tommy
03-12-2013, 06:34 PM
Al’s article yesterday was making the argument that Duke may have had a superior ACC regular season to Miami, despite Miami’s finishing atop the standings. Why? Because of the unbalanced schedule, and who the Blue Devils and Hurricanes did and didn’t have to face this year, and where they faced them. Seemed pretty reasonable to me.
This got me to thinking. In the eight years prior to this one that the ACC has had the unbalanced schedule, how many times has the regular season champion proved its worth by winning the tournament championship? That’s easy. But what I wanted to look at was how many times, when you look at the schedule they and their closest competitors played, did the regular season champion who did not prove their mettle with a tournament championship, perhaps benefit in a meaningful way in winning the regular season by virtue of the unbalanced schedule?
The answer: they really haven’t. In the years 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2010, the regular season champ (or co-champ) went on to win the ACC Tournament, which pretty much settles the issue of who the best team in the league was that year. In 2005 (the first year of the unbalanced schedule), 2009, 2011, and 2012, the regular season winner did not win the tournament. But I found that, at least in my evaluation of the schedules, and in light of the margin by which they won the regular season title, the schedules were pretty fair, or close enough that the schedules can’t fairly be said to have provided that margin in the standings. So I guess where that leaves us is that if they don’t prove it on the floor with an ACC title this weekend in Greensboro, this year’s Miami regular season championship, having benefitted significantly from the unbalanced schedule, as Al demonstrated, will be an anomaly in that there will be a legitimate question as to who the best team in the league really was.
Here are the records. Note that I didn’t break down the gory details of every team’s schedule like Al did, but I looked at the teams that were within a couple of games of the regular season winner, and then the bottom few teams in the league, and how many games they had against each other, where those games were played, and what the results of those games were. I didn’t get into “this team was very good at home and terrible on the road; therefore had they played a second time that would likely have been a loss” or that kind of thing. Too many seasons to analyze like that. But nevertheless, here’s the data I did come up with.
2005
UNC 14-2
Wake 13-3
Duke 11-5
Bottom 3: Clemson, UVA, FSU
Tournament winner: Duke
UNC – played once at Wake (lost), split vs Duke, but got Clemson, Virginia, and FSU all twice and swept all 6 games. Easy schedule.
Wake – beat UNC at home, split w Duke, beat Clemson on the road, swept UVA, split w FSU
Duke – split w UNC, split w Wake, beat Clemson and UVA at home, won at FSU – played each bottom feeder once only
Though they did have the most difficult schedule of the three teams, hard to see Duke having made up a 3 game deficit had UNC had to play some more middle-of-the-pack teams instead getting six against the bottom three teams.
Wake got only one less game vs. the bottom than did UNC, and they lost one of those they did get. If they had gotten another game w/ UNC, it would’ve been on the road.
Can’t say UNC didn’t earn this regular season “title.”
2006
Duke 14-2
UNC 12-4
BC 11-5
Bottom 3: VT, GT, Wake
Tournament: Duke
2007
UNC and UVA 11-5
Md, VT, BC 10-6
Bottom 3: NC State, Wake, Miami
Tournament: UNC
2008
UNC 14-2
Duke 13-3
Clemson 10-6
Bottom 3: UVA, NCState, BC
Tournament: UNC
2009
UNC 13-3
Duke, Wake 11-5
FSU 10-6
Bottom 2: UVA, Georgia Tech
Tournament: Duke
UNC – played once at Wake (lost), swept 2 vs Duke, won at FSU, swept UVA, and beat GT at home
Duke – got swept by UNC, split with Wake, swept 2 from FSU. Won at GT and at home vs. VA – only once each. Tough schedule
Wake – beat UNC at home, split with Duke, beat FSU at home. Won at UVA, split vs. Georgia Tech.
FSU – lost to UNC at home, got swept by Duke, lost at Wake, swept UVA, beat GT at home
Duke had the toughest schedule, playing each of the three other top teams twice, and only getting one game against the bottom two teams in the league. But they were only 3-3 in those games vs. the top, while UNC was 3-1 against the top 3. UNC did get one more game than did Duke against the bottom two, but that’s not enough to say there was a significant difference in schedule. And of course they beat Duke head-to-head twice.
Wake was also 3-1 against the other top 3 – albeit winning all three at home -- and they did beat UNC, but the loss to Georgia Tech hurts any argument on their behalf as being the best team in the league when they were outdistanced by two games in the standings.
Have to say UNC’s winning the regular season was not closely tied to schedule advantages here either.
2010
Duke, Maryland 13-3
FSU, Virginia Tech 10-6
Bottom 4: UVA, UNC, NC State, Miami
Tournament: Duke
2011
UNC 14-2
Duke 13-3
FSU 11-5
Bottom: NCState, Georgia Tech, but by far the worst was Wake 1-15
Tournament: Duke
UNC – split w Duke, swept FSU, got crushed by GT away, swept State, won at home vs Wake
Duke – split w UNC, played (lost) at FSU, swept NC State, beat GT at home, won at Wake
FSU – got swept by UNC, beat Duke at home, swept NC State, won at GT, swept Wake
This is a closer call as to who had the best regular season. UNC was 3-1 against the top two teams, while Duke was just 1-2. UNC got separation based on winning in Tallahassee, while Duke lost there. And they also took care of the Seminoles at home, which Duke might or might not have done as well had they had the chance. Both had four games against the bottom. Duke was 4-0, UNC 3-1. As relates to these two teams, the schedules weren’t obviously unbalanced in one direction or another. UNC just was a little better, even given the loss to Georgia Tech.
FSU – no argument. Got more games against the bottom three teams than did UNC or Duke, including two vs. Wake, and they got swept by UNC.
2012
UNC 14-2
Duke 13-3
FSU 12-4
Bottom 4: Wake, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, BC
Tournament: FSU
UNC – split w/ Duke, got crushed by 33 at FSU, won at Wake, won at VT, beat GT at home, beat BC at home – pretty strong schedule, as they only got the four bottom feeders once.
Duke – split w UNC, split w FSU, swept Wake, swept VT, won at GT and at BC
FSU – crushed UNC at home, split w Duke, won at Wake, swept VT, beat GT at home, lost to BC
Schedules between UNC and Duke weren’t all that far apart. UNC was only 1-2 against the two other top teams, while Duke was 2-2. Duke had the extra game, at home, against FSU that UNC didn’t have to play, but Duke got 6 games against the bottom four, while UNC only got each of them once, for a total of four.
FSU was 3-1 against UNC and Duke and got 5 games against the bottom four teams, going 4-1.
Schedules seem pretty even; if anything, Duke had it a little easier, with all those games against the bottom of the league.
This got me to thinking. In the eight years prior to this one that the ACC has had the unbalanced schedule, how many times has the regular season champion proved its worth by winning the tournament championship? That’s easy. But what I wanted to look at was how many times, when you look at the schedule they and their closest competitors played, did the regular season champion who did not prove their mettle with a tournament championship, perhaps benefit in a meaningful way in winning the regular season by virtue of the unbalanced schedule?
The answer: they really haven’t. In the years 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2010, the regular season champ (or co-champ) went on to win the ACC Tournament, which pretty much settles the issue of who the best team in the league was that year. In 2005 (the first year of the unbalanced schedule), 2009, 2011, and 2012, the regular season winner did not win the tournament. But I found that, at least in my evaluation of the schedules, and in light of the margin by which they won the regular season title, the schedules were pretty fair, or close enough that the schedules can’t fairly be said to have provided that margin in the standings. So I guess where that leaves us is that if they don’t prove it on the floor with an ACC title this weekend in Greensboro, this year’s Miami regular season championship, having benefitted significantly from the unbalanced schedule, as Al demonstrated, will be an anomaly in that there will be a legitimate question as to who the best team in the league really was.
Here are the records. Note that I didn’t break down the gory details of every team’s schedule like Al did, but I looked at the teams that were within a couple of games of the regular season winner, and then the bottom few teams in the league, and how many games they had against each other, where those games were played, and what the results of those games were. I didn’t get into “this team was very good at home and terrible on the road; therefore had they played a second time that would likely have been a loss” or that kind of thing. Too many seasons to analyze like that. But nevertheless, here’s the data I did come up with.
2005
UNC 14-2
Wake 13-3
Duke 11-5
Bottom 3: Clemson, UVA, FSU
Tournament winner: Duke
UNC – played once at Wake (lost), split vs Duke, but got Clemson, Virginia, and FSU all twice and swept all 6 games. Easy schedule.
Wake – beat UNC at home, split w Duke, beat Clemson on the road, swept UVA, split w FSU
Duke – split w UNC, split w Wake, beat Clemson and UVA at home, won at FSU – played each bottom feeder once only
Though they did have the most difficult schedule of the three teams, hard to see Duke having made up a 3 game deficit had UNC had to play some more middle-of-the-pack teams instead getting six against the bottom three teams.
Wake got only one less game vs. the bottom than did UNC, and they lost one of those they did get. If they had gotten another game w/ UNC, it would’ve been on the road.
Can’t say UNC didn’t earn this regular season “title.”
2006
Duke 14-2
UNC 12-4
BC 11-5
Bottom 3: VT, GT, Wake
Tournament: Duke
2007
UNC and UVA 11-5
Md, VT, BC 10-6
Bottom 3: NC State, Wake, Miami
Tournament: UNC
2008
UNC 14-2
Duke 13-3
Clemson 10-6
Bottom 3: UVA, NCState, BC
Tournament: UNC
2009
UNC 13-3
Duke, Wake 11-5
FSU 10-6
Bottom 2: UVA, Georgia Tech
Tournament: Duke
UNC – played once at Wake (lost), swept 2 vs Duke, won at FSU, swept UVA, and beat GT at home
Duke – got swept by UNC, split with Wake, swept 2 from FSU. Won at GT and at home vs. VA – only once each. Tough schedule
Wake – beat UNC at home, split with Duke, beat FSU at home. Won at UVA, split vs. Georgia Tech.
FSU – lost to UNC at home, got swept by Duke, lost at Wake, swept UVA, beat GT at home
Duke had the toughest schedule, playing each of the three other top teams twice, and only getting one game against the bottom two teams in the league. But they were only 3-3 in those games vs. the top, while UNC was 3-1 against the top 3. UNC did get one more game than did Duke against the bottom two, but that’s not enough to say there was a significant difference in schedule. And of course they beat Duke head-to-head twice.
Wake was also 3-1 against the other top 3 – albeit winning all three at home -- and they did beat UNC, but the loss to Georgia Tech hurts any argument on their behalf as being the best team in the league when they were outdistanced by two games in the standings.
Have to say UNC’s winning the regular season was not closely tied to schedule advantages here either.
2010
Duke, Maryland 13-3
FSU, Virginia Tech 10-6
Bottom 4: UVA, UNC, NC State, Miami
Tournament: Duke
2011
UNC 14-2
Duke 13-3
FSU 11-5
Bottom: NCState, Georgia Tech, but by far the worst was Wake 1-15
Tournament: Duke
UNC – split w Duke, swept FSU, got crushed by GT away, swept State, won at home vs Wake
Duke – split w UNC, played (lost) at FSU, swept NC State, beat GT at home, won at Wake
FSU – got swept by UNC, beat Duke at home, swept NC State, won at GT, swept Wake
This is a closer call as to who had the best regular season. UNC was 3-1 against the top two teams, while Duke was just 1-2. UNC got separation based on winning in Tallahassee, while Duke lost there. And they also took care of the Seminoles at home, which Duke might or might not have done as well had they had the chance. Both had four games against the bottom. Duke was 4-0, UNC 3-1. As relates to these two teams, the schedules weren’t obviously unbalanced in one direction or another. UNC just was a little better, even given the loss to Georgia Tech.
FSU – no argument. Got more games against the bottom three teams than did UNC or Duke, including two vs. Wake, and they got swept by UNC.
2012
UNC 14-2
Duke 13-3
FSU 12-4
Bottom 4: Wake, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, BC
Tournament: FSU
UNC – split w/ Duke, got crushed by 33 at FSU, won at Wake, won at VT, beat GT at home, beat BC at home – pretty strong schedule, as they only got the four bottom feeders once.
Duke – split w UNC, split w FSU, swept Wake, swept VT, won at GT and at BC
FSU – crushed UNC at home, split w Duke, won at Wake, swept VT, beat GT at home, lost to BC
Schedules between UNC and Duke weren’t all that far apart. UNC was only 1-2 against the two other top teams, while Duke was 2-2. Duke had the extra game, at home, against FSU that UNC didn’t have to play, but Duke got 6 games against the bottom four, while UNC only got each of them once, for a total of four.
FSU was 3-1 against UNC and Duke and got 5 games against the bottom four teams, going 4-1.
Schedules seem pretty even; if anything, Duke had it a little easier, with all those games against the bottom of the league.