The ACC Headed for Disaster

[Olympic Fan]

I've been one of the strongest defenders of the ACC in preseason. I keep pointing out that as of Tuesday this week, the ACC was still the No. 2 conference in RPI. It's terrible compared to what we're used to, but in a more balanced college basketball world, it's still very good.

But the one thing the ACC does not need is parity ... and that's what the first day of ACC competition gave us.

Virginia's one-point homecourt win over Miami was not bad -- two good, competitive teams going at it. A tough road loss to a ranked team won't hurt the 'Canes.

But the key to getting six or even seven ACC teams in the NCAA is for the middle echelon teams to sweep the lower echelon teams. That didn't happen today as Clemson crushed Florida State and Wake Forest upset Virginia Tech. I should mention that Duke had to struggle past a below-mediocre (for most of the season) Georgia Tech, while even mighty UNC had trouble at home putting a terrible BC team away (at one point in the second half, UNC saw a 21-point lead shrink to nine). They were never in any real danger of losing, but their problems against a team starting five freshmen (none of them prep All-Americans) is disquieting.

Still. Duke and UNC won, so no real damage done.

You can't say the same for FSU and Virginia Tech. It really hurts the Hokies because they had themselves in good shape in pre-ACC season. Starting conference play with a loss to Wake Forest -- a team that just lost at home to Wofford -- is a major blemish. And while I've been doing my best to defend FSU (since they were my No. 3 ACC pick), I can't dismis a dismal performance to a Clemson team that has already lost at home to College of Charleson, Coastal Carolina and a godawful South Carolina team.

Sunday, N.C. State is under the gun. Like Virginia Tech, they've put themselves in great shape in pre-ACC play, but they would throw a lot of that away if they can't beat Maryland at home.

Parity is great when the conference is recognized as a juggernaut. But after the preseason we had, the ACC can' afford for its middle of the road teams to lose games to its early season underachievers.

[cspan37421]

Really early. But if it plays out and your concerns come to fruition, yes, you're right.

I've never been a fan of expansion, but if it HAD to occur, I would rather it have been through adding regional teams. It would keep travel expenses lower, travel time lower (remember the concept of student-athlete? and if so, what school did we attend?), and of course our student fans could more easily go to the away games.

But that's an idealistic world, not the cold hard world of E$PN trumps everything.

[Newton_14]

I've been one of the strongest defenders of the ACC in preseason. I keep pointing out that as of Tuesday this week, the ACC was still the No. 2 conference in RPI. It's terrible compared to what we're used to, but in a more balanced college basketball world, it's still very good.

But the one thing the ACC does not need is parity ... and that's what the first day of ACC competition gave us.

Virginia's one-point homecourt win over Miami was not bad -- two good, competitive teams going at it. A tough road loss to a ranked team won't hurt the 'Canes.

But the key to getting six or even seven ACC teams in the NCAA is for the middle echelon teams to sweep the lower echelon teams. That didn't happen today as Clemson crushed Florida State and Wake Forest upset Virginia Tech. I should mention that Duke had to struggle past a below-mediocre (for most of the season) Georgia Tech, while even mighty UNC had trouble at home putting a terrible BC team away (at one point in the second half, UNC saw a 21-point lead shrink to nine). They were never in any real danger of losing, but their problems against a team starting five freshmen (none of them prep All-Americans) is disquieting.

Still. Duke and UNC won, so no real damage done.

You can't say the same for FSU and Virginia Tech. It really hurts the Hokies because they had themselves in good shape in pre-ACC season. Starting conference play with a loss to Wake Forest -- a team that just lost at home to Wofford -- is a major blemish. And while I've been doing my best to defend FSU (since they were my No. 3 ACC pick), I can't dismis a dismal performance to a Clemson team that has already lost at home to College of Charleson, Coastal Carolina and a godawful South Carolina team.

Sunday, N.C. State is under the gun. Like Virginia Tech, they've put themselves in great shape in pre-ACC play, but they would throw a lot of that away if they can't beat Maryland at home.

Parity is great when the conference is recognized as a juggernaut. But after the preseason we had, the ACC can' afford for its middle of the road teams to lose games to its early season underachievers.

Great post Oly and I agree 100%. I watched most of the Clemson/FSU game, and man, FSU is gawd-awful on offense. Putrid, horrible, ugly, pick a word. Most offensively challenged "good" team I have seen in many moons. They have great size, length, athlete's, quickness, etc, but cannot seem to use one ounce of any of those traits to help put the ball in the bucket. Hamilton is going to have to consider changing out some of the players to get some offense on the floor. If FSU finds a way to have some kind of great offensive game when they play Duke I may lose my mind. I was also surprised at how good Clemson looked overall, given the losses they have suffered to date.

Vatech losing to Wake is really bad like you alluded to.

Winning conference road games is tough no matter who you are (ask Florida) so that has to be factored in. With that, it is absolutely imperative that the middle tier of the ACC win ALL of their home games against the lower tier, and against fellow middle tier opponents. None of them can afford to get beat at home by teams not named UNC and Duke. That will be huge this season.

[rthomas]

The ACC in football and basketball (Duke, UNC excluded) may not be very good, but it's OK in the nonrevenues? yes?

[PSurprise]

When Seth and VT inevitably get left out of the NCAA again this year, the only thing the committee needs to do is remind them of today.

[jimsumner]

I've been one of the strongest defenders of the ACC in preseason. I keep pointing out that as of Tuesday this week, the ACC was still the No. 2 conference in RPI. It's terrible compared to what we're used to, but in a more balanced college basketball world, it's still very good.

But the one thing the ACC does not need is parity ... and that's what the first day of ACC competition gave us.

Virginia's one-point homecourt win over Miami was not bad -- two good, competitive teams going at it. A tough road loss to a ranked team won't hurt the 'Canes.

But the key to getting six or even seven ACC teams in the NCAA is for the middle echelon teams to sweep the lower echelon teams. That didn't happen today as Clemson crushed Florida State and Wake Forest upset Virginia Tech. I should mention that Duke had to struggle past a below-mediocre (for most of the season) Georgia Tech, while even mighty UNC had trouble at home putting a terrible BC team away (at one point in the second half, UNC saw a 21-point lead shrink to nine). They were never in any real danger of losing, but their problems against a team starting five freshmen (none of them prep All-Americans) is disquieting.

Still. Duke and UNC won, so no real damage done.

You can't say the same for FSU and Virginia Tech. It really hurts the Hokies because they had themselves in good shape in pre-ACC season. Starting conference play with a loss to Wake Forest -- a team that just lost at home to Wofford -- is a major blemish. And while I've been doing my best to defend FSU (since they were my No. 3 ACC pick), I can't dismis a dismal performance to a Clemson team that has already lost at home to College of Charleson, Coastal Carolina and a godawful South Carolina team.

Sunday, N.C. State is under the gun. Like Virginia Tech, they've put themselves in great shape in pre-ACC play, but they would throw a lot of that away if they can't beat Maryland at home.

Parity is great when the conference is recognized as a juggernaut. But after the preseason we had, the ACC can' afford for its middle of the road teams to lose games to its early season underachievers.

Seven ACC teams in the NCAAs.

You're funny. :)

Maybe when they expand to 128 teams.

But yes, for two supposedly good teams, VT and FSU sure seem to have a hard time putting the basketball in the basket.

But we all know the 'Noles will beat Duke 37-34 this year. Or something in that neighborhood.

[devildeac]

Seven ACC teams in the NCAAs.

You're funny. :)

Maybe when they expand to 128 teams.

But yes, for two supposedly good teams, VT and FSU sure seem to have a hard time putting the basketball in the basket.

But we all know the 'Noles will beat Duke 37-34 this year. Or something in that neighborhood.

37-34. Hmm....

I'd take that score this fall in Tallahassee, Jim.

;>))

[Ichabod Drain]

This year that is probably true. Overall though I feel the ACC will be moving up in the next couple years (it would be hard to keep going lower). Particularly I get the distinct feeling NC State is going to be an elite team in two years.

[darthur]

I've been one of the strongest defenders of the ACC in preseason. I keep pointing out that as of Tuesday this week, the ACC was still the No. 2 conference in RPI. It's terrible compared to what we're used to, but in a more balanced college basketball world, it's still very good.

I would say this just continues to prove how terrible RPI is as a measure of anything :D.

By comparison, the ACC is 6th in Sagarin. IMO the ACC deserves at *most* 4 spots this year.

[Olympic Fan]

I would say this just continues to prove how terrible RPI is as a measure of anything :D.

By comparison, the ACC is 6th in Sagarin. IMO the ACC deserves at *most* 4 spots this year.

You can rail about the RPI all you want, but its been confirmed over and over that the committee pays more attention to RPI than to Pomeroy or Sagarin.

And you can't say the ACC "deserves" this many or than many bids. Bids aren't awarded to conferences, but to individual teams. As of Sunday morning, the ACC had six teams in Pomeroy's top 47 teams (since you like Pomeroy better) -- you'd have to say all six of those teams are viable contenders to make the NCAA field. The RPI has NC State at No. 51 (before the Maryland game) and four teams in the top 41.

That doesn't include Miami (64 in Pomeroy and 57 in RPI), which has a realistic chance to move up now that Johnson and Jones have returned. If they do play better with those two guys, the committee is supposed to discount to some degree the problems they had playing short-handed. The same applies to Maryland. which is playing MUCH better since Len and Howard joined the team. But they have a bigger hill to climb at No. 93 in the RPI and 166 in Pomeroy (before the State game).

Now, I don't expect seven ACC teams to earn bids, but five or six are more likely than three or four. It depends on how the middle echelon teams do against the bottom four ... which is why I thought the two biggest outcomes Saturday were FSU's loss at Clemson and Virginia Tech's loss at Wake Forest. Both FSU and Virginia Tech came out of preseason in position to get bids, but they have to beat the bottom feeders and hold serve against the other middle-echelon teams at home.

Virginia did that against Miami ... and Sunday, N.C. State did it against Maryland. BTW, I think Maryland now looks more like a middle echelon team than a bottom feeder.

One other point ... in the first six ACC games played this weekend, the home team won five of them. We're all worried because Duke struggled, but the Devils are -- at the moment -- the only ACC team with a road win.

[loldevilz]

The ACC is better than it looks because Maryland and Miami are both adding significant players midseason. Virginia is already an elite team along with Duke and UNC. If Florida State ever figures out how to play offense they could also sneak in.

[uh_no]

The ACC is better than it looks because Maryland and Miami are both adding significant players midseason. Virginia is already an elite team along with Duke and UNC. If Florida State ever figures out how to play offense they could also sneak in.

I think you need to temper your words a bit. Being ranked =/= elite. Virginia is not elite. They just eeked out 1 point win against miami. They are a good team, and may be top 15 in the country....but there are only a few elite teams in the country. They are a whopping 1-0 against top 25 opponents. Now if they play close with UNc and us, i might reconsider, but the jury has to remain out. they just haven't played enough good teams.

Miami and maryland also have to beat some teams. but with the weak ACC, the SOS of lots of these teams is going to be so low they almost have to beat UNC or Duke once and then only have a few losses in league play to make the tournament. A team with blowout losses to duke and UNC and a league record of like 600 or so i just don't think is gonna make it from the ACC.

[jimsumner]

Olympic Fan was absolutely right in his OP. The last thing the ACC needs come Selection Sunday is a bunch of teams clustered at 8-8. The ACC needs some separation amongst the first division.

[WakeDevil]

Virginia is already an elite team along with Duke and UNC.

Have I stumbled on to Comedy Central? Where is Eric Cartman?

While we're at it, the next decent team Free Shoes University beats will be the first one.

[Bigdukeboi22]

Yup I been saying that ACC Basketball has been bad all year...and honestly it really is. We gain Syracuse next year which is great! They are number one and clearly look like a final four, National Championship caliber team. I am very happy that they are joining our conference. Pittsburgh, on the other hand is really struggling and I hope that they do not play like this when they join the ACC because it will further degrade our conference. My dad, who is 60 years old and has been a Duke fan and followed ACC basketball since the 1950's even admits that this might be the worst ACC basketball year he's ever seen(and its been pretty bad the last couple of years despite ACC winning 2 out of the last 3 National Championships) ACC still has won 5 out of the past 11 years but thats far in the past..

[uh_no]

Yup I been saying that ACC Basketball has been bad all year...and honestly it really is. We gain Syracuse next year which is great! They are number one and clearly look like a final four, National Championship caliber team. I am very happy that they are joining our conference. Pittsburgh, on the other hand is really struggling and I hope that they do not play like this when they join the ACC because it will further degrade our conference. My dad, who is 60 years old and has been a Duke fan and followed ACC basketball since the 1950's even admits that this might be the worst ACC basketball year he's ever seen(and its been pretty bad the last couple of years despite ACC winning 2 out of the last 3 National Championships) ACC still has won 5 out of the past 11 years but thats far in the past..

With the way the big east is playing, unless the ACC pays the big east a ton of money, that's seeming more and more unlikely.

[Duvall]

With the way the big east is playing, unless the ACC pays the big east a ton of money, that's seeming more and more unlikely.

The way the Big East is playing? What?

[throatybeard]

I love how almost any thread can eventually turn into whining about an expansion that was decided 8.5 years ago.

It's probably, no, it's almost certainly sample size, confirmation bias, or some other logical fallacy or failure of observation on my part, but the way it has felt or smelled to me the last dozen or so years is that the ACC is constantly falling just slightly short of one or a couple more bids, all the time, with the outcome depending on one or two games. The year that stands out in my mind is, I think, 1999. Three bids, Duke, Carolina, probably Maryland. The last week or two leading up to Selection Sunday, State and Wake Forest played each other in the last RS game, and because of seeding and standings, were guaranteed to do so again in the ACCT 4/5 game too. Mighta been 2000, but it was one of the two. I think 1999 because I was in Nick Halpern's 20thC poetry seminar at State, and I actually wrote the halftime score of the ACCT State-Wake game on the board before he got there. The consensus seemed to be if one of them swept those games, they'd be in good shape. Of course they split, and neither made it. And UNC got their butts handed to them by Weber State. I forget what happened to Maryland because I am of a micro-generation of Duke fans who refuse to admit, simply out of spite, that Maryland could possibly matter in any way. Or maybe that's all of us.

My feeling, which I suspect is wrong, is that the ACC has been in a unique position where the luck of how the teams are distributed against each other has been infelicitous in an improbable way for a lot of the last ten-twelve-fourteen years. As an educated layperson, my skepticism rejects this reflexively, but I know that is how it has felt to me. Too many 3-4 years and not enough 6s, and usually it's VT or some other school just barely screwing it up. I'd have to go back and look at everybody's record and SOS over the last epoch or so, and I'm not gonna. This post is I'm just sayin is all.

[NSDukeFan]

...

One other point ... in the first six ACC games played this weekend, the home team won five of them. We're all worried because Duke struggled, but the Devils are -- at the moment -- the only ACC team with a road win.

This might not be the biggest point as it relates to this thread, but an important one as it relates to the hand-wringing about Duke's performance. Nobody does as well on the road as at home and many teams in other conferences also struggled on the road this weekend.

[uh_no]

The way the Big East is playing? What?

The big east has made no indication they will be releasing the teams of their contractual obligations. They are planning for a 19 team league next year (or however many it will be). Dana O'neil and several others have written they think there is little chance pitt and SU get out next year.

[burnspbesq]

The ACC in football and basketball (Duke, UNC excluded) may not be very good, but it's OK in the nonrevenues? yes?

Very much so. After the fall, the ACC has four schools in the top 10 in the Directors Cup. The ACC won two titles, in field hockey and men's soccer, and had three of the final four in women's soccer.

The spring is when the ACC really shines in non-revenue sports. The league is extremely strong in men's and women's lax, men's and women's tennis, and baseball, and golf, softball, and track and field aren't far behind.

[Monmouth77]

The big east has made no indication they will be releasing the teams of their contractual obligations. They are planning for a 19 team league next year (or however many it will be). Dana O'neil and several others have written they think there is little chance pitt and SU get out next year.

Are freely and routinely broken in the American legal system, and for good reason. The question is how much it will cost 'Cuse and Pitt to leave the Big East (ie; breach their alleged contracts) relative to the gains they hope to experience in joining the ACC. Neither the Big East, nor a court, will keep these Universities from aligning themselves with the ACC next year if they believe it is a cost effective move.

[Olympic Fan]

I thought since I've been hammering the fact that the ACC was the No. 2 league in the RPI, that as of this morning, it slipped to fourth.

Reallistically, that's not a huge drop and by tomorrow, the ACC could be No. 2 again. Right now, the Big Ten has a significantly better RPI than the other BCS conferences. The Big East, SEC, ACC and Big 12 (in that order) are nearly dead even. The WCC and the A-10 come next, ahead of the pathetic Pac 12.

Interesting that we talk about expansion and it's impact on league strength ... the Big Ten didn't hurt itself that much by adding Nebraska, which is an okay 103 in the RPI. But the Pac 12, to add to its other troubles, made the "mistake" of adding Utah -- which at the moment is worst BCS team in the country -- at No. 259 it's 16 places below Boston College. Texas A&M, which has actually gotton top 25 votes this season, is the third-worse BCS team at No. 223.

[Bluealum]

I know it is very early, but the ACC continues to shoot itself in the foot. The teams not named UNC/Duke/Va that made it through the pre-conference slate with some amount of national respect intact are now losing to the four teams that many would argue are the worst bottom dwellers the ACC has ever had.

Witness:
FSU (the presumptive 3rd best team in the conference) getting blown off the court by Clemson. At this point, it would be logical to think perhaps it's Virginia Tech that can wear the mantle and then they lose to FSU, at home and to Wake Forest which is worse.

Clemson, the FSU destroyers losing to BC, which at one point was called the worst team to ever play in the ACC, and this after Wake set the bar last year.

The resurgent NC State squad losing on it's home court to Georgia Tech, and by their coaches admission, stinking it up.

With a poor conference RPI average, the desperation of the middle tier should ratchet up early. Only, I don't know who the middle tier is anymore. It will be fascinating to see which teams emerge and beat teams not named Duke/UNC with some level of regularity. It that does not happen, could a conference of 12, the one time standard bearer for college hoops, only get 3 teams into the 68 team Big Dance?

[camion]

I know it is very early, but the ACC continues to shoot itself in the foot. The teams not named UNC/Duke/Va that made it through the pre-conference slate with some amount of national respect intact are now losing to the four teams that many would argue are the worst bottom dwellers the ACC has ever had.

Witness:
FSU (the presumptive 3rd best team in the conference) getting blown off the court by Clemson. At this point, it would be logical to think perhaps it's Virginia Tech that can wear the mantle and then they lose to FSU, at home and to Wake Forest which is worse.

Clemson, the FSU destroyers losing to BC, which at one point was called the worst team to ever play in the ACC, and this after Wake set the bar last year.

The resurgent NC State squad losing on it's home court to Georgia Tech, and by their coaches admission, stinking it up.

With a poor conference RPI average, the desperation of the middle tier should ratchet up early. Only, I don't know who the middle tier is anymore. It will be fascinating to see which teams emerge and beat teams not named Duke/UNC with some level of regularity. It that does not happen, could a conference of 12, the one time standard bearer for college hoops, only get 3 teams into the 68 team Big Dance?


On the other hand:

Georgia Tech, thought to be moribund, played Duke a competitive game and then beat NC Stat on its home court.

Clemson blasted FSU, widely predicted to be third or fourth in the conference.

BC beat the same Clemson team that waxed FSU.

The glass is half full.

[Bluealum]

On the other hand:

Georgia Tech, thought to be moribund, played Duke a competitive game and then beat NC Stat on its home court.

Clemson blasted FSU, widely predicted to be third or fourth in the conference.

BC beat the same Clemson team that waxed FSU.

The glass is half full.


Well I don't disagree that it is a matter of perspective, and in this case the 'full' perspective may even be closer to reality due to new coaches putting in their systems and teams improving on a faster curve than normal, I would say that the current formula is not a good one for maximizing the teams from the ACC that will make the tourney.

If the teams that looked really bad against external competition beat the teams that looked okay in pre-conference and we have 2 or 3 teams that run away from the field, we are likely not to receive the benefit of the doubt or a good RPI for enough teams. It also, tangentially, hurts the tourney teams as their wins against a collection of bad RPI teams look less valuable and will likely affect their seeding.

As an example, for all of us that watched the Ga. Tech win, we looked pretty good for stretches in that game. I thought we played well and they hit some great shots and played pretty tough. We were much, much better than we were against Temple. But Ga. Tech is 130 in the RPI. For more distanced observers (and computers) it is not a good win (though it was away which is good) and many will look askance at the small victory margin.

Losses against BC (RPI 254!!) Ga. Tech, Wake Forest (RPI 89), and Clemson (RPI 163) hurt alot, particularly when it happens on a teams home court. I would contend that those four teams have no real chance of making the tourney, barring a really miraculous run and big wins against Duke/UNC. Va. Tech, FSU, and NC State do (59,60,61 RPI fyi), but losses to those two teams as well as Wake are particularly damning. Clemson, FSU, and Va Tech have done a lot in the last month to depress their tourney prospects. The Ivies have not helped us either!

I think the pressure is on early for those teams to seperate themselves in a year when the ACC is perceived to be so down. If they don't we could be seeing only 25% of the conference make the tourney. That would have to be a historical low point since the field expanded to 64. I fully expect 1 or 2 of those teams to emerge and make the tourney, I just have no idea who this will be and the early returns aren't very encouraging.