But you could also make an argument that the Big East was the best conference, and with certain criteria, it was. Generally everyone agreed that these two were the best in the nation.

THIS year, however, no one is talking about the ACC as the best conference -- it's not even close. The ACC simply doesn't have the talent or experience. The nail in the coffin is that when you look at the win-loss record against others in the BCS, it's even more clear that the ACC is not the best. We'd be lucky at this point to even be considered third best.

Last year, it was debatable. This year, at this point in the season at least, it's not even debatable. The ACC is down.

[Heelkiller1]

Going to be a very different year for the challenge.

[Olympic Fan]

THIS year, however, no one is talking about the ACC as the best conference -- it's not even close. The ACC simply doesn't have the talent or experience. The nail in the coffin is that when you look at the win-loss record against others in the BCS, it's even more clear that the ACC is not the best. We'd be lucky at this point to even be considered third best.

Last year, it was debatable. This year, at this point in the season at least, it's not even debatable. The ACC is down.

Beg to disagree ... as of this moment (Friday afternoon), Pomeroy rates the ACC No. 1, Sagarin rates the ACC No. 2 and RPI rates the ACC No. 3.

That's hardly "no one is talking about the ACC as the best conference -- it's not even close."

And to be frank, I'd wait a lot longer than 11 games in November before I'd start talking about "the nail in the coffin."

PS I still want to know what criteria we're going to rank conferences? Are we going to use the rating systems? Are we going to use overall OOC records? Are we going to use OOC BCS records? Are we going to wait until late March and use NCAA results?

And to quote Jason Evans' point, are we going to base it on the league's top 1-2 teams? The top 5-6? Or the strength of the entire conference?

Just let me know now -- I'm tired of the shell game that keeps changing the criteria to fit the best anti-ACC argument.

[ice-9]

No one's a bigger ACC homer than I was last year.

I don't think you can say "it's only 11 games" and then cite these various rankings. The rankings require a critical mass of games to be accurate.

IMO there are two ways of looking at it...qualitatively and quantitatively.

Qualitatively, NO ONE is talking about the ACC as the best conference. At least last year the ACC was in the conversation. This year we're not.

Quantitatively, there are records and rankings. Because there aren't enough games yet for a good quality ranking, the head-to-head matchups take precedence. And as you can see from the first post of this thread, the ACC is losing.

Qualitatively and quantitively, the ACC is down. To me, it's definitive (hence my perhaps misuse of the phrase "nail in the coffin").

[Olympic Fan]

Well, the ACC record against the BCS is now 6-7 after Duke's victory over the UCon(victs) and FSU's victory over Alabama.

Look, jyuwono, I absolutely agree that it's too early to use RPI or Pomeroy or Sagarin as something definitive. But you were the one using 11 games in November to make definitive statements -- I only showed you that the early data could be viewed two ways.

PLEASE, let's try to keep everything in context. The ACC has a bad week heading into today. That's all it was -- a bad week.

It might be the harbinger of a bad year for the conference. It might not be. We'll see. We'll know a lot more after next weekend, when most of the teams break for exams.

I'm just saying to wait a little bit longer to start nailing the ACC's coffin shut.

[pfrduke]

If we're reacting so strongly based on small sample sizes, yesterday certainly knocked the Big 10 down a peg - MSU loses to Florida, Michigan gets run out of the building by a Marquette team picked to finish 12th in the Big East, Minnesota loses to Portland (a really good team, by the way - the WCC has three legit squads in Gonzaga, St. Mary's, and Portland), and Illinois drops to Utah. All top 25 teams, all losing to unranked teams (at least at the time - Florida will almost certainly be in the top 25 next week).

[Eternal Outlaw]

Going into Saturday the ACC is 6-7 but besides being a low number of games, it was never stated how other conferences are doing. Right now, I have:

Big East: 10-6
SEC: 10-9
Big 10: 5-5
Big 12: 4-4
ACC: 6-7
Pac 10: 3-7

Percentage wise, the ACC is 5th right now but with so few games people shouldn't be making conclusions when 4 of 6 conferences are somewhere between 1 game over .500 and 1 game below .500.

The biggest thing I notice from the numbers so far is the SEC. Not for the 10-9 record but the fact they have played 19 games against the other 5 conference or nearly 30% of their games. The Big 12 on the other hand has played just 8 or about 13% of their games. So far the other conferences sit between 18.5% and 21.1%.

Besides being a low number of games, the post above shows another point. The Big Ten had a bad day yesterday going 1-4 but since only 3 games were against the other 5 conferences, their record was 1-2 not looking so bad.

4 teams were grouped closely above in just BCS games, here are their non-BCS game records:

ACC: 47-4 92.1%
Big 12: 48-5 90.6%
SEC: 36-9 80.0%
Big 10: 33-11 75.0%

This would surely seem to help the ACC's slightly worse BCS records when the SEC and Big Ten drop off in this aspect.

The problem with these broad strokes is that a win is a win and a loss is a loss when we know Duke beating UConn is not the same as Tennessee beating DePaul. On the other side a loss for Wisconsin to Gonzaga is treated the same as a loss of Rutgers to Vermont.

Still would be my contention that it is too early to tell as been stated by others but if something needed to be said, I would say the Big East left the blocks the best, the Big 12 has a real low body of work compared to everyone else, and the ACC is arguably #2 right now despite a sub .500 record against the other 5 by 1 game. The Pac 10, Big 10, and SEC all seem to have too many bad loses on their resumes compared to the ACC. Between the Big 12 and ACC, the Big 12 has a slight advantage in BCS at 4-4 to 6-7 and the ACC has a slight advantage in non-BCS at 92.1% to 90.6%. Only game was Texas A&M beating Clemson so head to head is very hard to judge anything on. Of course this still isn't weighting the games and calling this or that a good win or meh win or bad loss or overmatched loss and such stuff like road/win/neutral site wins/losses.

It's still very early and some conference like the Big 12 aren't playing the other conferences much yet. 8 games so far, won't hit the current ACC total of 13 until end of Dec. 2nd. Of course at that point I think the ACC will have played 14 more games in large due to the challenge and be up to 27 BCS games.

[pfrduke]

BC brought the record back to .500 with a win at Providence.

Thankfully (kind of), William & Mary is not in a BCS conference. Oh Wake.... (sigh).

[sagegrouse]

Update. pfrduke has already posted this, but I thought it would be useful to have a running account of games vs. other BCS schools:

Since Wednesday, the ACC has move to 0.500 and 7-7 with three wins.

Wins over:

Alabama (FSU)
UConn (Duke)
Providence (BC)

Also, as noted, Wake lost at home today by ten to Bill and Mary(?!). Other losses to non-BCS schools were two by Boston College at the Virgins Islands Paradise event, against St. Joe's of the highly respected A-10 and Northern Iowa, not so highly respected. I assume the BC Eagles otherwise enjoyed their time in the islands, although Coach Al's practices should be really intense next week. Georgia Tech also lost to Dayton of the A-10.

Earlier: The ACC has a collective 4-7 record against teams in BCS conferences. It's not too pretty.

Wins over:

Az State (Duke)
Ohio St. (UNC)
So. Car. (Mia.)
Auburn (State)

Losses to:

Syracuse (UNC)
Texas A&M (Clem.)
U. of So. Fla. (UVa)
Stanford (UVa)
Wisc. (UMd)
Cinc. (UMd)
Fla. (FSU)

Looks like the Big Ten has a chance for a breakthrough next week against the ACC.

sagegrouse

[Newton_14]

How does Wake lose to Bill and Mary? Wow. Unbelievable. Gaudio better get it together soon as that seat just got a lot hotter. With the talent he has on that team there is no excuse to losing to a team like that. The fact that it came at home makes it even worse!

Did Bill and Mary also steal the Wake Harley-Davidson and drive it home as well??

[ice-9]

The problem with these broad strokes is that a win is a win and a loss is a loss when we know Duke beating UConn is not the same as Tennessee beating DePaul. On the other side a loss for Wisconsin to Gonzaga is treated the same as a loss of Rutgers to Vermont.

Exactly.

Look at some of the "upset" losses the ACC has had (rankings at the time):
- #4 UNC losing to unranked Syracuse
- #19 Clemson losing to unranked Texas A&M
- #22 Maryland losing to Cincinnati and Wisconsin
- Wake Forest (others receiving votes) losing to Williams & Mary
- Virginia Tech losing to Temple
- Boston College losing to St. Joe and Northern Iowa

And who have we beaten as a conference?

#12 UConn is the conference's best win. #15 Ohio State is next. But in both those wins a higher ranked ACC team (#7 Duke and #4 UNC respectively) prevailed.

After that...a bunch of so-so opponents in
- Arizona State losing to #7 Duke
- Alabama losing to Florida State (others receiving votes)
- South Carolina losing to Miami (others receiving votes)
- Auburn losing to NC State
- Providence losing to Boston College

None of which are particularly impressive. In each win, with the exception of perhaps Auburn and Providence, the ACC team was supposed to win.

So far we are under-performing relative to expectations.

Perhaps those expectations were too high to begin with -- but I've adjusted mine downwards.

The ACC-Big 10 Challenge can help change my mind but I think this year we take the loss.

[dukelifer]

How does Wake lose to Bill and Mary? Wow. Unbelievable. Gaudio better get it together soon as that seat just got a lot hotter. With the talent he has on that team there is no excuse to losing to a team like that. The fact that it came at home makes it even worse!

Did Bill and Mary also steal the Wake Harley-Davidson and drive it home as well??
I agree. This has been Wake's MO for a while now- they play hard against the big boys and take nights off and lose to teams they should beat. This is about coaching and getting kids to play hard every night. The talent is more than there to beat a team like William and Mary.

[Olympic Fan]

As I suggested earlier, the larger the sample size, the less dire it looks for the ACC. We're back to .500 against the BCS ... big one tonite with FSU and Marquette.

No question Wake Forest's loss to W&M was an embarrassment. On the other hand, I think DBR's take on the Boston College-Providence game was 180 degrees wrong -- it was not an embarrassingly close win, it was a significant win on the road for an undermanned team against a Big East opponent.

Boston College has been playing without its best player, Rakim Sanders, who is out another week or two with an ankle injury. Providence is a huge regional rival and they were playing on their home court. Okay, the Friars aren't supposed to be that great (picked 14th in the 16-team Big East), but BC was picked 9th in the 12-team ACC.

To me, that was a significant win for BC. Good showing by soph guard Reggie Jackson, who had 20 points, 12 rebounds and seven assists.

Again, let's see where we stand after next week's games. That ought to give us a big enough sample size to made a fair assessment of where the various leagues rank.

[wisteria]

Another tough day for big-10, as two ranked big10 teams (Minny and Michigan) lost to their respective unranked opponents. Both games came down to the final seconds.

[airowe]

If Carolina plays like they are tonight against Michigan State you can definitely mark that down for a loss.

[ice-9]

OK feeling MUCH better about the ACC now.

#19 Clemson win over #12 Butler is huge. Butler might have been overrated but this is still a marquee win. The loss to Texas A&M doesn't look as bad now given the Aggies defeated #16 Minnesota; clearly, Turgeon's squad is underrated.

Similarly, the win over Alabama looks even better now for Florida State with #15 Michigan's loss to the Tides. Coupled with FSU's win over Marquette, FSU looks like a legitimate squad that could break the top 25.

UNC's narrow win over Nevada is concerning.

All things said, it looks like the ACC hierarchy breaks the following way:

Tier 1: Duke
Tier 2: Clemson, UNC, Miami, FSU
Tier 3: Georgia Tech, NC State, Maryland
Tier 4: Virginia Tech, Wake Forest, Boston College, UVA

[sagegrouse]

Update. pfrduke has already posted this, but I thought it would be useful to have a running account of games vs. other BCS schools:

Since Wednesday, the ACC has move to 0.500 and 7-7 with three wins.

Wins over:

Alabama (FSU)
UConn (Duke)
Providence (BC)

Also, as noted, Wake lost at home today by ten to Bill and Mary(?!). Other losses to non-BCS schools were two by Boston College at the Virgins Islands Paradise event, against St. Joe's of the highly respected A-10 and Northern Iowa, not so highly respected. I assume the BC Eagles otherwise enjoyed their time in the islands, although Coach Al's practices should be really intense next week. Georgia Tech also lost to Dayton of the A-10.

Earlier: The ACC has a collective 4-7 record against teams in BCS conferences. It's not too pretty.

Wins over:

Az State (Duke)
Ohio St. (UNC)
So. Car. (Mia.)
Auburn (State)

Losses to:

Syracuse (UNC)
Texas A&M (Clem.)
U. of So. Fla. (UVa)
Stanford (UVa)
Wisc. (UMd)
Cinc. (UMd)
Fla. (FSU)

Looks like the Big Ten has a chance for a breakthrough next week against the ACC.

sagegrouse

jyuwono has covererd the games very well. I watched the second half of Marquette-FSU, where Marquette led by 30-18 at the half and 39-22 at one point. FSU reeled them in and Solomon Alabi made an impressive shot at the end for the lead, and Marquette threw the ball away at the other end to give FSU the win.

For the record, the ACC now leads the ACC-BCS challenge 8-7:

Win

Marquette (FSU)

Clemson's comeback over Butler was also remarkable, esp. the focus and FTs made at the end. Only saw the last minute of this game plus a couple of updates during the FSU comeback.

Some have observed that the W-L statistic is meaningless with so few data points. Agreed, but that condition should ameliorate with 11 new observations this week from the official ACC-Big Ten challenge.:)

sagegrouse

[Saratoga2]

jyuwono has covererd the games very well. I watched the second half of Marquette-FSU, where Marquette led by 30-18 at the half and 39-22 at one point. FSU reeled them in and Solomon Alabi made an impressive shot at the end for the lead, and Marquette threw the ball away at the other end to give FSU the win.

For the record, the ACC now leads the ACC-BCS challenge 8-7:

Win

Marquette (FSU)

Clemson's comeback over Butler was also remarkable, esp. the focus and FTs made at the end. Only saw the last minute of this game plus a couple of updates during the FSU comeback.

Some have observed that the W-L statistic is meaningless with so few data points. Agreed, but that condition should ameliorate with 11 new observations this week from the official ACC-Big Ten challenge.:)

sagegrouse

What I noticed about that game is that Marquette was very quick but not very big. They also weren't a deep team and all the expenditure of energy seemed to exhaust them toward the end of the game where FSU made a concerted push and just eased by. I recognize a similarity for how our team and UCONN seemed to lose potentcy at the end of the UCONN game. With Mason returning and with Dawkins a viable sub, along with Kelly, we have the depth to avoid the apparent exhaustion at the end of games.

Good win for FSU.

[Olympic Fan]

Okay, now that the ACC is 8-7 vs. other BCS leagues, shouldn't we change the title of this thread? ;-)

Amazing how it's evened up. In the BCS "Challenge" three leagues are one game over .500 (8-7 ACC, 6-5 Big 12, 10-9 Big East), one league is one game under .500 (6-7 Big Ten). The SEC is leading at 12-9 and the Pac 10 trailing at 3-8.

Overall, the Big East (76-12) has a slight lead over the Big 12 (57-11) and ACC (58-12), which are separated by percentage points. The SEC (44-19) and the Big 10 (43-19) are separated by half a game for fourth place. The Pac 10 (36-19) is in last.

About the only thing that's clearcut at the moment is that the Pac 10 is the weakest BCS league -- by far. Anybody else see UCLA go 0-3 in the Anaheim tournament, losing to Portland, Butler and Long Beach State (a team that visits Duke Dec. 29). And Washington, supposedly the class of the league, had to fight for its life Sunday night against Montana at home.

Well, we'll learn a lot more about the ACC in the next week -- 11 games in the ACC/Big Ten Challenge, starting tonight. Then four more ACC/BCS matchups Saturday (Duke should beat St. John's in Cameron; UNC has a tough one at Kentucky; NC State is a big underdog at Marquette; Georgia Tech should beat Southern Cal in Atlanta ... that doesn't count Wake at Gonzaga) and one more (Villanova-Maryland!) Sunday.

By this time next week, we'll have 27 ACC/BCS games in the book -- and IMHO, that will be enough to draw some reasonable conclusions about the league.

If the ACC is still over .500 vs. the BCS at that point, THEN we really should change the title of this thread (and no smiley face this time).

[sagegrouse]

Here are the results season-to-date for the ACC against the other BCS conferences:

Pre ACC-Big Ten (8-7)
Wins over:

Az State (Duke)
Ohio St. (UNC)
So. Car. (Mia.)
Auburn (State)
Alabama (FSU)
UConn (Duke)
Providence (BC)
Marquette (FSU)

Losses to:

Syracuse (UNC)
Texas A&M (Clem.)
U. of So. Fla. (UVa)
Stanford (UVa)
Wisc. (UMd)
Cinc. (UMd)
Fla. (FSU)

ACC-Big Ten Challenge (5-6)
Wins over:
Indiana (UMd)
Mich. St. (UNC)
Iowa (VT)
Minnesota (Mia.)
Michigan (BC)

Losses to:
Penn State (UVa)
Northwestern (State)
Purdue (WF)
Illinois (Clem.)
Wisc. (Duke)
Ohio St. (FSU)


Post Challenge (3-1)
Wins over:
Marquette (State)
St. Johns (Duke)
USC (GT)

Losses to:
Kentucky (UNC)

Total for Season – 16-14

Upcoming Games

Sunday:
So. Car. @ Clem.
Georgia @ VT
Villanova vs. UMd @ Verizon Center (DC)

Monday:
UVa @ Auburn

Later in December:
VT @ Penn State
Auburn @ FSU
UNC @ Texas
State @ Arizona
Rutgers @ UNC
So. Car. @ BC

Three games today (Sunday) and then others scattered over the rest of the month.

ACC is doing OK with the State (Marquette) and Wake (Gonzaga, not BCS) wins yesterday being remarkable.

sagegrouse

Note to Mods: Can we change thread title end to -- “We’re winning” -- ??? 

[ice-9]

It was a good day for the ACC: everyone except UNC won. :D

[Olympic Fan]

It was a good day for the ACC: everyone except UNC won. :D

It was a great day for the ACC -- NC State winning at Marquette, Wake Forest winning at Gonzaga, Duke beating St. John's and Georgia Tech crushing Southern Cal in Atlanta. Too bad that embarrasment from Chapel Hill College let the league down again. ;-)

Actually, looking at the six power leagues after Saturday's game, there's only one real conclusion we can draw -- the Pac 10 is far and away the weakest BCS conference this season. Everybody else is still sorting themselves out.

If we rank the leagues based on overall non-conference record, we get:

1. Big East 94-17 .847
2. Big 12 73-16 .820
3. ACC 70-19 .787
4. SEC 67-21 .761
5. Big 10 58-25 .699
6. Pac 10 40-28 .588

If you rank the leagues according to OOC BCS opponents:

1. SEC 15-10 .600
2. Big 12 12-8 .600
3. ACC 16-14 .533
4. Big 10 12-12 .500
5. Big East 10-12 .455
6. Pac 10 5-14 .263

A couple of observations:

(1) One reason the Big 12's BCS record is so good is that they're playing a challenge series against the woeful Pac 10. Believe me, if the the ACC has played the Pac 10 instead of the Big 10, they wouldn't have finished 5-6.

(2) Amazing how weak the Big East OOC has beenn-- 16 teams have played just 22 BCS opponents. Put it this way, ACC teams have played an average of 2.5 BCS opponents apiece. The Big East has played 1.4 apiece. The Pac 10 has played 1.9, the Big 12 1.7; the Big 10/11 2.1.

That's all still in flux. The Big East is starting a challenge series with the SEC. That should be interesting. Also, the next two days will provide plenty of chances for the ACC and SEC to measure each other -- the ACC currently leads at 3-2, but today South Carolina is at Clemson and Georgia is at Virginia Tech. Monday, Virginia is at Auburn.

The ACC leads the Big East 5-3 head to head after Saturday's two wins. The BE gets a chance to cut into that margin when Villanova takes on Maryland in Washington.

FWIW, the ACC is 6-4 against ranked OOC opponents.

[Olympic Fan]

Improved the ACC's BCS record to 18-15 with two victories Sunday over the SEC (Virginia Tech over Georgia and Clemson over South Carolina), balanced against a loss by Maryland to Villanova (although after getting blown away in the first half, the Terps fought back and made a tight game of it in the second).

PS Glad to see that the title of this thread was changed, since the ACC is no longer losing the "BCS Challenge"

[pfrduke]

Improved the ACC's BCS record to 18-15 with two victories Sunday over the SEC (Virginia Tech over Georgia and Clemson over South Carolina), balanced against a loss by Maryland to Villanova (although after getting blown away in the first half, the Terps fought back and made a tight game of it in the second).

PS Glad to see that the title of this thread was changed, since the ACC is no longer losing the "BCS Challenge"

Not going to be much movement on this during the week - only two games (Virginia @ Auburn tonight, VT @ Penn State Saturday).