MBB: Virginia 75, Syracuse 56

[moonpie23]

UVA taking it to the orange.....up 11 with 4:58

refs just called 2 consecutive fouls for ennis... (not ON him....FOR him)

[Duvall]

Virginia was favored, and not by a little. Maybe -4.5?

[hurleyfor3]

Not sure Cuse losing at UVa is statistically an upset.

[moonpie23]

up 13 now

[dukelifer]

up 13 now

Cuse is down for the count - UVa is playing well.

[Dukehky]

Virgina gets a little luck with the Grant injury, but they have hit more shots today than like, ever.

I wanted Cuse to win today, because they probably would have gotten the 1 seed in the ACCT, and if we beat UNC like I think we will, that would have meant Duke got UVA in the semi's, which I would have rather had. Oh well, beat who is in front of you I guess. Of course, we could still get the 4 seed I guess, but that would mean losing to Wake or UNC, and I would rather not do that...

I got $100 bucks says that UVA rushes the court. Maybe something will go wrong. Twice in one week and they'll have to ban it!!!!

[moonpie23]

ennis is fouled out....

[hurleyfor3]

Cuse played the last 10 minutes like it had a plane to catch. Similar to us against unc.

UVa is the acc's best team right now, it's not close, and they beat us in the transitive property vs. Cuse. I'd rather get Cuse in the tournament.

[Dukehky]

Real cool Boeheim, foul away.

[slower]

Real cool Boeheim, foul away.

My once-favorable impression of Boeheim has disappeared after the past few games. He has shown himself to be somewhat of a tool.

[Dukehky]

Cuse played the last 10 minutes like it had a plane to catch. Similar to us against unc.

UVa is the acc's best team right now, it's not close, and they beat us in the transitive property vs. Cuse. I'd rather get Cuse in the tournament.

Color me skeptical of that one.

[Furniture]

Was the UVA coach crying at the end?

[moonpie23]

Trying to rush the court.....line of security, but only on one side......lol

[dukelifer]

Still not convinced their game will translate to the big dance - but congrats to UVa. Well coached and a very tight team.

[rocketeli]

Cuse played the last 10 minutes like it had a plane to catch. Similar to us against unc.

UVa is the acc's best team right now, it's not close, and they beat us in the transitive property vs. Cuse. I'd rather get Cuse in the tournament.

Not me--I'm hoping Syracuse loses before we see them-can't you imagine how much the refs will be bending over to accommodate JB after his tantrum and the whole Duke-gets-all-the-calls men?

[Troublemaker]

Virgina gets a little luck with the Grant injury, but they have hit more shots today than like, ever.

I wanted Cuse to win today, because they probably would have gotten the 1 seed in the ACCT, and if we beat UNC like I think we will, that would have meant Duke got UVA in the semi's, which I would have rather had. Oh well, beat who is in front of you I guess. Of course, we could still get the 4 seed I guess, but that would mean losing to Wake or UNC, and I would rather not do that...

I got $100 bucks says that UVA rushes the court. Maybe something will go wrong. Twice in one week and they'll have to ban it!!!!

Haha, you and I had completely opposite rooting goals today. I wanted Cuse to lose so Duke could get closer to them on the S-curve, AND I wanted Duke to face them in the ACC semis (as long as Duke takes care of Wake and UNC in the remaining regular season games). We need to beat Cuse on Saturday of the ACC tournament so the selection committee can have enough time to factor that potential victory into the bracketing and seeding. Beating Cuse on Sunday would still be great (because ACC champs!) but getting them Saturday was the better result, imo. (Also, this is burying the lead, but I truly think UVA is better than Cuse anyway.)

[Tripping William]

Tonight Hooville's gonna party like it's 1983.

[Duvall]

Cuse played the last 10 minutes like it had a plane to catch. Similar to us against unc.

UVa is the acc's best team right now, it's not close, and they beat us in the transitive property vs. Cuse. I'd rather get Cuse in the tournament.

UVa is clearly better than Syracuse without Jerami Grant, but a lot of teams are. Be interesting to see how they would do playing against a full-strength Orange the way Duke did twice.

As for who Duke would rather play, I imagine they will have to beat both to win the ACC Tournament, so it doesn't really matter much.

[Dukehky]

I think we're better than Cuse and UVA. I would be shocked to see if UVA EVER shoots anywhere near the way they did in the second half today.

[duke4ever19]

Color me skeptical of that one.

I agree.

Can't put a finger on it, but there is something a bit suspect about that UVA team. I wouldn't be shocked to turn on the TV in a few weeks and see that they got upset in the second round of the NCAAs.

[BobBender]

I detect that many posters feel greatness is about program bloodlines and HS recruiting press clippings. In the here and now, UVa is the best team in the ACC. I don't care where their players were ranked coming out of HS and that they haven't been successful in 20 years. In the here and now, they are the best. And we can put the unbalanced schedule stuff to bed. We would not have beaten them in C'Ville. They have been killing everybody in the last 10 minutes of every game because of depth. I hope Parker comes back because they are not going to fall back to the pack next year. They baasically crushed Syracuse with harris doing squat.

[Troublemaker]

Can't put a finger on it, but there is something a bit suspect about that UVA team. I wouldn't be shocked to turn on the TV in a few weeks and see that they got upset in the second round of the NCAAs.

The teams at the top of college basketball this season are weak. You shouldn't be shocked if any of them (including Duke and Syracuse) lost in the second round (assuming you mean Round of 32)


I detect that many posters feel greatness is about program bloodlines and HS recruiting press clippings. In the here and now, UVa is the best team in the ACC. I don't care where their players were ranked coming out of HS and that they haven't been successful in 20 years. In the here and now, they are the best. And we can put the unbalanced schedule stuff to bed. We would not have beaten them in C'Ville. They have been killing everybody in the last 10 minutes of every game because of depth. I hope Parker comes back because they are not going to fall back to the pack next year. They baasically crushed Syracuse with harris doing squat.

I agree they will be strong again next season, but I don't think they'll be as strong as Duke even without Parker. (Despite their ability to win today without great stats from Harris, he's a big loss. Akil Mitchell is a good player and a senior, too).

[sporthenry]

I detect that many posters feel greatness is about program bloodlines and HS recruiting press clippings. In the here and now, UVa is the best team in the ACC. I don't care where their players were ranked coming out of HS and that they haven't been successful in 20 years. In the here and now, they are the best. And we can put the unbalanced schedule stuff to bed. We would not have beaten them in C'Ville. They have been killing everybody in the last 10 minutes of every game because of depth. I hope Parker comes back because they are not going to fall back to the pack next year. They baasically crushed Syracuse with harris doing squat.

That is b/c teams game plan for Harris. Harris opens up a ton offensively just by being there. I think Duke and UVA are pretty even. Lest we forget Duke had an 11 point lead at Cameron. Sure, the pissed it away but pretty silly to think that UVA is that superior to Duke.

As far as next year, UVA loses Harris and Mitchell. Gil and Anderson will step in but there goes their depth and they don't have much in the way of recruits coming in. UVA will be good but not sure why you are anointing them for next year.

[Wander]

As for who Duke would rather play, I imagine they will have to beat both to win the ACC Tournament, so it doesn't really matter much.

I imagine the odds of Duke, UVA, and Syracuse all making the ACC semifinals are less than 50%. There's only been one time in the past decade when the top 4 seeds were all in the semifinals. So I wouldn't stress too much over the conference tournament bracketing (plus, I think Syracuse, Duke, and UVA are all about equal anyway).

[bbosbbos]

1. For sure UVA is well coached and game plans are well executed. But I am not convinced that they are as good as what you said.

2. If Parker is back next year, I am really happy. If he is leaving for NBA as #1 I think that is better for Duke in the long run. just my 2 cents.


I detect that many posters feel greatness is about program bloodlines and HS recruiting press clippings. In the here and now, UVa is the best team in the ACC. I don't care where their players were ranked coming out of HS and that they haven't been successful in 20 years. In the here and now, they are the best. And we can put the unbalanced schedule stuff to bed. We would not have beaten them in C'Ville. They have been killing everybody in the last 10 minutes of every game because of depth. I hope Parker comes back because they are not going to fall back to the pack next year. They baasically crushed Syracuse with harris doing squat.

[Duvall]

I detect that many posters feel greatness is about program bloodlines and HS recruiting press clippings. In the here and now, UVa is the best team in the ACC. I don't care where their players were ranked coming out of HS and that they haven't been successful in 20 years. In the here and now, they are the best. And we can put the unbalanced schedule stuff to bed. We would not have beaten them in C'Ville. They have been killing everybody in the last 10 minutes of every game because of depth. I hope Parker comes back because they are not going to fall back to the pack next year. They baasically crushed Syracuse with harris doing squat.

Huh?

Virginia is a good, top-10 team. But when you look at their results from the whole season it's hard to conclude that they are head and shoulders above everyone else.

[dukelifer]

I detect that many posters feel greatness is about program bloodlines and HS recruiting press clippings. In the here and now, UVa is the best team in the ACC. I don't care where their players were ranked coming out of HS and that they haven't been successful in 20 years. In the here and now, they are the best. And we can put the unbalanced schedule stuff to bed. We would not have beaten them in C'Ville. They have been killing everybody in the last 10 minutes of every game because of depth. I hope Parker comes back because they are not going to fall back to the pack next year. They baasically crushed Syracuse with harris doing squat.

Well I hope they are still good. It would be nice to have a few more consistently talented teams in the ACC. They played well today but we will see if they can win outside the league. That is the big test.

[Bob Green]

In the here and now, UVa is the best team in the ACC.

I agree with you. Virginia is healthy and playing very good basketball right now.

[Dukehky]

Grant is a huge piece to Syracuse's team (see both games against Duke) and he didn't play the entire second half. UVA shot 50% from 3 and from the field today, and they average 65 points a game, they scored 10 more than that today against a good defensive team without one of their best defensive players.

Virginia won the acc regular season, they are not the best team in the league, and it will likely be another 30 years before they win another one.

They are a very solid team who plays hard and plays hard together, and that can certainly carry you, but I would like for you to show me the last NCAA tournament champion without a first round pick, go ahead, I'll wait...

I like UVA, I like Bennett, I like Harris, but I am not drinking the kool-aid on their chances to go deep into the tournament, and i would be shocked if they made it to the ACCT finals.

Sorry if that sounded like I hate Virginia, I just got frustrated with everyone on tv and some on the board thinking they're some revelation of ACC basketball.

[BobBender]

That is b/c teams game plan for Harris. Harris opens up a ton offensively just by being there. I think Duke and UVA are pretty even. Lest we forget Duke had an 11 point lead at Cameron. Sure, the pissed it away but pretty silly to think that UVA is that superior to Duke.

As far as next year, UVA loses Harris and Mitchell. Gil and Anderson will step in but there goes their depth and they don't have much in the way of recruits coming in. UVA will be good but not sure why you are anointing them for next year.

I'm not anointing them for next year. I think you are missing the big picture here. Bennett may have them now where K had Duke around '85. He is a young coach who will not let that program slip back. They are gonna be perennially top 5 in the league.
I checked their recruits and again, you assume press clippings in HS are more important than guys who fit a system. It seems that Isiaiah Wilkins from Atlanta is going to be groomed to be anther Akil Mitchell, 6'8" leaper with a defensive motor and a better perimeter game. BJ Stith is a 6"5" G at Oak Hill who is playing well there. Again , he fits what Bennett wants, big guards who are versatile, like Brogdon and Harris. The third guy is a big from New Zealand, don't know anything about him.
Bottom line, we are all a little self absorbed about how epic Duke, Syracuse and UNC are. I think we should wake up to reality about UVa.

[vick]

Grant is a huge piece to Syracuse's team (see both games against Duke) and he didn't play the entire second half. UVA shot 50% from 3 and from the field today, and they average 65 points a game, they scored 10 more than that today against a good defensive team without one of their best defensive players.

Virginia won the acc regular season, they are not the best team in the league, and it will likely be another 30 years before they win another one.

They are a very solid team who plays hard and plays hard together, and that can certainly carry you, but I would like for you to show me the last NCAA tournament champion without a first round pick, go ahead, I'll wait...

I like UVA, I like Bennett, I like Harris, but I am not drinking the kool-aid on their chances to go deep into the tournament, and i would be shocked if they made it to the ACCT finals.

Sorry if that sounded like I hate Virginia, I just got frustrated with everyone on tv and some on the board thinking they're some revelation of ACC basketball.

UVA won by 19 points! Replacing Grant with Wilt Chamberlain wouldn't account for a 19 point swing in 20 minutes of basketball.

[Bob Green]

I like UVA, I like Bennett, I like Harris, but I am not drinking the kool-aid on their chances to go deep into the tournament, and i would be shocked if they made it to the ACCT finals.

Sorry if that sounded like I hate Virginia, I just got frustrated with everyone on tv and some on the board thinking they're some revelation of ACC basketball.

I don't think they are "some revelation of ACC basketball" but I do think they are a well coached, talented team. They have earned the #1 Seed so they will have a seeding advantage; however, they will have to win the games on the court to make it to the ACCT finals. We will all know how it plays out in a couple of weeks.

I am neither anointing them anything nor dismissing them.

[Dukehky]

UVA won by 19 points! Replacing Grant with Wilt Chamberlain wouldn't account for a 19 point swing in 20 minutes of basketball.

Didn't say he would do it all, I said he would have helped make the game much closer to the spread. Also, losing a starter can have way more of an impact on a team than simply his scoring. Grant's length on the back line of that defense is part of what makes it so good. Not to mention his rebounding. Of Course Grant wasn't scoring 19 points in the second half, but he certainly makes Syracuse much more formidable.

My other point was that UVA shot out of their minds in the second half. UVA outplayed Cuse today but a substantial margin, but if these two teams played in the ACCT, I would take Syracuse, if Grant is healthy.

Regardless, UVA earned the 1 seed in the ACCT. I would love to see them in the finals (again, assuming we beat Wake and UNC, which I expect, but you know what happens when you assume). Virginia handled their business all season long and they will be rewarded with the top seed in the ACCT and a high seed in the NCAAs, I just don't think they're the best team in the conference. I think they're the 3rd best team in the conference. I would actually really like to watch a UNC UVA match-up right now. Mostly because they would beat the hell out of each other before, hopefully, a match up with Duke in the finals.

[slower]

UVA won by 19 points! Replacing Grant with Wilt Chamberlain wouldn't account for a 19 point swing in 20 minutes of basketball.

Yeah, I'd probably take you up on that bet.

[brevity]

UVA won by 19 points! Replacing Grant with Wilt Chamberlain wouldn't account for a 19 point swing in 20 minutes of basketball.


Yeah, I'd probably take you up on that bet.

That's a terrible bet to take. Wilt Chamberlain has been dead for almost 15 years.

[vick]

Yeah, I'd probably take you up on that bet.

No player is worth +70 per 100 possessions over a replacement college player, which is about what we're talking about here (20 point swing in ~29 possessions). For comparison, the difference between LeBron James and Michael Beasley was like +15 per 100 possessions last year. The idea that Jerami Grant (or anybody!) is worth even close to what's being described here is peculiar.

[ice-9]

As for who Duke would rather play, I imagine they will have to beat both to win the ACC Tournament, so it doesn't really matter much.

Depends how well you think UNC is playing. I don't think it's a given that an ACC tournament title means defeating both UVA and Syracuse.

[Newton_14]

I detect that many posters feel greatness is about program bloodlines and HS recruiting press clippings. In the here and now, UVa is the best team in the ACC. I don't care where their players were ranked coming out of HS and that they haven't been successful in 20 years. In the here and now, they are the best. And we can put the unbalanced schedule stuff to bed. We would not have beaten them in C'Ville. They have been killing everybody in the last 10 minutes of every game because of depth. I hope Parker comes back because they are not going to fall back to the pack next year. They baasically crushed Syracuse with harris doing squat.

I happen to agree. I watched them first hand in Cameron and tried to tell everyone we had just beaten a really good team that night. Few listened. Since the clock struck 2014 after the Tenn embarassment, UVA has been kicking tail and taking names, except once.

They are solid and strong with their guard play and that is where it starts in College Hoops, and they are versatile. They will be a hard out in both tourney's. I recognize matchups are key in the Big Dance, and UVA having no recent Big Dance experience is a potential weakness, but I am not ready to bet against them.

[FerryFor50]

Depends how well you think UNC is playing. I don't think it's a given that an ACC tournament title means defeating both UVA and Syracuse.

Seeing as how UNC has now struggled in two straight games against mediocre and bad teams, respectively, I can't say they are currently playing well.

Lucky for them, no tough games until Duke.

[ice-9]

I detect that many posters feel greatness is about program bloodlines and HS recruiting press clippings. In the here and now, UVa is the best team in the ACC. I don't care where their players were ranked coming out of HS and that they haven't been successful in 20 years. In the here and now, they are the best. And we can put the unbalanced schedule stuff to bed. We would not have beaten them in C'Ville. They have been killing everybody in the last 10 minutes of every game because of depth. I hope Parker comes back because they are not going to fall back to the pack next year. They baasically crushed Syracuse with harris doing squat.

At the beginning of this season I thought UVA was going to be Duke's main threat at winning the ACC based on the progress they built on last year. And I'm happy to see that my preseason prognostication came true. But let's see what happened between then and now:

UVA started the season by losing to the only two ranked nonconference opponents they played in VCU and Wisconsin; no shame there, but both games were at home and you'd think the ACC champ could have gone at least 1 of 2. And then UVA lost to Green Bay and Tennessee! And the the latter by 35 points!!

Of course, ACC play began and Wahoos magically went on a tear. I began to wonder whether the ACC was truly down this year for a team like UVA to do so well in-conference and so badly out-of-conference, or whether some kind of fundamental change occurred when conference play started, or whether Bennett is perhaps the kind of coach that needs to deeply study his opponents to win.

While I acknowledge that UVA is a legitimate regular season title winner with a 2-game lead (even with an unbalanced schedule), until their performance out-of-conference is explained I won't anoint them as the best team to represent the ACC in the NCAA tournament.

[cspan37421]

Virginia won the acc regular season, they are not the best team in the league, and it will likely be another 30 years before they win another one.



Good grief, even with an unbalanced schedule, would they have to go 17-0 instead of 16-1 for you to conclude they are the best team in the league? How else do you determine it? In a tournament you don't play everyone.

They just crushed a team we played evenly over two games. They managed to not lose to UNC (we lost solidly, they beat them by 15); we managed to get spanked by Clemson and lose to ND away. Their ONLY ACC loss was to us on our court, and that, barely. IMHO you should give credit where credit is due. Since the conference schedule started, they have steamrolled compared to everyone else. Darn near perfect, and a lot closer to perfect than the rest of us.

Now, you may be right if you say that they will revert to form out of conference when the NCAAs come along. We'll see ... maybe so. But it really comes across as sour grapes when we have 4 conference losses to their 1. That's not that close ... and the only team closer, they just ran them out of the building.

[Henderson]

I agree with cspan. Facts are facts. And if we're playing "what if"... If Virginia met Wichita State on a neutral court, my money would be on Virginia.

[drcharl]

UVa is now no longer below the radar. They have not been in a position until now where teams will be gunning for them. It's a much different game when you are climbing to the top then when you are there and defending. UVa still has much to prove tournament time. Cuse looked like they were simply tired and out of gas while UVa had a streak of very hot shooting while Cuse went cold. I remember when Cuse looked unstoppable and then came more and more close games followed by the losses.

[ice-9]

Good grief, even with an unbalanced schedule, would they have to go 17-0 instead of 16-1 for you to conclude they are the best team in the league?

If the records were close, unbalanced scheduling is a factor. But with a 2 game lead, I think UVA has done enough to show they won the regular season.


Now, you may be right if you say that they will revert to form out of conference when the NCAAs come along. We'll see ... maybe so.

Isn't this the real question on the table? Why was UVA so bad in the nonconference? Hypothetically, if each conference can send only one team to the NCAA tournament, would UVA really be our choice?

[weezie]

Now, you may be right if you say that they will revert to form out of conference when the NCAAs come along. We'll see ... maybe so.

Agreed, even if I still think they had a gentle road. They're looking like a short version of last year's miami.

[Duvall]

No player is worth +70 per 100 possessions over a replacement college player, which is about what we're talking about here (20 point swing in ~29 possessions). For comparison, the difference between LeBron James and Michael Beasley was like +15 per 100 possessions last year. The idea that Jerami Grant (or anybody!) is worth even close to what's being described here is peculiar.

Okay, but let's not pretend that Virginia is 38 points better than Syracuse over 40 minutes either.

No player is worth a 20 point swing on his own, but a swing from winning to losing can cause a team to implode mentally and get blown out. Which is obviously what happened here.

[wsb3]

Not taking anything away from Virginia, (you play who is in front of you) but is there a strength of schedule rating for just conference play?

[vick]

Okay, but let's not pretend that Virginia is 38 points better than Syracuse over 40 minutes either.

No player is worth a 20 point swing on his own, but a swing from winning to losing can cause a team to implode mentally and get blown out. Which is obviously what happened here.

Oh certainly UVa's not that much better than Syracuse, no question. But they have been better, Grant or no, for a while now.

[hurleyfor3]

Not taking anything away from Virginia, (you play who is in front of you) but is there a strength of schedule rating for just conference play?

How about some simple arithmetic: just add together the conference wins of the conference teams you beat. Beat a team twice, count their wins twice.

UVa 106
Cuse 95
Duke 85
Unc 79

In the past I have suggested this method over the "ladder" to break ties for tournament seeding, as it considers your entire record rather than just one or two games. Not perfect (doesn't account for home/road), but let me hear your better idea that is as easy to compute.

[slower]

No player is worth +70 per 100 possessions over a replacement college player, which is about what we're talking about here (20 point swing in ~29 possessions). For comparison, the difference between LeBron James and Michael Beasley was like +15 per 100 possessions last year. The idea that Jerami Grant (or anybody!) is worth even close to what's being described here is peculiar.


I'd still take the bet (replacing Grant with Wilt in his prime), no matter how "peculiar" you might find it. ;)

[vick]

Not taking anything away from Virginia, (you play who is in front of you) but is there a strength of schedule rating for just conference play?

There are ratings, but the ones I have seen have problems. Pomeroy has rankings based on the average Pomeroy ranking of a team's opponents, but this methodology has some weird implications--a perfect double-round-robin would show the easiest schedules for the top teams, because they don't have to play themselves. I don't really like this--does it really make sense to describe Duke's schedule as easier than BC's because we don't play Duke? I don't think so. I've been fiddling around with this for a couple of weeks, and what seemed most logical to me was to place each team's schedule into a spreadsheet, calculate the odds of winning each game (from Pomeroy), compare that winning percentage to what the expected percentage would be in a double-round-robin, and that difference is the scheduling advantage (or disadvantage) a team has. When I do that right now, I just don't get numbers that are very big--the easiest schedule is BC's, but it only gave them an expected 0.4 wins against "fair," and the hardest, FSU's, only cost them 0.3. I'm open to better ideas about how to think about this (and there's certainly a chance I messed up something in my analysis), but as I read the evidence, the impact of unequal scheduling is just nowhere near as large as a lot of fans make it out to be.

[Olympic Fan]

Good grief, even with an unbalanced schedule, would they have to go 17-0 instead of 16-1 for you to conclude they are the best team in the league? How else do you determine it? In a tournament you don't play everyone.

They just crushed a team we played evenly over two games..

If they are really the best, then all they have to do to convince me is to win the tournament in Greensboro. Miami -- which also got a break from the schedule -- did that a year ago.

Virginia has had four games against the top five teams in the ACC ... Syracuse has had six such games. You think that might have accounted for the two-game difference? Virginia's one game with Syracuse was in Charlottesville.. you think if it were in the Carrier Dome, there might have been a different outcome? And that would have left them tied -- even with Virginia's edge in schedule.

And do you think that Syracuse had to play without Grant today might have had anything to do with the ease of Virginia's victory?

PS And what's all this talk about Virginia's first title in 30 years? They shared the regular season title in 2007 -- just seven years ago. Okau, 1981 was their first -- and only previous -- outright regular season championship.

But their only real ACC championship was in 1976.

[FerryFor50]

I'd still take the bet (replacing Grant with Wilt in his prime), no matter how "peculiar" you might find it. ;)

Yea, Wilt might have taken away a few of those layups and offensive boards UVA got. Might have scored a few times, too. :)

[slower]

Yea, Wilt might have taken away a few of those layups and offensive boards UVA got. Might have scored a few times, too. :)

And in a better world, he'd get to dunk his free throws.

[vick]

If they are really the best, then all they have to do to convince me is to win the tournament in Greensboro. Miami -- which also got a break from the schedule -- did that a year ago.

Virginia has had four games against the top five teams in the ACC ... Syracuse has had six such games. You think that might have accounted for the two-game difference? Virginia's one game with Syracuse was in Charlottesville.. you think if it were in the Carrier Dome, there might have been a different outcome? And that would have left them tied -- even with Virginia's edge in schedule.

And do you think that Syracuse had to play without Grant today might have had anything to do with the ease of Virginia's victory?

PS And what's all this talk about Virginia's first title in 30 years? They shared the regular season title in 2007 -- just seven years ago. Okau, 1981 was their first -- and only previous -- outright regular season championship.

But their only real ACC championship was in 1976.

Wait, UVA went 3-1 against top-5 teams (including a road win). Why are you penciling in two losses if they played six games?

There is some seriously whiny stuff being said (not necessarily by you) that's beneath this board, IMO. UVA won at Clemson, and at Notre Dame. We didn't, and that's why they won the ACC regular season, and we didn't.

[Duvall]

There is some seriously whiny stuff that's beneath this board, IMO. UVA won at Clemson, and at Notre Dame. We didn't, and that's why they won the ACC regular season, and we didn't.

Well, there are two conversations going on. One is whether Virginia is a deserving winner of the ACC regular season, and the answer is pretty clearly yes. The other is whether Virginia is the best team in the ACC, and that's a much closer question.

[vick]

Well, there are two conversations going on. One is whether Virginia is a deserving winner of the ACC regular season, and the answer is pretty clearly yes. The other is whether Virginia is the best team in the ACC, and that's a much closer question.

Well, I would agree with a slight clarification, which is that there is a close question to which team is the best in the ACC if you look at the whole season (which is perfectly legitimate to do!). I don't think there's a real question as to which team has played best over the conference season--the scheduling advantage is real, it's just that the magnitude isn't that big. If you don't like the way I looked at it above, you can do a simpler analysis:

UVA efficiency margin: 113.1 - 89.7 = 23.4
Duke efficiency margin: 118.6 - 100.7 = 17.9
Syracuse efficiency margin: 108.3 - 99.9 = 8.4

I took the average difficulty from Kenpom, and found the efficiency margin of the closest team:

UVA: .7466, 9.7
Duke: .7711, 10.4
Syracuse: .7914, 12.1

So, after adjusting for schedule, the top three teams' efficiency margin:

UVA: 33.1
Duke: 28.3
Syracuse: 20.5

Therefore I maintain that UVA has played the best basketball in conference play this season.

[Newton_14]

Well, there are two conversations going on. One is whether Virginia is a deserving winner of the ACC regular season, and the answer is pretty clearly yes. The other is whether Virginia is the best team in the ACC, and that's a much closer question.
Agree and all Vick, Bender, and I are saying is that looking at the evidence on the whole, you have to give the nod to UVA as of today. Before the unc loss, I likely would have argued loudly that despite UVA's ACC record, Duke is playing better. But that loss, combined with the two horrible losses at ND/Clemson (with UVA winning at both places) that we can't shed short of winning in Greensboro, puts us behind UVA.

Losing Grant hurt for sure, not having to play in the Carrier Dome helped for sure. I think it would have been tough for us to win at UVA, depending on when in the schedule the game would have been played.

With the unbalanced schedule we lost the ACC Regular Season Title with the two bad losses, but heading into Greensboro I beleive there are 3 real contenders and anything else would be an upset. UVA, Duke, Syracuse. I will be shocked if any other team cuts down the nets. Advantage UVA as they will not have to go through both Syracuse and Duke barring a really tragic event next week...

I am interested to see our guys coming off the 8 day rest...

[weezie]

There is some seriously whiny stuff being said...that's beneath this board, IMO.

I think it's just cuz we don't have anything else to do without a game this weekend.
I received a txt from a good, loyal, long suffering hoos alum tonight after I congratulated him on the conference title.

He said, "Thanks! Now we know how Duke feels most years!"

[Cameron]

The reality is that, unbalanced schedule or not, Virginia is just a better basketball team than Syracuse at this juncture of the year. Home or away, the Orange have been utterly pedestrian over the course of the past month and a half. While legit defensively, Syracuse is an average offensive team. Their inability to score will be their ultimate undoing in the NCAA Tournament. Syracuse is a first or second round upset waiting to happen.

I will be the first to admit that I was dead wrong about Virginia, when earlier in the year I incorrectly -- understatement of the year -- referred to the Cavs as a probable NIT team. Virginia has come a long way since its 40-point beat-down at the hands of Tennessee prior to Christmas. Presiding over the best scoring defense in the country, the Cavs are holding opponents to just 54 points a game and have only allowed 60 points once over the last 11 contests. They have dominated their opponents in the ACC, winning their 16 league games by an average margin of 14 points while shooting better than 40% from beyond the arc. It's on the offensive end of the floor wherein most people underestimate Virginia. While not the Showtime Lakers, Virginia possesses a more than sufficient supply of offensive production in conjunction with its outstanding defense that will make the Cavs an extremely tough out in the NCAA Tournament. Loaded with veterans ingrained in Tony Bennett's system, Virginia plays smart, tough-minded, turnover-free basketball and will not beat itself. A healthy mixture of seasoned guard play, pinpoint three-point shooting and solid paint production makes this team just as effective in its pursuit of scoring the basketball as it is in stopping it. I think Virginia is much better than some here are giving the team credit for.

A strong detractor of Jim Boeheim, I was drunk off delight over the result of today's game, which denied the man the honor of winning the ACC's best regular-season record prize (not to be confused with ACC champion) in his first year in our conference. Great win for Virginia and for the ACC as a whole. May the ACC Tournament follow a similar script.

[hurleyfor3]

I wonder why we have to hate on everyone else who's good. It's just so much work, so much energy that doesn't need to be expended.

[Vincetaylor]

Tony Bennett is pretty clearly the best in-game coach in the conference. Only one loss for a team with this little NBA talent makes this one of the best coaching jobs in ACC history. Sure they might not go far in the NCAA tourney, but their chances are just as good as Duke, Syracuse, and UNC...all with much more talent than UVA.

[Troublemaker]

I'm not anointing them for next year. I think you are missing the big picture here. Bennett may have them now where K had Duke around '85. He is a young coach who will not let that program slip back. They are gonna be perennially top 5 in the league.
I checked their recruits and again, you assume press clippings in HS are more important than guys who fit a system.

While I would agree that UVA's going to start making the NCAA tournament more often than not under Bennett....for the bolded statement to be true, UVA will have to start getting 5-star recruits. (And maybe they WILL after the success of this season.)



I checked their recruits and again, you assume press clippings in HS are more important than guys who fit a system.

You need both, that is, you need highly-ranked guys that fit. (I'm assuming "press clippings" means star rankings.) A program can't consistently contend for conference championships and Finals Fours using 2-star, 3-star and 4-star recruits. Gary Williams was a very good coach, too. And he did a great job finding underranked gems in Dixon, Blake, and Baxter. What's more, he was able to find these gems in a short period of time so that they were able to play with each other and win big for Maryland. But once those guys left, Maryland never saw another Final Four and were never a consistent threat to win the ACC.

Maybe the same thing is happening here. Perrantes = Blake? Brogdon = Dixon? Tobey = Baxter? (I guess this would make seniors Harris and Mitchell be Laron Profit and Obinna Ekezie, respectively. No Steve Francis on this UVA team, though.) My point is, UVA needs to up their recruiting level because collecting this much underranked talent in a short period of time might be a once in a career type deal.

[Troublemaker]

Tony Bennett is pretty clearly the best in-game coach in the conference. Only one loss for a team with this little NBA talent makes this one of the best coaching jobs in ACC history. Sure they might not go far in the NCAA tourney, but their chances are just as good as Duke, Syracuse, and UNC...all with much more talent than UVA.

Let's not go crazy here. I suspect Brogdon, Harris, Anderson, and Tobey will all be pros. Brogdon's going to have a long NBA career; the others might only receive a cup of tea in the league, though. Regardless, UVA found some underranked gems here, much to their credit. But they're not winning with bums.

All that said, Bennett appears to be a great coach.

[duke4ever19]

I suspect Brogdon, Harris, Anderson, and Tobey will all be pros. Brogdon's going to have a long NBA career; the others might only receive a cup of tea in the league, though.

By "pros", do you mean those four guys will all be NBA-level players?

[CBecker]

A very well deserved ACC regular season title for them. Love the way they play on both ends. No selfishness whatsoever, just great team play.

[BobBender]

[QUOTE=BobBender;709836][QUOTE=Troublemaker;709830]While I would agree that UVA's going to start making the NCAA tournament more often than not under Bennett....for the bolded statement to be true, UVA will have to start getting 5-star recruits. (And maybe they WILL after the success of this season.)

I think Maryland did win an ACC crown with the Greveis Vasquez team about 4 or 5 years ago.but getting back to Bennett. It is scary to think what he could do with 5 star talent. And he might eventually get it. Why? He is the only HC in the ACC who can say he played in the NBA and had a very significant college playing legacy. Plus, Virginia has a facility that is big-time.
Again, The assumption by so many that things are static is ridiculous. That it is always going to be Duke , UNC, and Syracuse. News flash: Boeheim and K are old men and Roy is no DaViinci as a game coach. Mark my words, Va is here to stay, not a Miami or FSU one year wonder

[Troublemaker]

Who's assuming that things are static? Not me. I already said UVA's going to be a tournament team most years now. To be more than that -- i.e. a program on the level of Duke, UNC, Louisville, Syracuse -- they're going to have to start recruiting better.

[JPtheGame]

Really glad an ACC team won the regular season championship in the first year with the newcomers. Really didnt want to deal with the big east chatter about walking in and winning it year one.
Having said that, Virginia is not a program revived. Virginia is old. Miami did it last year, Florida State the year before. If both teams have talent, the older guys win. Its why Butler went two years in a row and it's why we won it in 2010. Until Bennett starts hooking some bigger fish i dont see a reason to worry about more than once every 3-4 years.

[Duvall]

Really glad an ACC team won the regular season championship in the first year with the newcomers. Really didnt want to deal with the big east chatter about walking in and winning it year one.
Having said that, Virginia is not a program revived. Virginia is old. Miami did it last year, Florida State the year before. If both teams have talent, the older guys win. Its why Butler went two years in a row and it's why we won it in 2010. Until Bennett starts hooking some bigger fish i dont see a reason to worry about more than once every 3-4 years.

Those Butler teams weren't very old.

[JPtheGame]

Those Butler teams weren't very old.

2010 8 juniors and seniors (although their best player was a soph)
2011 8 juniors and seniors

Not saying I knew that off the top of my head but I did remember the announcers going on and on and on about their experience.

[ice-9]

Tony Bennett is pretty clearly the best in-game coach in the conference. Only one loss for a team with this little NBA talent makes this one of the best coaching jobs in ACC history. Sure they might not go far in the NCAA tourney, but their chances are just as good as Duke, Syracuse, and UNC...all with much more talent than UVA.

I don't understand why we keep ignoring UVA's nonconference. What is the narrative there?

With Duke, it was the realization that Parker, Hood and Cook were getting tired end of game. It was Coach K grieving over his brother's death. Extending the rotation, getting Parker focused on post play and the emergence of Sulaimon are what explained the change from losing to Notre Dame and Clemson to beating UVA and Syracuse.

With UNC, it was finally moving on from PJ Hairston, taking Britt out of the starting five and thus the leadership of Paige. McDonald shooting better and McAdoo taking better shots helped as well.

There's a narrative behind each turn. What was UVA's?

Anybody know? I'm actually really curious.

[El_Diablo]

Virginia's rotation tonight consisted of 2 seniors, 4 sophomores, and 1 freshman. Their top 10 players in terms of minutes for the season = 2 seniors, 1 junior, 6 sophomores, and 1 freshman. That's not old.

[Wahoo2000]

I don't understand why we keep ignoring UVA's nonconference. What is the narrative there?

With Duke, it was the realization that Parker, Hood and Cook were getting tired end of game. It was Coach K grieving over his brother's death. Extending the rotation, getting Parker focused on post play and the emergence of Sulaimon are what explained the change from losing to Notre Dame and Clemson to beating UVA and Syracuse.

With UNC, it was finally moving on from PJ Hairston, taking Britt out of the starting five and thus the leadership of Paige. McDonald shooting better and McAdoo taking better shots helped as well.

There's a narrative behind each turn. What was UVA's?

Anybody know? I'm actually really curious.

The only big mistake made by Bennet this season. Due to our influx of talent at the big spots, we went to a pretty major variation of our old offense. In Nov and Dec, we went to an inside-out system that was predicated on read-and-react decisions from all the players (almost triangle-offense-like). It was WAAAY too complex for our guys. We were turning the ball over like crazy through the nonconference schedule (at least compared to in-conference play). We just couldn't develop any rhythm whatsoever. This eventually bled into confidence issues that started spreading to our jumpshooting percentages falling, and (IMO) eventually even affecting us so greatly as to cause mental lapses and poorer than normal play on the defensive end.

After the Tennessee debacle, a lot has been made in the media of Joe Harris going to Tony's house around New Year's Eve and having this big meeting about "taking ownership" of the team and "embracing roles". Important, sure, but the REAL key was throwing that newer offense in the garbage and going back to something VERY structured, which the guys were already pretty familiar with. The miscommunication plays and bad turnovers ended immediately, and everyone started looking A LOT more comfortable out there on both ends of the court. The whole thing has really just kind of snowballed until we reached the point we're at now.

In most seasons, I'd be somewhat worried that our success was more due to familiarity with better-scouted conference foes, but considering for all intents and purposes that ND, Pitt, and 'Cuse were basically "nonconference" opponents, I feel a lot better headed towards the postseason.

One thing to a previous poster: We ARE NOT an "old" team. We lose Mitchell and Harris this year, but have Anderson, Gill, and Atkins to fill those spots next season. In fact: Perrantes, Brogdon, Anderson, Gill, and Tobey will all be here until 2016. I HOPE that the best is still yet to come for this squad.

[ice-9]

The only big mistake made by Bennet this season. Due to our influx of talent at the big spots, we went to a pretty major variation of our old offense. In Nov and Dec, we went to an inside-out system that was predicated on read-and-react decisions from all the players (almost triangle-offense-like). It was WAAAY too complex for our guys. We were turning the ball over like crazy through the nonconference schedule (at least compared to in-conference play). We just couldn't develop any rhythm whatsoever. This eventually bled into confidence issues that started spreading to our jumpshooting percentages falling, and (IMO) eventually even affecting us so greatly as to cause mental lapses and poorer than normal play on the defensive end.

After the Tennessee debacle, a lot has been made in the media of Joe Harris going to Tony's house around New Year's Eve and having this big meeting about "taking ownership" of the team and "embracing roles". Important, sure, but the REAL key was throwing that newer offense in the garbage and going back to something VERY structured, which the guys were already pretty familiar with. The miscommunication plays and bad turnovers ended immediately, and everyone started looking A LOT more comfortable out there on both ends of the court. The whole thing has really just kind of snowballed until we reached the point we're at now.

In most seasons, I'd be somewhat worried that our success was more due to familiarity with better-scouted conference foes, but considering for all intents and purposes that ND, Pitt, and 'Cuse were basically "nonconference" opponents, I feel a lot better headed towards the postseason.

One thing to a previous poster: We ARE NOT an "old" team. We lose Mitchell and Harris this year, but have Anderson, Gill, and Atkins to fill those spots next season. In fact: Perrantes, Brogdon, Anderson, Gill, and Tobey will all be here until 2016. I HOPE that the best is still yet to come for this squad.


Thank you, just the explanation I was looking for. Sporked you!

Now I hope the 'Hoos live up to their billing and exact some revenge in the NCAA tournament.

[jhmoss1812]

Really interesting read. I love this board because there's just really good basketball conversation. I think it's fair to debate whether UVA is truly the best team in the ACC. I don't think any reasonable UVA fan would definitively say yes but we have a strong argument. I actually think Duke is the best team in the ACC, meaning that your best is better than our best. However, UVA is the more consistent team and demonstrated that over the course of the ACC season. There's a lot of talk about imbalanced scheduling and it's a somewhat fair criticism. We obviously got the easiest schedule in terms of who we play twice. However, you also have to look at where you play the better teams once. As far as the top-half of the ACC, we had to play Duke, Pitt, NCSU, and Clemson all on the road. We won all of those games except Duke and that was a 4-point loss. Sure, UNC and Cuse can say they had to play UVA on the road but both of those outcomes were double-digit victories. I'm not sure how much those losses can be attributed to being on the road. I don't necessarily think that playing those teams twice would automatically mean losses. I can't say they would be wins either. It's frustrating that VT is our main rival and they suck. It's unfortunate that we had to play ND twice and they suspended their best player. All we can do is take care of business and we did. I am fine with fans of teams like Duke, UNC and Cuse questioning how good we really are. It means we're relevant. And we had a pretty weak showing in the non-conference. It's been a magical season for UVA and I will cherish it no matter how the post-season plays out. I think we have an opportunity to do some special things this year but we're not immune to being upset either. If we continue to play at this level, we have a chance to go deep. Good luck the rest of the way. I have a feeling we may see you in the ACCT finals. I hope that Saturday in the ACC has some combination of UVA, Duke, Cuse and UNC.

[OldPhiKap]

The only big mistake made by Bennet this season. Due to our influx of talent at the big spots, we went to a pretty major variation of our old offense. In Nov and Dec, we went to an inside-out system that was predicated on read-and-react decisions from all the players (almost triangle-offense-like). It was WAAAY too complex for our guys. We were turning the ball over like crazy through the nonconference schedule (at least compared to in-conference play). We just couldn't develop any rhythm whatsoever. This eventually bled into confidence issues that started spreading to our jumpshooting percentages falling, and (IMO) eventually even affecting us so greatly as to cause mental lapses and poorer than normal play on the defensive end.

After the Tennessee debacle, a lot has been made in the media of Joe Harris going to Tony's house around New Year's Eve and having this big meeting about "taking ownership" of the team and "embracing roles". Important, sure, but the REAL key was throwing that newer offense in the garbage and going back to something VERY structured, which the guys were already pretty familiar with. The miscommunication plays and bad turnovers ended immediately, and everyone started looking A LOT more comfortable out there on both ends of the court. The whole thing has really just kind of snowballed until we reached the point we're at now.

In most seasons, I'd be somewhat worried that our success was more due to familiarity with better-scouted conference foes, but considering for all intents and purposes that ND, Pitt, and 'Cuse were basically "nonconference" opponents, I feel a lot better headed towards the postseason.

One thing to a previous poster: We ARE NOT an "old" team. We lose Mitchell and Harris this year, but have Anderson, Gill, and Atkins to fill those spots next season. In fact: Perrantes, Brogdon, Anderson, Gill, and Tobey will all be here until 2016. I HOPE that the best is still yet to come for this squad.


Thank you, just the explanation I was looking for. Sporked you!

Now I hope the 'Hoos live up to their billing and exact some revenge in the NCAA tournament.

Sporked you as well, excellent post.

Virginia has been dormant for a long time, I would like to see them back in the annual hunt. Good coach, good kids (as best I can tell), very good institution. And I am glad that a traditional ACC team won the regular season race as well; unbalanced schedules are part of the new norm and you play who shows up.

Now, let's take care of business and go Jackets/'Noles!

[cspan37421]

Why was UVA so bad in the nonconference? Hypothetically, if each conference can send only one team to the NCAA tournament, would UVA really be our choice?

Perhaps they had injuries or other personnel issues - I don't know. Perhaps they're just playing better as a team now than in late 2013. So the answer to your last question - well, I think I would send them, because they are playing the best right now. If they had the same overall and conference record, but their loss to GB was 2 weeks ago, I'd feel differently. But we have seen our team get better through a season before, and that's what may be happening with them.

[cspan37421]

Okay, but let's not pretend that Virginia is 38 points better than Syracuse over 40 minutes either.

No player is worth a 20 point swing on his own, but a swing from winning to losing can cause a team to implode mentally and get blown out. Which is obviously what happened here.

I'm not sure that's so obvious. Didn't Virginia shoot the lights out in the second half (from what I quickly read)? You don't need their opponent to implode for that to happen.

[Kedsy]

Virginia has been dormant for a long time, I would like to see them back in the annual hunt.

While it has been awhile since Virginia was regularly relevant, the Hoos were ACC regular-season co-champs in 2007, which isn't, you know, that long ago.

[cspan37421]

How about some simple arithmetic: just add together the conference wins of the conference teams you beat. Beat a team twice, count their wins twice.

UVa 106
Cuse 95
Duke 85
Unc 79

In the past I have suggested this method over the "ladder" to break ties for tournament seeding, as it considers your entire record rather than just one or two games. Not perfect (doesn't account for home/road), but let me hear your better idea that is as easy to compute.

Simple and elegant! I wonder what happens if you go one step further: subtract the conference losses of the teams you lose to. [I'm not volunteering, sorry!]. My guess: similar order, more separation.

[sporthenry]

Virginia's rotation tonight consisted of 2 seniors, 4 sophomores, and 1 freshman. Their top 10 players in terms of minutes for the season = 2 seniors, 1 junior, 6 sophomores, and 1 freshman. That's not old.

Perhaps not old but they are losing 2 of their best 3 players. I can't think of another team that comes to mind with a similar make up to compare how they did going forward. But I think the main point is that UVA isn't going to fall off the face of the earth but I'm also not sure they'll be title contenders next year either. I'd venture to guess this will be their best chance to make noise into March.

Harris opens up so much offensively b/c other teams key in on him. Brogdon is good but next year, he'll have to carry that much more of the load. And replacing Mitchell will be no easy task even though Gil is good. A lot will probably come down to Perrantes. He has been very good but shown a bit of a wild side. It'll be interesting to see them going forward.

Perhaps I'm a hater but I just don't get the people ready to anoint them as the new ACC power. Bennett's program is more stable than perhaps Miami or NC State but I'm not sure they'll have enough firepower year in and year out to compete with Duke or Syracuse. I envision something like an FSU who finished with 10+ wins 4 straight years.

[cspan37421]

If they are really the best, then all they have to do to convince me is to win the tournament in Greensboro. Miami -- which also got a break from the schedule -- did that a year ago.

Well, you set a high bar, one that really downplays the regular season. Sure, they might have lost an extra game in the Carrier Dome - esp. if they rented the same zebras we got - but they might have won it. We'll never know. I don't think we can automatically count it as a loss, any more than we could pencil in our games at Clemson and ND as sure wins. The simple fact is we'll never know. But they won the acc regular season fair and square.

The ACCT is simply not the same test as the regular season. It's simply different. Now, I don't think it would be unreasonable to factor ACCT results into a team's record and give it some weight to determine the best ACC team. It's more information, to be sure. But the winner of the ACCT is not necessarily the best overall team in the ACC. They are denoted as ACC Champions, I recognize that. And after the ACCT is completed, the winner of the ACC regular season isn't necessarily the best ACC team. You can use their ACCT performance and add that in the mix. Should UNC or Duke win the ACCT, and UVA be one-and-done in a sloppy, ugly blowout, yeah, I might reconsider whether UVA is the best ACC team with all the information available to that point. But even that would only bring it to more of a tossup for me.

To each their own! Cheers

[vick]

Perhaps they had injuries or other personnel issues - I don't know. Perhaps they're just playing better as a team now than in late 2013. So the answer to your last question - well, I think I would send them, because they are playing the best right now. If they had the same overall and conference record, but their loss to GB was 2 weeks ago, I'd feel differently. But we have seen our team get better through a season before, and that's what may be happening with them.

I'm not sure why a loss at Green Bay is considered such a horrible thing anyway, given that they are better than Notre Dame and about the same level as Clemson (of course, I hope we have improved since January too!). But really UVa only has one terrible result on its resume, getting smoked at Tennessee.

[OldPhiKap]

While it has been awhile since Virginia was regularly relevant, the Hoos were ACC regular-season co-champs in 2007, which isn't, you know, that long ago.

Well, yeah, but . . .

UVa was 11-5 in the conference that year, and 21-11 overall. They went out in the second round of the NCAA (round of 32).

Before that, the last regular season "championship" was 1995. Career Sweet Sixteen teams were 1995, 1993, 1989, and 1981-4.

I would argue that 2007 was a really weak ACC field, us included (#6 seed, lost to VCU in the first round (round of 65)). Despite getting seven bids, the ACC went 7-7 with only one team making it to the sweet sixteen (UNC, which lost in the regional championship to G'town). It was the first time since the field expanded to 64 teams that the ACC failed to place a team in the final four in two consecutive years.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

I really don't understand the effort of some to dismiss UVA's accomplishment as the result of an "easy" schedule. They took care of business. Beat good teams along the way. This is the same silly stuff that we've heard people say about last FB season for Duke. And we know all too well the crap that's been perpetuated about our path to the 2010 NC. I don't think any of us agree on either count. We played who we played. There were no cupcakes. We took care of business. So why turn around and attempt to deny UVA its accomplishment on the grounds of an "easier" schedule. It comes across as childish to be honest.

[OldPhiKap]

I really don't understand the effort of some to dismiss UVA's accomplishment as the result of an "easy" schedule. They took care of business. Beat good teams along the way. This is the same silly stuff that we've heard people say about last FB season for Duke. And we know all too well the crap that's been perpetuated about our path to the 2010 NC. I don't think any of us agree on either count. We played who we played. There were no cupcakes. We took care of business. So why turn around and attempt to deny UVA its accomplishment on the grounds of an "easier" schedule. It comes across as childish to be honest.

Exactly. In the ACC games I have seen, they are worthy to carry the banner of the regular season leader.

[DBFAN]

If we win out, and Cuse drops another that gives us the 2 seed right? Since we beat UVA. Not too shabby from a young team that lost at Clemson and ND

[Troublemaker]

Correct. Duke would be the ACC 2 seed if those things happen.

Pretty sure the Syracuse @ FSU game will be Senior Day for FSU, too. It could happen.

[DBFAN]

That's better than I thought. I just figured Cuse would be at home because of how many road games they have had lately

[OldPhiKap]

That's better than I thought. I just figured Cuse would be at home because of how many road games they have had lately

They host GT then finish in Tallahassee. Hoping the 'Noles are up for one last scalping.

[Channing]

This year's UVA team strikes me as similar to the UMD teams from 2000-2002. At that point Gary Williams was being haled for finding the "diamond in the rough" because of the success he was having with Juan Dixon, Steve Blake, Lonnie Baxter et al. However, once that crew left town he was never able to get back to the elite level, and was never much more than a good, but certainly not great (or even ff contender). Tony Bennett has some great "diamonds" on this team, with Joe Harris and Akil Mitchell. Both have evolved into all ACC type talents. It will be interesting to see if he can keep the parade going or if this is a flash in the pan type of year for UVA.

[Wahoo2000]

Perhaps not old but they are losing 2 of their best 3 players. I can't think of another team that comes to mind with a similar make up to compare how they did going forward. But I think the main point is that UVA isn't going to fall off the face of the earth but I'm also not sure they'll be title contenders next year either. I'd venture to guess this will be their best chance to make noise into March.

Mitchell and Harris may be "2 of our best 3 players", but there really isn't much separation in talent/ability from #1 to #7 on this squad. If you were to look over our boxes this season, you'd see PLENTY of games where Harris and/or Mitchell didn't play well. A much forgotten guy on our team this year is Darion Atkins, who is a VERY similar player skillset/athleticism to Mitchell. I think Tobey/Gill/Atkins next season (with an average level of offseason improvement from all 3) will AT LEAST be even to this season's frontcourt. Anderson should be a more than capable fill-in for Harris next year (again, expecting some offseason improvement). In fact, with a full offseason for Perrantes, Brogdon, and Anderson to improve - I think the backcourt may be better as well. The key for us next season will be finding some reliable backcourt/wing depth from the bench. If Even Nolte, the redshirting Devon Hall, or incoming frosh BJ Stith (bryant's son) can provide that, I think we'll have a similar team next year.



Perhaps I'm a hater but I just don't get the people ready to anoint them as the new ACC power. Bennett's program is more stable than perhaps Miami or NC State but I'm not sure they'll have enough firepower year in and year out to compete with Duke or Syracuse. I envision something like an FSU who finished with 10+ wins 4 straight years.

I actually do agree with this. We've been unbelievably hot since early January. With the addition of Louisville and the possibility of a tougher conference schedule, it wouldn't surprise me lose more like 4-6 league games next year. Anytime we can finish top 4 (and get the double-bye), I'll be happy - winning the conf outright is icing on the cake.

[hurleyfor3]

Simple and elegant! I wonder what happens if you go one step further: subtract the conference losses of the teams you lose to. [I'm not volunteering, sorry!]. My guess: similar order, more separation.

You're already not adding the teams you lose to, so the effect is accounted for implicitly. It may move the needle if you have multiple bad losses against a weak schedule. But even then your weak schedule would give you fewer positive points.